Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

THURSDAY, 4 OCTOBER 1984

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

Ministerial Statement 4 October 1984 997

THURSDAY, 4 OCTOBER 1984

Mr SPEAKER (Hon. J. H. Warner, Toowoomba South) read prayers and took the chair at 11 a.m.

PAPERS The following papers were laid on the the table— Orders in Council under— Grammar Schools Act 1975 and the Statutory Bodies Financial Arrangements Act 1982 Rural Training Schools Act of 1965 and the Statutory Bodies Financial Arrangements Act 1982 Regulations under— Health Act 1937-1984 Radioactive Substances Act 1958-1978 Food Act 1981-1984 Cremation Act 1913-1978 Rural Training Schools Act of 1965 By-laws under the Education Act 1964-1984 Reports— Timber Research and Development Advisory Council of South and Central Queensland for the year ended 30 June 1984 Timber Research and Development Advisory Council of North Queensland for the year ended 30 June 1984 Details of firms which received payment from the Department of Mapping and Surveying for surveying and mapping contracts and consultancies for the year ended 30 June 1984.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT Allegations by Member for Mackay Hon. Sfr JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN (Barambah—Premier and Treasurer) (11.4 a.m.), by leave: Yesterday in the House the honourable member for Mackay made statements and, in view of the way in which he presented his accusations, I feel that I am bound to reply to his speech. We are all aware, of course, that outside the Chamber the honourable member is known as a professional mud-slinger. As I have mentioned on many occasions in the House, it is known that, in his earlier days, when he was contracting, he did not pay his debts. We know, too, that he does not always stick to the tmth. Very often he does not. In his speech yesterday, he did not. Honourable members know that the honourable member for Mackay was caught red-handed in the poker machine racket and that his own party tossed him aside as lea-'er. Its members would not have him, and they tossed him out. The honourable member for Mackay (Mr Casey) alleged that the weir had never been mentioned by the Minister for Water Resources and Maritime Services and that its construction supposedly cropped up very, very quickly. On 9 May 1983, the former Leader of the Opposition (Mr Wright) asked about these weirs. At that time the proposals were outlined to the member for Rockhampton (Mr Wright) in a letter from the Minister for Water Resources and Maritime Services (Mr Goleby). Mr Mackenroth: What date did you say? Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: The letter from the honourable member from Rockhampton (Mr Keith Wright) was dated 9 May 1983, which is quite a long time 998 4 October 1984 Ministerial Statement ago. This matter has been on the go for many years and is not something that has just been pulled out of the hat, as the honourable member for Mackay said yesterday. In his reply to the member for Rockhampton, the Minister for Water Resources and Maritime Services wrote— "In regard to the programme of weirs I indicated that consideration would be given to the following. 1. Up to five (5) recharge weirs being constructed on various streams throughout the Lockyer Valley—" they are being constmcted all over the State and being paid for by the State— "2. One recharge weir on Cressbrook Creek near Toogoolawah. 3. Early commencement of the Joe Sippel Weir on Barambah Creek above Murgon, originally planned as part of the Barker/Barambah Irrigation Project. 4. Investigation of larger weirs in several districts throughout the State, including East Deep Creek near Gympie, Maranoa River near Mitchell and Mackenzie River in reach between Bingegang Weir north of Dingo and the junction of the Dawson and Mackenzie Rivers." That letter, which was written a long time ago, set out exactly what was happening. The honourable member for Mackay claimed that the project was not listed by the Water Resources Commission—another big lie! The 1982-83 annual report of the Water Resources Commission mentions the project in two or three different places. Mr R. J. Gibbs: Have you been on the drink, or are you just nervous? Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Wolston will withdraw that remark. Mr R. J. GIBBS: I withdraw that remark, but he is shaking. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: I appreciate that the honourable member is trying to be funny. I could read the three parts of the annual report of the Water Resources Commission that refer to the weirs to be constmcted on the Mackenzie River. That project has been listed for a long time and was reported in the 1982-83 annual report of the Water Resources Commission. That puts the lie to the statement by the honourable member for Mackay (Mr Casey) that the project was decided upon only recently. The fact is that it is mentioned three times in that report. Public meetings have been held about the construction of the weir. What the honourable member did not mention is that the farmers have to pay for the water. My son John will not be using the water for many a year because he is still at the developmental stage of clearing the property. The point is that whoever uses the water in a weir, as the honourable member for Mackay ought to know, has to pay for it. Weirs are self-funding, but the honourable member tried to make out that my famUy would get a benefit from it. Of course, the Labor party will not build any weirs. After this year the Commonwealth Govemment will pull out of all weir constmction in this State. There will be no more money from Canberra for these sorts of weirs. I indicated that many other property- owners will benefit from the constmction of the weir. The weir that the honourable member spoke about at Tartms is 30 miles north of John and, of course, wiU benefit many other properties long before the water gets down to John's property. The weir is a State project on the Mackenzie River. The Fairbairn Dam is further upstream. There are two other weirs below the Fairbairn Dam. The weir at Tartms is some nules down from those other three big projects. Because the Mackenzie River is so big, over a long Personal Explanation 4 October 1984 999 period many more weirs, which will benefit the farmers in the area, will be constmcted on it. The Labor Party has no sympathy for primary producers and has no interest in their getting water. Members of the Labor Party like the honourable member for Mackay try to use the fact that at some time in the future some of this water might be used by John, who would have to pay for it. The Labor Party says that the other farmers should not benefit from the water, either. The honourable member for Mackay can laugh and play the fool—we know he is one, of course—but the members of the public still know that he has made a statement that reflects on my family. I do not know what the honourable member is hiding behind, but I cannot see him. I assure him that, unlike certain of his colleagues have done recently, I will not cry. Mr Casey interjected. Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: I know that the honourable member is pretty big. The former Leader of the Opposition ought to be downright ashamed of himself because of the way he has misconstmed the tmth of the matter. He should also be downright ashamed of his own history, which includes unpaid debts, poker machine rackets and all the rest. If anybody is to be reprimanded, it ought to be the member for Mackay.

PERSONAL EXPLANATION Mr CASEY (Mackay) (11.11 a.m.), by leave: A few moments ago the Premier and Treasurer, in a ministerial statement, made a tremendous number of misrepresentations in relation to me. Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: I rise to a point of order. The honourable member said that I made a number of misrepresentations—in other words, that I did not tell the tmth. That is completely incorrect. As I indicated, I have the evidence here. He cannot get out of it that way. He has been caught red-handed, as he has been on a number of other occasions. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Mr CASEY: The Premier offered some personal insults, which I will completely ignore. The names that the Premier might like to call me do not hurt me one little bit. If he wants to talk about non-payment of debts, 1 will tell this Parliament the story of the Premier's Cape Hillsborough mining venture. I am sure that he would love everybody throughout the State to know about it and the way in which investors lost all their money. Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: Mr Speaker Mr CASEY: 1 am Mr SPEAKER: Order! Whilst I am on my feet, the honourable member for Mackay will resume his seat. Is the membei^ for Mackay making a personal statement? Mr CASEY: Yes. Mr SPEAKER: Then the honourable member will keep to making his personal statement, and get on with the job. Mr CASEY: Certainly, Mr Speaker. 1 mentioned misrepresentation. If the Premier reads the record of what I said yesterday in this Chamber, he will realise that I stated clearly that the first mention of a proposal for a weir at the site on the Mackenzie River where the Tartms Weir is to be built, was in the 1982-83 annual report of the Water Resources Commission, to which the Premier referred today. 1000 4 October 1984 Personal Explanation

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I cannot allow this personal statement to turn into a debate. The honourable member is not making a statement on matters which affect him personally. The honourable member knows the mles relating to personal statements. Mr CASEY: Mr Speaker Mr SPEAKER: Order! Sit down! The honourable member will resume his seat until I sit down myself, and I mean it. I have asked the honourable member to make the statement for which he obtained leave. If he strays from that errand, he is in trouble. Mr CASEY: I do not think that anything can be more personal than the remarks the Premier made concerning me—no-one else. The Premier could not even see me. He wanted to stand on tip-toe to look over the clock to talk to me. This morning, in the Parliamentary Library, I perused the last 10 annual reports of the Water Resources Commission, which were presented to this Parliament. In not one of them, until the 1982-83 report, to which I referred in this Parliament yesterday, was there any mention of a proposal to build a weir at the site mentioned by the Premier this morning. In relation to the other comments he made regarding the Lockyer Valley and other areas—the ten reports are filled with literally hundreds of water resource surveys into potential water storage areas, including some in your own area, Mr Speaker. They have all been shelved so that money can be spent, irrespective of the Commonwealth's attitude, on Tartms Weir on the Mackenzie River, above the Premier's property. Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen: You are a liar, if ever there is one. Opposition Members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I am sure that the Premier will withdraw that remark. Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: I could explain the honourable member's character and his background in many ways. If he wants me to, I could explain it in any other way. I will withdraw. Mr CASEY: I rise to a point of order. Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: The cold hard facts- Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Premier is withdrawing the remark? Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: Yes, I will withdraw the statement, "You are a liar" because it is unparliamentary, but I can Mr CASEY: Mr Speaker Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Premier has withdrawn the statement. Sfr JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: Yes, I have. Mr Casey interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I do not care whether the member heard it or not. It has been withdrawn. Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: I rise to a point of order. I will withdraw the unparliamentary remark that the honourable member is a liar. I could describe him in many other ways. Mr CASEY: I rise to a point of order. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I cannot allow this matter to continue any longer. Questions Upon Notice 4 October 1984 1001

Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: Mr Speaker Opposition Members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I will send a number of members out if they do not behave themselves. Opposition Members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I remind honourable members that when 1 am on my feet they will all be seated. Is the Premier taking another point of order? Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: Yes. I will finish on this point: I want to indicate quite clearly Opposition Members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: All I want to do is clear up, clearly and fully, the inaccuracies and untruths stated by the honourable member for Mackay. I have sought to do that. I only want to say to the honourable member that he will not be permitted to use this House to get away with the type of slander that he is always involved in. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Premier has certainly made his point, and I am certain that all honourable members understand what it is. Mr Fouras interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I warn the honourable member for South Brisbane under Standing Order No. 123A.

PETITION The Clerk announced the receipt of the following petition—

Nurse Education From Mr Campbell (15 signatories) praying that the Parliament of Queensland wiU transfer all nurse education in Queensland to the higher education sector by the end of 1993. Petition received.

QUESTIONS UPON NOTICE Questions submitted on notice were answered as follows—

1. Medicare Mr BURNS asked the Minister for Health— What were the numbers of patients seeking medical care at the casualty and out­ patient departments of the Royal Brisbane Hospital and Princess Alexandra Hospital in each month for the 12 months prior to the introduction of Medicare and for each month since its introduction? Answer— I am informed by the North Brisbane and South Brisbane Hospitals Boards that the number of patients receiving out-patient and casualty treatment for each month as requested is as follows—

64164—34 1002 4 October 1984 Questions Upon Notio

Prior to Medicare Since Medicare Royal Brisbane Princess Alexandra Royal Brisbane Princess Alexandra Hospital Hospital Hospital Hospital Feb '83 31335 Feb '83 15927 Feb '84 30785 Feb'84 15839 March '83 34559 March '83 17815 March '84 30374 March '84 16051 April '83 29728 April '83 14907 April '84 27104 April '84 13955 May '83 33876 May '83 16803 May '84 32120 May '84 15719 June '83 30738 June '83 15511 June '84 28155 June '84 14313 July '83 30892 July '83 14327 July '84 28170 July '84 14070 August '83 33744 August '83 16586 August '84 29546 August '84 16168 Sept'83 30968 Sept '83 16646 Oct '83 31853 Oct '83 15594 Nov '83 31199 Nov '83 17411 Dec '83 27353 Dec'83 14628 Jan '84 29671 Jan '84 15980

2. Mining Leases, Moreton Island Mr BURNS asked the Premier and Treasurer— With reference to Moreton Island— (1) What action is being taken to declare further national parks in the mining lease areas relinquished by Murphyores and Mineral Deposits in July 1984? (2) Have any new lease appUcations for purposes other than mining been made or granted in this relinquished area and, if so, (a) who made these appUcations, (b) what area of land is involved and (c) what is the proposed usage for these areas? (3) Have any other new leases been applied for or granted on the island in 1983 or 1984 for tourist resort purposes or any other purposes and, if so, (a) who made these applications, (b) what area of land is involved and (c) what is the proposed usage for these areas? (4) Has the Brisbane mining warden's recommendation, that lease applications 1105, 1106 and 1107 by Mineral Deposits Ltd be rejected, been adopted by the Govemment and, if not, when will a decision be made public? Answer— (1) Advice that the mining leases have been released has been conveyed to the National Parks and Wildlife Service. The concurrence of the Land Administration Commission will now be sought in having the surtendered areas set aside for national park. (2) Records indicate that applications were made by— A. A. Heinich to lease 1 000 square metres south of Tangalooma Point for storage of fishing equipment; and B. R. Keddie for an area on each end of Tangalooma track for a non-residential/ snack bar caravan. No applications have been granted. (3) Records indicate that 12 leases were applied for in 1983-84 and I have a schedule of these applications which I seek leave of the House to have incorporated in "Hansard" No leases have been granted. Leave granted. Questions Upon Notice 4 October 1984 1003

Schedule Townsend and Anderson for land near Day's Gutter for storage of oyster-farming equipment; D. N. Armstrong for two hectares on the east coast for a professional fishing base; G. Hall for two areas of land for a motor-repair workshop in the town of Kooringal; E. Newman for three hectares at Yellow Patch for fencing to protect applicants adjoining land; E. G. Hoffie and Others for two hectares north of Kooringal for an education and recreation centre; Roberson and Sons for land in the town of Bulwer for a storage shed; Underground Research Group of Queensland for off-shore area near Cowan Cowan for underwater habitat to study marine life; Moreton Island Safaris for an area at Bulwer for housing vehicles; Bramble Bay Sporting Association for an area for fishing club activities; Queensland Institute of Technology for a field study centre; Powerchute Promotions for a site at Tangalooma in connection with parachuting; and A. Perry for an area at Day's Gutter in connection with his oyster bank's license. Answer (continued)— It is proposed to issue a special lease covering 0.4 ha to D. H. and M. E. Schroeder for the purpose of processing oysters from an oyster farm operated by the applicants. These applicants have established a viable commercial enterprise over a considerable period of time. Provision is also being made for a small area to be made available for oyster-processing purposes to other holders of oyster licences. These areas are to the north of Kooringal. (4) Mining Lease Applications Nos. 1105, 1106 and 1107, Brisbane, on Moreton Island were granted on 6 August 1984 to Mineral Deposits Limited. The grant of these mining leases followed the surrender by that company and its associated companies of mining leases, parts of nuning leases and the abandonment of mining lease appUcations, and parts of mining lease appUcations on Moreton Island, Bribie Island, Fraser Island and the Central Queensland Coast, and is in strict conformity with the recommendations of the Cook Report and previously announced Queensland Govemment policy for sand- mining on Moreton Island.

3. Assistance to Small Business Mr LICKISS asked the Minister for Industry, SmaU Business and Technology— As small business in Australia complains of frustrations and restrictions caused by red tape, bureaucracy and Govemment interference, what action is the Queensland Govemment taking to assist small business by reducing disabilities to a minimum in this State? Answer— In the Budget, the Govemment has greatly increased the funding of the Small Business Development Corporation. This will allow the corporation to increase its business advisory services and to create a comprehensive and State-wide panel of business professionals, who can be used by the corporation as referral consultants where business expertise and experience is required. The corporation's experience to date has been that many of the disabilities perceived by small-businessmen result from lack of knowledge of the sources of financial and management expertise, and the panel of referred consultants should be able to provide the necessary information. In addition, funds have been provided for the development of a business profile data base, which will be invaluable for information comparison. The data wiU be used to show a firm seeking assistance from the corporation how it compares with the worst, average and best firms in its industry. 1004 4 October 1984 Questions Upon Notice

4. Petrol Prices, Brisbane-Toowoomba Mr LICKISS asked the Minister for Employment and Industrial Affairs— As the retail price of super-grade petrol between Brisbane and Toowoomba varies from 47.9c to 42.5c per litre, how does he rationalise this price range when the major centres of population, Brisbane and Toowoomba, appear to have a price stmcture at or near 47.9c per litre while the less populated areas in between these centres have a price ranging down as low as 42.5c per litre? Answer— The difference in the price of petrol at highway sites between Brisbane and Too­ woomba can best be attributed to competition by service station operators and oil companies for a share in the market from passing traffic. In the case outlined by the honourable member, it is quite likely that the locations referred to between Brisbane and Toowoomba have reseller sites that are owned by the operators who probably receive a rebate from suppliers in retum for their business. These operators may also purchase supplies from jobbers at a lower wholesale price than that set by the Prices Surveillance Authority (PSA). Instead of keeping the rebate as an additional profit, the reseller often uses his buying advantage to seU at discounted rates in an endeavour to stimulate more business. Consumers generally benefit from this activity because they can shop around for the best price when buying petrol.

5. Medicare Mr LITTLEPROUD asked the Minister for Health— To what degree is the Federal Govemment 35-day limit under Medicare having adverse effects upon care for aged people in Queensland? Answer— There has not been any effect upon the care provided in Queensland public hospitals. However, in respect of private hospitals, the patient's length of stay is not affected providing the acute care certificate issued by the treating medical practitioner is submitted and approved by the Commonwealth Acute Care Advisory Committee. In the absence of an acute care certificate, private hospitals could suffer a loss of revenue because of reduced Commonwealth benefits resulting from recategorisation. I understand that the Commonwealth health legislation is presently being amended to establish criteria in relation to the 35-day rule, and I will advise this House of the likely effect of those legislative amendments. An increase in demand for nursing-home accommodation has occurred as a result of Medicare.

6. Concessions, Coal Rail Freights Mr VAUGHAN asked the Premier and Treasurer— With reference to the coal rail freight concessions announced by him on 22 December 1983— (1) Have those concessions since been amended in any way and, if so, in what way? (2) If they have not been amended, in view of the claims by coal-mining companies that the concessions are not sufficient to enable them to remain viable having regard to the current world coal market, is any consideration being given to increasing those concessions and, if so, when will such further concessions be announced? (3) If no further concessions are being considered, on what grounds is it considered further concessions are not necessary? (4) As it was reported during the parliamentary recess that a number of coal companies were withholding rail freight payments, as at 30 June what amount of coal Questions Upon Notice 4 October 1984 1005 rail freight revenue, if any, was outstanding, what coal companies were involved and what amount was outstanding from each company? Answer— (1) As I told the House last December, the Government moved quickly to undertake a review of rail freight rates on coal in accordance with the policy announced by the Government in the State election campaign. A comprehensive study of the situation was made and a scheme of assistance that took into account the problems confronting the coal industry was developed. The scheme was soundly based. The arrangements, which have been accepted by the particular coal export companies, are virtuaUy the same as those announced on 22 December 1983. The companies were concerned about the provisions under which, when and as the price received by the mines under Japanese contracts increases, the freight rate was to increase by 25 per cent of the coal price increase from 1 January 1984. An amendment was agreed to under which this date was altered to 1 July 1985. In other words, the companies were given an additional concession. However, overall, the concessions were otherwise unchanged from those that were announced in December 1983. (2 & 3) The rail freight concessions have been accepted by the companies, and no further negotiations on the matter are proposed. The concessions are quite generous and designed to meet the particular problems of the industry at this time. I must say also that I always have in mind the constant criticisms of the honourable member and his ALP colleagues that the Government was not extracting an adequate return from the mining industry. I could go on ad infinitum and mention all the times that the Opposition has criticised the Government for not charging enough. Mr Vaughan: They were good times. Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: Yes, but these are good times, too. Mr Vaughan: Ask the mining companies. Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: The Opposition is sitting on the other side of the fence now; but it cannot have it both ways. In fact, it is sitting on a barbed wire fence. Answer (continued)— (4) It would be improper to divulge confidential commercial information with respect to individual companies. However, I can say that all of the disputed rail freight amounts were settled between the Government and the companies concemed by 30 June 1984.

7. Electromagnetic Fields, Power Transmission Lines and Smelter Potlines Mr VAUGHAN asked the Minister for Mines and Energy— (1) What information, if any, has the State Electricity Commission on studies reported to have been carried out in the United States, which have indicated that exposure to electromagnetic power transmission line fields speeds the growth of existing human cancer ceUs? (2) Has the State Electricity Commission carried out any investigations into the effects of electromagnetic power transmission Une fields on the human body? (3) If so, what are the results of such investigations? (4) Is he aware of any studies that have been undertaken into the effects of electromagnetic fields associated with potlines in aluminium smelters? (5) If so, what were the findings of such studies? (6) If he has no knowledge of the effects on human beings of electromagnetic fields associated with power transmission lines and aluminium smelter potlines, will he have 1006 4 October 1984 Questions Upon Notice an immediate investigation made into these matters and report the results of such investigation back to this Parliament? (7) If not, what is the reason? Answer— (1) Considerable literature exists dealing with possible biological effects of electro­ magnetic fields. (2) No. (3) See (2). (4) No. (5) See (4). (6) No. (7) Queensland electricity authorities have a policy of ensuring that the electro­ magnetic fields associated with overhead transmission works are below the internationally accepted levels. The application of this policy is supported by documented World Health Organization findings.

8. Telecasting of Football Finals Mr COOPER asked the Premier and Treasurer— With reference to the decision of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation not to televise the Rugby League event of the year, the Brisbane grand final, but instead to televise the Adelaide Australian Rules grand final— Will he use his influence and intervene in favour of those people, particularly those receiving ABC television coverage only, for example, in westem Queensland, so that they may receive major sporting events that are appropriate to their region? Answer— I inform the honourable member that, on a number of occasions, I have made approaches to the Commonwealth Government of the day in relation to the televising by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation of major sporting events in country areas. 1 also have had continual discussions with the chairman of the Queensland Rugby League, Ron McAuliffe, who is a personal friend of mine, on the telecasts of Rugby League matches. As recently as last Sunday, at the Brisbane Rugby League grand final, I once again expressed my concern that residents of the western areas of the State were missing out on these telecasts. I have been assured by the chairman of the Queensland Rugby League that my strong representations will be borne in mind when the board considers the tenders submitted by all four television stations for Rugby League telecasts in 1985.

9. Therapists, Special Schools Mr FOURAS asked the Minister for Education— (1) Does he subscribe to the philosophy that all children, no matter what their handicaps, have full educational rights? (2) Is he aware that 71 per cent of the children at Narbethong School for Visually Handicapped Children have additional handicaps? (3) Is he aware that a recent report of the Committee to Review Decentralisation of Services to the Visually Handicapped recommended that therapists should be put on the educational team? (4) Is he aware that Narbethong school currently has one speech therapist for 15 hours each week, one physiotherapist for one day per week and no occupational therapist? Questions Without Notice 4 October 1984 1007

(5) Is he aware that, prior to a Cabinet decision in 1979, therapists were employed by the Education Department and, since 1979, therapists have been employed by the Health Department? (6) Will he support the reversal of the 1979 Cabinet decision since it is patently obvious that the therapist needs of special schools, such as Narbethong, are not being met by the Health Department? Answer— (1) Yes. (2) Yes. (3) Yes. (4) Yes. Support for the 90 children who were enrolled at the Narbethong school as at 20 July 1984 should be seen in the context of 34 teachers who have specialist training and 11 teacher aides working a total of 215 hours a week. The support for those 90 children is 34 teachers plus 11 teacher aides, working 215 hours per week. Mr Fouras: What about speech therapists? Mr POWELL: I said "specialist teachers" The honourable member should listen. Answer (continued)— (5) Yes. (6) No, I do not support the honourable member's contention. The Health, Education and Welfare Interdepartmental Committee provides a stmcture for liaison and negotiation between those departments. Mr Fouras interjected. Mr POWELL: I am very happy with the treatment that those 90 children are receiving from the 45 specialists who are handling them. Mr Fouras: Disgraceful! Mr POWELL: The honourable member seeks to introduce an emotional argument into a matter that should not be emotional. At that school the relationship between adults and children is at the ratio of 1:2. The specialist teachers are there to handle the problems of the children.

10. Retail Shop Leases Act Mr FOURAS asked the Minister for Industry, Small Business and Technology— With reference to press statements that he will toughen the retail shop leases legislation because some shopping centre landlords were using loopholes in the legislation and consequently were placing undue burdens on the small shop-keeper— (1) Does this mean that the Retail Shop Leases Act is a toothless tiger and consequently that he has to rely on moral pressure or, in other words, talking tough? (2) Does he now consider that the watering down of the original Bill, at his behest, was a mistake? Answer— (1) No. (2) No.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Overseas Travel by Officers of Statutory Bodies Mr WARBURTON: In directing a question to the Premier and Treasurer, I remind him that on Tuesday of this week I asked whether he would provide details of overseas travel during 1983-84 by officers of statutory bodies under the control of the Queensland Government. 1008 4 October 1984 Questions Without Notice

In his answer yesterday, he stated—r "Since May 1983, the prior approval of Cabinet has to be obtained for all such travel by members, officers or staff of statutory authorities in Queensland, with the exception of local authorities." In view of that statement, why is it that he claims that the information I sought "is not readily available and to provide it would require considerable research by all ministerial departments involving many man-hours by numerous staff, which could not be justified." Surely it is reasonable to assume that the information regarding Cabinet approval of these overseas trips is systematically recorded and readily retrievable. Therefore, I ask: Will the Premier and Treasurer explain his refusal to provide the information covering the period from May 1983 to the present time, which I requested, and also will he reconsider his position and agree to table the relevant information in this Parliament next week? Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: If, as requested by the Leader of the Opposition, a team of men is asked to collate all the information concerning many departments throughout the State, 1 do not know what real benefit will be gained. Mr Warburton: You can get it out of your minutes. Sfr JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: But that is a large job. The Leader of the Opposition can imagine the work that would be involved in going through all the minutes in relation to every area of the State's activities. I made a statement that was based on information supplied to me by senior officers who were responsible for collecting that information. I was told that the man-hours involved and the cost of obtaining the information sought by the Leader of the Opposition was not justified. It is as simple as that. Perhaps the Leader of the Opposition could explain to me why he wants the information. It may be that he would just read it and toss it away. Perhaps he wants the information to make some criticisms. The Queensland Govemment is not concerned about criticisms of the public service, because every officer is involved in very important work. Many officers travel overseas to places such as New Guinea and China. Men are coming and going all the time. A check is kept on their activities. Mr Warburton: 1 thought that we might have a right to know that. Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: The National Party is in government. When the Opposition becomes the Government in the year 3000, the honourable Leader of the Opposition can look at the information to his heart's content. The cost of obtaining the information is not justified. Special Major Capital Works Program Mr KAUS: In directing a question to the Deputy Premier and Minister Assisting the Treasurer, 1 refer to the disclosure yesterday by the Leader of the Opposition that he cannot comprehend the impact of the State's $600m Special Major Capital Works Program over two and a half years. I now ask: Can he advise how much will be expended in 1984-85 from the Special Major Capital Works Program? Mr GUNN: That question will be duly answered at the end of the Budget debate. The Leader of the Opposition is wrong when he says that $72m will be spent this year. It shows his inability to understand the program. Special program funding in 1984 wUl be approximately $140m, made up of $72m that will be spent on education, water resources, etc., and an additional $70m on hospital works. The Leader of the Opposition does not seem to understand that the $600m relates to a special program that is in addition to the normal $348m program. I do not think Questions Without Notice 4 October 1984 1009 that he understands that it is a $600m special program. The Opposition is saying that that is too good to be tme. It shows what the National Party can achieve in govemment by itself The Opposition is divided. Mr Burns: Did you blame the Liberals for holding you back before this? Mr GUNN: If Queensland was ever held back, it was prior to 1957 when the Labor Party was in office. Mr Burns: You just blamed the Liberals a minute ago. Mr GUNN: The era of politics when Labor was in power was called the Rip Van Winkle era of Queensland politics. Queensland slept until 1957, when it was awoken. Since that time, it has gone ahead in leaps and bounds. The Opposition was divided on all these matters. In the Mackay "Daily Mercury" of 21 September 1984, the following report appeared— "Member for Mackay, Mr Ed Casey, said yesterday he was 'reasonably pleased' with the Budget." The article further stated— "Mr Casey said Mackay would benefit directly with the constmction of a new high school at Beaconsfield, a new primary school at Northview, a new pre-school at Andergrove, an additional special education school at north Mackay, and a new technology building at the Mackay TAFE College." The member for Mackay has praised the Queensland Government's Budget. Mr Casey: Keep reading! Mr GUNN: I have the editorial in my hand. It states that the Budget appears to represent a responsible assessment of the continuing economic recovery in Queensland. The Opposition is divided on the matter. Generally the people of Queensland have proclaimed the Budget as the best ever. Mr CASEY: I rise to a point of order. The Deputy Premier and Minister Assisting the Treasurer is deliberately misrepresenting my statement by quoting only part of the comment by me in the Mackay "Daily Mercury" He ought to be required to read the rest of it, in which I pointed out clearly that all of that was possible because of the money being given by the Commonwealth. Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Government Assistance for Liver Transplant Operations Mr BURNS: In directing a question to the Premier and Treasurer, I refer to the three young Queenslanders, Paul McKee, Kevin Mitchell, and Brendan Gray, whose parents face the trauma of having to appeal for donations to pay for the cost of expensive liver transplant operations in the United States of America. As he is responsible for the operation of the free hospital scheme in Queensland, which was begun by Labor, can he advise how much money was provided by the State Government to assist each of the two young children who have been overseas for the operation? As the Commonwealth Government has provided up to half a million dollars to assist Paul and Kevin, will he make a special grant to the family of Brendan Gray so that he may be assisted to good health? Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: The Government is considering the provision of assistance for those requiring liver transplants, as the Minister for Health (Mr Austin) has mentioned on a number of occasions. The Government has indicated that, where urgent transport is required, it is prepared to co-operate by providing the Govemment aircraft. 1010 4 October 1984 Questions Without Notice

Mr Burns: Are you giving any money? Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: If we could obtain the $52m from Canberta—the amount we are owed under Medicare—we could do something about it. Mr Burns: These children are in need, you know. Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: The Government has asked Canberra whether assistance can be given for the establishment of a transplant unit in Queensland. As far as I am aware, it has had no response from Canberra about whether any contribution will be forthcoming. Mr Burns interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! I call the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to ask his second question. Mr Lane: You're very cynical, Tom. Mr BURNS: In the Year of the Family, I am sorry to hear that interjection by the Minister for Transport. I am sorry, too, about the harsh way in which the Govemment is treating those families. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition wiU proceed with his second question. Mr BURNS: I was provoked, Mr Speaker. Besser Vibrapac Concrete Plant Mr BURNS: In directing a question to the Minister for Industry, Small Business and Technology, I refer to his statement to the Parliament on 20 September 1984 in answer to a question from the Leader of the Opposition. When referring to the possibiUty of a high-technology concrete plant, which at that time was being spoken about at Lytton, he said— "This company is Besser Vibrapac. The company has had access to the Brisbane City Council. My officers have taken representatives of the company to the Brisbane City Council to try to cut the red tape, but they have been unable to succeed." The Minister knows that Mr Paul Harding of Besser Vibrapac said on 24 September that it was the fault of the Minister and his department. He made it clear that the Minister misled the House. Mr Harding said— "We were attracted to Queensland by all the Govemment publicity, but their performance has not matched the publicity." Mr Harding said his company had warned that it would take its business elsewhere and that the reason was fmstration with the Minister's Department of Commercial and Industrial Development. I ask: Will the Minister now take the steps necessary to ensure that his department no longer frustrates companies trying to set up in this State, and ensure that his practical performance lives up to his high public-relations performance in talking about industrial development? Mr AHERN: I happen to have with me a letter from Mr Harding. Mr Burns interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Lytton has asked his question. He wUl listen to the reply. Mr AHERN: I hotly deny any suggestion by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition that I made any approach to Mr Harding. Questions Without Notice 4 October 1984 1011

Mr Burns: You didn't? Mr AHERN: Or any of my officers. Mr Burns: Nobody? Mr AHERN: Absolutely nobody. I challenge the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to produce evidence of his claim. There is not a shred of evidence to support it. Mr Burns interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! If the member for Lytton continues to interject, I shall have to warn him. Mr AHERN: Mr Harding wrote to me to clarify the article that appeared in the "Daily Sun" He enclosed a copy of a letter to the editor of the "Daily Sun" so that his position was made absolutely clear. Shortly, I will lay on the table of the House a copy of the letter, which was completely unsolicited by me. 1 was aware that the gentleman would probably be sensitive about being named in Parliament, but that was not my fault. I was challenged to do so by the Leader of the Opposition, and I did. I will table this letter in which he makes it absolutely clear that he is quite happy with the performance of my department. He makes it absolutely clear that my departmental officer, Mr Colin Bunker, spent a whole day taking him on a tour of potential industrial sites in Queensland. He took his appUcation to the Brisbane City Council, which on that occasion indicated that if he proceeded on that site as suggested at that time, there would be a two-year delay. That was the advice given to Mr Bunker. The situation is unchanged. I am completely unrepentant. The letter of apology is here from Mr Harding for all to see. I will certainly be happy to have it incorporated in "Hansard" It completely vindicates everything that I said on that occasion and I caU on the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to apologise to the House. Leave granted. Whereupon the honourable gentleman laid on the table the following document— 24th September, 1984. The Hon. M. J. Ahern, M.L.A., Minister for Industry, Small Business & Technology, M.I.M. Building, 160 Ann Street, Brisbane Q. 4000. Dear Minister, I am concerned that to-day's report in the "Daily Sun" of comments attributed to me have been used by the Press to stir up arguments between the State Government and the Brisbane City Council. For the record the following observations were made but not reported either in the correct context or at all. 1. The proposed industry is the manufacture of precast, prestressed concrete panels for flooring and walling systems and is not to be confused with a cement plant. 2. We have not as yet approached the Brisbane City Council for either re-zoning or consent use but intend to do so in the immediate future for the specific project. 3. Since the comments about "establishing our Industry in N. S. W." were made to Officers of the Department of Industrial Relations, considerable time has been expended by both parties (the D. I. D. and ourselves) to investigate and evaluate land of possible use. 1012 4 October 1984 Questions Without Notice

4. We have subsequently located a suitable land area in private ownership and we are currently concluding negotiations to purchase. A consent application is in preparation for immediate submission to the Brisbane City Council. 5. We certainly indicated that we have selected Queensland as the State most conducive for medium and long term business growth and as yet are not deterred in establishing in this State. I have sent an identical letter to the Editor of the Daily Sun and to Alderman Joseph St. Ledger.

Yours truly, BESSER VIBRAPAC MASONRY (N.T.) PTY. LIMITED. L. PAUL HARDING. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. International Tourist Facility, Noosa Mr NEWTON: In asking a question of the Minister for Tourism, National Parks, Sport and The Arts, I refer to an article in yesterday's "Daily Sun" that states that Noosa is one of five areas under consideration for the development of an intemational standard tourist facility. Is that correct, and, if so, what is proposed? Mr McKECHNIE: First I wish to thank the press, including the "Daily Sun", for the very favourable way in which the recent introduction of the Bill was reported. However, I would like to clarify part of what was in the "Daily Sun" article, which stated that five resorts are under consideration. That is technically correct and reported accurately. However, what was not said is that the resort at Noosa has been temporarily delayed. The reason for that delay and for consideration not being given to it at this time is that I am not yet convinced of the stabilisation of the area as well as some other local concems. I wish to make that point clear, as was done in some of the other newspapers. I have also had brought to my attention an article in today's "Courier-MaU" with the headline, "Greenies object to Govemment resort plans" The co-ordinator of the North Queensland Conservation Council—how he gets into south Queensland, I do not know—claims that the Queensland Conservation Foundation has had some influence on the slowing down of the Noosa project. That body has had no influence. A close relationship between the local member the honourable member for Cooroora, the Queensland Tourist and Travel Corporation and me has resulted in further consideration. I might contrast the close co-operation I have received in Noosa from the honourable member for Cooroora with what has happened in regard to the Pioneer River site at Mackay. I have received repeated representations from the mayor of Mackay (Sir Albert Abbott), the honourable member for Whitsunday (the Minister for Welfare Services, Youth and Ethnic Affairs) and the member for Mirani (Mr Randell), but I have heard nothing from the member for Mackay. I have not heard from him about jobs and development in his area. I would say that he is so busy tipping garbage cans round the place that he does not have time to make representations on behalf of the people in his area.

Mr UNDERWOOD: I rise to a point of order. The Minister is seeking to mislead the House. He made it quite clear that he would not talk to the Labor Townsville City Council. Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Mr McKECHNIE: The member for Mackay has been so busy muck-raking round this place that he has not had a chance to look after the people of his electorate properly in regard to these tourist developments. That contrasts with the endeavours of the other members in the area. The honourable member for Mackay is a millstone round the Questions Without Notice 4 October 1984 1013 necks of the people of north Queensland. He is a disgrace to Mackay. I might add that he was sacked by his own party, wormed his way back in as leader and was sacked again. Community Services Legislation Mr NEWTON: I ask the Minister for Northem Development and Aboriginal and Island Affairs: Is it tme that the National Aboriginal Conference has changed its attitude to mining rights on deed of grant areas in Queensland? Is it also tme that the two Aboriginal communities that originally objected to being denied double voting rights in local authority elections, following the passage through this House in April this year of the community services legislation, have now withdrawn those objections, and have advised the Human Rights Commission accordingly? Mr KATTER: It is interesting to note that when the community services legislation was discussed in the House, with the exception of two front-bench members, no-one from the Opposition opened his mouth against the legislation. It is also interesting to note that there has been no official condemnation by the Federal Govemment, as would be expected. The facts of the matter now are that the only outstanding complaint that we had was from the Yarrabah council. It complained because it wanted a vote in the local council elections as well as a vote in its own community council elections. The council has contacted the Human Rights Commission and officially withdrawn its complaint. So there are now no outstanding complaints from any community in Queensland against the legislation, which is rather peculiar when one considers the stand taken by the Opposition spokesman. It is very pleasing for me to be able to state that Leonie Biddle from the "Sunday MaU" rang me and asked me for an interview. She said, "Do you know that Steve Mam has said that he only wants mining rights the same as the rest of Queensland?" I said, "That is a very dramatic reversal of opinion by the NAC. I do not think you are correct in saying that." She then quoted from her interview notes and said that he simply wanted the same rights as anyone else, which were to compensation and not to mining itself Although I did not know whether the information she had gathered was correct, she asked for my comment and I said, "We are very pleased to see these people coming round to the point of view of the Govemment in Queensland. It proves once again that we have been right all along, that as time goes on all the outstanding criticism will cease and the people will come around, as these people have, to the point of view which we put forward originally." I would be very pleased if Opposition members achieved the same enlightment that seems to pervade the thinking of all members of the Aboriginal community in Queensland and of other govemmental bodies throughout Australia. The only exception to that enlightenment seems to be the spokesman for the Opposition and some of the misguided people he has around him. Ministerial Visit to Tartrus Weir Site Mr CASEY: 1 ask the Minister for Water Resources and Maritime Services: During the currency of the National Party conference in July this year, did he accompany the Premier on a visit to a weir or dam site in central Queensland? Was the site that of the proposed Tartms Weir? What is so special about this project that it should appear in the Water Resources Commission's annual report, then still not named as a weir, for the first time in 1982-83 as a consultant's current investigation, yet it is now proposed for construction despite the hundreds of other areas throughout (Queensland with already- established priority that have been in the commission's pending files for years? Mr GOLEBY: I am very pleased that the honourable member has asked me that question. I want to remind him and other honourable members opposite that the Federal Govemment denied Queensland $35m of bicentennial funding for water projects. 1014 4 October 1984 Questions Without Notice

This Govemment saw fit to put $7m of wages pause money into the system to be used exclusively for the building of weirs. It was decided that seven weirs would be constmcted. Consultants were immediately appointed to investigate aU facets and quickly prepare plans, because the wages pause money had to be spent within a very short time. Only two weirs remain to be constmcted, one in Glenore Grove and the other on the Mackenzie River at Tartms, which I inspected 12 months ago. It would be one of the best weir sites on any stream in Queensland. It has a complete rock base, so the foundations wUI be excellent. The commission inspected 13 sites along that river and, as far as it was concemed, Tartms was the best site. In recognising the need for water throughout the State and the urgent need to complete major schemes that have been on the drawing-board and under constmction for many years, the Govemment set aside $100m to be spent over two and a half years to bring the schemes to fmition. It is all very well for the honourable member to make all sorts of accusations. I remind him that a major scheme not very far from his area was announced in the Budget. I refer to the Proserpine dam, of which there is no record and to which no reference is made in any report. I inspected that area also.

Mr Casey: I talked about it for 12 years. Mr GOLEBY: I am talking about last year's report. I went to Proserpine and spent two days there with the member who represents the area. I met representatives of all organisations, including chambers of commerce and local authorities, as well as representatives from the tourist bureau. I analysed fully the needs of the area. I can say without fear of contradiction that the scheme was brought to fruition in this Budget because it is considered to be the most urgently needed in the State. Revocation of State Forest; Transfer of Land for Freeholding Mr CASEY: In asking a question of the Minister for Lands, Forestry and Police, I remind him that on 19 September 1984 he moved and had passed in this Chamber a motion revoking part of State Forest 18, Parish of Moultrie, by which 1 178 ha, or approximately 3 000 acres, known as portion 13, was transferred from the Crown into the hands of the owner of portion 10 for freeholding purposes, despite the fact that it had been surrendered to the Crown only in 1977. I now ask: Is it not a fact that the department recommended against the revocation because the land had become part of the State forest such a short time before, and will the Minister explain why he took the unusual step of giving that land, which is adjacent to the Mackenzie River and directly across the river from the Bjelke-Petersen family property, to the new owner, namely, Leslie Charles Thiess and members of his family?

Mr GLASSON: Once again, the honourable member is trying to cast aspersions that something was done in an underhand way. Initially, the land reverted to the Crown by surrender, the Forestry Department accepted it into the forestry reserve and an assessment was made. It is not unusal, as honourable members and the people of Queensland should know, for areas to be excised from State forest reserves. In the last revocation, no fewer than 17 pieces of land were excised from forest reserves. In this instance, an application was made. The Foresty Department reassessed the area to determine what stress or strain would be placed on the supply area by an excision. There was very little millable timber; it was mainly round fencing timber or mining timber. Whatever royalties are due on that area of land will be paid by the applicant, who happens to be Mr Theiss, as the honourable member said. I have no idea what that has to do with it. As far as I was concemed, it had nothing to do with the matter. Any other land-holder could put forward a similar argument about land. The area was Questions Without Notice 4 October 1984 1015

surrounded by cultivation and, in fact, no forestry timber has ever been harvested from the area. Mr Casey: It has a nice little water supply upstream now. Mr GLASSON: The honourable member need not make aspersions. It is very easy for him to say that there is something sinister in this matter. There is nothing sinister in the action that has been taken. All dues wiU be paid to the Crown by the applicant. Mr Fouras inteqected. Mr GLASSON: I wiU pay no attention to the honourable member for South Brisbane. Mr Fouras: We have got the best Govemment that money can buy. Mr GLASSON: There is no tmth whatsoever in that. There is nothing sinister in the action taken, and I have nothing to hide. The proposal was recommended by the Forestry Department before it came to the House. Effect of Redundancy Payments Mrs HARVEY: I ask the Minister for Employment and Industrial Affairs: Is he aware that, because of the fear that the Federal Govemment's proposed redundancy payments will be introduced, a number of businesses in my electorate and elsewhere are already planning to restmcture to enable them to retrench as many staff as possible? Can the Minister take any action to encourage businesses to retain their employees? Mr LESTER: This scheme, which is designed to cut out employment for young people, is supported by aU Labor Govemments in AustraUa. The fact is that industry cannot afford it, and Australians must start to come to grips with the problem. Basically, the redundancy terms mean that, if a person has been employed for four years, he wiU have to be given four weeks' notice, eight weeks' serverance pay and time off. I understand that the unions are making fiirther claims for relocation expenses and retraining expenses, among other things. Quite simply, under this scheme anyone starting up a new business wiU have to establish a tmst fund. Before a big business can get off the ground, hundreds of thousands of dollars will have to be put into that tmst fund so that provision can be made for possible redundancies. How can business be expected to begin, expand and compete in this country when these impositions are placed upon the goodwill and initiative of business people? The redundancy claims have already been granted to employees under Federal awards, but they have not been granted to those under State awards. We in the Govemment are working very hard with business to make a combined appeal to the State Industrial Commission should the unions with employees under State awards apply for a flow-on. The community should not impede the employment generation processes of the nation. The Govemment cannot support the flow-on to the State awards of redundancy payments and I expect the Labor Party to back the Govemment in the interests of employment of our young people about whom they speak so much. Electricity Tariffs Mrs HARVEY: In directing a question to the Minister for Mines and Energy, I refer to local and national press reports of criticism levelled by the member for Kurilpa about the electricity industry in this State. She said that the recent tariff increases were deceitful, hidden State taxes and that Ipswich coal-miners were being put out of work to justify the spending of moneys on a power station in the electorate of the Premier and Treasurer. I ask: Can he comment on these allegations? 1016 4 October 1984 Questions Without Notipe Mr SPEAKER: Order! Because the member for Greenslopes is fairly new to the Parliament, I advise her that she cannot ask a Minister to comment on a matter. She must ask a question. I ask the honourable member to rephrase her question. Mrs HARVEY: I ask the Minister for Mines and Energy: Can he say whether these allegations are correct? ' Mr I. J. GIBBS: The allegations that are attributed to the member for Kurilpa have been brought to my attention. The honourable member for Kurilpa spoke about electricity tariffs being a form of taxation and claimed that the Tarong Power Station was constmcted in the electorate of the Premier and Treasurer. The Tarong Power Station is not in the Premier's electorate. In fact, it is in the electorate of the Deputy Premier and Minister Assisting the Treasurer (Mr Gunii). The member for Kurilpa alleged that electricity tariffs are a form of taxation. I point out that, in Queensland, the electricity industry is organised within its own framework. The Government receives no revenue by way of taxation from the electricity industry. Mr Vaughan: Oh, yes it does; there is a capital works levy of 25 per cent. Mr I. J. GIBBS: The member for Nudgee mentioned capital works. Industry development comes under capital works. Mr Vaughan: It's a tax. Mr I. J. GIBBS: It is not a tax. The member for Nudgee knows that that is a lot of rubbish. The electricity industry works within its own framework. No money goes to the Govemment, and the Government does not put any money into the industry. Because the industry is self-contained, there is no taxation; no money leaves the system. That situation is different from that of New South Wales and Victoria. In those States, the Government receives, off the top of the tariff, a tax that is based on about 7 per cent of the gross tariff. That puts approximately $l20m a year into the New South Wales Government. Queensland has no such tax and does not intend to impose such a tax. The same goes for Victoria. As for the comments regarding coal and the Ipswich group—I have some figures here that show that, as at 30 June 1984, the Swanbank Power Station had a coal stockpile of 762 000 tonnes. The desired stockpile is 303 000 tonnes, so there is a large difference between the desired stockpile and the actual stockpile. The value of that difference is $18,153,000, and the interest that is paid each year on that additional coal is $2,450,000. That interest is paid for by the electricity consumers. Recently I saw on a wall a plaque that stated, "When you put your mouth into gear, engage your brain." The article attributed to the honourable member is an example of the mouth being opened without the brain being engaged. Vigor (Queensland); Fitness and Aerobics Mr WRIGHT: In directing a question to the Minister for Employment and Industrial Affairs, I refer to the failure and closure of the Vigor fitness and aerobics centres throughout Australia and, in particular, Queensland, and also to the closure today of the Vigor centre in Rockhampton. Those closures have caused thousands of people to lose what could total as much as $3m in pre-paid membership fees. As it is believed that this nation-wide failure was orchestrated by Dick McDonald and his business associates, who, through their fraudulent misrepresentations, have financially benefited enormously, I ask: Has the Minister referred the matter to the Minister for Justice and Attorney-General for investigation by Corporate Affairs officers? If not, what action has he taken, firstly, to retrieve the money that has been lost by many Queenslanders and, secondly, to change the law to protect people who are involved in pre-paid membership plans as promoted in particular by Vigor and Inshape? Questions Without Notice 4 October 1984 1017

Mr LESTER: I would have thought that the honourable member for Rockhampton would get right behind me and try to get across to the public the contents of this pamphlet, which I hold up. It warns people not to get involved in schemes of the type referted to by the honourable member. However, I have not received one representation from him. When I warned consumers to be careful in relation to certain matters, the honourable member asked me to resign. That was his contribution. The honourable member claims to represent the consumers. I have not received any representations from him. Why did he not do his work earlier? Mr WRIGHT: I shall repeat my question. Has the matter been referred to the Minister for Justice and Attorney-General in order to try to apprehend those crooks? What action will the Minister for Employment and Industrial Affairs take, not to wam people but, in conjunction with the Minister for Justice, to ensure that this type of thing does not happen again? Mr LESTER: The honourable member for Rockhampton has failed in central Queensland to get the message across. On more than one occassion, my Consumer Affairs Bureau contacted the Justice Department in relation to this matter, particularly when the matter arose in the Toowoomba area. Furthermore, after the Vigor centre in Toowoomba closed down, I visited it. I'll bet the honourable member for Rockhampton hasn't. Payment of Subcontractors Mr WRIGHT: I ask the Minister for Justice and Attorney-General: Is he aware of the increasing number of claims by subcontractors that they are not being paid by principal contractors, especially when Government contracts are involved? I cite the StanweU Power Station as an example. That is a matter that the Minister and the Premier have tried to sort out. I also ask: What action can be taken to protect Queensland's small businesses that subcontract for Govemment or semi-Govemment projects, especially since the practice of requiring statutory declarations as proof that subcontractors and employees have been paid has proved to be unreliable as many such declarations are signed falsely, and, moreover, because of the legal difficuUies involved in claiming under the Subcontractors' Charges Act? Mr HARPER: 1 thank the honourable member for his question. The difficulties experienced by subcontractors relate to contracts entered into by them with other than Govemment departments. It would be incorrect of constme that the difficulties are involved only with Government contracts. That is not the case. I have had discussions with contractors, including contractors from the Rockhampton area. I recognise that there is need for the Subcontractors' Charges Act to be amended. At present I am working towards that end. The honourable member would appreciate that subcontractors become involved in difficulties owing to their desire to obtain work. In many instances subcontractors go out of their way to obtain work by cutting their prices excessively. The matter is complicated. I hope that the present position can be improved or that the difficulties can be resolved. The Government is working in that direction. Allegations by Mr R. Bottom Mrs CHAPMAN: In directing a question to the Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing, I refer to a report in this morning's "Courier-MaU" by crime investigator Mr Bob Bottom and ask: Is he aware that the so-called "Age" tapes have allegedly revealed that southern crime bosses lobbied three Queensland knights in an attempt to corrupt a Queensland Turf Club inquiry? Does the Minister agree with Mr Bottom's claim that Queensland is complacent about organised crime? Has Mr Bottom supplied any evidence to the Minister to substantiate any of his claims as reported in today's "Courier-Mail"? 1018 4 October 1984 Questions Without Notice

Mr HINZE: I hasten to answer the honourable member's question by answering firstly the second part of her question. I do not agree with Mr Bottom*s comments that there is any reason to be concemed about racing in Queensland as compared with liacing in any other State. As charges are laid and as events unfold, everybody in Australia will see that most of the problems are arising in New South Wales. An inquiry has been conducted in that State. Mr Bottom is a joumalist with "The Age" in Melboume and is a former member of the staff of the New South Wales Premier, Neville Wran. He telephoned my office this moming. He said that the tape-recorded telephone conversations of Mr Robert Trimbole, the fugitive dmg boss wanted for the murder of Griffith antidmg campaigner Donald MacKay and other various alleged crimes, showed that Trimbole had spoken to Sir John Egerton and had sought Sir John's assistance in influencing a QTC inquiry. I state specifically that it was not the Fine Cotton inquiry. It is alleged that Trimbole sought Sir John's assistance in approaching Sir James Killen and Sir Edward Williams in this matter. I emphasise that, although those knights have been named, no inference should be drawn that they have anything to do with any of those problems. Mr Bottom admitted in "The Courier-MaU" this moming that there is no claim that any of those knights were themselves involved in organised crime. A member of my staff told Mr Bottom that I had responded to the "Telegraph" this moming when asked for a comment on his claims, simply to say that the QTC inquiries were independent of myself and that he, Mr Bottom, as was indicated in today's press by my colleague the Minister for Police, should supply to the Queensland police any information, including the tape of the Trimbole conversations. I think that everybody throughout AustraUa would agree that the Queensland Police Department has done a very good job. It cannot be faulted in any way. The member of my staff stressed again in his conversation with Mr Bottom that it would be proper to provide the police with the tapes if they showed there was some evidence of criminal activity. Mr Bottom told my secretary that the Victorian police had begun an investigation into some aspects of the Trimbole taped conversations and that he would suggest to the Victorian police that they should send a copy of their report, when completed, to the Queensland police. He also said that the Federal Attomey-General, Senator Evans, had had a copy of those tapes for some time. Work Skill Australia Mrs CHAPMAN: I ask the Minister for Employment and Industrial Affairs: In view of the Govemment's commitment to Work Skill Australia, would he outline the coming activities related to the Work Skill program? Opposition Members interiected. Mr LESTER: I am amazed that members of the Labor Party do not appear to be interested in Work Skill Australia. The program is an Olympic event for the nation's apprenticed tradesman and women under the age of 21 years. For the first time, Queensland has this year become involved. There are regional competitions throughout Australia, national finals and then the world competition, the Skill Olympics. Comm­ encing next Sunday, 7 October, the first of the Brisbane regional finals, extending over two days, will be held at the Brisbane Exhibition Ground. I invite each and every member to attend and witness our young people competing. Competition is very important for our young people, for eventually they will have to face the further competition presented on the international market. At the world competitions recently held in Austria, Australia did not fare very well at all. We have to improve our performance, which is why Queensland has become so involved in this matter. Townsville has already completed its regional competition, and it did so very well indeed. The Rockhampton competition will be held on 18 and 19 November, the Gold Coast one on 16 and 17 Febmary and the Toowoomba one on 2 and 3 March. The winners will compete at the Australian Questions Without Notice 4 October 1984 1019 championships, which will be held in Queensland. They will be held at the Chandler complex in June next year. Let us all as a Parliament get behind that very important initiative. Entertainment Expenses, Queensland Film Corporation Mr DAVIS: I direct a question to the Minister for Tourism, National Parks, Sport and The Arts. It is not a Dorothy Dix question, but I think he should answer it today and not ask that it be put on notice. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Is it upon or without notice? Mr DAVIS: I will say Mr SPEAKER: Order! Is it upon or without notice? Mr DAVIS: It is without notice, but I will give him the opportunity to have it put on notice. I ask: With reference to the Queensland Film Corporation for the period from 1 July 1983 to 30 June 1984— (1) Which members of the corporation made claims for entertainment or hospitality expenses? (2) On how many occasions has each person lodged such claims? (3) What was the cost of each individual claim? (4) What information and explanations were requested by the Auditor-General with respect to the corporation's account? If the Minister cannot answer it, I will table the relevant parts of the Auditor-General's report. 1 ask further— (5) Were the inquiries by the Auditor-General of a financial nature? (6) Did these inquiries affect any members of the Queensland FUm Corporation and, if so, which members or officials and in what precise form? If he cannot answer it, he should not be in the job. Mr McKECHNIE: I have total confidence in the members of the Queensland Film Corporation. In view of the details the member has asked for, however, I could not possibly be expected to give an answer. Therefore, I ask him to put it on notice. Mr DAVIS: I do so accordingly. Edward River Mission; Comments by Member for Cook Mr LINGARD: In directing a question to the Minister for Northem Development and Aboriginal and Island Affairs, I refer to the contribution by the member for Cook in the Adjournment debate last Tuesday night, in which he made comments aimed at causing division among the residents of the Edward River Mission. Obviously he was disturbed by the very positive presentation in "60 Minutes" on Sunday night, in which were shown attempts at encouraging Aborigines to develop their own cattle station at Edward River. I now ask: Is the Minister aware of the statements and the methods used by the member for Cook to cause discontent in the northem settlements and reserves? Mr KATTER: I did have a look at the statements made by the honourable member for Cook the other evening. They profoundly worry me. The House should take note of what is happening in that area. It is a very fragile matter and, limited though the honourable member's ability may be, he has the ability to cause trouble up there and wreck those very positive things that the department is trying to do. I attended a meeting of all the people of the town. They were asked whether they had any problems with the television program. With the exception of a person who has been in and out of mental institutions, not a single person up there complained about the program or raised any problems with respect to it. If any problems occur, the blame 1020 4 October 1984 Questions Without Notice will be fairly and squarely sheeted home to the honourable member for Cook. He has already served warning that problems will arise. All I can say is that nothing up there will cause any problems. The only problems that will arise wiU be created by the honourable member. My department and I will watch his activities up there very closely to see if he delivers the punches that he telegraphed the other night. I would hope that he would take an objective look at what is taking place up there, assess it and back the Government very, very strongly in what it is trying to achieve. I would like to think that the honourable member would do that. Purchase of Materials by Parents and Citizens Associations Mr LINGARD: In asking a question of the Minister for Education, I refer to a recent media statement about the amount of materials that some p. and c. associations are purchasing for schools. What policies are being adopted by the Govemment to assist those associations? Mr POWELL: As all honourable members well know, the latest Budget increased by 33 Vs per cent the amount of money given to schools to allow them to have greater flexibility in purchasing what they see as necessary items. The Government's attitude has always been to provide the facilities necessary for education, and I do not think that anybody can really dispute that fact. In the past some people in the community have undertaken a campaign, which I suspect has been based on a fair bit of ignorance of the Govemment's policies and the way in which those policies have been implemented, aimed at trying to show that, in education, money means everything. Of course, it does not. The latest Budget increased expenditure on education by 16 per cent on last year. One would have thought that the critics of the Government might have at least been gracious enough to look at the Budget and acknowledge what the Government is doing in education. Apparently the positive things that the Government has done have gone over the heads of the negative people who wish to make those announcements. The increase of 33'/3 per cent in the grants given to schools will have a real, positive influence. The money is given to the principals, who then distribute the funds as they see necessary. A large number of items attract a 50 per cent subsidy, which assists the parents and citizens associations that work so diligently to raise funds to give schools the luxuries that parents think their children should have. In the computer education field, the aim of the Govemment is to ensure that by the end of next year every child in secondary education will have the opportunity of hands-on experience with computers. In the secondary field, p. and c. associations will not be asked to contribute any money at all in that area. Primary schools wiU receive a subsidy of up to $500 for computers. I must add that at the moment the primary school software really has not been proved to be of great educational value. Consequently, the Government is not going all out in providing computers to primary schools. Mr SPEAKER: Order! The time allotted for questions has now expired. Hon. W. H. GLASSON (Gregory—Minister for Lands, Forestry and Police): I seek leave of the House to table the information requested by the honourable member for Chatsworth during question-time yesterday. Mr Davis: Incorporate it in "Hansard" Mr GLASSON: I seek leave to have it incorporated in "Hansard" Leave granted. Whereupon the honourable gentleman laid on the table the following document— Detective Sergeant 1/c P. V. Mahony, took no further part in the fraud squad's investi­ gations into the Bargara land sales inquiry, as from October 27, 1982. Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1021 This was in accordance with the explicit recommendation of the then Acting Detective Inspector John Huey, as approved by his senior officers as shown in the copy of Inspector Huey's report—dated October 26, 1982—and tabled in this House by me on September 19 this year. However, as stated in that report by Inspector Huey, Mahony who is in charge of the land fraud section of the Brisbane C.I.B., was to act as a consultant to other police involved in land fraud matters due to his (Mahony's) considerable expertise in this field. In this capacity as consultant, he could have answered queries from people he had previously been in contact with, when working on the investigation. Police records shows conclusively that Detective Sergeant Mahony did not take an active part in the actual Bargara land sales investigations after October 27, 1982.

SUPPLY Committee-Financial Statement-Resumption of Debate Debate resumed from 2 October (see p. 893) on Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen's motion— "That there be granted to Her Majesty, for the service of the year 1984-85, a sum not exceeding $588,000 to defray Contigencies—His Excellency the Governor." Mr SCOTT (Cook) (12.20 p.m.): It is rather interesting to note that both the member who asked the question about the problem at Edward River and the Minister concerned have seen fit to leave the Chamber, although I do not doubt that they will be sitting in their rooms with their ears glued to their television sets because they know I will have something to say about the role of the Minister for Northern Development and Aboriginal and Island Affairs. He is one of the weakest Ministers in what is a very weak team. Government Members interjected. Mr SCOTT: I am surprised that members of the Committee are laughing. I thought they would be rather worried about travelling on any safari with that Minister, because he is destroying the credibility of the Government. Government Members interjected. Mr SCOTT: Government members should not laugh about it; it is a very serious matter. If they listen for a while I will demonstrate why that is so. Government members should not point their fingers at me. I have the microphone, and only I can be heard. I am proud to be able to take part in the debate on the Financial Statement. I compliment the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Warburton) for his knowledgeable and masterful display and the way in which he destroyed the credibility of the Government and its Budget. He has not occupied that position for very long, but it certainly has not taken him long to get on top of the Premier and Mr Gunn. He made a very telling analysis of the Budget. Mr Gunn interjected. Mr SCOTT: Mr Gunn can laugh, but he has a trivial knowledge of economics. The only reason you are sitting there is because you are propped up by the Premier. You will be the first political casualty when he goes; you will not last a week. Mr Gunn interjected. The CHAIRMAN: Order! I will not allow this debate to turn into a slanging match across the Chamber. The honourable member for Cook wiU continue. Mr SCOTT: I am pleased to hear you say that, Mr Row— The CHAIRMAN: That comment applies equally to the honourable member. Mr SCOTT: There needs to be some control of the debate. Government members cannot stand fair criticism, certainly not that offered by the Leader of the Opposition. 1022 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO

I was very pleased to hear the Leader of the Opposition develop the theme of the $600m deception that this Government has tried to put over the people of Queensland. He highlighted the dishonest claim about the $600m boost for jobs, and I will have more to say about that later on. He said that honesty and credibility have been sacrificed to the cause of this mirage-like program, and that is exactly what it is. The Government's entire operations could be called a mirage. You are fooling the people of Queensland that you are offering good government and reducing unemployment, building up business prospects and things like that. But you are just not doing that; you are not doing your job at all. This Budget will certainly not lead to any real improvement. Mr Warburton's analysis showed that the figure is not $600m, not $90m as mentioned in the small print, but it might be $72.Im. That is one-eighth of the figure you and the Premier have claimed.

Mr Gunn interiected. Mr SCOTT: It is no good sitting there saying that it is mbbish, because it is tme. It is very difficult to glean facts from the Queensland Budget, because they have all been very nicely disguised by expert public servants. We on this side of the Chamber have looked at the Budget and know that your claims are simply not tme. Not only we on this side but also the people in the Cook electorate and people all over Queensland know that you mislead the House constantly. The Premier certainly misled the House with the last Budget when he promised the people of Cooktown a new hospital. The Budget was brought down in December last year. When I made some inquiries in Febmary to see when the project would start—I gave you a month's grace—senior Health Department officers told me that there was simply no money. I said that the project had been mentioned in the Budget, and they did not have an answer for that. I imagine that under their breath they said, "We are required to provide information for the Budget whether it is tme or not." That is the sort of things you are doing to Queensland. The Premier is simply not an honest man. He constantly misleads the people of Queensland, and he has done it again in this Budget. All the evidence is there. You can cry till you are short of breath, but it is tme, and the evidence is there concerning the Cooktown Hospital. I am astounded that Govemment members let the Premier get away with constantly misleading the people of Queensland. How many of the things referred to in the Budget will see the light of day? I do not think that many will come to pass. The $600m is a lot of nonsense. Unfortunately, quite a number of projects are listed for the Cook electorate. I say that because I am very worried that they will be treated in the same way as the Cooktown Hospital. The Cooktown Hospital got another mention in dispatches. The figure for that hospital is another misleading figure in the Budget. How much is part of the two-year program, how much is in the three-year program, and how much will not be tackled at all? The Government must answer those telling questions. 1 was rather interested to note that not once did Mr Gunn interrupt the Leader of the Opposition during his masteriy exposition on the Budget. You did not take the time to stand up at any time to rebut one argument. You could do that at any time during the debate. You have the right to speak. Opposition members have to wait their turn but you could stand up whenever you wanted to. You could interrupt the debate to give an answer—and you did not answer him because you do not know the answers. You are just hoping that the people will forget. The Government Whip said that this was an election Budget. Mr Gunn: Well, it is. Mr SCOTT: Who's election? Your election? Mr Gunn: Did you notice the public opinion polls? Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1023

Mr SCOTT: The National Party in Queensland will need all the help that it can possibly get for its Federal candidates, because they will go right down. It will be a wipe- out for the Liberal and National Party candidates. Mr MiUiner: What did Mr Hinze say about it? He said it would be a "holocaust", didn't he? Mr SCOTT: That is quite right. I was interested to hear him say that. We know that he has not the highest regard for the Liberals, but I think that his statement could be taken broadly and be applied to the National Party in Queensland as well. I read in the press today about a revolution in the National Party. What is happening over there? You are all held together by paper and glue. Without doubt the paper and glue will eventually fall apart in the humid political climate of Queensland, and down you will go. He is not taking any notes. He has nothing on which to stand and attack the Opposition's analysis of the Budget. We will have to wait till your public servants write the reply. The CHAIRMAN: Order! I remind the honourable member for Cook that when he refers to other members in this Chamber he should refer to them by their correct titles. I do not think that he has done that once in this debate. I also remind him that he has come very close to imputing improper motives. I suggest that if he does not moderate his speech I will deal with him under Standing Order No. 123A. Mr SCOTT: I accept your words of advice, Mr Row, and I will continue. The Budget brought down by the Premier and Treasurer will not be a Budget for the Federal National Party people in Queensland. I was interested to hear the member for Mulgrave try to take to task the member for Leichhardt (Mr Gayler). In doing so, he made an atrocious reference to Mr Gayler. I must say that Mr Gayler enjoys a glass of beer, but he can carry alcohol. He can enjoy a convivial glass and mix with people without any problems. He will certainly work on the member for Mulgrave if he takes note of him. The honourable member for Mulgrave made a scurrilous reference. I note that he was not pulled up for doing that. The member for Mulgrave is barely hanging onto his seat. We will see in the next Federal election how the votes are cast in Babinda and other areas in the electorate of Mulgrave. The member for Mulgrave referred to North Queensland Engineers and Agents. Because it deserves it, that firm will get work from the Federal Government. Because of the type of company it is, and because of the good men and women of Caims who work for it, it will get support from the Federal Government. There is a good deal of goodwill towards NQEA, and there is a good deal of goodwill towards the sugar industry in far-north Queensland. Mr Gunn: What about the submarine tenders? Mr SCOTT: I do not think the Minister knows anything about tendering. Mr Gunn: I do. Mr SCOTT: How can I say at this stage that they will win the tender? Mr Gunn: It will go to South Australia. Mr SCOTT: If it is a matter of goodwill—and unfortunately tenders are not evaluated on that basis, as the Minister knows—that firm will get the contract. The Federal Government has expressed a great deal of goodwill for the sugar industry. Mr Kerin is one of the best Ministers for Primary Industry that a Federal 1024 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO

Government has ever had. One would have to go back to the time of Ken Wriedt to find a Minister of equal capability. The Federal Government has given money to the sugar industry. Mr Kerin has said that the sugar industry must get its house in order. I suggest that honourable members read the article by Peter Trundle in "The Courier-MaU" last week. What criticism did that article offer of the Federal Government? Mr Milliner: None! Mr SCOTT: That is true. Peter Trundle criticised the sugar industry itself and the people who are mnning it. Under the administration of a Labor Government, the sugar industry operated in the proper way; but it has lost that ability now. Mr Gunn interjected. Mr Davis: He said that Peter Trundle was a member of the ALP. Mr SCOTT: I am sure that Peter Tmndle will love that! The National Party Government is doing nothing for north Queensland, and that will be reflected in the votes cast at election-time. Mr Stoneman interjected. Mr SCOTT: The member for Burdekin wants to put in his two bob's worth; that is about all he is worth. If Mr Stoneman listens, he will leam something about far-north Queensland. He is a newcomer to politics in the north and he has a lot to learn. I might add that none of his colleagues are contributing anything worth while to north Queensland politics. The performance of the Government in north Queensland will ensure the re­ election of John Gayler with an increased majority. I also believe that Brigid Walsh wiU be the next member for Kennedy. That will mean that there will be one fewer Katter in the political arena of north Queensland. I refer to Mr Katter senior, who is the member for Kennedy. I might add that, on the performance of the member for Flinders (Mr Katter junior), there will be no Katter on the ministerial bench of the State Government. My speech in the Adjournment debate attracted some attention from members on the other side of the Chamber. I am pleased to note that some of the things I say do attract attention. In that speech, I highlighted the lack of Budget proposals for northem development. In fact, the Budget displayed a total lack of concern for north Queensland and far-north Queensland. I spoke also about the ineffectiveness of the Minister for Northem Development and Aboriginal and Island Affairs. I endorse those remarks today. He has a grasshopper approach to his portfolio. That might be the wrong metaphor to use, because grasshoppers can come in plagues. With due respect to the Minister, the last thing that the Aboriginal people need is a plague of people like the Minister because he fails to look after their interests. Mr GUNN: I rise to a point of order. I draw your attention, Mr Row, to Standing Order No. 119, which states that a member shall not use unbecoming or offensive words in reference to another member. The member for Cook is using offensive words. Mr Prest: He is telling you the rules, Mr Row. The CHAIRMAN: Order! I do not need any member from either side of the Chamber to tell me the rules. Before the Deputy Premier and Minister Assisting the Treasurer rose to a point of order, I was about to remind the honourable member for Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1025

Cook that imputations of improper motives are out of order. For the benefit of the honourable member, I read from "Erskine May—Parliamentary Practice" as follows— expressions which are unparliamentary and call for prompt interference, may be classifed as follows:— 1. The imputation of false or unavowed motives. 2. The misrepresentation of the language of another and the acquisition of misrepresentation. 3. Charges of uttering a deliberate falsehood. 4. Abusive and insulting language of a nature likely to create disorder." Because some of the comments of the member for Cook can be classified in those terms, 1 ask him to desist from making them and to continue with his speech. Mr SCOTT: Thank you, Mr Row, for your advice. I am wondering why the Minister for Northern Development and Aboriginal and Island Affairs is not in the Chamber to defend himself He has two members taking up his cause for him. The CHAIRMAN: Order! I remind the member for Cook once more that it is within the jurisdiction of the Chair to defend any member of the Committee, and I am doing so. 1 warn the honourable member under Standing Order No. 123A. Mr SCOTT: I do not believe that I am transgressing the rules of the Chamber in any shape or form. The Minister for Aboriginal and Island Affairs only touches lightly on many things. Unfortunately, sometimes there is a sting in his tail; but that is how he operates—he concerns himself only with unimportant issues in north Queensland. However, occa­ sionally the Minister dives in, and he has the capacity for doing a good deal of damage. That is what I am trying to highlight in the language that I am using today. One thing that is not seen is butterflies shifting great loads. I liken the Minister for Northern Development and Aboriginal and Island Affairs to a butterfly; he is not carrying any great political load in the north. He is certainly not doing the people of far-north Queensland any good. He is not doing the job that he was nominated by the Premier to do. I want to know why. I am calling him to account. Important issues are involved in the north—water supplies, roads, health services, education and the development of ports. None of those issues are being taken up by the Minister for Northern Development; they are not mentioned by him. Nor are they mentioned in the Budget speech, as read by the Premier and Treasurer, except for a one-line mention of staff; and the only Northern Development staff is one executive officer in Townsville. No northern issues have been given priority by the Govemment. Of the things that were mentioned in the Budget, what will be provided? I do not know, and I simply do not trust the Government to provide them, anyway. The evidence concerning the Cooktown hospital is sufficient to back up my comment. One thing that was not mentioned in the Budget is a water supply for Kammba. Reference has been made to a $4.4m water supply project in central Queensland, which, it has been claimed, will benefit a member of the Premier's family. That sum happens to be the exact sum that would provide a water supply for the people of Kammba. It has not been provided. Things are being rigged in this State. People are not being given the attention that they deserve. The CHAIRMAN: Order! By saying that things are being rigged in this State, once again the honourable member is imputing improper motives against the Premier. I ask him to withdraw the comment in the context in which it was used. 1026 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO

Mr SCOTT: I will withdraw the remark, Mr Row. I must say that the Premier gets The CHAIRMAN: Order! The honourable member will withdraw the remark without qualification. Mr SCOTT: I have withdrawn it without qualification, Mr Row. All I was trying to say was that the Premier is given the best opportunity possible to take part in debates in this Chamber, but he is never here to defend himself, except when he uses question- time to make long-winded ministerial statements. The matter of a water supply for Kammba has been around for years. I have made representations concerning it, the Carpentaria Shire Council has made representations concerning it, and almost everyone in the area has made representations conceming it. However, all those representations were ignored by the Government. What happened over the $2.8m water supply scheme that was proposed several years ago for Kammba? It is an interesting commentary on the integrity of Ministers. The Minister for Local Government, Main Roads and Racing (Mr Hinze) is on record as having said that it would not be a requirement of that scheme that the business people of Kammba pay the $600,000 that they would otherwise have to contribute out of their own pockets. He promised a deputation comprising the shire clerk and councillors of the Carpentaria Shire Council that the business people of Kammba would not have to pay that money. What happened? The Minister welshed on his word. He claimed that Cabinet decided that the people of Kummba would have to pay that money. May I say, Mr Row, that the Minister cannot be trusted and that his word is not his bond? He promised those people of Kammba that they would not have to pay that money. Kammba still does not have a water supply. The Federal Government promised that it would look at the situation in the Carpentaria shire. It honoured its promise. It paid just under $lm to assist and it promised a contribution equal to that of the State Govemment. The Federal Govemment kept its word to the people of the Carpentaria shire. However, the point I stress is that the provision of water supplies is a State matter. It should be the State Government that provides water supplies in the Carpentaria shire. The State Government is so remiss that it did not even apply to the Federal Government for money for a water supply at Kammba or for other necessary water supplies in Queensland. It is trying to make out that the Federal Government has not provided the money. The Federal Govemment certainly is not remiss; it was not asked by the Queensland Government. So the opportunity went begging. Now the State Government is trying to blackmail the Federal Government into providing $2.2m. The Premier said that, if the Queensland Government provides $2.2m, the Federal Government should provide $2.2m to make up the $4.4m that is necessary for the newly designed scheme. A statement was made in this Chamber that money is available in Queensland for certain favoured irrigation schemes, but it certainly is not available for a water supply scheme for the people of Kammba. Water supplies and the augmentation of existing water supplies are needed in so many other towns in far-north Queensland.

So far the augmentation work on the Cooktown water supply has been carried out by the Federal Government. The augmentation work on the Coen water supply has also been carried out by the Federal Government. The augmentation work on the Thursday Island water supply has been carried out by the Federal Government, not by the State Government. The State Government claims that no water is available on Thursday Island. Where is that stated in the report of the Queensland Water Resources Commission? Thursday Island is like a frontier town. It is the administration centre for the border area between Australia and Papua New Guinea. It is an area in which development Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1027 must take place. The Queensland Govemment cannot turn a blind eye to the' needs of that area. For real northem development to occur, port development must take place. That is needed at Cooktown, because the wharf there is dangerous. Boats are moored five or six abreast. People who come ashore from the outside boat must clamber over the other boats. I wrote to the Minister for Water Resources and Maritime Services about that matter. I received the reply that the Government has no money to develop a wharf facility there. The Government is falUng down on its job. The same situation applies in Weipa and Thursday Island. Small boating facilities and major port facilities are urgently needed. The Government is doing nothing about that. Although boat-owners pay the full charges, they receive no service. All requests for the upgrading of facilities have been refused. The matters to which I have referred are important for two reasons. Firstly, the Government should recognise the effect that such development would have in Queensland. The Government talks constantly about development but does not do anything about it. The Govemment should put its money where its mouth is. The development of those facilities would improve the life-style of the people in those remote areas. Although they deserve something from the Government, they do not receive it. Firstly, the Govemment does not have the wit and perception to appreciate that. Secondly, it does not have the concern for people to implement those policies. The Commonwealth has stepped into the breach. The member for Mulgrave had the temerity to criticise the Federal member for Leichhardt (Mr Gayler). He referred to the Cooktown incident. As that matter relates to the Budget, I will set the record clear. It involves the expenditure of Government funds. Peter Morris drove to Cooktown. When did the Minister for Main Roads (Mr Hinze) last drive on the roads in far-north Queensland? He flies over them. When did the Minister for Northern Development last drive over the roads in north Queensland? Again, the answer is, "Never"; he flies over them. Peter Morris drove over the roads in north Queensland and called on the chamber of commerce. He does not need the Federal member for the area to be in tow. Mr Gayler was attending to his electoral business. Along with a large group of people, he was attending a meeting of the Australian Labor Party in Cooktown. The back-bench members of the National Party have to point their Federal counterparts in the right direction, but Mr Gayler does not need to do that with the Federal Minister. If back­ bench members of the National Party do not do that, their Federal counterparts get into trouble in the electorates, and they do not like that. The State members try to temper the foolishness of their Federal counterparts. Mr Sinclair is a classic example. Which member in his right mind would want Mr Sinclair going round his electorate? It is the last thing that he would want. I hark back to Peter Morris, the Federal Minister who drove to Cooktown. He is looking at the roads. He will drive to Weipa. That is one characteristic of Federal Ministers that I admire. They are getting out where the action is. They are showing up the inadequacies of the Queensland Govemment. Mr Morris is concerned about roads in remote areas. Queensland Ministers do not go into those areas. They do not even take the trouble to make submissions to the Federal Govemment. Mr Morris said that there had been no application for Commonwealth funding of the Peninsula Development Road. When I drive round the northern areas, all I see is Australian Bicentennial Road Development signs. Commonwealth money is being used for remote areas. Even the Minister for Environment, Valuation and Administrative Services (Mr Tenni) is trying to claim credit for bridge construction and roadworks carried out in his electorate with ABRD funds. He claims that State funds are being used. However, that is incorrect. I refer to the Kammba water supply. I said that no approach had been made to the Federal Government under the country towns water scheme. Blackmail was used against the Federal Government. Similar tactics have been used in relation to roads. It is heartening, however, that the Commonwealth is active up there. There are signs indicating that, under the Australian Bicentennial Road Development Program, work is being done 1028 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO on the ChiUagoe Road, the Kennedy Highway, the Cooktown Road and the Gulf Developmental Road. Mr Davis interjected. Mr SCOTT: I am pleased that the member for Brisbane Central agrees with me that ChiUagoe is a great place. The Leichhardt and Cook voters are aware of the Commonwealth's efforts. So are the Kennedy voters. The results will show in the Federal election. In health matters, country people are getting a raw deal from a city-oriented Government. The Cooktown Hospital is a classic example. I ask the Minister for Health to give the people of Cooktown an undertaking on when it will be built. Other health issues in my electorate are not being addressed by the Government. There is a need for additional doctors and nurses, for example. Nurses for community health services are needed in towns such as Georgetown and Cooktown and other remote areas so that aged persons can be assisted. Sisters are required in places such as Mount Surprise and Lakeland Downs. I ask the Minister for Health: When are those services to be provided? There are numerous matters on which I have not even received answers to my correspondence to the Minister for Health. I am hoping for increased administrative efficiency. Ministers should get themselves into gear and expedite replies to correspond­ ence. It is often said when we rise in Parliament to ask a question, "Put it in a letter." It takes longer to receive a reply to a letter than it does to obtain an answer in question- time, and question-time is bad enough because of the mles that apply in the Parliament. The people in the Cook electorate and I would like to know when the Health Department will take over the health facilities previously administered by the Department of Community Services. Again I ask the question: Is there to be a Cape York Hospitals Board to administer those facilities? The question was asked a year ago. The people should be told. The Budget has been brought down. The fine print has yet to be determined, but we should know what will happen in the peninsula and the Torres Strait area. What about the take-over of health facilities in the Torres Strait area. Is that to happen? I put those questions to a Government that simply does not care to give the answers. That is a shame. I am putting the questions to the Minister for Health and wiU repeat them during the debate on his Estimates. He needs quite a deal of time, apparently, to deliberate on such matters. Does that indicate that he has not the capacity to do the job? If he has not, he should resign. On so many occasions I have written to him but I have had no answers. On one matter I did receive a reply. It must have slipped through the system. I refer to the request for a morgue at the Croydon Hospital. I have heard that the morgue is to be placed in a lawn locker. The mind boggles! That illustrates the Government's thinking. That idea was proposed in all seriousness. The Normanton Hospitals Board is being required by the Health Department to provide that facility, but the department will not allow it to spend money. The instruction was to get a prefabricated shed—a lawn locker. When it was pointed out that it would be most embarrassing to move mortal remains in and out of such a facility, particularly during rain, the answer was, "Get two lawn lockers." I do not know what they cost—possibly $200 each. Immediately the expenditure has been doubled! What a shocking answer for the people of Croydon! Let the Government back-benchers deny it if they can. They are silent now. They do not know very much about northern areas. Mr Stoneman: Wait and see. Mr SCOTT: I will wait. I have been waiting for a long time. All I know is that they have not done much that is effective. However, save us from a National Party Government that would install two lawn lockers as a morgue facility at the Croydon Hospital. Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1029 It would be remiss of me if I did not mention education. At long last—very belatedly—the Education Department has made moves to take over education in the Torres Strait area. Why did it not happen years ago? The Government has been widely criticised for the poor standard of education in the Torres Strait area. The teachers up there do their best with the material they have available, but they just have not been given a fair go by the Govemment. People up there are worried that the group principal idea for the Torres Strait Island School may be abandoned next year when the new region is established in Cairns. I hope that is not so. I make a strong personal plea to the Minister. I notice that I have gained a spark of interest in members opposite. When they feel like a winter holiday, they travel to the Torres Strait area to look around. I urge honourable members opposite to go up there again, ask questions and, for goodness' sake, listen to the answers, because the people up there will tell them. Because the need is there, that Torres Strait school should be kept going for several years in the new region. To close that school down would be a bad move. There is talk of having three group principals for the eastern, central and western islands. I submit that that is simply not good enough. Another aspect of education in the Torres Strait that is troubling me greatly is the proposal for Year 8 classes to be established on two islands. My inquiries reveal that that has not been well received by practising teachers in the area. Administrative teachers, those who have forgotten the practical aspects of education and who have gone to the top ot the tree, might see some merit in the idea. That seems to be where the proposal is coming from. Has the Government changed its criteria for secondary departments? That is what these will be—embryonic secondary departments. When I inquired about the establishment of a secondary department at Cooktown, I was told that 25 to 30 students were needed before that could happen. I understand that, at the very most, only eight children will go into Year 8 on the islands concerned. So why should a Year 8 class be established there? The students simply will not get the proper education. They will have to go to Thursday Island for Year 9, and they will not have the proper basis or the necessary suppport for the remainder of their secondary education. That will be a very wrong move. I must refer to the Dimbulah school, which has been mentioned in this House on numerous occasions. I have made personal and written representations to both the Minister for Education and the Minister for Works and Housing. Surely the Govemment can find the money to reconstmct the Dimbulah school, something that is wanted so badly by the students, teachers and parents of the area. Is it tme that $300,000 is to be spent on a school at Laurinel while so many students in the State are going begging for a better education? The Committee has not been given a satisfactory answer to that question. I made representations for a school at Rossville for at least 28 students. The Govemment provided a bus run over 40 km of very rough road. For nearly two years, the children up there have travelled to school in a bus over very rough roads when the Government could have provided a school in the area. So let Laurinel take its place in the department's priority plan. Has that area got something special going for it? Mr Campbell: The money has already been spent, but it was not in the program. Mr SCOTT: All I can say is that that is a shame. Some sort of wrong influences must have been brought to bear for that to happen. Because of that, the students in Rossville have to catch a bus. I have asked the members of the committee of the Minister for Northern Devel­ opment and Aboriginal and Island Affairs Mr Stoneman: What about the rest of the education story? You have not mentioned the good things. 1030 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO

Mr SCOTT: I have a time-limit in this debate. Will the Education Estimates be brought on for debate? No, they will not! EveiTthing is hidden in the fine print. I am not worried; I will take very opportunity to sort honourable members opposite out. However, I have limited time, so I will move on to the Minister for Northem Development and Aboriginal and Island Affairs. Mr Row, will you advise me if I am out of order? I have to ask the question: Is the Minister insane? The CHAIRMAN: Order! I ask the honourable member to withdraw that question and the word "insane" Mr SCOTT: I will withdraw it, Mr Row. I asked for your advice. I make an unqualified withdrawal. Something is wrong when the Minister can appear on a program such as "60 Minutes" and say the things that he said at the Edward River Mission. He is trying to divide that community. He said in the House that there was a public meeting and that the people had agreed to the filming of the program. Has the Minister made the decision, of has he still to get it through Cabinet? The Minister is the one who is being destmctive up there. He sat down on the ground and put down little pieces of bark and asked some people if they would like that land. That totally supine public affairs program—"60 Minutes"—did not have one telling question to ask the Minister. As yet, the deeds of grant in tmst have not been issued. People in Aboriginal communities do not even know what land they will receive under the deeds of grant in tmst, in spite of extreme pressure from a whole range of prople for the Govemment to act honestiy in Aboriginal affairs. The legislation was passed a long time ago, but nothing has been done. The Minister sat on the ground up there and told two people that they will be given what appear to be fairly vast tracts of land. I ask: what about the other people in the community? What about the tmstees who administer the deeds of grant in tmst who, under the legislation, will be charged with the responsibility for dispersing that land? They have the responsibility of drawing up the lease agreements and having them approved by the Minister for Lands, Forestry and Police. Yet the Minister for Northem Development and Aboriginal and Island Affairs sat in front of the television cameras telling the people of Queensland that such and such will happen. The people of Edward River will not see that program. I know the two people concemed, and I have the highest regard for them. It is terribly divisive legislation. What is the Minister trying to do? Is he trying to destroy those people and the other communities? Other people wUl be asking, "What about our land?" The Government has two stories on Aboriginal land rights. On one hand, the Minister for Northern Development and Aboriginal and Island Affairs and other Ministers travel round telling the grazing fratemity, "We are not giving land to Aborigines." Yet the Minister for Northern Development and Aboriginal and Island Affairs was on television giving the lie to that statement and saying the the Govemment is doing so. Where does the Government stand? What is it doing about land rights in Queensland? It tells the Aboriginal people that it is giving them land rights. Is the Premier aware of his Minister's behaviour in this regard? I do not think that he is. I wish that there was some spine in the public affairs programs in this State. They should be taking a telling look at what is happening. We are certainly not getting any information from the media. But this is the place in which criticism can also be levelled, and it is my job to do that. Aboriginal and Island people have waited for years now whilst an incompetent Government has tried to sort out its Aboriginal land ri^ts policy. The Govemment has been hypocritical over this issue. I have given instances of Ministers talking to the grazing fraternity with one tongue, one might say, and talking to Aborigines with another tongue and telling them a different story. I wonder what the grazing fraternity in Queensland thought about that television program? I am certain that the Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1031 ripples will flow on and on through the National Party halls of power. I am certain that this matter will lead to the Premier removing the Minister for Northem Development and Aboriginal and Island Affairs. Because the Minister for Northem Development and Aboriginal and Island Affairs does not speak to his under secretary, there is a smoke-screen constantly thrown over Aboriginal and Island Affairs. That is a dreadful state of affairs. I cannot understand why the Premier allows that to happen. Surely either the Minister or the under secretary has to be removed. With the present state of affairs, how can the department progress? I ask the Minister for Lands, Forestry and Police: If he could not deal with his permanent heads, would he allow the situation to continue? I know he would not, because there is a bit of strength and substance to him. Perhaps he has a bit of clout in the Cabinet that the Minister for Northem Development and Aboriginal and Island Affairs does not have. It is a cry from the heart of the people in that area that something should be done, and I ask the Govemment to do it. Perhaps I should tum my attention to Sir Robert Sparkes. After all, he is the power-broker. Should I write to him or should the people say to him, "Exert your influence and have one of those people removed, because it is a bad state of affairs." The Aboriginal and Island people are not fools. They know what the under secretary is doing. In answer to a question from me the Minister for Northem Development and Aboriginal and Island Affairs had to admit that in the last nine months the under secretary had made 20 trips to or through Caims. The people believe that he is going up there for one reason only, and that is to bring disgrace on this Govemment. As soon as he arrives there he is seen in the company of a young female departmental officer. That is a shame. I look round the faces of the good Govemment members and tell them that their Govemment, or that small segment of it, is being destroyed because that situation is allowed to continue. I ask those Government members who are able to do so to take action and bring some rationality into the debate. Something has to be done. It has been said that there is no fool like an old fool, but the Aboriginal people might add that there is no roue like an old roue. This whole affair is causing a total loss of faith among the people, and that is a shame. It should not be allowed to happen. It is also the reason there is no effective administration by the Department of Community Services. What about all the things I have asked for? It is bad enough writing to the Minister for Health and receiving an answer after six or eight weeks, but it takes three months to get an answer from the Minister for Northem Development and Aboriginal and Island Affairs, and that has to reflect incompetence on his part. The CHAIRMAN: Order! The member used the word "incompetence" when referring to the Minister. That is an unparliamentary term when it is used to refer to a member of this Chamber. Mr SCOTT: "Incompetence" is an unparliamentary term? The CHAIRMAN: Yes. The honourable member will withdraw the word. Mr SCOTT: I will withdraw it. Can I replace it with "lack of ability"? The CHAIRMAN: The honourable member will continue with his speech. Mr SCOTT: I will continue my speech, but there is a lack of ability. Sitting suspended from 1 to 2.15 p.m. Mr SCOTT: Before the luncheon recess I had spent some time outlining many examples of the inability of the Minister for Northem Development and Aboriginal and Island Affairs—and his Under Secretary and I mean both of them—to mn a department. 1 will spend the remaining few minutes of my time citing some other examples. 1032 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO

Mr Lingard: What a waste! Mr SCOTT: It is not a waste of time. The honourable member will not like what he hears. I am glad to take the member's interjection because he is on the Minister's committee. A little earlier, he said that I gave him a mention. I did not give him a mention, but he must accept collective responsibility for what has happened. I have photographs of houses at New Mapoon. For the information of honourable members. New Mapoon replaced the old Mapoon. Leaders of the Mapoon community, which was near Weipa, were taken to Bamaga and shown some ground. They were told to make a decision to go there. The houses were built many years ago, but have not since been maintained by the Government. They are in a very dangerous condition. The buildings are falling apart and they are electrically unsound. On the last occasion that I was at New Mapoon I drew the attention of the manager to the fact that earth wires on the houses had been disconnected. The manager told me that he would give the defects urgent attention. That is probably the only work that has been done, but it was done purely as a safety measure. 1 will table the photographs because they show the poor conditions that the department and the Government require people to Uve under. Many years ago, the people were taken from a long-established community at Mapoon and put into a line of houses in an unsightly area. They were then forgotten. They pay their rent, and are good tenants, good parents and concerned people. The Government is totally uncaring when it allows them to live is such houses. The condition of the houses is an utter scandal. They are dangerous because of the electrical faults, the lack of staircases and the rotten floor-boards and because the sullage is allowed to discharge onto the ground. The condition of the houses can be attributed only to the landlord who, in the first instance, is the Department of Community Services and, secondly, the Government of the State. A strong moral obligation lies on the Government to carry out effective maintenance work on those houses and on almost all other houses in Aboriginal communities. In the Torres Strait area, houses are built without internal plumbing. They are built on slab-cement floors that do not have any piping in them. When a plumber instils a sink he knocks a hole through the wall of the house. The pipes discharge onto the ground or into very primitive sumps. The bathrooms and toilets are in detached buildings, well away from the houses. Duckboards lead to them. When someone with me asked responsible departmental people what was supposed to happen to the water in the out­ house, or how it should be cleaned up, he was told it could be mopped out or sloshed out onto the ground. I should point out that the department does not provide taps in the bathrooms. The water has to be carried in by bucket. What dreadful advice to give the tenants of the houses and the member who represents the area. Mr Lingard: What were they like when the Labor Party was in control? Mr SCOTT: They were a lot better. We looked after the Aboriginal people. Just because the honourable member was a principal does not make him a strong historian. He should think in terms of the present age rather than worry about what happened under Labor. I am glad that the honourable member interjected because Labor will be in power after the next election in Queensland. The National Party Govemment is falling to pieces. Labor will show how to govern properly. A Government Member: When you become the Government! Mr SCOTT: That will be when we become the Government. The honourable member did not quite say next year, but he is worried. I advise the Government to become more competent in its financial management so that it makes a fair distribution of funds throughout the State. This is the time for a real deficit instead of the Clayton's deficit that the Government has imposed on the people of Queensland. Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1033 Whereupon the honourable member laid the photographs on the table. Mr STONEMAN (Burdekin) (2.20 p.m.): I take the opportunity today to inform the Committee of the background and the implications of a major Budget initiative concerning the rationalisation of remote area student allowances in Queensland. The initiative amounts to $3.1m for the forthcoming year. That sum will contribute signifi­ cantly, I believe, in overcoming the deficiencies that have been recognised increasingly in the last few years. Three Ministers for Education have recognised the importance of maintaining and improving financial assistance to isolated families for the provision of education for their children, and the Ministers have received the dedicated support of officers in the Department of Education. This is a positive and ongoing tribute to the commitment of the Government towards helping every student in Queensland attain the educational standard desired. I congratulate the Premier and Treasurer and the present Minister for Education (Mr Powell) on the positive steps that have been taken towards the ration­ alisation and strengthening of remote area student allowances. It saddens me that the member for Cook, who represents the vast majority of the people in the Gulf and Peninsula areas, did not see fit to recognise the importance to his electorate of the new allowances. Mr Cahill: He has left the Chamber. Mr STONEMAN: Yes, I notice that he has left the Chamber. He made no comment in his speech about these allowances. The assistance provided for people in Mr Scott's electorate will have a tremendous impact. It is the culmination of years of work by the members of the Isolated Children's Parents Association of Queensland, and particularly by the Caims radio branch that covers the electorate of Cook. Ministerial Advisory Committee: Since the commencement of payment of allowances to isolated students in Queensland began many years ago, changes in the rate, style and criteria under which payments have been made have generally evolved in an ad hoc manner. Following acceptance by the then Minister for Education (the Honourable Val Bird) of a resolution from the BoUon branch of ICPA in 1980 requesting that a committee be set up to review all allowances paid to isolated children and make suggested improvements, Mr Bird's successor (the Honourable W. A. M. Gunn) formalised the committee on 6 October 1981. The terms of reference for the committee of 11 people from appropriate organisations were flexible. In effect, they provided for an open book approach to all existing allowances. The terms of reference also allowed for research into new methods of assisting isolated children to gain access to the appropriate level of schooling that was denied to them simply because of geographic location. The committee compiled a report, containing a series of recommendations, that was presented to the present Minister (the Honourable Lin Powell) and investigated by the department. The resulting rationalisation of allowances commenced this year with the introduction of a travel allowance scheme. That scheme has been fine-tunedan d expanded to cover the whole of the State. Existing allowances: The Remote Area Allowance Scheme, the Senior Remote Area Scholarship Scheme and the Student Allowance Scheme are to be phased out so that those who entered with the expectation of the allowances continuing will not be disadvantaged as might be the case if the allowances were simply cut off. New allowances covering tuition, travel and hostel boarding replace the old schemes. The committee's conclusions were similar to those of the Tannock report—as it is popularly known—which was chaired by Professor Peter Tannock of the Commonwealth School's Commission. The costs of board or living away from home for primary and

64164—35 1034 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO secondary education were identified as a Commonwealth responsibility, the cost of tuition and travel to school being generally accepted as a State responsibUity. The new schemes incorporate the following changes in eligibUity criteria and thus ensure that benefits are more equally distributed— 1. No means test will be appUed to the new allowances. 2. Distance criteria wiU be made consistent with those that apply to the Common­ wealth assistance for isolated children scheme. 3. Students in Years 1 to 3 are now included in the schemes so that all students from Years 1 to 12 are able to receive benefits. 4. There will be no appUcation of academic requirements in the criteria. The new schemes are— Remote area tuition allowance: This allowance will be paid to assist parents whose children incur a tuition cost by virtue of attendance at a boarding institution. The payments will vary from school to school owing to the wide range of charges, but in no case will exceed the actual fees paid. The allowance will be paid directly to the school as a means of assisting not only parents in the education of their children, but also the schools that provide that education. The assistance is designed to complement existing State and Commonwealth per capita grants to non-State schools and to reflect the level of fees paid. Remote area hostel allowances: Children attending hostels are generally accepted as having access to a State school and thus have no tuition fees to pay. Because student hostels in mral areas provide very necessary facilities, the hostel aUowance has been stmctured so as to moderate in some way fee increases and improve facilities for those boarding at the hostels. The Remote Area Travel Scheme: Because this scheme breaks entirely new ground, a much broader resume of the factors that lead to its stmcturing are required so that the logic may be better appreciated. I have here two maps that serve to support and graphically illustrate the base and final boundaries of the committee's investigation and conclusions. For the information of honourable members, I table those maps. Whereupon the honourable member laid the documents on the table. Precipitating factors: Increasingly over recent years, there has been a recognition by many people in Queensland that there are a considerable number of families who, by virtue of their physical isolation in the extreme sense, incur costs well in excess of the norm in conveying their student children to a place of board where they are able to receive appropriate education. The Isolated Children's Parents Association (ICPA) has passed a considerable number of resolutions requesting the implementation of a travel scheme for isolated students in the State along the lines of a Westem Australian scheme. Particular emphasis has been given by the association to the problems experienced by families in the Gulf/Peninsula area and the far south-western Channel Country. Following a study completed by several residents of the lower Peninsula area of northem Queensland, which was presented to the State conference of ICPA at Charters Towers in 1978, representations were made to the then Treasurer, Dr Edwards, for financial assistance. Dr Edwards agreed with the need to implement such a scheme, but made the point that drawing lines of demarcation would be very difficult. He said, "Show me how boundary lines can be drawn indicating needs, and you can have the money!" Among the committee's recommendations was one conceming the need for a travel allowance to assist students in far-flung areas to attend the boarding school closest to Supply (Financial Statement) 4 October 1984 1035 their home. The committee accepted the principle that any travel scheme should work from the extreme areas of the State inwards towards the boarding school and that the maximum amount possible be paid to those students assessed as living in extreme areas of geographical isolation. I am delighted to see that the honourable member for Cook has returned to the Chamber to hear of the good work that is being done in his area. Thus began the quest for a formula that could be recognised as fair and provide the basis for relatively simple administration and legislation. Basic formula: The committee recognised that virtually every family in Queensland has a considerable travel component encompassed within education, and a few simple sums show that "normal" daily mnning to a bus or even a school around the comer meant that distances of between 3 500 and 4 000 km were commonplace for urban families and those living near smaller centres throughout mral areas. The committee was also mindful of the fact that for students travelling to and from boarding schools train travel presented considerable problems in terms of lack of service schedules matching school breaks, time taken up by train travel over very long distances and security (particularly for girls). It accepted the arguments put by the ICPA over the years that bus travel was more suited and appropriate for students with long distances to travel to and from boarding school. The committee also considered the question of bypassing the nearest boarding school and accepted that the basis of scheme payments should be to the nearest centre that provided the full range of facilities, and should be on a per-student basis rather than a per-mile-type scheme that would be cumbersome and costly to administer. Thus emerged the fact that three general areas on or near the eastern seaboard contained all necessary components providing for the full range of boarding school facilities— (1) The Toowoomba/Brisbane/south coast region; (2) The Rockhampton/Yeppoon region; and (3) The Charters Towers/Townsville region. A study of a road map will indicate that these centres are connected to the western areas by a series of sealed roads, rail lines, and, of course, air services. Members of the committee who had practical experience over a large area of the State and personal knowledge of transporting their own children to boarding school were of the opinion that families living within 300-400 km of the three designated centres were in a relatively favourable position, in that it was possible to make a one-day round trip to the boarding school centre if no bus service was avaUable, or, if it was, generally could travel up to 160 km to a bus service travelling the main tmnk routes. For instance, if, subject to weather conditions, parents decided to deliver their student child or children to boarding school personally, and they lived 300 km from the centre, a total of eight 600 km trips per year would have to be traveUed, for a grand total of 4 800 km. Usually, such trips have a twofold purpose, whether for business, medical treatment or pleasure. It is believed that many families within a radius of 300- 400 kms of a boarding school more often than not deliver their children personally to the school. Because of a greater number of roads and better roads in the south-eastem section of the State, a radius of 400 km from Toowoomba provided the first cut-off Une to the west, with decreasing distances applying to Rockhampton and Charters Towers because of fewer roads and higher travel costs generally. The distances involved were 350 and 300 km respectively. This first measurement provided the key to dividing the State into three areas. As the committee sought in principle to provide the extremes with the maximum benefit within budgetary considerations, Area 3, as it is known, resulted. 1036 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem)

Area 2: It was recognised that once a family Uved outside the area designated as being within a reasonable distance of a designated centre, further expenses would have to be incurted to maintain similar access, and investigation shows that most children further than 300-400 km from a boarding centre generaUy travel by bus or, in some instances, by aircraft, to and from school. These families, however, can reasonably expect to travel up to approximately 160 km each way to meet a bus or plane, and that is accepted as not being excessive under normal road conditions. The three boundary circles of Area 3 come within approximately 160 km of the main road/rail lines of communications servicing the inland, and if that distance is duplicated to the west, Area 2 emerges in logical terms. The anomaly is in the north- westem quarter of the Charters Towers circle indicated as a 160 km buffer line, which is not as weU serviced as areas to the south. For this reason, a line along longitude 144 is seen as an appropriate boundary. In summary, families living in Area 2 are seen as requiring assistance additional to that required by families in Area 3 but are still less remote than their neighbours to the north and west. Area 2 families are virtually locked into a need to utilise bus, aircraft or train as means of travel for their boarding school student children. Area 1: This region emerges logicaUy from the above criteria, but also has origins for other reasons, uppermost among which is great uncertainty in relation to weather conditions from January until May of most years, when leaving home could well mean not being able to retum. The area is divided into two natural regions of vastly differing topography, but in both cases, and under perfect conditions, it is still not generally possible to place a student child on a bus service connecting with the nearest boarding school centre and return home in the one day. An overnight stop is required of either the student or the parent, or both. The survey noted earlier, which was carried out by Mrs Helen Betts while she lived at "Abingdon Downs" in the lower peninsula, showed that families in that region almost invariably faced the cost of aircraft charter at least once a year (mostly for the retum to school in late January) and that assistance, if and when it came, should recognise that. A study of the watershed and drainage pattem for Queensland, coupled with monsoonal rainfall pattems, fairly suggests that the further down a river system one lives, the greater are the effects of isolation during the wet season in the Gulf, Peninsula and Channel Country regions. I hope that the member for Cook is listening and learning a little about that part of his electorate. The combination of river systems, wet-season influence, a total absence of scheduled bus services, and long distances to boarding school centres, mostiy over indifferent road systems, made the final boundaries of Area 1 quite identifiable. Fine-tuning area boundaries: A study of the maps that I have tabled shows that the shaded radius area from each boarding school centre follows shire boundaries almost exactiy, with two exceptions, namely, the Balonne and Etheridge shires. SimUarly, the line between Areas 1 and 2 is also generally along shire boundaries, with some exceptions. In the Balonne shire, because those families living west of meridian 148 were obviously disadvantaged in comparison with the residents of the Booringa shire, the western section of the shire has been included in Area 2. As to the Quilpie shire—given that the committee accepted the fact that train travel is no longer a totally acceptable transport facility for remote-area students, QuUpie has a rail facility that allows all-weather access to connect with bus routes from Charleville to the east. Quilpie shire is arguably the best served in terms of all-weather access of those shires partly or wholly in Area 1. To have totally excluded the Quilpie shire from Area 1 would not have been consistent with the distance criterion, and to have included the whole of the shire would have created anomalies right across the State, as even a Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1037

cursory study of the area boundaries indicates. Thus, meridian 144 is the easternmost line permissible for the shire, the alternative being meridian 143 further west. For the Boulia shire, the use of latitude 22 as a northern cut-off became automatic, given that the shire boundary mns to within a few kilometres of Mount Isa city. In strict terms, most of the Croydon and Mareeba shires and all of the Etheridge shire would have been excluded from Area 1 if the criterion of a buffer line had been extended. The committee accepted, however, that that would not have been reasonable, given the extremes of wet-season access and lack of road services throughout the region. Again, for consistency, the eastern cut-off line for the Etheridge shire should be meridian 143, or a line running due north from the point where the Richmond and Hinders shires meet the Etheridge shire boundary. However, that would have created an anomaly between the Etheridge and Mareeba shires, so meridian 144 becomes a reasonable balance. The Etheridge shire, because of proximity to Charters Towers, good road access to the north and south and a rail link to Caims, could be said to be very similar to the Quilpie shire. Probably they are the areas most favourably served by the scheme in comparison with some of the extreme areas. The region does not, however, have reasonable access to scheduled bus services connecting directly to the nearest boarding school centre, and this is recognised by a lower threshold in the distance criterion. The problem of drawing boundary lines for the payment of allowances is difficult under any circumstances; but where there is no commonly accepted boundary such as a shire boundary, the problem is deepened. The precedent of using lines of longitude and latitude is not unique to the travel scheme and has been a part of Queensland life for many years, as recognised by the basic wage districts. The difficulty of dividing a State as decentralised and geographically complex as Queensland cannot be overstated, but it is essential to recognise that there are families who have distances, and thus costs, beyond the normal in conveying their student children to boarding school. Honourable members must recognise that the Remote Area Travel Scheme is based on the following several very basic factors— 1. The scheme derives its basis from the location of three major boarding school centres along the eastern seaboard. 2. That students living away from home at places other than at the above centres, will be assisted under similar criteria but at varying rates not necessarily connected with the three major areas as defined. 3. That aU families, regardless of location in Queensland have costs associated with the delivery of children to schooling. 4. That the principle of not making payments to bypass the nearest appropriate centre must be maintained. 5. That, regardless of the area in which a family lives, there is no direction as to which centre or type of boarding facility is to be used. 6. The prime principle of working from the outside towards the coastal belt prevails throughout the scheme. 7. That the introduction of the scheme is on a staged basis and is part of a package of aUowances—not just a scheme in isolation. 8. That payments will generally be made on the basis of providing an average eight bus student fares from the nearest scheduled routes pick-up point to the most direct boarding school centre. 1038 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO 9. That in any scheme there will be people either side of a line and that the drawing of such a line is essential if reasonable assistance is to be extended to those most in need. 10. That families in area one do not have the luxury of large numbers and ready access to even basic facilities and thus deserve the assistance and support of every isolated family, regardless of which area they live in. The Remote Area Travel Scheme has been many years in coming, but quite specifically responds to requests from individuals and organisations made over those years. The boundaries are believed to be as practical as it is possible to conceive and have generally stood the test of close scmtiny by families and organisations from all three areas. It is hoped that the logic of the areas as well as the scheme as defined will alleviate the fears of those who feel that they are in some way missing out and be accepted as part of a package that seeks to even out assistance to families living throughout the remote areas of this vast State. Mr CAMPBELL (Bundaberg) (2.43 p.m.): The Leader of the Opposition has clearly set out the Labor Party's view that the Budget, as presented by the Premier and Treasurer, is a fraud—a fraud of which the Government is obviously very proud. The presentation of the Budget is a deliberate exercise to con the public into believing that the Govemment is making a spectacular effort to serve the best interests of the State. To begin with, the Special Major Capital Works Program must be viewed in the context of a Budget for the current financial year. The Queensland Budget operates on an annual basis, but the entire thmst of this special package is to roll an illusory three- year program into a one-year Budget. In effect, the Budget tells the people of Queensland what the Government will spend this year, next year and the year after. Next year the Budget will again tell the people what the Government will spend in that year, and that will be repeated in the third year. In effect, the people of Queensland will be told three times what the Government will spend once. Nowhere in the full-page newspaper advertisements is the public told that less than one-eighth of the $600m splashed across the headlines will be spent in the current year. These works in the Special Major Capital Works Program are no more than what the Government would be expected to carry out to meet some of the State's urgent needs over the next three years. To date, in this debate not one Government member has clearly shown the extra increase in capital works spending in the 1984-85 Budget above the normal Capital Works Program. Not once have Government members stood up and identified and clarified the so-called special works in the Budget. 1 will consider one aspect of this matter—the Estimates of expenditure from Tmst and Special Funds for transport. Many Ministers have referred to the many extra jobs that will be provided by the electrification of the railway lines in central Queensland. Next year $128m will be allocated for that project. What will happen to the jobs that were supposed to be created with the $282m that was allocated last year to the Railway Mineral Projects Fund? They were nothing more than the jobs provided under the new Main Line Electrification Project Fund. In fact, the position is even worse because, although $284m was allocated, only $208m was spent. So the fraud goes on. Last year the Government boasted about how many jobs it would provide, but it did not even spend all the money. It is just reallocating the money again this year, so it is having two bites at the cherry. It now says that this money will be spent over two years. It is the same fraud that has been going on for a long time. I now want to read to members what the editorial of "The Courier-Mail" of 21 September 1984 thinks of this State Budget. It states— "The Queensland Budget is largely an accounting exercise in spending money raised by the Federal Government." Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1039

Day after day this Government complains about the taxes raised by the Federal Government, yet all it can do is spend the same money. It takes the praise for spending the money raised by the Federal Govemment. The editorial continues— "The Premier's advisers have put the best possible gloss on a fairly mundane set of accounts." Recently the member for Surfers Paradise referred to what I suggest is this Government's illusory support for private enterprise. Let me read what "The Courier- MaU" had to say about that— "Although the Govemment has been saying much about increasing Queensland's technological base, this Budget does little to provide tangible, financial support apart from providing land for technology and science parks." It continues— "By comparison. Enterprise Queensland, the Government's self-congratulatory propaganda exercise, will receive $1.2 miUion." It must be great to be congratulated for spending money to advertise oneself The editorial continues— "Queensland's future rests with two major industries, tourism and mining. Apart from a 20 percent increase in the Queensland Tourist and Travel Corporation's budget, there is not much evidence of an imaginative approach to this important industry. Those optimists in the mining industry who waited for a change of heart on the attitude to rail freights will still be waiting. This Budget will do little to encourage new mines. It does even less for those risk-takers in the business community which the Premier so admires." That is a comment about this Government, which is supposed to protect small business and the free enterprise way of life. Later in my speech I will go into some detail about the lack of help that this Government has given to private enterprise in country areas. Recently even the member for Balonne complained that Australian farmers will pay tax because they have become profitable. I would like all farmers to be paying tax, because if they are paying tax, they must be making profits. Every member would want every cane-farmer to be making a profit and be able to pay tax. The problem is that they are not making a profit. People who complain about that worry me. Obviously they do not understand the basics of business and taxation. A person pays tax only when he makes a profit. All business people should be paying tax because that would mean that they were all making a profit. Government members have condemned the Federal Govemment because, they say, it is not doing enough for the farmers. I will now read a letter in the "Bulletin" from a Lindsay Tomkins of MuUamuddy, via Mudgee, New South Wales. It is headed. "Primary Producers' Friend", and is in these terms— "When Prime Minister Mr Hawke made Mr Kerin Minister for Primary Industry, I did not think his qualifications as ex-public servant were sufficient for the job. But, since the publication of the Hawke-Keating budget, my opinion has changed considerably and I am pleased to admit my mistake as, according to the budget, Mr Kerin has done more for the primary producer that the combined efforts of the last two ministers—Mr Sinclair and Mr Nixon." It should be noted that they were both National Party members. The letter continues— "Both the last named gentlemen were elected as primary producer's representatives and members of the National Party. But all they achieved for the primary producer was detrimental to them, such as high tariffs on machinery, much higher prices on distillant and much higher prices on fertiliser. 1040 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO In conclusion, I would suggest primary producers in general support the party who supports them and not the party who only claim they do." Mr Comben: Who said that? Mr CAMPBELL: A New South Wales farmer. It is excellent to see the amount of money being spent on capital works in Bundaberg, particularly the extra money for the Bundaberg Irrigation Scheme. For once we have a supposed completion date. Although the year 1990 is 10 years later than the originally proposed finishing date, I am glad that it has been announced, because the scheme will provide extra stability for the country. Mr Yewdale: That was only because of your good representation. Mr CAMPBELL: I thank the honourable member. Mr Prest: You have received no assistance from the member for Isis. Mr CAMPBELL: He looks after his own interests. It was announced in the Budget that funding will be provided for a marine technology building. That is very important because it will mean additional technology and edu­ cational facilities for the fishing industry. It seems marvellous to me how the State Govemment always takes credit for spending Federal Govemment money. TAFE colleges are funded by the Federal Gov­ ernment. It is important to appreciate what the Federal Govemment is doing in providing funds in the Bundaberg district for TAFE colleges. The special education unit is very welcome. For a long period much energy and determination was devoted by the parents of children with special needs to get this special education unit. Children with special needs will no longer have to be sent to Rockhampton or Brisbane. Do honourable members realise that these children in the electorate of the Minister for Education had to travel to Rockhampton or Brisbane for education? Bundaberg will now have a Government building which, it is hoped, will house the staff of the Department of Primary Industries. It is indeed welcome, because the old facilities are probably the worst in Queensland. How can good service be provided without good facilities? I call on the Government to make the Bundaberg section of the Department of Primary Industries the horticultural research centre for southern and central Queensland. This is the area in which the largest increase in horticulture has taken place. It is the best area for a horticultural research centre, because experiments can be conducted in the field for 12 months of the year. The Budget papers appear to be grossly deficient. It is difficult for many people to determine exactly what is being spent. A comparison with the precise information presented in Victorian and New South Wales capital works budgets reveals how shoddy and incomplete the Queensland Budget papers are. I will now refer to the Auditor-General's report for the year ended 1983-84, which states— "The Statement sets forth information specifically prescribed by the law and such other information as the Premier and Treasurer considered should be included therein to give a true and fair view of the transactions for the year in the public accounts and the Treasurer's Investment Suspense Account, and the financial position at the end of the year of each of those accounts." Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1041 This is the key sentence— "By comparison with the previous year there has been some reduction in the coverage by the Statement but, as I have indicated, the reduced coverage meets the statutory requirements." The Govemment covers up things and provides the least amount of information that it can. Those figures should be provided so that they can be fairly and squarely considered by the Opposition. Let there be tme and open govemment. I tum now to consider some of the figures contained in the Auditor-General's report. I will deal, firstly, with receipts from State sources. The main revenue source from taxation is pay-roll tax, which provided $409.7m for the year ended 30 June 1984. That increase of 3.9 per cent was achieved despite an increase in the exemption level and a reduction in the number of registered tax-payers during the year. What that means is that more pay-roll tax per tax-payer is being levied. The Government's argument that the pay-roll tax exemptions will be worth while is a fallacious one. The Auditor-General's report reveals that stamp duty provided $333.8m in the last financial year, which is an increase of 23.2 per cent. The Govemment claimed that there would be a reduction in stamp duty. The report also states that there was an upturn in the duty collected on mortgage transactions, motor vehicle registrations and transfers, credit and rental business and insurance policies. The Queensland home-owner, pensioner, unemployed worker and ordinary family man now pay stamp duty of 25 per cent on their home insurance premium. That is a shocking state of affairs. The Auditor-General's report states further that collections from land tax decreased by $1.6m to $26.8m. The Government has increased the stamp duty payable on home insurance premiums for people such as pensioners and the unemployed, but the wealthy, large land-holders have had their taxes reduced. I turn now to railways. The Auditor-General's report reveals that general increases in goods and livestock freight rates, passenger fares and other charges were introduced from 1 November 1982 and from 1 September 1983. Increases of about 15 per cent applied from the earlier date and of 10 per cent from the latter date. In the last two years, railway charges have increased generally by 25 per cent, and there has been yet another increase. But this Government claims that it does not increase taxes. These increases have affected country people and farmers. They have also affected decentralised businesses because they cannot afford the extra freight rates that are being levied. 1 turn my attention now to the Treasury Investment Suspense Bank Account. I quote from the Auditor-General's report— "The Treasurer may make investments from the Treasury Investment Suspense Bank Account on account of the Treasurer's General Cash Balance... Such investments are made without appropriation and without Governor's Warrant, the principle being that such investments are not 'expenditure' of pubUc moneys, but a change in the form in which balances are held. The Treasury Investment Suspense Bank Account is also used in connexion with moneys placed by certain bodies with the Treasurer for investment on their behalf Sums held in the account are invested in short term investments." In 1983, $1.4 biUion was involved in short-term investments. After one year, that figure is now approaching $2.25 billion. Instead of being used for the people of Queensland, that money is gaining interest on the short-term money market. However, the amount in loans to statutory bodies has decreased from more than $195m to over $107m. That means that the Govemment is investing less money on behalf of statutory bodies. However, the most important point—one could say that this is the killer—is that Queensland tax-payers have $ 1.25m worth of shares in Suttons Foundry, a company which is in liquidation. They are not worth a cent. What great budgeting! What a great Treasurer he is who can say, "Last year, I was able to buy for the people of Queensland $ 1.25m worth of worthless stock."! 1042 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statement)

In addition to the public debt, the State is responsible for the repayment of Commonwealth grants under various schemes and arrangements. Certain departments also borrow in their own right from private lenders, and two authorities which are "departments" for the purposes of the Act borrow money for onward lending to statutory bodies. At the date of the compilation of the report, the information in regard to the public debt was incomplete. In other words, the Treasurer cannot even teU the people of Queensland how much money the State owes. That is total incompetence. A very important segment of the Budget deals with the money that Queensland obtains from the Commonwealth and the Commonwealth Grants Commission. I revert to the meeting that was held in Brisbane early this year, at which Queensland Treasury officials frankly admitted that Queensland's deficit was debt related. The Australian Bureau of Statistics has shown that Queensland has the highest public sector debt in Australia and that many of the tax concessions and financial initiatives that were announced in the last State Budget had failed to increase transactions through Brisbane. In other words, they were failures. I believe that the position is no better in the 1984 Budget. The Treasury officials had to admit that the Queensland economy had failed to adequately diversify and that it remained narrowly based and overdependent on the mining and mral sectors. In the 26 years that the Govemment has held office it has failed to diversify, stabilise and make secure the economy of Queensland. That is an indictment on a poor, tired, wom-out Government. The Grants Commission argued against Queensland's claims that it had been hard done by and short-changed over the years, and it referred to Queensland's allegations that Medicare compensation arrangements place Queensland at a disadvantage compared with other States as totally irrelevant assertions. The Treasury officials would not back­ up the statements made by Queensland Cabinet Ministers. The Grants Commission found it odd that Queensland had failed to argue in its submission for assistance for water supplies and sewerage in country areas. This Government claims that it is concerned for the plight of country people, so is it not strange that the Government did not even consider the financial plight of many of the mral and provincial local authorities and argue on their behalf for water supplies and sewerage in the country areas of Queensland? The Govemment has eroded subsidies and has even shown a lack of concem for water, sewerage and road needs of country Queenslanders. It pretends that it upholds the rights of the State, yet it erodes the rights of the local authorities and the individual. I turn now to Table 17 in the document titled "Summary Tables Relating to the Public Accounts 1984-1985", That table is headed, "Statement of Loan Receipts and Expenditure from all Sources and Loan Account Cash Balances for the Financial Years, 1978-79 to 1983-84" Under the heading "Expenditure", loans and subsidies to local bodies are shown. In 1981-82 they totalled $45.5m, whereas in 1983-84 they had dropped to $27.5m. That shows how much the State Government cares and looks after local authorities. Mr Littleproud: That is not a tme measure at all. Mr CAMPBELL: It is a tme measure and shows that the Govemment does not give help to local authorities. What the Government has done is take the burden of taxes and charges out of its State Budget and put it onto the shoulders of the rate-payers in local authorities. Mr Yewdale: That local authority near the Mackenzie River did all right. Mr CAMPBELL: Yes, it did all right, especially in Main Roads Department works. The aspect that concerns me is that the subsidies have nothing to do with areas of need. In other words, the money is not going to the pensioner, the unemployed or the Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1043 ordinary Queenslander. That is the tragedy of the Government's deliberate policy. It imposes the greatest onus upon the pensioners, the unemployed and the ordinary man. Table 18 sets out programs for State works and housing, and loan raisings by State, semi-Govemment and local authorities from 1972-73 to 1984-85. Under the heading "State Semi-Government and Local Authorities" it can be seen that in 1983-84 semi- Government and local authorities had approved programs worth $392m. In 1984-85 they will increase to $1,552 billion. The table shows that the financial responsibilities are being put onto the local authorities. To maintain the myth of Queensland being a low-tax State, local authorities will be forced to raise all their taxes by imposing increased charges. I turn now to the approved program for State works and housing, and loan raising by State, semi-Government and local authorities, per head of population. In 1984-85, under that program $612.98 was raised per head of population compared with the Australian average of $444. In other words, the Queensland Govemment is putting on local authorities the onus and burden of raising extra money by raising taxes and raising charges. Local authority charges in Queensland are the highest of any State in Australia. The figuresare — State Amount $ New South Wales 369 Victoria .... 422 Queensland 612 South Australia 309 Western Australia. 594 Tasmania 530 Queensland has the highest local authority charges in Australia owing to the deliberate policy of the Queensland State Government. The evidence before the Grants Commission cast serious doubt on the Govemment's plans and seriously questioned its ability to successfully manage the Queensland economy. That reflects on the financial competence of the Premier. I believe that he has none. If Queensland had a Treasurer who really believed in looking after the economy of the State, why would he he not have had time to read Queensland's submission to the Grants Commission? On 28 August I asked, "Will this Premier and Treasurer go down as the most incompetent Treasurer in the history of Queensland?" Following the Budget that he has presented the only answer is "Yes" I turn now to the state of the economy. I shall refer to some comments made by the "Canberra Survey", which I think is a monthly publication. It states that the basis for most of Queensland's extraordinary growth in the last decade—the development of the central Queensland coal and aluminium industries—has dramatically slowed down. To maintain the economic growth to which Sir Joh is so politically allied requires a new economic basis. As capital investment in the central Queensland coal industry has dropped, new investment has not taken over. Queensland is lagging behind. Investment has dried up. Queensland's growth, especially between 1978 and 1983, did not come from coal mines and alumina plants churning out their products, but from the building of new coal mines and alumina/aluminium projects. It was a building process that attracted the capital investment and created the jobs throughout the State. Once a coal mine is up and mnning, 600 to 1 000 employees are required to maintain a production of 4 million tonnes to 5 million tonnes a year, whereas in the building stage, 2 500 to 5 000 people are employed. The constmction of major tumkey projects built up from the early 1960s, with the first central Queensland coal mines, the Weipa bauxite mine and the Gladstone alumina plant, to 1983 when five coal mines were under constmction at the one time. 1044 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem) In 1983 major projects worth nearly $2,000m were under constmction in central Queensland. In 1984-85 that has dropped from $2,000m to $600m in Queensland. That is less than one-third of last year's figure. That includes the BHP mini-steel-mill at Brisbane, which is not committed, but excludes most tourist-related constmction. There has been an excessive reliance on coal. In March, the Department of Commercial and Industrial Development issued a list of projects totalling $20.2 billion that were committed, feasible and possible. However, the list included 37 coal projects, constmction on none of which is expected to commence until the late 1990s, and a coal-loader, when present coal-loaders are working at barely half capacity. It includes also 10 oil-shale projects and a coal liquefaction plant, constmction of which is not expected until at least the year 2000. How wonderful to think that all of this will happen in the future! Even if oil prices quadmpled, only one or two oil- shale projects could be expected to commence—and then only in the 1990s. A dissection of the $20.2 biUion worth of projects that the Government boasts about shows that, in the $5.4 billion committed category, 11 projects worth $3.2 billion have already been completed. In other words, we are told that money that has already been spent is yet to be spent. An amount of $1.4 billion has already been spent on the other projects. Of the remaining $4 billion, $3.3 billion is for Government and semi-govemment projects. Out of the claimed $20.2 billion, only $500m is for private sector projects. That clearly demonstrates the massive drop in private sector investment in major projects in Queensland. It shows why the constmction and heavy engineering sectors in Queensland are facing a halving of work in progress and more than a halving of work on order. I reiterate that "The Courier-MaU" editorial claims that the Queensland Government has done very little or nothing for the risk-takers—the private enterprise section of our economy. Mr Littleproud: What have the unions done for the risk-takers in this State? Mr CAMPBELL: What have the unions done for Queensland? Our country has been built on the blood, sweat and tears of our workers. Nobody else has done it. Other people's money may have been used, but the workers of Australia have built this country, and I am proud to say it. The workers have played their part in the accord. They have done their bit. On the other hand, the State Govemment has tried its hardest to break the accord. Deliberately and stealthily it has increased charges at more than the rate of inflation. The increases are hidden in regulations. The Government does not present its increases in the State Budget. That is the sneaky and fraudulent way the State Govemment acts. It adds 25 per cent to the worker's home insurance premium, in stamp duty, but takes less in land tax from the wealthy land-owners. That is the type of Govemment it is. I am proud to stand up for the workers. We have had 200 years of dedication from our workers. They have fought for the country, too. Electricity demand has dried up. The problem has arisen because of the Government's policy of providing no direction. There is doubt about the viability of some of the major projects in the Government's projection of capital investment worth $3.5 billion. The State Electricity Commission has slowed down construction of the StanweU Power Station as much as it can economically. Many projects have been either cancelled or deferred. I challenge Government members to stand and admit it. The Minister for Industry, Small Business and Technology has conceded that it is now much more difficult to attract major projects to Queensland. Despite access to cheap coal—$11 a tonne compared with $120 a tonne paid by European and Japanese electricity authorities—electricity charges in Queensland are now the same as, or in some cases slightly higher than, those overseas. If the Government is not going to utilise the resources of the State and give the benefits to business, how can it expect businesses to come to Queensland? Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1045

In the late 1970s, the Queensland Government outlined a plan under which, after the initial resources investment boom, Queensland's next growth phase would be based on attracting secondary processing industries on the basis of cheap energy prices. However, Queensland has not been able to deliver that price advantage, so the second phase of the State's development plan has stalled and that is the problem with the State's economy. The area of greatest concern now is the lack of direction of the economy, the lack of diversification and the lack of a stable and secure industrial base. I now turn to one aspect that exemplifies the way in which the Govemment has failed to secure the industrial base of the State's economy. For most of my information, I rely on a 1983 report by Professor C. P. Harris from the Department of Economics at the James Cook University into Decentralisation Project No. 2 for the Wide Bay- Burnett region, Bundaberg and Maryborough. That report deals with the strange approach that the Govemment has to assisting country businesses. A recent article in "Queensland Country Life" stated that the Queensland Govem­ ment would back the rescue of Massey-Ferguson (Aust) Ltd. The manager of a local development board said that there would be talks with the Deputy Premier and Minister Assisting the Treasurer (Mr Gunn) on a range of options to keep the factory open. He said that interest had been shown by a large machinery company already serving the sugar industry, and that a possible option was the formation of a consortium to mn the operation. That was what the Deputy Premier said he would do for a manufacturing plant in a country area of Queensland. However, only this week in this Chamber the Deputy Premier and Minister Assisting the Treasurer blamed the company for going broke. He said that it was the company's own fault, that it was simply bad luck. He could not care less. That is an indictment on the Government's attitude towards development in the country. In his report. Professor Harris said that the Queensland Govemment has no explicit decentralised policy or set of policy measures designed to favour the establishment or expansion of industries in non-metropolitan parts of the State. Regardless of what is said by the Deputy Premier and the Minister for Industry, Small Business and Technology, the finding of Professor Harris is a most damning criticism of the non-directional policies of the State Government. The report further stated that, in general, a very large proportion of the respondent firms in the Bundaberg and Maryborough districts were established without any assistance from the Queensland Government. In other words, that was free enterprise. The Government said, "Make it on your own. We will give you no help at all." The firmsals o indicated that the most important identified difficulty was the adverse effect because of the smallness of the local or regional markets. That difficulty can be overcome by the State Government only if it influences future population distributions in the State in favour of decentralised regions. Over the decades, the Goverment has done little to encourage people to go back to the country. The Govemment has adopted the policy of "Get big or get out" The shocking state of affairs is that many people have got out, which has resulted in dwindling populations in country towns. The Govemment has adopted no positive approach to decentralisation. After small local markets, the main difficulties faced by firms in the Bundaberg and Maryborough districts are related to distance from markets or sources of material supplies. In other words, the effects of distance, transport costs, distance from main markets, remoteness from the centre of Government and its departments, delays in receipts of stocks of material, delays because of communication and delays in repafrs and maintenance services are what is holding back industry in the country areas. Many of those areas could be helped by the State Government. It should be asked to take some positive actions to help businesses in country areas. One of the conclusions reached in the report was that the Queensland Government places emphasis on local purchases and supply preference and reference is made to the cost and efficiency of rail transport, market development assistance, long-term development 1046 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO finance, pay-roll tax relief and industrial estates. In spite of that, in most cases this Govemment has not done anything. In relation to the cost and efficiency of rail transport— in two years the Govemment has increased charges by over 25 per cent. That will hold back businesses in country areas. There has been a call to provide subsidised freight-in and freight-out for businesses in country areas to enable them to continue. Further assistance could be provided through the decentralisation of Govemment departments. They should also be permitted to order and buy in country areas. Orders of $125 or over cannot be placed in Bundaberg, even if they can be filled more cheaply. The department has to order through the State Stores Board in Brisbane. Why does the Govemment not support local communities? The report states also that decentralisation incentives are a necessary condition for the reversal of the increasing tendency for Queensland industry and population to be concentrated in the south-east comer of the State. However, such incentives are not in themselves a sufficient condition, and other factors, including local initiative and effort, a sustained revival of the Australian economy and a substantial reduction in the rate of inflation must also be favourable for greater non-metropolitan regional economic growth in Queensland in the future. It should be pointed out that the Federal Govemment is playing its part by substantially reducing the rate of inflation and by aiding a revival of the Australian economy. At least it is helping in that respect. A positive State Govemment policy is needed that would lead to the diversification of industry to ensure the stability and security of the economy of the Wide Bay/Bumett region. I can only say that this Budget has not given the necessary direction. It will not help industries in country areas to become more diversified, stable and secure. On those grounds, this State Budget must be condemned. Hon. W. D. LICKISS (Mt Coot-tha) (3.23 p.m.): I join this debate not so much to comment in detail on the provisions of the Budget as to discuss govemment generally as it now exists in Australia. As far as the Budget is concemed, since 1957 the Govemments of Queensland have moved towards, and achieved, balanced Budgets, and this Budget is no exception. I congratulate the Premier and Treasurer on the presentation of his second Budget. It is progressive, and it is designed to assist in improving the State's economy and to provide and promote employment. In any case, the well directed expenditure of public moneys must improve the economy. I believe that the question of ensuring that value is obtained for the public dollar is of importance in the implementation of the Budget. I take this opportunity to congratulate the Under Treasurer and his staff for the tremendous amount of work that they put into the preparation of the Budget and the Budget documents. This aftemoon, I wish to draw attention to the trend in govemment in Australia and to try to demonstrate how the fabric of our system of govemment is being undermined. Australia is both a geographic and a legal entity. However, the geographic and the legal entities do not coincide. The geographical includes all the mainland and Tasmania, while the legal entity—more correctly called "The Commonwealth of Australia"—does not include the Territories, including the Northem Territory and the Australian Capital Territory. The reference to Australia, without any qualification, has led to legal confusion and has obscured the fact that Australia has not a unitary Govemment, but is a federation. The Commonwealth Government, both nationally and internationally, is reluctant to acknowledge the cortect legal position. It is necessary to mention these aspects in order to see matters in their correct perspective. The Commonwealth of Australia is the result of an agreement by the various Australian colonies "to unite in one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth" The agreement obtained its legal force by an Act of the United Kingdom Parliament. Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1047

The Constitution foUowed the United States' pattem by conferring specific powers on the central body and leaving the residue of powers to the States. That is often forgotten. The broad division of powers revolved around the idea that some powers relating to overseas and interstate matters—for example, defence, customs and trade— were appropriately exercised by the central body, while the ordinary everyday matters were left to the States which had a more intimate contact with citizens than a more remote central body in Canberra. Federation was the result of a compromise. States did not wish to lose their identity, but agreed to combine for common purposes. One outstanding aspect of the compromise was the creation of the Senate as the States House, which h was originally to be called. The Senate is often branded as an upper House, which frequentiy obstmcts the wiU of the elected lower House. The legal reaUty is that the Senate is an integral part of the Commonwealth Pariiament and is, itself, elected by the same voters who elect the House of Representatives. The concept of a States' House was considered necessary because of the disparity in size and population of the various States. Indeed, without the Senate there would not have been any federation, and people should not lose sight of that. As events have turned out, particularly with the liberal interpretation given by the High Court to the Constitution in respect of Federal power, the Commonwealth Govemment and Parliament have assumed a dominance which was hardly anticipated by the founding fathers. Until the recent decisions of the High Court in respect of the extent of the extemal affairs power, the power which contributed most effectively to Commonwealth strength is the grants power (section 96). Through its stronger fiscal position and by annexing conditions to its grants, the Commonwealth has been able to influence and largely control numerous State activities. By virtue of the power and the conditions imposed on the States in respect of grants, the Commonwealth has been able to create several departments whose primary function is to regulate the manner in which States may spend the moneys advanced by the Commonwealth to the States. Health, education, primary industry are but some of the areas of State power, but such power is very much circumscribed by the control exercised by the Commonwealth through the power of the purse. The recent High Court decisions have opened a new and potentially devastating means of the Commonwealth's obtaining a direct means of acquiring power at the expense of the States. The effect of those decisions is that where the Commonwealth enters into any international agreement under which it assumes obligations, there arises power in the Commonwealth Parliament to legislate to give effect to those obligations. The term "obligations" has received a very wide ambit and it is immaterial whether the agreement speaks in terms of counselling or urging rather than imposing a direct obligation. As such agreements can be over virtually any topic, the implications for the States are horrendous. Section 109 of the Constitution gives paramouncy to vaUd Commonwealth legislation, so that legislation enacted pursuant to an intemational agreement—and perhaps also in respect of matters of even international concem—can override any State legislation. For instance, if the Commonwealth entered into an intemational agreement conceming, say, criminal punishment, the Commonwealth Parliament, by its legislation, could override any or all similar State legislation. The wide ambit given to section 109 has the result that, if the Commonwealth legislation purports to cover the field, there is no room for State legislation on the particular matter. It is to be noted also that agreements are entered into by the Executive and that parliamentary sanction is not required at Commonwealth level in respect of the making of the agreement, even though it is required for the implementation of the agreement. 1048 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO

The power to legislate arises from entering into the agreement. Once that power exists, it may or may not be exercised as the Parliament decides. I now point out the danger of some High Court decisions. The decisions of the High Court in the two major cases decided recently were not unanimous. In each case there was a bare majority of one; in each case the Chief Justice dissented. The Chief Justice and Mr Justice Wilson pointed out in graphic terms what consequences would, or could, result from the interpretation favoured by the majority. The majority did not consider that there were any inhibitions on the extemal affairs power arising from the federal nature of the Constitution and that reference to a balance of power between the Commonwealth and the States was irrelevant. The stage has been reached in Australian affairs when the whole nature of federalism has been eroded greatly and the States are likely to be rendered impotent. Because of the use of financial power and the extension of extemal affairs power, the Constitution, as it affects the States, is something vastly different from what was intended by the founding fathers to be effected by the indissoluble agreement to establish a Federal Commonwealth involving a sharing of powers. There are many who regard the States as anachronisms and believe that the existence of seven Governments and Parliaments is a waste of money. The United States and Canada have survived nationally and intemationally as federal entities. Likewise, Germany, Switzerland and other nations retain federalism. Like all compromises, federalism may not be ideal, but it is a practical means of creating unity amongst diversity. The motto of the United States of America, "E pluribus unum" (one from many), is relevant today. Australia covers a large geographical area. State Governments dealing with day-to­ day issues and familiar with events and the desires of their citizens, can deal more effectively with local issues than a central Government operating in a capital that is removed from the mainstream of Australian life and whose citizens are largely professional public servants who are, consciously or unconsciously, influenced by their somewhat sterile environment. People need someone to whom or something to which they can relate and from whom or from which they can expect a better appreciation of their problems. If States did not exist, they, or something like them, would need to be created. It would be difficult for people in Cooktown, wanting an urgent decision on a matter of local concern, to have to wait for the views of someone in Canberra. Those people who advocate a centralist Govemment—and I refer to members of the Labor Party— admit that there must be a form of regional Govemment. What they see in place of the States and the sovereignty of the States is a system of administrative agencies or regions, which will be beholden to the sovereignty of the central Govemment in Canberra. The Commonwealth public service is notoriously centralised. Moreover, the risk of the interests of isolated and less-populous areas being overlooked or disregarded in favour of more electorally sensitive places is by no means minimal. If the people of Australia wish to have a unitary Govemment, they should be given the opportunity of saying so by a referendum. The constitutional guarantees thought to exist have been side-stepped as the result of the direct and indirect acquisition of power by the Commonwealth. Australia is moving towards a unitary Government, not in the way envisaged by our founding fathers—if that happened, perhaps, to be the desire of the people of Australia—but by stealth and deception perpetrated largely by the centralists in Canberta. Mr Davis: You are still on the same old stuff. Mr LICKISS: Hello, he is awake! Good on him! At this stage of our history, it is appropriate to pause and consider where we are and where we should go. If we are to remain a federation, the balance between States and Commonwealth needs to be identified and secured. Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1049

The trend, since Federation, has been an increase in Commonwealth power with a corresponding decrease in State power. It is appropriate that, as Australia marched towards nationhood and emerged from the general overlordship of Great Britain, the body which represents the Australian people should have had sufficient stature and powers to move freely on the international scene. That does not mean, however, that it needs to be supreme at all levels of activity within Australia. International co-operation is quite compatible with decentralised government at the domestic level. The growth of centralism in domestic affairs within Australia (intemal and not external) has come about by (a) financial power; (b) external affairs power; and (c) beneficial interpretation of the Constitution by the High Court. Finance is, to a large extent, in the realm of politics. That is to say that, at present, the disposition of moneys by the Commonwealth is determined by policies of the central Government and by its attitude towards policies of State Govemments. States should not be crippled or hobbled by the arbitrary power now exercised by the Commonwealth. The money, though raised by the Commonwealth, comes from the people and, where the Commonwealth raises money for disposition to the States for their essential services, it is misleading to refer to the money as Commonwealth money. In respect of the composition of the High Court, the appointment of judges is a matter for the Commonwealth, although there is a requirement of Commonwealth law— which, of course, may be repealed—for consultation with the States. Consultation may be—and frequently is—mininal, as I found out. The reality is that the Commonwealth can appoint anyone it wishes. No doubt, judges subjectively consider themselves impartial, but, as members of the highest tribunal not bound by its own decisions, judges are free, in constitutional areas, to express their individual views on what a constitutional provision means. Such views can be affected by the personal views of the judge as to what the provision means or should mean. Recent decisions have shown quite startUng departures from what was commonly accepted as being the case. For instance, the High Court, by a narrow majority, has allowed representation of mainland Territories in the Senate, the States' House. Such senators are on equal terms with State senators and, indeed, may—and have—become Ministers of the Common­ wealth Government. The Koowarta and Tasmanian dam cases show considerable orig­ inality in their exposition of the extemal affairs power. As has been said, agreements entered into by the executive of the Commonwealth can create legislative powers in the Commonwealth Parliament, notwithstanding that the powers are ones otherwise exercisable by the States. Such a weapon in the hands of the Commonwealth can be used to weaken and emasculate the States. The postion is critical and demands attention. How, then, is the balance between central and decentralised govemment to be adjusted? Granted, the Commonwealth has and should have power to enter into intemational agreements. That does not mean, however, that the Commonwealth cannot consult in a meaningful way with the States in respect of those agreements where the matters dealt with in such agreements have a substantial impact of States and concem matters which are, intemational agreements apart, ones over which States alone can exercise jurisdiction. What is meaningful consultation? How is it to be undertaken? How is it to be underwritten? In the first place, there needs to be machinery available to identify relevant agreements. Such machinery involves representation from States and Commonwealth both at the political level and at the officer level. The States cannot insist on an input in respect of purely external matters, but they have a very great interest in matters which affect them. Accordingly, in respect of proposed international agreements which deal with matters of State concern, there should be meaningful consultation both as to the necessity to enter into such agreements and, if the agreeements are to be entered into, the terms on which the Commonwealth will become a signatory to the agreement. 1050 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO The machinery involves the creation of a ministerial council assisted by relevant officers with expertise in respect of particular matters. The present position is unsatisfactory. While the Commonwealth can acquire power, it would need to develop, in many cases, vast administrative areas to effectively execute the agreement. The States already have, in most cases, the necesary apparatus—for example, courts, police and facilities, and the duplication of these, for singularly Commonwealth purposes, would be grossly and wastefuUy expensive. A very real problem which arises in respect of agreements is that the power to legislate is restricted to giving effect to the agreement. That is important. This means that the agreement becomes the source of power. Such agreements are not always drafted with the domestic problems of member States in mind. The agreements are general in their terms and, as a consequence, there is often room for speculation as to their meaning. In the Australian context, we are aware of the time, energy and expense associated with ascertaining the meaning of the apparently simple phrase in section 92 of the Constitution which states, "Trade, commerce and intercourse among the States shall be absolutely free." The irony of the situtation is that intemational agreements, whUst enhancing Commonwealth legislative power, restrict and put in narrow compass that power, as well as, potentially, the unrestricted power of the State. In a very real sense, the power in respect of subjects of intemational agreement is vested in some intemational body. Quite often the countries, which are so active in such bodies, are anything but the embodiment of the principles which the agreement espouses. For instance, the Soviet Union was one of the early signatories to the covenant deaUng with human rights. Many countries with repressive regimes are signatories to documents expressing high principles of freedom. There is a real need to bring matters back into perspective and this may be done by- (1) Meaningful consultation which involves— (a) Ministerial councU (treaties council) consisting of ministerial reprentatives from States and Commonwealth Mr Comben: Mr Lickiss, you're boring. Mr LICKISS: I thought that the honourable member might find some point of interest in this. Mr Comben: Only if it was accurate. Mr LICKISS: Out of the mouths of babes! As I said, there is a real need to bring matters back into perspective. It may be done by meaningful consultation which involves— (a) Ministerial council (treaties council) consisting of ministerial represen­ tatives from States and Commonwealth; (b) Such council to be assisted by appropriate officers from States and Commonwealth. (2) The council to identify agreements which bear substantially on State issues. (3) In respect of agreements which affect States, the States have a significant input— (i) whether the Commonwealth should be a party to any such agreement; and Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1051

(ii) if the Commonwealth is to be a party to such an agreement, the terms and conditions of such participation. (4) Effective means of establishing and maintaining such consultation which may be by way of— (i) Constitutional amendment; (ii) Commonwealth and State legislation; (iii) By a treaty between the CommonweaUh and the States. The legal efficacy of these options is in descending order. I apologise if I have bored the honourable member for Windsor, who, although he purports to be a student, is not terribly bright. One would not put a high stake on his IQ. However, I might simplify it for him by summarising the matter in the following way— (1) Australia is a federation consisting of a central body—the Commonwealth and the States. (2) The Constitution provides for a distribution of powers— (i) Specific powers to the Commonwealth; (ii) Residue of powers to the States. (3) The Constitution is the result of a compromise under which, generally speaking, the central body has power over overseas and interstate matters, while the States exercise powers over their own domestic matters. Mr Comben: That's not tme. Mr LICKISS: It is tme. Perhaps the honourable member should see me when I have concluded my speech. Outside is a brochure, simply written, which is handed out to Year 7 children to explain the Constitution. Mr Comben: And that is about all you base your constitutional law on. Mr LICKISS: The honourable member may be surprised. I will continue my summary for him— (4) The power of the central body has expanded to the detriment of the States by reason of— (i) Financial power, especially grants power; (ii) Interpretations by the High Court, especially of the extemal affairs power. (5) Through the grants power, the Commonwealth exercises control over many State activities—for example, health, education and primary industry—and, to do so, has established numerous Commonwealth departments. (6) High Court decisions, particularly in the dam case, by the narrowest of margins have opened the door to considerable expansion of power to the Com­ monwealth so as to enable it to deal with matters which are otherwise reserved to the States. (7) The result of the High Court decisions is that where the Commonwealth Executive enters into an agreement with one or more countries— (i) The Commonwealth Parliament has power to legislate to give effect to such agreements; (ii) In doing so, it cannot go beyond the terms of the agreement; (iii) There is no limitation as to the subject-matter of such agreements. They may—and do—include matters which are ordinarily only within State power; (iv) Where the Commonwealth Parliament legislates, for practical purposes the State cannot legislate. (8) The use of the external affairs power results in an increase of Commonwealth legislative power, but the need to confine legislation to the terms of the agreement 1052 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO

limits the Commonwealth as to the extent to which it may legislate and the States as to the power to legislate at aU. (9) The position, all round, is unsatisfactory. (10) No objections can be taken to Commonwealth participation in agreements which are tmly international in character or which only incidentally affect domestic activities, but there should at least be consultation since, in many cases, there wiU be some impact on State matters. (11) Where agreements will have a substantial effect on State powers or affairs, States should have a real input both as to whether the agreement should be entered into at all and, if so, the extent and terms of participation. (12) In order to determine what agreements are appropriate, and particularly to identify ones affecting States, machinery should be set up to carry out such vetting. (13) Such machinery could be— (a) Ministerial Council (State and Commonwealth Ministers with appro­ priate officers' support); (b) Established and maintained (in descending order of effectiveness) by— (i) Constitutional amendment; (ii) Commonwealth and State legislation; (iii) Formal agreement between States and Commonwealth. Mr Davis interjected. Mr LICKISS: The honourable member for Brisbane Central asks about new States. Let me tell him about the 60 States that the Federal centralist Labor Govemment would like. In fact, it has already advocated them. In the time of Mr Uren, when he was responsible for DURD—the Department of Urban and Regional Development—what was to happen? First of all, the Labor Government intended to directly fund local govemments. Once it had weakened the States completely, it intended to set up 10 regions in Queensland. Those regional councils would fund the local authorities. That would have meant that local authorities would have withered on the vine and Queensland would have ended up with 10 rather powerful regional councils, which would not have had the sovereignity of a State but would have had powers delegated from a central Government. That move was to be repeated State by State in an effort to introduce into Australia a central Government and, with that, a republic. Let the honourable member for Brisbane Central deny that. Let him try to retort that in his time Calwell did not advocate 60 States to bring about the decentraUsation of Australia! However, they would not have been the sovereign States that Australia has today, which share power with the CommonweaUh Government under the federal system as envisaged by our founding fathers. There would have been a centralised, all-powerful Government in Canberra which delegated authority to the various regional councils throughout Australia. That would have been a move towards a republic. That is what the Labor Party wanted; that is the type of decentralisation that it wanted. Because of that policy, the Labor Party stands condemned. Mr HAMILL (Ipswich) (3.52 p.m.): If the Budget for 1984-85 contains a message, it is that the boom in the Queensland economy is well and tmly over. An interesting fact is that the Minister for Industry, Small Business and Technology went unheeded when he warned the public earlier this year that the Queensland economy was slowly running out of steam. I am afraid that the big boom, which the Queensland Government is always saying is just around the corner, is not there. Unfortunately, like Cassandra, once again the Minister has been ignored. Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1053

The Premier and Treasurer brought down a Budget that refused to face the economic facts in this State. Queensland still has a colonial economy. Despite the promises of the Govemment that it will undertake a diversification of the economic base of the State, Queensland still has a colonial economy. Mr Comben: And a colonial Govemment over there. Mr HAMILL: One would think some of them are still in the colonies. The fact is that the State has a colonial economy, which imports capital and is based on the primary and extractive industries. If any honourable member opposite cared to look at the problems facing those two basic industries in the State, he would realise quite clearly why Queensland currently has such grave economic problems. The industries producing two of the key commodities in the State—sugar and coal—are undergoing very hard times indeed. Despite the rhetoric and the mythology of the Government, it has to face the fact that the Queensland economy is not coming out of the recession as well as those of other States. Although during the 1970s and the early 1980s unemployment in Queensland had been below the national average, it is now ahead of the national average. The reason is that the Queensland economy is stmcturally unsound, and the Government will not recognise that. Mr Borbidge interjected. Mr HAMILL: We see the cargo-cult mentality that is so often displayed by people such as the member for Surfers Paradise. They talk all the time about tourism and will not come to grips with the basic problems facing the State. The Govemment is continually advocating policies that involve putting all of the State's economic eggs into the one basket. In the past it was the mining industry; now it is tourism. What will be the new boom industry tomorrow? Queensland needs a broad and diversified economic base, something that the Government has not provided for the State. I will consider some of the other frauds that the Government is perpetrating. The greatest fraud of all is the Budget brought down by the Premier and Treasurer in this Chamber only a short time ago. Members have already seen the economic management of the Govemment epitomised in the Premier's denials of the statistics formulated by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. I might add that the Deputy Premier and Minister Assisting the Treasurer told this Assembly some time ago that that organisation was quite authoritative. Those statistics, when the same budgetary framework is provided for all States, revealed that in 1983- 84 the public sector deficit in this State would be $1,741 billion, $835m in the State Budget and $914m owing to the bortowings undertaken by public instmmentaUties in the State. The Government wishes to distort the figures and then make comparisons with other States based on a different accounting procedure. It will not accept that, when the same accounting procedures are applied from State to State, Queensland's economic record is found wanting. But, of course, it does not suit the Govemment's purpose; it does not fit in neatly with the mythology that the Government continually creates about the economic state of Queensland. Let us look at some of the promises, the mythology and the frauds. The Premier promised in the Budget that there will be no new State taxes and charges. Of course not! They all went up under the Financial Administration and Audit Act. A whole range of increases was published in the Gazette, and a number of them were considerably ahead of the rate of inflation. Why put up the charges in the Budget when it can be done by sleight of hand? That again epitomises the sort of fraud perpetrated by this Government in the area of economic management. It is the people of Queensland who will pay for this Government's neglect; it is the people of Queensland who will suffer because the present Government is so short-sighted that it will not look further than the next Budget or the next State election, if you like, in terms of developing the economic base of this State. 1054 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem)

But, very importantly indeed, if one looks at the sources of revenue of the Queensland Government, one sees that the Queensland Govemment is heavily dependent upon the generosity of the Federal Government of the day. Judging by the level of payments made to Queensland over recent years, the Hawke Labor Govemment has been extraor­ dinarily generous to the Queensland Government. In fact, in the first year of the Federal Labor Government, Commonwealth payments in money terms—these figuresappea r in the Premier's own Budget statement; unlike what is done so often in debate in this place, I am not inventing them—increased by 16.1 per cent last year. Again, there wiU be a real increase in Commonwealth payments to this State this year. In fact, the level of Commonwealth payments in 1984-85 is estimated by the Premier to be $2,235 bilUon. The 1984 Federal Budget has been very important to the economy of Queensland. A number of disbursements to Queensland are of specific benefit to this State. A $3m contribution has been made towards the capital costs of Expo 88. An amount of $61m has been provided for 1984-85 for the new Brisbane airport. Very importantly—and I hope that some Government members take it on board—there has been a 40 per cent increase in the disbursement to Queensland under the Community Employment Program. A comparison of last year's Budget and this year's Budget shows that the only employment- generating program, an additional pushing of funds into our economy to engage labour— a labour-intensive employment program—is actually funded by the Commonwealth. In 1984-85, almost $58m will come into this State under the Community Employment Program, and it is expected to generate approximately 11 000 jobs. Another $82m will be provided under the Commonwealth/State Housing Agreement for public housing. An additional $35m on top of the original payment will be provided in the area of Medicare. That is in addition to the money already provided for the hospital system in this State. Another area of Commonwealth Government initiative—the anniversary of which was achieved this week—has been the Commonwealth Labor Govemment's first-home­ owners scheme, which for Queensland alone processed 12 000 applications in the last year. This State can expect about $54m of the total outlay of $265m under the scheme in 1984-85. That is very significant funding in addition to the normal tax-sharing arrangements. The State Government does extraordinarily well from the division of Commonwealth revenues to the States through the Grants Commission. Queensland does so well that it has caused considerable disquiet among other State Governments by undermining its own revenue base whilst, at the same time, holding out its cap like a mendicant, expecting the other States to help it along in its economic endeavours. The level of Commonwealth disbursements to the States is very important to Queensland. It has also been very important to Queensland that inflation has been lowered by the policies directed by the Hawke Govemment. Inflation has been more than halved since the Hawke Government came to office and thousands of new jobs have been generated, but in Queensland unemployment has risen above the national average. As I continue to analyse the State Budget it will become apparent why the State of Queensland is not doing as well as the other States in dragging itself out of the economic recession. Mrs Chapman: That's garbage. Mr HAMILL: The honourable member for Pine Rivers has great experience in local government. If she is really well acquainted with garbage, I suspect that she might be more use back in local government. If she wants to stay here, she ought to face the fact that the Government to which she belongs is doing nothing at all to tum the Queensland economy round. In fact, the Government is exacerbating the stmctural problems that currently exist in the Queensland economy. 1 have said that Federal funds are cmcial to the State Govemment's Budget strategy. I will now deal with the Consolidated Revenue Fund as set out in the Budget papers. Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1055

Approximately half of all the receipts in the ConsoUdated Revenue Fund come from Commonwealth payments. As I have said, the estimated receipts for 1984-1985 total $2,236 billion, an increase of 7.7 per cent in addition to the real increase for last year. It should be noted that the Consolidated Revenue Fund reveals that the State is becoming ever more reliant on a narrower and narrower base of State revenues. If the State is unable to diversify its revenue base, it will face a very serious problem if some future Federal Govemment, irrespective of political ilk, is not so generous to it. Mr McPhie: Come on, it's our money; they have got to give it to us. Mr HAMILL: I have already pointed out that Victoria and New South Wales heavily subsidise the Queensland tax-payer in the disbursement of funds at the Com­ monwealth level. We do very well out of federation and the financial arrangements that go with it. I wiU deal now with the estimated revenue for 1984-1985. The heading "State Taxation" is quite a misnomer. State taxation in the Consolidated Revenue Fund is to increase by 5.3 per cent over the figure for 1983-1984. According to the Estimates tabled by the Premier, it will amount to $921.6m. State taxation is declining each year as a proportion of the total receipts of the Consolidated Revenue Fund. On the face of it, that appears to give credence to the Government's oft-repeated claim that it is maintaining low State taxes. But we must look a little further. If we were to come to that conclusion, it would be because of a very superficial analysis. Based on the total receipts that the Premier expects to reap into the State Treasury in 1984-1985, the Consolidated Revenue Fund wiU exceed $4.6 billion, a 10.2 per cent increase in money terms over the financial year that has just passed. I have said that approximately half of the revenue is coming from Commonwealth sources. That source is to increase by 7.7 per cent. The other 50 per cent of income to the Consolidated Revenue Fund will be derived from State initiated sources and it will increase at a greater rate than the average rate of 10.2 per cent. In this is the key to the Govemment's Budget duplicity. The document is a fraud. One cannot be satisfied to look merely at the types of taxation that the Government deigns to list under the consolidated revenue account. The whole gamut of State Govemment taxes and charges and the whole range of revenue operations must be considered. If one carries out that exercise, one finds that extra, hidden charges are increasing at a rate that is outstripping the growth in the designated Ust of State taxation in the Consolidated Revenue Fund. That is because the Govemment has at its disposal a whole range of charges or levies that are of the ilk of regressive taxes. They are introduced by way of regulation. They are published in the Queensland Govemment Gazette and are not presented in the Budget papers. Revenue raised in that way comprises a significant portion of the Government's total revenue. Members of the Opposition have centred their attacks on these types of levies imposed upon the Queensland populace. For example, the Opposition has highlighted the special levies that are imposed for the electricity industry to generate funds for its capital works program. The Opposition has also drawn attention to the increased stamp duty on third-party insurance and to the increase in motor vehicle registration charges. The Queensland populace is now paying a new tax, the collection of which the Govemment refused to take responsibility for. I refer, of course, to the fire levy. The Government has placed that responsibility onto local government. It is a sad and sorry state of affairs when the Government does not have the intestinal fortitude to raise itself the revenue that it requires. Some time ago in this place I spoke about the requirement upon parents and citizens associations over many years to supplement and augment the disbursement of funds from the Education Department for the general mnning of the State's schools. Despite the token gestures of the Government, it is to be noted that education expenditure in this State is well below the levels provided for education in other States. If the Queensland 1056 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO Government is to catch up to the other State Governments, the increase in education expenditure will need to be far greater than that provided for in the Budget. The proportion of consolidated revenue that the Govemment has ear-marked for education this year is a lower proportion than the allocation for education in this State 10 years ago. Once again, the Government is long on propaganda but short on substance. I refer now to the mining industry, which is a very important part of the State's revenue base. If ever a Govemment in this State came close to killing the goose that laid the golden egg with respect to the mining industry, it is this one. Mrs Chapman: That is not uranium mining, is it? Mr HAMILL: No, it is coal-mining; and coal-mining provides the jobs in this State. Thousands of jobs depend upon the viability of the coal-mining industry, and that is what concerns me. It is obvious that the member for Pine Rivers is not concerned about employment prospects in Queensland. I wish to consider some of the problems that the coal industry is facing, and I do not make my remarks solely about the coal industry near my electorate of Ipswich. I refer generally to the coal industry that was the corner-stone of the National/Liberal Government's economic strategy in the late '70s and early '80s. I hasten to point out that I am not the only person concerned about this matter. If Queensland had not received the generous Federal payments of recent years, the State Budget would be in a very precarious position. My views are backed up by an authoritative journal, the "Business Review Weekly" In the June 1984 issue, in relation to the Queensland economy and the tax base, this comment was made— "If Federal funding is cut, Queensland's narrow tax base would be exposed. Pay-roll tax and stamp duties make up 84 per cent of State tax revenue and, with coal rail freight profits, make up more than half of all State-collected revenues." The actual figures are borne out by the Premier and Treasurer's Budget. I have already stated that the mining industry is confronted by serious problems. Coal and metal prices on world markets are at a low level. Despite that, the State Government sees fit to reap even a larger proportion of its revenue than ever from the State's mining industry. The Premier and Treasurer estimates that mining royalties will bring in approximately $ 147.5m in 1984-85. That represents an increase of 30.4 per cent over the figure for last year, and last year's figures were 18.4 per cent higher than those for the year before. Even the most unintelligent Government member would be able to realise that, if the total consolidated revenue receipts rose by 10.2 per cent, a 30.4 per cent increase is far higher than the general increase in the Consolidated Revenue Fund. That is not the end of the story. I turn to the other element of taxation that is levied upon the mining industry, namely, rail freights. They, too, are a golden egg for the Government. In 1984-85 the operations of the railways are estimated to bring into the Govemment a total of $865.02m, which represents an increase of 25.3 per cent on last year's revenue. The revenue derived from the railways last financial year represented an increase in real terms of 23 per cent on the revenue obtained in the year before. What does the Auditor-General have to say about the operations of the railways? From his report on the Treasurer's Financial Statement for the financial year ended 30 June 1984, it is apparent that over half of the total revenue obtained by way of raU freights comes from export coal. The State Government applies a significant hidden tax, a resource rental tax, by way of rail freights, which, as I have said, are a tax, a levy and an impost on the mining industry. As my colleague the honourable member for Bundaberg has pointed out, the Government makes enormous profits from rail freights on coal. The price of loading Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1057 coal is mininal. However, it obtains a vast amount of revenue from rail freights on coal. It has been suggested that, if the Government's revenue base were to be impaired, the most sensitive area would be the $200m a year that the Govemment derives by way of rail freights that are imposed upon the mining industry. Any responsible Government would be concerned about the financial viability of its industrial base. I have already pointed out that this State's industrial base is very fragile indeed in that it rests heavily on agricultural production and mining. The Government, through its levies on the mining industry, is hitting that industry while it is down. The mining industry is suffering from grave problems, but the Government has not let up on its taxing policies in relation to the mining industry. The level of revenue that the Government is taking from the mining industry is increasing at a far faster rate than the level of inflation in Queensland. In real terms, this financial year that revenue represents a far greater tax grab from the mining industry than it did last financial year. Mr Littleproud: Have you identified the cause of the problem in the mining industry? Mr HAMILL: If the honourable member had been listening, he would know that I have already done that. The problem of rail freights has not escaped the notice of the business community. The cost to the Queensland Government of freighting coal is about 2c a tonne per kilometre. The ^'Business Review Weekly" states— "It costs the Queensland railways only about two cents a tonne per kilometre to move the coal, so the excess is a hidden resources rent tax pouring about $200 million profit into Queensland Government Treasury." 1 have highlighted the keys to the Queensland Government's revenue base. The revenue base is not broad; it is centred upon the mining industry. Apart from mining royalties and freight rates on mineral production, other hidden imposts are levied on the mining industry by the State Government. Those imposts appear in the Budget. In the capital works section of the Budget papers, reference is made to the projects that are funded by the security deposits that are lodged by the coal companies and the State Electricity Commission for railway constmction. In 1984-85, expenditure of $105,400,000 is proposed on those projects. The moneys from that fund come out of the pockets of the mining companies in this State. The Queensland Government has three major courses of attack on the mining industry. Like so many other of its taxing policies, it is tax by deceit. Taxes are hidden or are imposed in the form of levies and charges. The deceit in the Budget does not end there. The honourable member for Sandgate dealt very well indeed with the basically dishonest nature of the Special Major Capital Works Program that the Premier and Treasurer announced as part of the Budget. He said that $600m would be provided over two and a half years. It looked great in the newspaper advertisements on which the State Government spent a large sum of money to publicise what appeared to be a major initiative in the Budget. However, as one goes through the Budget papers disappointment sets in. As the Leader of the Opposition pointed out, the expenditures that would be expected to be made this year, which is the first full year of those two and a half years, are simply not provided. Unless the State Govemment pours enormous funds into capital works over and above its normal projects in the last one and a half years of that period, the Budget will be a cargo cult. I am afraid that so much of the economic strategy of the Queensland Government can be aptly described as the result of cargo-cult mentality. Unless the Queensland Government recognises that it cannot rely upon one or two industries to provide its revenue, and that its financialstrategie s may not be underwritten by generous Federal Government outlays, the Queensland Government will find its total economic strategy in absolute tatters. We cannot afford to be placed in a situation of being forced to believe what is nothing more than political propaganda on the Queensland 1058 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem) economy. I do not know whom Government members think they are kidding. Busi­ nessmen certainly do not believe the extravagant claims of the Premier and Treasurer about the condition of the Queensland economy. The level of private capital expenditure in Queensland is decreasing. The member for Bundaberg pointed out that the boom in employment generated in this State in the 1970s and the eariy 1980s through the minerals boom is over. The economic thinking that underiies the policies of the Queensland Govemment is outdated and inappropriate to the needs of the 1980s.

Jobs existed in great abundance in the mining industry during the constmction phase of those projects in central Queensland. Now that the projects are on stream, the constmction jobs no longer exist. It must be recognised that the maximum employment created by the mining industry is in the constmction phase. Nowadays, mining is a capital-intensive industry. Even if the industry is doing well, there are not large numbers of jobs for ordinary Queenslanders in the mining industry of this State. From the way in which it is levying such high taxes and charges in the mining industry, one can only assume that the Queensland Government thinks that it is doing weU. Employment in this State has faltered. That can be seen clearly in the employment statistics. The Queensland Government certainly did not make much noise about them, but they appear in the Government's own Budget papers. Employment prospects are grim, as can be seen in the projections for pay-roU tax receipts for the coming year. The Queensland economy is in bad shape. Employment opportunities simply are not available. Unemployment in this State is higher than the national average. The strategy used in the Budget, however, is doing nothing to redress the social problems that flow from that high level of unemployment. Other State Governments have. Why hasn't the Government of Queensland? The Budget is a deceitful document. The case has been made time and time again in this place that the Queensland Govemment has brought down a dishonest Budget for 1984-85. If the capital projects that are listed in the Budget were to be brought on stream without delay, the employment position in this State would be assisted. However, the Queensland Government appears to be saying to the community at large, "We will now have to generate the economic activity, because, quite frankly, the business sector has lost faith in the economic management of the Queensland Govemment" The Queensland Government is living out a lie in so doing, because it is not putting its money where its mouth is. It lists the projects that it would like to undertake, but it does not provide the dollars and cents in the Budget to undertake those projects. I repeat that it is a cargo-cult mentality Budget from a Govemment that has no grip whatsoever on the economic management of this State. The National Party has shown itself to be particularly inept and particularly iU-suited to look after Queensland's economic future in the 1980s.

Mr McPHIE (Toowoomba North) (4.23 p.m.): I do not wish to respond to the ravings of the two previous Opposition members who joined the, debate, the honourable members for Ipswich and Bundaberg. Never before have I heard such a tirade of misinformation and deliberate misinterpretation of facts. Their understanding of the Budget is so bad that their credibility must surely be suspect.

In joining the Budget debate, I would like to speak at length on just one facet of the Government's massive and comprehensive undertaking in funding and developing Queensland in the 1984-1985 period. 1 was delighted to note the Premier's acknowl­ edgement of and commitment to soil conservation in the Budget speech, for this is a most important part of the future of this State and its vast primary industries. It is to that subject that I address my remarks. Supply (Financial Statement) 4 October 1984 1059

My interest in and knowledge of soil conservation centres on my life-long love for the land, and goes back many years to my time as a stock and station agent in Queensland and later as a farmer and grazier on the Darling Downs. It is linked closely, too, to my electorate in Toowoomba, for that city, with its rapidly expanding industrial and educational facilities, is so very dependent on the viability and strength of the primary industries on the Darling Downs and in south-westem Queensland. It is the service city for so many primary producers and country towns throughout the area. Its very prosperity is vitally linked to their prosperity, and that, in turn, is dependent directiy on the prosperity of the very soil on which those primary industries are based. Many areas of Queensland suffer from a soil conservation problem. It is not new. It is being addressed by Government. However, it is expanding in area as new country is opened for farming or grazing and older country gradually deteriorates under damaging utilisation practices. It is therefore timely for the Premier to state that he is aware of staffing problems in the section of the DPI dealing with soil conservation and that action has been taken to overcome the problem. I well remember the soil damage on the Downs and in southern Queensland back in the '50s. I experienced at first-hand what massive flooding could do to farmland at Yandilla and to grazing country at Quilpie. I knew the horrors of the Nissan Flat stretch between Toowoomba and Warwick after heavy rain and recall the early work done on the Downs with contour banks and water-channelling. From an agricultural science correspondence course, I understood soil structure and the theory associated with its preservation.

On returning to Toowoomba just over two years ago after 20-years' service in the air force, I found soil conservation problems had not diminished, rather they had increased in spite of the great increase in the amount of work and forward thinking in combating this problem. Many changes had been made in those intervening years. Contour banks and water control channels are common on the Darling Downs today, new farming techniques have been introduced and, with them, new machinery for these techniques. There is a far greater awareness of the problem and a greater willingness amongst farmers to address it. But the problem is greater now. More land is cleared and water run-off is more rapid in many places and often, as a result, floods are higher than previously for the same rainfall. Still there is no ready answer for the flooding associated with big rains and still there is much land on the Darling Downs and in other areas of Queensland which slopes, is not contoured and is steadily deteriorating. But soil conservation is not solely associated with water mn-off problems alone, varied though they may be. Australia is the driest continent in the world and its rainfall incidence is the most irregular. Droughts, dust storms, bush fires and even salinity problems in some areas are as much a part of country life as floods. AU cause their share of damage to soils and soil stmcture, as do many of the varied practices of the people on the land and the various people and authorities concemed with developing the land. Degradation of the soil is not new. It can be traced back to the early history of mankind. There are areas in Messopotamia where early civilisations so ravaged the land that they eventually perished in the wastelands they were responsible for creating. The massive dust storms in the American central western States in the 1920s and 1930s will be recalled by many. Excessively extensive cultivation of poor soils and heart-breaking drought years saw the valuable soil assets of those States blown away in dust storms causing damage to some areas which may never by redressed. Those dust storms were so massive that they reached across the Atlantic, in some instances to Europe. Conditions in this State today could well result in similar destmction in an adverse season, with tragic loss of valuable soil assets and permanent destmction of the heritage of our future generations. 1060 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem)

An enlightened and progressive program by Governments and the private sector can do and has done much to offset and control these ravages of nature. The Tennessee Valley Authority in America and Australia's own Snowy Mountains Authority are by­ words in the control of flooding in their respective areas, the associated generation of electricity and the development of progressive farming practices. But they are the large publicity-gaining projects at national level in these countries. What is required today in Queensland is Govemment involvement on a greater scale than previously to eliminate adverse soil management practices, whether by a land-holder or Government instrumentality, and the involvement of the land-holder down to the one on the smallest area to ensure the conservation of the soil, this valuable and irreplaceable asset, for the future. 1 am sure that a program will develop from the Premier's Budget initiative in this area. The damage to the State's soils is staggering in degree. It has been estimated that the Darling Downs is losing 8 million tonnes of prime topsoil each year. The total for the whole State would be many times that amount. Each year approximately 65 000 to 80 000 ha of previously uncultivated land is put under the plough but only an additional 50 000 ha is added to the protected cultivated area. Of the 1.62 million sq. km of agricultural land in Queensland, almost half requires soil conservation work of one sort or another. All honourable members know the damage that a flood can cause—washing away topsoil, fencing, crops and at times livestock. They know how gullies can be eroded in both farming and grazing land and how road and rail facilities can be destroyed. But the problem is far more extensive than that. Subsoil is bared when the topsoil is washed away. Depending on the locality, the subsoil may be of a different stmcture to the soil that has been lost. In grazing areas grass may never grow again, while agricultural areas may require a number of expensive workings over a period, and often the addition of fertilisers and micronutrients before a seed-bed comparable to the lost asset can be produced. Sheet erosion on a hillside can take away a broad coverage of topsoil in one sweep, or gutter erosion can cut into the topsoil channels which will rapidly deepen into gullies if cortective action is not taken immediately. In both instances high additional costs are required to rehabilitate the land and working conditions are made more difficult for the machinery involved. Downstream from areas of erosion another problem occurs, for the washed-away soil is eventually dumped somewhere, be it to silt up a watercourse or dam, or to cover a road, crops or pasture. That, too, must be corrected. I have mentioned other damage which must be addressed in any soil conservation program. It includes destruction of soil structure through incorrect farming practices. The disc ploughs of 20 years ago are not popular today. The pounding of the soil with those ploughs actually contributed to the dust-storm risk when soils were left to lie worked up into a fine tilth in extended periods of dry weather. Those same finely worked seed-beds are themselves prone to further structural damage from the rain droplets themselves in time of heavy rain and they, too, are sitting ducks for massive erosion once run-off commences. Salinity is a problem in an increasing number of areas in which natural salts have been leached from the soil and left to accumulate in areas of concentrated water-holding. I have been speaking largely about the Darling Downs so far, but the problem of soil degradation is manifest throughout the State. Overgrazing can cause massive damage. Many members know of the terrible damage caused by the rabbit plagues in New South Wales years ago. The constmction of roads, railways and power lines, and open cut mining and forestry practices can add to the problem if suitable corrective measures are not taken with each development. Fortunately the record of our departments in these areas is a good one, and is improving. Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1061

The problem, which is acute, is principally related to our farm lands. It applies equally to the cane lands on the coast, to the Atherton and Central Highland farmlands, and especially to those far western Queensland ploughed areas, as it does to the Darling Downs. Much has been done by capable and dedicated people amongst the land-holders in each area as well as Govemment and local authority personnel. It is disappointing to note, however, that a succession of Federal Govemments have left soil conservation very much to the individual State Governments. The present Federal Labor Government allocated $lm to soU conservation in the financial year just completed. In its current Budget $3.3m has been allocated—a heartening increase. But when that is divided among the six States and the Northem Territory, Queensland's share comes to $610,500—for a whole State! Out of that paltry amount, 17 projects are specified to receive amounts between $7,000 and $92,000, with a majority receiving between $35,000 and $45,000. Another example of the Federal Labor Govemment's contempt for, and neglect of, the primary industry sector! On the other hand, in the financial year just completed Queensland allocated more than $6m to soil conservation and the current Budget matches that contribution, along with the Premier's commitment to correct manning deficiencies in the soil conservation section of the Department of Primary Industries. Currently, 162 personnel at 33 locations throughout the State are working on soil conservation in one way or another in the research, services and land resources branches of the department. More are urgently needed in the field extension area to go out and talk and plan and show the land-holders and local authorities what is required in individual areas. The work of the department and its officers is progressive and dedicated. Soil conservation regions have been established in the State. The Darling Downs region is composed of 14 shires covering more than 40 000 sq. km of one of the most intensively used agricultural areas in the nation. More than 7 500 land-holders contribute to a gross value of agricultural production in the area in excess of $200m each year. Winter and summer crops are grown on erosion-prone black soils which need careful management to ensure continued production and preservation of the soil asset. Before 1973, some 30 per cent of the land-holders in the area had commenced soil- conservation practices on a voluntary basis. But often this was a piecemeal answer to problems which could in turn generate other problems in adjoining areas. Today the situation has been significantly improved. The region has been divided into 22 major catchments. Each major catchment has been subdivided into small subcatchments which form the basis for project plans. These plans show the locations of waterways and diversion banks and the direction of flow of water throughout the area. They thus clearly outline the co-ordinated mn-off control works needed as a basis for bringing soil losses down to acceptable levels. Size, shape and spacing of works are determined by the degree of erosion hazard. Departmental officers fully consult all affected land-users on a step-by-step basis regarding the planning and implementation by catchment programs. Some Government subsidy incentives are available to private land-holders and local authorities to help achieve the desired results. Most on-property works, however, must be attended to by the individual land-owner for he is the one who will directly benefit from a program introduction or suffer from remaining outside a needed program. The task for extension officers in these soil-conservation regions is enormous when one considers the number of major catchments in each region and the many subcatchments within each catchment. Each subcatchment has its own provisional project plans and gazetted project plans for its component zones. The number of additional field staff required is of the order of 50 to 60 men as soon as available. I am pleased that the Premier's commitment will be making a start on providing them. 1062 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO

High tribute must also be paid to a State-wide band of primary producers who are intimately involved in the soil-conservation program in Queensland. They are men and women who strongly believe in the urgent need for conservation practices to be introduced throughout the State as soon as possible. They have freely given of their time in many ways to extend the existing program in their own areas, to show and help neighbours and to always work towards better farming and conservation practices and techniques. Two of these men I have known for many years. Both are from the Linthorpe Valley catchment area outside Toowoomba. One of them is Hector Tod. He has been a leader in this field since the '60s. He was honoured a few years ago as Queensland's Farmer of the Year for his work in developing new techniques in soil conservation at his Poplar Farm on the plain country behind Jondaryan. The other is Geoffrey Sale, a retired farmer and grazier now living in Toowoomba. He is still an ardent worker for soil conservation. Many other names should be included, such as Dr Brian Roberts, Dean of the School of Applied Science at the DarUng Downs Institute of Advanced Education in Toowoomba. He convened the land-use seminar that the Minister for Primary Industries will be attending tomorrow in Roma. I should also mention Mr Brodie Greenup, chairman of the South Downs Soil Conservation Advisory Group Committee. On a recent wet day I had the pleasure of accompanying Messrs Tod and Sale through the Linthorpe Valley. Mr Davis: What have you done? Mr McPHIE: If the honourable member had paid attention on a suitable day be would have learnt a tremendous amount that he cannot understand or experience in his sheltered electorate in Brisbane. We saw at first-hand how the catchment-control plan was coping successfully with run-off in the undulating country near Southbrook and how other areas outside the soil- conservation planning area were suffering damage. We saw the results of strip-cropping techniques at Poplar Farm where the flat plain country was utilised alternately for strips of summer and winter crop to spread and control water mn-off. We saw the results of stubble mulch and minimum and zero-tillage techniques where new machinery and chemicals are used to cause minimum disturbance to the soil in pre-planting periods to effectively reduce the risk of water and wind erosion or soil-structure damage at this critical time. We saw, too, how the local authorities concerned were actively participating in water channel construction and road-making to assist in water control. The roads are not being built up, as was the previous method, for that building up acted as a water blockage and impeded the controlled spread and flow of run-off water. In 1982 the Government released an agricultural policy for Queensland. This policy statement noted that the importance of the need to stabilise and conserve Queensland soils cannot be placed too highly, and that soil conservation is increasingly looming as one of the greatest problems affecting agriculture in this State. The statement noted also that it is necessary to mobilise the available resources of land-owners and all Govemment and semi-Govemment instmmentaUties into an effective soil-conservation effort with the full co-operation of all concerned. The Government policy statement noted further that the question arose as to whether legislative controls should be introduced to protect productive agricultural and grazing land from indiscriminate subdivision or destmctive utilisation practices. Cane land and fmit and vegetable crop areas can be affected by subdivision problems, as can farming and grazing areas. I refer, of course, to the encroachment of urban sprawls and hobby farm developments. It was noted that producers generally do not favour legislative controls on marginal land use, even though a strong case could be made for such controls in certain hobby farm and ploughed areas in south-west Queensland. Primary producers favour research, Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1063 education and extension services to increase awareness of the Umitations of the land and to initiate correct farm techniques and programs for soil conservation. It is in this area that the additional field staff that is under consideration by the Premier and Treasurer will be utilised. I am happy to report also that, from conversations I have had with the Minister for Primary Industries, recommendations from the Father report, which the State Planning Committee for Soil Conservation presented a few months ago, will be implemented progressively. Soil conservation is a community concem because it involves one of the most valuable assets of this country. The technical answers relative to the prevention of water and wind erosion, salinity and degradation of soil stmcture are known. The problem is to find ways of implementing the solutions. The commitment by the Govemment, as announced in the Budget, will be the start of that, and I tmst that future Budgets wiU build on the initiative. I congratulate the Premier and Treasurer on this aspect of the Budget because it will bring more far-reaching benefits to the State than some of the more expensive and publicity-catching projects. Above all, I congratulate him on an excellent Budget—one that will ensure continued progress and prosperity in this State for years to come. The Budget must surely be the envy of other Treasurers in Australia. Mr EATON (Mourilyan) (4.43 p.m.): In joining in the debate, I would like to be fair to the Govemment and say that some useful increases in the appropriations for certain departments have been announced in the Budget. However, I had to look hard to find improvements, and many of them are long overdue. In fact, some increases are so long overdue that their real benefit has been reduced. Mr Menzel: We thought that you were going to be fair. Mr EATON: I am being fair. Because some of the increases are so far behind the times, the people of Queensland will not receive the benefits that the Govemment has led them to believe they will receive. Mr Bailey: You are not being influenced by the lunatic Left? Mr EATON: No, I am not. I will be fair to the Govemment. I was particularly pleased to see an increase in the amount allocated for water resources projects. Lack of water is one of the State's biggest problems. Members of the Government claim continually that people are flockingint o Queens­ land from the southem States. However, the State is lagging behind the other States in the provision of education and health services, especially in the remote areas of the State. Mr Bailey: Why are they coming? Mr EATON: That is what I want to know. If they are coming here, why is the Govemment not providing for them. Mr Bailey: We are looking after them very well; that is why they are coming. They like the place. Mr EATON: If that is why they are coming, it must be very tough in the south. The Premier and Treasurer has said many times that 2 000 people a month are coming to Queensland. If as many as that were coming, Queensland would be bursting at the seams. What is the figurefo r the number of people who leave the State? Queensland would be overpopulated if no-one was leaving. The Govemment promotes only the figures of those people coming into the State. 1064 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem)

I am sure that every member of Parliament receives from the electoral office lists showing the deletions and additions to the rolls. Despite the fact the many thousands are coming into Queensland, many thousands are leaving. I point out to the Government that if it has been aware of this migration for so long, it should have built up the State and kept services and facilities up with the times so that the people coming here are encouraged to stay. One set of figures quoted by the Premier and Treasurer was for the number of adults migrating to Queensland. If 2 700 adults come to Queensland each month, the number of children accompanying those adults must be significant. Not all people who come to Queensland are single males or females; surely the numbers include families also. Perhaps the Premier and Treasurer can substantiate his claims that a certain number of people are coming to Queensland each month. However, he should tell us how many people leave the State each month. Both sets of figures would reveal the tme picture. If the increase in population is as high as the Premier and Treasurer claims, he should provide more schools and other facilities throughout the State. Mr Davis: The numbers should be put down in age groups. Mr EATON: That is quite right. However, perhaps people are moving round this State so quickly that this slow Govemment is not able to pin them down and ascertain their age. Of course, this Government is a slow Government in many respects. I turn now to a subject in which I am keenly interested—water resources. The Budget figures for 1983-84 show that in that year under the Capital Works Program $90m was allocated to water resources. The figure as revealed in this year's Budget represents a substanial increase over that figure, and I welcome that. But in the context of the total Budget it represents less than one half of 1 per cent, and that is in this very big, dry and agriculturally minded State. Mr Menzel: And wet, too. Mr EATON: Certainly the honourable member represents some wet areas in which people are praying for it to stop raining. However, Queensland is a land of contrasts. Most of the State is made up of dry areas in which people are praying for it to begin raining. The Government has been in office for many years, so by now it should have come up with a long-term strategy that stmck a balance between the various needs of the State. It could have embarked upon many long-term projects that could have created jobs. I refer particularly to water resources. Quite often an overlap occurs between the Water Resources Commission, the local authorities and the Co-ordinator-General's Department. Whenever a local authority wishes to embark upon a permanent water supply system that will be of long-term benefit to its area, that project must be investigated by the Water Resources Commission and approved by it. On some occasions, such projects are handed over to the Co­ ordinator-General's Department. I know that in the past it has played a very important role; many projects have been undertaken by the Co-ordinator-General's Department. Certainly no member of the Opposition complains about the job that that department has done. Last week, the Premier, the honourable member for Burdekin, the Minister for Northern Development, Senator Peter Walsh and I were present at the unveiling of a plaque at the Burdekin Falls Dam. Tremendous progress has been made on that project. However, it is 20 or 30 years behind the times; it should have been finished long ago. Last year proved beyond all doubt the need for water conservation and water storage projects in Queensland and also throughout Australia. In Febmary 1982, I flew from Townsville to Perth and I did not see a blade of green grass after I left the Innisfail/ Ingham district until I landed in Perth. Perth is a beautiful and green city, because the Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1065

people who live there are able to water their lawns and gardens. The Swan River is more like a harbour than a river. I spoke to people in all areas of Western Australia, from as far south as Albany to the Ord River in the north. The people in the Ord area have more water than they can poke a stick at. At that time, it was the only place in Australia that had plenty of water and did not need rain. I was there for four days and five nights, and each day a storm hit the area. The lowest rainfall on any day was 2'/2 inches. Great importance must be placed on water conservation and water storage in Queensland. This State's whole agricultural industry is tied to water. Certainly, as mentioned by the honourable member for Mulgrave, some parts of the State in the wet belt require drainage schemes to allow their agricultural potential to be fully realised. The Government must look at that matter, too. Earlier, I said that the Opposition is pleased with the increased aUocation for water resources. Recently other members have emphasised why there have been increased allocations for water resources, particularly dams. In north Queensland the Burdekin Falls Dam scheme is going ahead. There are many areas in the Burdekin River system in which to locate future storage dams. The river system begins near my electorate. There are suitable dam sites in the Herberton shire. In 1956 an irrigation and land development scheme was proposed by the then Commissioner for Water Resources (Mr Haigh). A commission of inquiry was conducted. A scheme that included the constmction of two dams across the Wild and Millstream Rivers would have enabled the provision of irrigation for about 270 farmers, if my memory serves me correctly. At that time the majority of the land was owned by the Crown. It was suitable for development. However, now there is no Crown land left for development. At that time the Labor Party was looking forward to the commencement of that scheme. Following a report issued in 1957, the Labor Party lost office and the Govemment pigeon-holed the report. Although the cost at that time would have been £31m, today it would probably cost $100m. A great deal of the land has been freeholded. Development is restricted because of the limited water supply. There is no reason why the Govemment cannot constmct those dams and allow the farmers who have taken up the land to use the water for irrigation purposes. Peanuts and sorghum are grown. Many other crops could be grown if a good water supply was provided. That is something that should be examined. It is a matter that cannot be over-emphasised. There is a shortage of water in many town water supply systems. In the south-east corner of Queensland, particularly in the Brisbane area, large dams and other projects have been completed or are in the process of being completed. No local authority water problems are experienced in that part of the State. However, in the northem and western areas of Brisbane enormous problems are faced by some local authorities. I can work the parish pump for the Herberton shire. Because of its high elevated position, there is insufficient water to supply its needs. An investigation has been carried out. The old pipes have clogged up. They are being replaced with new pipes. The shire has got rid of the night-soil carter and made everyone install septic systems. Because of that, those residents in the hilly districts of the Herberton shire do not have any water after about 10 o'clock in the morning. At present, the pipes are not suitable and the council will need to spend half a million dollars to rectify the problem. The area of the shire is about 3 600 square miles. The shire has only 3 500-odd rate-payers. With one rate-payer per square mile, one can imagine the budget under which that shire must operate. The Government is not assisting those small country areas. Although the Herberton shire has an area of 3 600 square miles, it has only three small towns. A large number of miners reside in those towns. Many miners have left the industry because of the problems that have been experienced in the last two years. Although the Government continually claims to be the friend of the farmer and country people, it is neglecting them hand over fist.

64164—36 1066 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem) The member for Cook (Mr Bob Scott) referred to the funding needed in his electorate, particularly at Kammba and Thursday Island. Because the Queensland Government would not accept its responsiblities and provide services to the communities in those areas, he had to obtain assistance from the Federal Government. Mr Menzel: You need Federal funding in Herberton. Mr EATON: I want it; yes. The small mral areas must be considered. The Queensland Govemment has done nothing in its Budget for local authorities. I am sure that there are maiiy Govemment members who have been shire councillors and chairmen. They would know only too well the problems encountered by local authorities. No member of any local authority in Queensland would be happy with the Budget. The Government is throwing local authorities to the wolves by saying, "If you want money, we will change the mles and give you avenues to raise your own money." However, because of the vastness of some shires and their small population, they cannot afford to borrow large sums of money. They could not service the debt. The Govemment has not looked closely at that at all. In my opinion, the greatest overall benefit is given to country people through assisting their local authority. The benefit goes across the board to the people, rather than to individual groups or areas. That must be emphasised. Each year the grants are being reduced. It is becoming more difficult to raise loan money. Today, local authorities are in much the same position as primary producers—they are being floggedb y the private banks. The Government has failed sadly in not building up the scope of the Agricultural Bank. Since this Government came to power, there has been very little improvement in the scope of the Agricultural Bank—the farmers' friend. It has been kept within the confines of its operation in 1957. At that time amounts of money advanced to farmers were in the vicinity of $4,000 or $6,000. A person who borrowed that amount probably could not sleep at night, thinking that he was in debt up to his ears. Now, the same bank might lend well over $ 100,000 to one farmer. That has resulted in a drain on funds. If the Government had been fair dinkum, it would have established a State bank similar to that operated in Western Australia, which has what is called the Rural and Industries Bank. Just like the Agricultural Bank, it is open to mral people as weU as to those in industry. The Minister for Industry, Small Business and Technology is in the Chamber. He is charged with the responsibility of looking after Queensland. I ask him to act in conjuction with some of his ministerial colleagues in merging such an operation with the Agricultural Bank. Such a bank could play a role in all aspects of business and community life in the State. The biggest bugbear in Queensland militating against development is distance. Concessions are made available to transport goods to north Queensland, but there is no way in the world that a north Queensland manufacturer can gain a concession to export his goods in competition with those from the south. It is more profitable for a company to manufacture goods in south Queensland and transport them to the north. I ask the Government to consider that. Mr Davis: There is no incentive. Mr EATON: That is right. It is not by any means an incentive Government. A better term would be "Indian giver" The Government will not give a dollar unless it sees a dollar in it for itself That is proved by the Budget. Mr Cooper: Usually you are a very fair person. Mr EATON: I am being fair now. It is just that Government members cannot see that I am being a fair man. Supply (Financial Statement) 4 October 1984 1067 I would like to give the private banks and the sugar industry Mr Davis: A belt. Mr EATON: A belt, yes. No-one knows more about the troubles of the cane-farmer than the cane-farmer himself Over the last two and a half years I have been consistently asked by farmers to approach the Rural Reconstmction Board. In most instances the person's own banker has to be advised so that he is not cranky about his going over his head. I approach the banker and say that I am taking up the cause on behalf of a particular farmer. The banks must be seen to refuse an application for finance before a person qualifies for a loan from the Rural Reconstmction Board. I will now give the example of a farmer who had two sons and who had never been in trouble with banks in his life before. As honourable members know, every so often the sugar industry has had expansions. Because this farmer was reasonably well off, his banker called him in and suggested that if another expansion should occur in the sugar industry he would not qualify to participate in it because he was land-locked and, therefore, he should borrow some money to buy another farm. That farmer mortgaged his freehold farm, which was free of all encumbrances. As he was a good farmer, naturally he bought a good farm, but he had to pay dearly for it. He had been practically talked into this by his banker. Then the sugar industry crashed, the cmnch came and now that same banker is putting the pressure on the farmer. That is what is causing the problems in the industry. All the private commercial banks are doing that. Over half of the cane-farmers who have got into trouble through paying very high interest rates on the large amounts of money that they borrowed are having pressure put on them by the private commercial banks, which are causing the trouble for primary producers. If it had not been for those bankers, the farmers would not be in half the trouble they are now in. Nearly all the farmers' worries have been caused by the private bankers. Some people wonder why the Federal Government has allowed overseas banks into Australia. That was forced upon the Government. In time that will prove to be only a short-term solution; but at least when those foreign banks enter Australia they will bring money with them and take over some of the debts of farmers, which will put the money back into circulation. With the economy and the market-place the way they are, there is no way in the world that in the future primary producers will experience boom periods. Unless the sugar industry in this country can sort itself out in the next three to five years, the European Economic Community and the developing nations will have disastrous effects on Australia. If a collapse occurs before that and a depression comes, everybody, regardless of nationality, will feel the pinch. I have given banks and bankers a belt; they should be given a few more belts along the way. I have no sympathy whatsoever for them. I obtained some information on the International Monetary Fund and the world banking system, which reaUy frightened me. 1 wonder how anybody will be able to face up to the future, or even if there is any future. I read about the House of Paris. To be honest with honourable members, as I have been, I did now know what the House of Paris was. I took the reports on the International Monetary Fund and world banking to bankers in InnisfaU. Although they have been involved in banking all of their lives, they did not know what the House of Paris was. That is how insincere they are. Mr Davis: Mr Gunn would not know what the House of Paris was, either. Mr EATON: No, I bet he would not. Mr Davis: And he is our top financial adviser. Mr EATON: He is the State's top economist. 1068 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO

Some time ago bankers were the friends and advisers of farmers. That is no longer the case; they can see only dollar signs before their eyes. When a customer walks in through a bank's door, the banker can see so many dollars in that customer or so many dollars against him. That is the way banks operate today. They are not the friends and advisers that they used to be. If bankers keep going the way they are, customers will be better off if computers are installed. Because of computers, customers can find out the state of their accounts as at two days prior to the inquiry. Everything is done by computerisation. If the computers were left in banks and the managers were got rid of, the customers could work the computers. I felt that the mining industry was badly done by in the Budget. The only mention is of coal, but Queensland has other minerals. I agree that hundreds of millions of tonnes of product are involved in the coal industry. At present the tin industry in north Queensland is going through a bad stage. I have an article from "The Australian Financial Review" of Thursday, 27 September 1984. Although I intend to give the Govemment a bit of a kick here, I must say that it has not caused all of the problem. The article stated— "In an unprecedented move against small mining interests, the Queensland Government has issued more than 100 notices to North Queensland tin miners asking them to show cause why their leases should not be forfeited." The article stated that over 150 show-cause notices had been issued in my area alone. Most notices were issued because the lessees had not fulfilled their labour requirements. I will explain what has happened. The Federal Govemment, through the Department of Trade, handles the sale of tin products. Because of the world economic crisis, it had to introduce a quota system. Quotas of a certain tonnage, or in some cases less than a tonnage, were imposed on tin-miners so that even if they did produce the quota it was still insufficient to meet their promissory notes. Literally thousands of people in north Queensland have had to leave the tin industry. Hundreds of miners who owned their own mine or claim, or held a lease, were employing quite a few people, but when the Federal Govemment imposed quotas, they had to walk off. But now the State Government, which handles the lease and claims, is imposing certain conditions. If a miner produces any tin over his quota, he cannot sell it. If he does so, penalties are imposed. Between the Federal and State Governments, the miner is in a bind. I can understand the problems of both Govemments, but I do not believe that the State Govemment has been lenient enough in trying to solve the problem. UntU the last 12 months, I do not think the Mines Department had issued a show-cause notice for 40 years. During the boom time when the miners were making money Mr Littleproud: That must be back into Labor times. Mr EATON: Yes, but under this Government there were good times in the mining industry up until a couple of years ago. This Govemment let the hide go with the tail. It did not worry. But at a time of poor economic conditions, when people are looking for a sympathetic Government, they find that this Govemment wants to enforce the mles. Because of economic pressure, the Government needs revenue from somewhere. When the mining boom was under way the Government was interested only in the big mining companies. It forgot that it was a rural-based political party. Mr Lingard: They signed the form. Mr EATON: Who? Mr Lingard: The mining people. Mr EATON: The Government wanted to deal only with Utah and the other big mining companies with hundreds of milUons of dollars to spend. Those companies took the money out of the economy, and that handicapped the individual Mr Bailey: How did they take, the money out? Supply (Financial Statemem) 4 October 1984 1069

Mr EATON: Utah and the other big companies such as General Motors-Holden's were only interested Mr Bailey: They are bringing the money in. We don't give them money. Mr EATON: Then why is the employment situation as bad as it is? Why has the spending power of Australians been reduced? The Government was allowing Utah to develop this mine and Blair-Athol to develop that mine, but those developments were costing hundreds of millions of dollars. I agree that they were developments worth hundreds of millions of dollars, but they were taking money out of the system. The dairy-farmer, the cane-farmer, the shop-keeper and the home-buyer all had to compete with those big companies on the money market. Mr Bailey: But they were creating something as well as jobs. Mr EATON: If they did create something, where are the jobs? The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Randell): Order! The honouraWe member will address the Chair. Mr EATON: I apologise, Mr RandeU. I have to raise these issues because the miners in my area depend on the Government's lenience and understanding. The industry as a whole needs help. The value of production has dropped by millions of dollars, and I am sure that the Government will have noticed the reduction in revenues through the loss of freight, registration fees and so on. I thought that any Government which had its finger on the pulse would have tried to recoup this revenue, and this Government has a golden opportunity to do so by trying to ease the burden faced by the tin-miners. 1 know that other forms of mining face problems. For instance, the copper industry faces marketing problems. Although everything seems to be well on the surface in some areas, conditions are far from healthy. Education matters are a bugbear for most honourable members. Although the Government is increasing the Vote for education, the needs are increasing faster than money can be provided. Innisfail has three fairly large State primary schools. I have been here for only four years and I think this is the fourth year in a row that I have had to speak out about the East Innisfail State School. It has no suitable playground. On sports day a bus has to be hired to take the children about 4 or 5 km to a sports field in a suburb on the edge of the town. If a sports ground is not hired, the children cannot participate in interschool sports. For about seven years the Government has owned an area of land that the council held in trust. The Government has not tumed it into a sports field because money has to be spent on it before the Works Department can hand it over to the Education Department. In the meantime, the schoolchildren and the members of the parents and citizens association have to do without a satisfactory playground. Mr Kaus: Why doesn't the school have a playground? Mr EATON: It was once a one-room school. It is situated between the river-bank and the main road. If the school was given this land as a playground the children would have to cross the road. The land is very rocky. I am told that it will cost $16,000 to develop it properly. When the Government acquired the land it did not have $10,000 for the necessary improvements. The cost is probably more than $16,000 at today's money values. People who live in country areas have to bear additional costs. The Government is well aware that elderly country people prefer to retire in country towns near their families, but not when they are 200 miles from a town with specialist practitioners. In one instance the Government displayed sheer callousness in dealing with a dear, elderly lady who lived in Mount Garnet and had no relatives in the town. Twice a year she had to go to 1070 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem)

Atherton or Cairns for special tests. If a bus, air or train service had been available to take her from Mount Garnet to Atherton or Cairns, the Government would have paid her fare. Mr Lee: How far is the journey? Mr EATON: About 90 miles. Mr Lee: She would not need an aeroplane. Mr EATON: No. The elderly lady had a friend who drove her to Caims or Atherton. When she made the journey, she kept the dockets for the petrol, cut lunch for herself and the friend who was driving her and made thermos flasks of tea. The alternative was that she could have got a ride to Ravenshoe, which is about 45 miles away. From there the railmotor mns three days a week to Cairns. If she had done that, she would have had two overnight stays on her trips to see the specialist. Although the railmotor mns three times a week, it leaves Cairns early, gets to Atherton just after lunch and arrives in Ravenshoe in the mid-afternoon. The Minister would not use his discretion—I am sure that all Ministers have discretionary powers—to reimburse her about $50 for petrol. That woman went through all of that to save the Government money. But the Government said that if she had taken a train or a bus it would have reimbursed her so that she could have had a free ride; yet this National Party Government claims that it is for the people. As far as 1 am aware, this Government is the only State Government in Australia that will not make a contribution to the diabetic association in its State. Mr Underwood: It is anti-diabetics. Mr EATON: Yes. Within three months of the Federal Govemment coming to power last year, it made a sizeable donation to the diabetic foundation. Country people do not have the same hospital facilities or medical supplies as city people. Country people have to overcome many hardships. I could refer to many health services that they do not receive, but my time is almost up. Mr Kaus: You can keep on talking. Mr EATON: That is good. 1 will refer again to my shadow portfolio, and move from my electorate to the Mackay area. The Government is dragging the chain in trying to keep up with the demands of all parts of Queensland. When travelling through the State, one meets many interesting and sometimes well-educated and well-qualified people. The Bowen area has experienced a very dry period for about four or five years. Town water and irrigation water have been rationed. The water is underground, and that creates problems, but the Government cannot say how much water is underground and how long it will last. If the Government made money available to its qualified officers in the Water Resources Commission, they could carry out tests and research so that information could be on tap. That information would be of assistance in times of crisis, such as that facing the people living in the Bowen region. A similar problem exists at Sarina, and I know that problems like it exist all over the State. Mount Isa needs millions of dollars so that it can build a treatment plant. After the expenditure of millions of dollars, the city of Mount Isa has a water supply, but the council is faced with the problem of servicing the debt. AU local authorities, if they bortow money, are faced with a similar problem. Mount Isa wants about three and a half to four million dollars for a treatment plant. Supply (Financial Statement) 4 October 1984 1071

Cloncurry also has a serious water problem. However, all the water that that town needs is available at the Mary Kathleen Dam, which is higher than Cloncurry. It will cost about five and a half million dollars for earthworks and pipes to mn that water downhill to Cloncurry. The Government wants nothing to do with it. It says that if the local authorities want the money, they should borrow it. The Cloncurry Shire Council could borrow the money, but it would not be able to service the debt. I am sure that the Minister for Northern Development and Aboriginal and Island Affairs is aware of these problems. Mr Katter: The answers are not easy to find. If we do it for Cloncurry, we have to do it for everywhere else in Queensland. Then we are talking about a lot of money, money that the Government does not have. Mr EATON: That is what the Government is all about. The Government must try to help these people. As I have told people, if I was given all the money I wanted, I would be the best Premier in Queensland. The same applies to the Govemment. It wants someone to give it the money. Government members say that the naughty Federal boys will not give them the money. The Government has lost a golden opportunity. The State has come through the boom years and all the Government has done is to try to look after its friends in some parts of the State and in big business. Now it wants to increase charges. When the coal-fields were first developed in Queensland, the Govemment received more revenue from stamp duty than it did from royalties on coal. The Government now realises that in the past it made mistakes and it wants to increase royalties. However, because of the downturn in the world's economy, the mining companies cannot afford to pay high royalties. Mr Ahern: All we want is a fair go from Canberra. Mr EATON: There they go again! At present the Queensland Govemment is getting more money from Canberra than at any other time. Mr Katter: With water resources they have cut it all in half You know that that is true. Mr EATON: No. Queensland has received more money from Canberra for water resources than any other State has received. Mr Eraser's program was only pie in the sky. He knew of the existence of that huge deficit. Mr Randell: You knew that the Burdekin was quite separate from the normal funding. Mr EATON: I know that; but I am not talking about the Burdekin. Some Federal money is going into the electorate represented by the honourable member for Mirani. I did a tour through the Mackay/Sarina/Bowen Basin area, and I was very disappointed at the Government's performance there. If it was an up-to-date Government, it would have started schemes throughout that area. The Pioneer River can be likened to the Snowy River and the Tennessee Valley, in which water is re-used. A similar scheme could be implemented in the Pioneer River. I am sure that the honourable member for Mirani is aware of that.

Mr Randell: Under Rex Patterson, the Federal Govemment started a scheme, gave the Queensland Government $5m, and then walked away. Mr EATON: The area got a good start in life. An Opposition Member interjected. 1072 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem)

Mr EATON: Since the Government came to office in 1957, no Queensland Premier or Treasurer has come away whinging from either a Loan Council meeting or a Premiers Conference. Mr Ahern: What about the last one, over Medicare? Don't you read the newspapers? Mr EATON: Yes. The Premier said that he was happy with the result of that meeting. When Mr Hawke was in Brisbane for the conference on Expo, the Premier had a very cheeky grin on his face when he was asked what he thought of Mr Hawke. He admitted that Mr Hawke had given him some money for Expo. This Government is a "gimme" Government. It says, "Gimme the money and I wiU do it." Governments should take the initiative. The honourable member for Mirani said that the Federal Government started a scheme. Surely the Federal Government is not expected to mother the State and feed it all the way through. This State Government has no initiative; it will not get up and go. Mr Randell: Where does the money that the Federal Government gives us come from? That is our money. Mr EATON: Not all of it. Queensland gets more money than any other State gets. All honourable members are aware of that. However, I have been informed by my Whip that my time is up. Mr LITTLEPROUD (Condamine) (5.23 p.m.): The Federal Govemment is the major tax-gatherer in the nation and it controls the economic climate in the country. That means that the State Budget must either complement the Federal Budget or compensate for it. The State Budget does in fact compensate for the Federal Budget. The major fault in the Federal Budget is that it killed incentive. It imposed a tax on superannuation, dropped the investment allowance, imposed an assets test on pensioners, and slowed down protection by way of tariffs and bounties for the manufacturing industries. That opinion is not mine alone. I quote the words of the president of the National Farmers Federation, Mr Ian McLachlan, who said— "Although the Federal Government has been making the right noises about reducing protection on Australian industry, the change is slow. At the same time, farm competitiveness is declining. In the light of this, the National Farmers Fed­ eration has clearly decided to focus on one sensitive issue, namely, jobs. The Trade Department estimates that every 5 per cent of growth in export volumes creates 30 000 new jobs. Recent National Farmers Federation statements have said that the declining competitiveness of the farm sector has cost approximately 45 000 jobs this year. Moreover, this loss of exporting also affects Australia's ability to service foreign debt. This is particularly important in the light of this Government's announced deficit. If fact in the last decade the average annual growth in Australian debt has been around 30%. This compares with Latin America countries whose debt level has only run at around 25%. NFF makes the point that the main economic debate, particularly leading up to the election has been about the redistribution of income rather than its creation despite the self evident fact that economic growth would reduce unemployment and increase real wages." What has the Queensland government done to compensate for the Federal Government's attitudes? It has reduced death duties. It has set up industrial estates. It has created a Department of Industrial Development. It has undertaken mineral research. It has had the foresight to build oil and gas pipelines. The capital works programs are open to private enterprise. The Govemment has initiated "Enterprise Queensland" The Government has provided growth in Government services in both the productive sector and the welfare sector. Supply (Financial Statement) 4 October 1984 1073 The Leader of the Opposition said that no mention of the Budget was made in "Queensland Country Life". However, an article written by the President of the United Graziers Association, Mr Magoffin, appeared in "Grazier", a magazine published by the United Graziers Association. The article states— "The UGA said recentiy that the Federal Govemment should follow Queensland's lead in introducing balanced budgets. UGA President, Mr Gordon Magoffin, congratulated Premier and Treasurer, Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen, on the State Budget. Mr Magoffin welcomed the increased payroll tax exemption limit, nil growth in public sector administration and more money for water resources, mapping and survey, education in remote areas and the brucellosis and tuberculosis eradication campaign. He also particularly welcomed proposals to amend stamp duty on family property transfers which the UGA had sought for about three years.

Mr Magoffin noted the budget should lead to employment growth, despite other States exporting many of their unemployed to Queensland." Mr Davis: What is your source of information? Mr LITTLEPROUD: The UGA publication, "Grazier" An Opposition Member: The UGA publication is an official organ of the National Party. Mr LITTLEPROUD: The honourable member should have more sense. The major points of the Budget have been highlighted. To reiterate some of them, the Budget is a balanced Budget. 40 000 man-years of employment will be created. The borrowings of the State are about 5.6 per cent of total Budget outlays, • whereas the Federal Government's borrowings are about 8.6 of its total Budget outlays. The Labor Government in Victoria is selling off its assets and leasing them back to fund its programs. Queensland has a huge capital works program. The Budget contains exciting new initiatives in education. As the member for Mourilyan (Mr Eaton) said, further devel­ opment of water conservation programs will take place. Assistance will be provided to the tourist industry. The impetus given to technological innovation should not be forgotten. The Queensland Govemment also recognises that the complexion of Queensland's economy is changing. Primary industries continue to grow. The retail industry continues to grow. The major boom in the coal industry is over, but solid, continuing progress is being made. Coal output for this year has increased. Growth is taking place in tourism. Exciting developments are taking place in the oil and gas industries. The Queensland Budget is framed in accordance with the changes that are occurring in the State's economy. I have referted to the word "accord" After Mr Hawke became Prime Minister, he summoned together those people whom he thought were important. The Premier of Queensland said, "Be careful, fellows. Don't sign this." It was a big gloss job, and that is not only my opinion. Mr Borbidge: It was a fraud. Mr LITTLEPROUD: It was a fraud. Mr John Leard, managing director of Australian National Industries Limited, stated in a recent article— "Firstly, on the international scene there are four factors which influence all of our business lives—viz:—the continuing confrontation between the United States 1074 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO

and the Soviet Union; the increasingly difficult problem of the indebtedness to the international banking system of Third World Developing countries; the continuing war between Iran and Iraq and the potential for dislocation of world oil supplies from the Middle East; and finally, the manner in which the world economic order is becoming increasingly dependent on the health or otherwise of the US economy.

The international issues are, of course, areas where Australia as a nation has little influence. We are merey reactors to issues as they emerge.

The issues on the Australian political and economic scene are closer to home and capable of more immediate analysis and action. What then are some of the real issues which confront business people in Australia today? Firstly, we should recognise that in AustraUa today we basically have govemment for the unions by the unions. We really have a coalition Govemment today—a coalition between the Labor Party and the ACTU. It is the first time we have had a coalition Govemment where one member of the coalition has not been elected by the people." That bears emphasis—"It is the first time we have had a coalition Govemment where one member of the coalition has not been elected by the people." His statement continues— "Whether this offends our democratic principles or not is unimportant. What business people have to understand is that under the Accord the ACTU regards itself as an equal partner in the mnning of Australia. In making our investment decisions in business today—" and in this he is referring to business people— "we should not only have regard to the policies of the ALP but also the policies and objectives of the ACTU as these will also impinge on our future. We need to understand the concept of the Accord. I have always regarded the Accord as a document of the Left. In the media we mainly hear and read that the Accord is about prices and incomes. But the Accord is much more than this. The implementation of the Accord would give the unions control and influence over sectionsof Australian life which would be repugnant to most Australians. . Make no mistake about it, every investment decision you make may ultimately be influenced by the unions. We need to realise that the continued adherence to wage indexation means that we are not dealing with the two main issues of the Economic Summit—competitiveness and the unemployed. The great need for Australian industry and business today is to become more competitive. It might not be palatable to the authors of the Accord but we will never create more jobs if we continue to increase the wages of those who already have jobs, without regard to the capacity of industries and businesses to pay. Government for the unions by the unions virtually means govemment for the employed. I have become completely convinced that no-one gives two-figs for the unemployed. They are the largest disenfranchised group in Australia today. We need more taxes in Australia today like we need a hole in the head. Those businessmen who advocate the introduction of a capital gains tax, a wealth tax and death duties in exchange for a reform of the personal tax system are out of their minds. They forget that we have government for the unions by the unions. There is no way that the ACTU will allow the Government to reduce the 60 cents tax rate (or the 46 cents rate either for that matter). The ACTU stands for more and higher gradients in the tax scale. This means that these new taxes will just slug harder those already in the highest tax brackets. These are the people who are Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1075

capable of showing initiative and taking risks. We should remember that risk takers create jobs—we need more risk takers in Australia. Finally, business ought to be much more concerned with competitiveness rather than protection. One of the failures of Australian business has been our predeliction to seek protection as the first option in our problems rather than the last." Mr Ian McLachlan, president of National Farmers Federation had this to say Mr Underwood interjected. Mr LITTLEPROUD: A short time ago a colleague of the member for Ipswich West claimed that the ALP stood for the man on the land. Now the member for Ipswich West is attacking the very organisation that represents those people. The following is a report of Mr McLachlan's address to the Australian Dairy Farmers Federation— "The Australian community is largely switched off to agriculture.

McLachlan went on to list eight areas for action, inviting farmers to choose which ones they wanted NFF to focus on: farm costs, EEC animal welfare, containing capital gains and other taxes. Aboriginal land claims, wage rises, conservation push, or communicating farm policy issues. McLachlan placed some emphasis in his talk on the 'tall order' of convicting govemment, the community at large and some farmers of the importance of policies favourable to agriculture." It is well known—it has been stated many times today—that primary industries are a vital part of our economy. They are an infinite source of wealth. They have been with us since this country was first settled and they will be with us for ever more. I Ust the grain and cotton industries of my area as well as beef, sugar, wool, horticulture, fishing and various other aspects of primary production. They will always create a major share of this State's wealth. A fair comment is that the State's primary industries are efficient and that the people in them are great innovators of technology. An example of that is the activities of the Dalby firm of Napier Russ Pty Ltd. I was recently told by that firm's research and development branch that it has developed a new air seeder. People from that firm travelled throughout the agricultural belt of the United States of America to see the latest developments there and returned to Australia convinced that this nation leads the way in the development of this type of technology. Mr Simpson: It always has. Mr LITTLEPROUD: That is so. History shows that it was Australians who introduced headers. A recent innovation is Metal Alert. It detects metal filings, which indicate a breakdown of bearings. That allows an overhaul to take place before a major breakdown occurs. Australia has cane- harvesters and peanut-harvesters. The background of the farming industry in Australia shows great innovation. Primary industries also have great problems. Not much can be done about three of them—drought, flood and price fluctuations. Other worries are the cost of inputs, the protected industries that service the State's primary industries, and tariffs and bounties. The State's products also have to compete internationally with products subsidised by the European Economic Community and others. At present the seasons are good, but I inform honourable members that all is not well in the primary industries. When the drought broke not too many months ago, Mr Hawke quickly admitted that the increase in productivity in the mral sector led to an 1076 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO overall recovery in the Australian economy. If he knows that to be the fact, why is it that he has killed the incentive for the ones who provided that recovery? When problems occurred in the past and people were short of a dollar, as large tracts of agricultural land became available throughout Queensland, they took the obvious step and bought more land. They knew that if they could produce more they would get bigger. However, the time has arrived when that can no longer be done. In the wheat and sugar industries one of the problems is that there is over-production. The world market cannot take any more of the product. The solution is not to produce more units but to make more profit per unit. Mr Milliner: Don't you believe in free enterprise? Mr LITTLEPROUD: Of course I do. Does the honourable member? Mr Milliner: We do. Mr LITTLEPROUD: The Labor Party does not do much to assist free enterprise. The farmers have had to obtain a bigger margin of profit per unit of production and have done that with the use of better technology which has provided more efficient methods of production. That has resulted in farms becoming non-viable. Recently I tried to get a young farmer set up under the Young Farmer Establishment Scheme, but the banks have to look ahead 20 years. The farm that he wanted to buy was nearly 800 acres of agricultural land on the Darling Downs and is regarded today as a good unit. The man would have had to pay it off over 20 years. The Agricultural Bank looked at the trends in the economy and had to refuse the application for a loan because, before 20 years elapse, that farm will not be an economic unit. What a sad state of affairs. That has resulted in a displacement of people. In some cases a farmer can afford to get funds to buy out his neighbour, but that takes a huge capital outlay. That has caused many unskilled people—those who have only primary industry skills—to be displaced. The country towns that service those industries are dying also. Mr Davis: That assistance scheme has put three or four farmers on the land. Mr LITTLEPROUD: That is interesting. Back in the 1940s and 1950s the ALP held many, many electorates in western Queensland. Because the ALP got completely out of touch with country people, today it holds only one seat west of the Great Dividing Range. Mr Borbidge: They sold them out. Mr LITTLEPROUD: Yes, they did. To find out how that happened is quite interesting. Union and ALP policies have abandoned the bush. When the wool industry was doing well, the shearers were paid a prosperity loading. When wool prices decreased, the allowance was never removed. Sugar-cane-farmers have been forced to pay a prosperity loading to their workers. Now that the sugar industry is in a bad shape, that loading remains. The same thing could be said for the coal industry. The member for Ipswich has lamented the fact that coal-miners in Ipswich are working in inefficient mines and therefore will lose their jobs. The coal-miners have not been flexible enough to say that they will take reduced wages. A complete contrast to that is the National Party industrial relations policy arid the policy of the National Farmers Federation. An article in the Queensland Graingrowers Association newspaper, "Queensland Graingrower", states— "Australians were being sold a pup with their present national wage-fixing system, the National Farmers' Federation told the annual conference of the N.S.W. Employers Federation in Sydney. Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1077

N.F.P. president Mr Ian McLachlan said defenders of the present system used a fraudulent haze of popular words like responsibiUty, consensus, equity and industrial reality to justify a righteous, rigid and remote system. He challenged the members of the industrial relations 'club' to justify a system which in the name of industrial reality, aUowed 25 per cent of 15-to-19-year-olds to be unemployed, forced the closure of potentially viable businesses because of intolerable wage increases and maintained a high level of general unemployment in spite of Australia's natural endownments. Industrial reality is a euphemism for appeasement which usually means a scramble for industrial peace followed by a spirit of self-congratulation among club members. Economic realities are rarely considered, Mr McLachlan said. Mr McLachlan strongly questioned the responsibility shown by all participants in the wage-fixing system; employers, unions, the Arbitration Commission and govemment. All parties have condoned a vigorous and mindless application of the principle of comparative wage justice which had seen wage increases in a strong area of the economy being imposed on other industries throughout the economy. A successful wages system should isolate industrial activity within each industry or enterprise to ensure that the folly of one is not gratuitously imposed on others Mr McLachlan said.

The path of our future must be one in which employers get closer to employees, and in which they were able to deal with each other in a rational and sensible manner. He pointed to developments in the United States in the area of employee stock ownership plans and compared them to the regulation-ridden concepts of worker participation in Australia. A wage-fixing system driven by industry or enterprise negotiation will greatly accelerate this recognition of the mutual interest of employers and employees he said." That shows that the policy of the National Farmers Federation is the same as that of the National Party, which is much more realistic than that of the Labor Party. I wish now to make some comments about the grain industry. I mentioned before that all is not well in primary industries, and certainly all is not well in the grain industry. I bring to the attention of honourable members an article relating to statements made by Mr Rod McLeod, the general president of the Queensland Graingrowers Association. The article stated— "The recent upsurge of interest in the problem of farm costs has been welcomed by the Queensland Graingrowers Association. General president of the association Mr Rod McLeod said both the Federal Government and the Opposition should take note of this groundswell of grower opinion and make clear pre-election commitments to meaningful reductions in government taxes and charges on farm inputs. He said the whole Australian economy would suffer if mral export industries are allowed to stagnate because of extravagant charges. The Federal Govemment could help the grain industry to remain competitive on export markets by abolishing tariffs on essential farm machinery, by exempting all inputs to agricultural production from sales tax and by completely removing the excise from fuel used on farms Mr McLeod said." 1078 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem)

I refer also to another article from the same newspaper which dealt with statements by Mr David Comben, the chairman of the Dalby District Council of the Queensland Graingrowers Association. It stated— "The costs of grain farming today were frightening, Q.G.G.A. Dalby District Council president David Comben said in his annual report. Fuel, fertilizer, machinery and labour were expensive and commodity prices were low. Mr Comben said it was little wonder the average age of farmers was increasing. Young men and women would find it almost impossible to start any farming venture without immense financial backing.

The Federal Budget was a non-event for farmers and the header tariff issue was a glaring example of the Federal Government's attitude, he said. I don't believe that the Federal Government is facing up to reality—that is, that Australia is living beyond its means. The productivity isn't there for the wages that are being paid." I have mentioned already that, to overcome their problems, those people are either buying out their neighbours in order to get bigger, to go broad acre, to go extensive, which necessitates huge capital borrowings to buy the property and the equipment, or going intensive. That is another option, which means using irrigated crops or grain to fatten pigs and poultry or set up feedlots for cattle. Using either option, they have had to apply new technology. They have done all that they can. A comparison should be made between a person in private enterprise trying to increase his income and a person on wages trying to do the same thing. I have had exerience in both spheres. If a man on a property in the grain industry wants to make an additional $10,000 a year, he must provide up to $100,000 in additional capital. If a worker wants to make $10,000 more in wages in 10 years, it is virtually a matter of 10 hearings in the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Commission and continuing to pay his union dues. To be realistic, people who are investing capital should share in the wealth of the nation rather than have their share whittle away gradually while those in other sections of the community receive an automatic flow-on. The Budget announced major initiatives in education. Funds totalUng $ 1,072.6m have been allocated. That represents an increase of 15.7 per cent on the amount provided last year. Opposition members are always critical of expenditure on education in Queensland on the basis that it is below the national average. At the moment, I think Queensland expenditure is about 85 per cent of the Australian average. However, Opposition members fail to mention that in terms of attainment Queensland children are equal to, or better than, most children throughout Australia. Nothing is wrong with Queensland's education system. I intend to highlight some of the initiatives to be taken following the Budget. An extensive building program will provide new pre-schools, primary schools and high schools. In all, about 1 500 new teachers will be employed. The additional teachers will help to reduce class sizes. The Government is looking to the future in providing $7.5m for a computer program. Secondary schools with less than 1 000 students will get 15 microcomputers and schools with more than 1 000 students will get twice that number. Primary schools will receive a subsidy of up to $500 to assist them in the purchase of computers. I stress that that is a move towards the future. In the past, the special grants for schools have been criticised. Today, at question- time, the Minister for Education explained in detaU the 33'/j per cent increase in that field. Textbook allowances are to be increased. The total cost of that allowance will be almost $10m. Per capita grants to private schools are to be increased. It is rather Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1079 interesting to note that Opposition members are keen to get rid of as many private schools as they can. The Government is following up the initiative taken last year to incorporate TAFE- type courses in high schools. That is vitally important in country areas, because many country towns throughout the State will never be big enough to justify the establishment of a TAFE college. They are lucky to have a high school. I should hope that in the years to come, TAFE courses will be available in country high schools so that children may be prepared for the life ahead of them, irrespective of where they live in Queensland. A new education region is to be based on Caims. It is to be known as the Peninsula Region. Today, the honourable member for Burdekin spoke about the new allowances available for children in isolated areas. In almost every instance, isolated children will receive increased allowances. Education in Queensland is in good shape, thanks to forward planning and achievement. Honourable members should be mindful of the overall aims and rationale of education. They should realise that facts outgrow themselves quickly these days and that world knowledge doubles very quickly. It is essential, therefore, to teach children a few facts and many skills. The emphasis must be placed on skills so that children can continue to educate themselves throughout life, irrespective of age. Mr Davis interjected. Mr LITTLEPROUD: The member for Brisbane Central would benefit from further education, even at his decrepit stage of life. The Government intends to give children the skills and facts that they will need to prepare themselves for the future. Some major expenditure is included in the welfare budget. The Playground and Recreation Association is to receive $295,000. That includes money for a $20,000 unit at Toowoomba. The Youth Employment Support Scheme has been a great success. In the past five years, it has placed about 4 500 young people in permanent work. Community projects are to be provided with $ 150,000 in special grants. In the last three years, 12 new centres have been built in the State. This year, $400,000 has been allocated. The Youth Assistance Scheme has been allocated $948,000. That is for capital works subsidies to assist young people and organisations that assist young people. In that regard I mention a scouting group based in the Condamine area that has developed a scouting camp in the bush at an old forestry camp called Gilgunya. I have every confidence that, this year, some sort of Government subsidy will go to those people because they are self-motivated and hard-working. That camp is used not only by cubs, scouts and guides, but also by other community organisations. I am sure that the people of Queensland welcome the initiatives taken by the Government to support such enterprising groups. International Youth Year is approaching and $ 150,000 has been allocated to it. That will complement the current Year of the FamUy program, and another $90,000 will be spent on that project. The Year of the Family has been an outstanding success, and it highlights the basic quality of life that the National Party stands for. It is interesting to note the way in which the concept has been taken up so enthusiastically by people throughout the State. The Department of Children's Services deserves mention. It is the aim of that department to support families and to care for children who are in need. This year, $8m has been allocated for assistance to families and grants to foster parents. Approximately 1 600 children need fostering in Queensland. 1080 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO Family day-care centres have been established. Criticism has been levelled in the past that there are mother and child care centres and crisis housing facilities, but that very little has been done about crisis housing or accommodation for whole families. These centres represent a new initiative. The draft Family and Community Development Bill, which was laid on the table of the House, is still being considered. That new legislation will rewrite the current children's services legislation. Recently, I was concerned to read a press release from the member for Redcliffe (Terry White). He was critical in saying that Queensland desperately needed that legislation. He knew full well that the draft Bill had been laid on the table of the House. The final Bill has not as yet been introduced because interested organisations and community groups have been making submissions on the provisions in the legislation. The intent of the Minister for Welfare Services, Youth and Ethnic Affairs is that, when the final Bill comes before the Parliament, honourable members and the community will know that it has been drafted in line with the thoughts of the welfare organisations that do so much good for young people and families in Queensland. The Government has also allocated $108,000 for family emergency accommodation and $60,000 for welfare community development officers. Those officers will travel round the State to assist community welfare organisations already in existence. I wiU give an example from my own electorate. Chinchilla has a family support centre. The people who work there counsel those with family troubles and give accommodation and food parcels to those who are desperately in need of them. The Minister, who recently visited the centre, saw first-hand the work it does, spoke to the people who do the counselling and to those who fill in the numerous forms, and acknowledged that, because of the recent developments of farmlets on some of the poorer land in the district, there was a great and growing need for the centre. The Minister responded to that need by providing further funding. The people working at the centre do such a sterling job. I would also like to make a comment about ethnic affairs. Earlier in this debate, the member for South Brisbane spoke strongly about racial prejudice in the community, and it does exist to a certain degree. However, it must be agreed that the Minister and the Govemment are being positive in what they are doing. The Queensland Ethnic Affairs Advisory Council, which is based in Brisbane, and the Northem Ethnic Affairs Advisory Council have been established. Those bodies meet and discuss problems and make suggestions and submissions to the Minister and his departmental officers. I am sure that Queensland is going a long way in integrating people from ethnic backgrounds into the community. I understand that approximately 14.4 per cent of people resident in Queensland were born overseas. The member for Townsville (Mr McElligott), in his speech in this debate, spoke about the prison system. Because of his remarks, I would also like to comment about Queensland's prison and corrective services. The Minister has spoken in this Chamber a number of times about his intention to ensure that first offenders and persons sentenced to less than six months' imprisonment do not necessarily go to gaol. I am sure that few people would disagree with that idea. The Minister has taken initiatives to make that intention a reality. I refer to community service orders, which are already in vogue, and the fine option program. The honourable member for Townsville had a good deal to say about what he alleged was the poor state of Queensland's prisons. The Government has already announced that, as a result of the report titled "Queensland Prisons to 2000 and Beyond", it will spend $41.9m on prisons. A staff training college will be established, and parts of the prison at Boggo Road and the one at Stuart will be replaced. In 1983 trouble broke out at the Brisbane Prison Complex, but long ago I commended the Minister for the attitude that he adopted on that occasion. I do so again. I could not say the same for certain members of the Opposition, who highlighted the situation both in the press and in this Chamber. They only added fuel to the situation. Their comments were very negative. Supply (Financial Statement) 4 October 1984 1081

Recently the Minister for Welfare Services, Youth and Ethnic Affairs took the members of his committee on a tour of most prisons in Queensland and some in New South Wales, Victoria, South AustraUa and Tasmania. I am a member of that committee. We were able to make some good comparisons between the prison system in Queensland and those in other States. In most instances, the Queensland prison system compares very favourably with those in other States. We made comparisons on three aspects. The first is the stmctures themselves. With the exception of parts of the prison at Boggo Road and the Stuart prison, prison stmctures in Queensland are extremely good, functional and in good shape. Certainly some brand- new prisons exist in other parts of Australia, and they incorporate many of the ideas that are put into effect in Queensland. There is an intercourse of ideas between the prison officers in the various States. They freely give information to one another. Of course, certain prisons in other parts of Australia are extremely old. Many are of the same age as the prison at Boggo Road. Some even date from 100 years ago and are quite inadequate. Of course, the whole matter depends on funding. The cake that has to be cut up is of a certain size. How much does the Queensland Govemment allocate to prisons from its share of the cake, when so many other worthwhile things can be done with the money? The second aspect on which we made comparisons is morale of the inmates. In Queensland, the prison officers relate to the inmates very well, and the inmates relate to one another in the same manner. Similarly, inmates react to visitors very well. Queensland is lucky to have the prison officers that it has. The officers and the prisoners in Queensland have a mutual respect for one another and they engage quite openly in conversation. Many features that we saw in southern States leave a good deal to be desired. The third aspect is rehabilitation. It is the desire of the Prisons Department in Queensland to have workshops in prisons so that the inmates can be actively employed. Furthermore, they are provided with study facilities and recreational facilities. The Queensland system compares more than favourably with those in other parts of Australia. In conclusion, I support the initiatives in the Budget. They will assist economic recovery and cater for education, technological development in industry, welfare and health services. My earnest hope is that at the next Federal election the Federal Government will change so that Australia can return to the philosophy of creating more wealth and helping more people instead of redistributing the wealth that Australia already has.

Sitting suspended from 5.59 to 7.15 p.m. Mr PALASZCZUK (Archerfield) (7.15 p.m.): As my leader, Mr Warburton, pointed out, the Budget presented by the Premier and Treasurer is a sham. Both the Labor Party and the Liberal Party are highly critical of the Budget. A snap check of country newspapers shows that they also are less than enthusiastic about it. It is an example of taxation by stealth. At a time when the average wage and salary earner is observing the wages pause and inflation is falling fast, the Government increases its charges by an average of 25 per cent and, in some cases, by up to 100 per cent. It then tries to justify the rises by suggesting that it is just covering normal cost increases during the year. The Govemment is setting an example for businesses. Although there have been no wage rises, price rises have been hefty. That is good for profits. The main reason the Budget has been a non- event is that the people of Queensland have heard it all before. What we heard in the Governor's Opening Speech and at Budget-time can only be described as pie in the sky. Although schemes are launched with a fanfare of tmmpets, after a few weeks they fade quietly into the sunset never to be heard of again. I suggest to honourable members that they spend some time reading the newspapers that were 1082 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO

published a few years ago. They are full of reports of schemes, but those schemes have never hit the deck. One interesting proposal was to use the old Evans Deakin shipyard at Kangaroo Point as an Expo site. However, that proposal was not pursued. Instead, half of South Brisbane will be resumed and businesses will be mined. My colleague the member for Kurilpa (Anne Warner) dealt with that matter at length. Another smart trick of the Government is to claim every mooted project as its own, whether it is proposed by the Federal Government, local government or private enterprise. Fortunately, the people of Queensland wUl no longer fall for that trick. I represent an area that has an above-average level of unemployment. It is nothing short of despicable for the Government to keep tmmpeting how much employment those non-existent schemes will generate. They only raise people's hopes. The unemployed become very disillusioned when they are told that those schemes are only projections, that the finance has still to be raised^ or that they are at a very early planning stage. I note in the Budget papers that in 1984-85 the Queensland Housing Commission will constmct 2 000 living units. Unfortunately, that rate of constmction is not keeping pace with the increase in the waiting-list. In recent weeks I have noted in my electorate office an alarming increase in the number of persons seeking help in obtaining Queensland Housing Commission accommodation. Contrary to what the Premier and Treasurer would have everyone believe, those people are not dreaded southerners flocking across the border to take the homes of good Queenslanders; they are local people who, through unemployment or inability to afford high private sector rents, are in desperate need of low-rent accommodation. It is to be hoped that, with the massive injection of funds under the new Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement, the wait-time and wait­ list can be drastically reduced. At present, it is buyer's market for established homes. The commission should seriously investigate the matter. Buying of established homes will shorten wait-time and will achieve a much needed housing mix in the community. I was also pleased to note that a matter that I raised in my maiden speech, namely the encouragement of couples and single people to move from large family homes into single bedroom apartments, is being actively pursued. That matter is frequently raised with me. Of course, the mb is that people want to remain where they are. However, that is not always possible. The suburb of Acacia Ridge is in my electorate. No land on which to build units is available there. I hope that my suggestion that more units should be constmcted on the vacant land near my electorate office is pursued.

Mr Kaus: What type of units? Mr PALASZCZUK: Pensioner units. I draw the attention of the Minister and the commission to the redevelopment of WooUoomooUoo by the New South Wales Government. The area has been totally redeveloped and upgraded for low-cost housing for city workers, who can virtually walk to work. Perhaps after Expo '88 the land at South Brisbane could be turned over to the Housing Commission for a similar housing development instead of being used for more high-rise blocks. Knowing the record of this Government, however, I will not hold my breath waiting. 1 will take a few minutes to discuss tourism. At a time when the mining industry is on the decline, it seems only natural to me that we should be hopping on to the tourism bandwagon. The Australian Tourist Commission is doing an excellent job spending a great deal of money to encourage Australians to holiday in their own country. The Queensland Government and its Tourist and Travel Corporation seem to be promoting developments that are designed for the well-heeled overseas visitor. Those projects are not meant for the average Australian family man. Supply (Financial Statement) 4 October 1984 1083

No-one with a family, particularly small children, wants a luxury suite on the 23rd floor of a high-rise apartment. I know that that type of development is favoured by the honourable member for Surfers Paradise (Mr Borbidge). One has only to look at those units at night. They are mostly in darkness. Three-quarters of them are unoccupied. They remind me of sleeping giants waiting to be awakened by the five jumbo-jet loads of tourists that each day the Premier tells us are to arrive very shortly. I would suggest to the Minister for Housing (Mr Wharton) that those monstrosities could be put to a very constmctive use. Either the Housing Commission could buy them and reduce its waiting-list or the tenants of the commission homes in needy circumstances could be given a free month's holiday a year in them. The average family man on holiday with his family wants a modest apartment, with modern facilities, at a reasonable tariff. It is about time that the Tourism Minister and the Government turned their attention to that aspect of tourist accommodation. To my mind, one of the problems is the Queensland Tourist and Travel Corporation. It is top heavy with tall poppies. They live in a dream world, completely out of touch with reality, lounging in their luxury office suites high in the clouds. They are surrounded by their crystal, fine china and silver ware, and enjoy well-catered lunches. They do not have a clue what is wanted by the average Australian family man. Perhaps if the Minister took a good, hard look at the crowds waiting to be attended to in the Brisbane office in Adelaide Street, he might give consideration to increasing the counter staff and pmning the non-productive staff in the corporation offices. I will now mention an area that has been, is and always will be dear to my heart— education. I taught in the Inala area for most of my teaching life. During that time I noticed the shortcomings of the educational facilities in my electorate. Class-rooms that have been standing for 30 years have still not received an internal repaint. Considering the many important changes*-that have been introduced to the school curriculum involving changes in class-room management, I would have thought that bright, appealing class-rooms were a necessity. However, that is far from the reality. No schools in my electorate have received an internal repaint since they were constmcted. The only exception is the Rocklea State School, which had to be rebuilt after it was destroyed by fire. Mr Kaus: Has anybody made approaches? Mr PALASZCZUK: Of course. Approaches were made by my predecessor. The files are in my office. Mr Kaus: Will you do the same thing? Mr PALASZCZUK: Of course I will do the same thing. In fact, I am doing it right now. Teachers strive to improve the class-room environment with posters, displays of children's work, mobiles, fish tanks, interest corners and any other avenue open to them, but they have to find the money for those things out of their own pockets. In 1976, some of my colleagues and I were so concerned with the class-room environment that during the summer vacation we painted our own class-rooms. Unfortunately, the problem does not end there. After working in the substandard class-room environment, teachers are confronted with the same problem when they enter the staff-room—dingy staff-rooms that would not be tolerated in any other industry. In recent weeks, when dental, medical and accounting professions have been discussed, I have listened intently to Government members admonish Opposition members for profession-knocking. Where is the Government's regard for teaching as a profession? Inala teachers are regarded as members of a second-class profession. Mrs Chapman: No, they are not. Mr PALASZCZUK: Of course they are. Look at their staff-rooms and other conditions. The honourable member for Pine Rivers has not been out there. 1084 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO I appeal to the Minister for Works and Housing (Mr Wharton) to rectify as soon as possible the problems that I have raised as, educationally, Archerfield is a very deprived electorate. I tell the member for Pine Rivers that it is a case of out of sight, out of mind. Recently the Queensland Teachers Union was directed by the teaching staff of Inala schools to conduct a survey of their conditions. The results of the survey are nothing short of scandalous—class-rooms crying out for paint, class-rooms with no lighting, second-rate furniture, and substandard toilet facilities. While I am on the subject of lighting—on a cloudy, dark day, there is a fight in Inala schools for the overhead projector to get lighting into the class-rooms. That is how bad things are. The schools of Inala, the teachers and, most important of all, the children, have been totally neglected. For education in Inala, time has stood still. It was fair comment for the honourable member for Mansfield (Mr Kaus) to advise the Chamber during his speech in the Address in Reply debate that all schools in his electorate have swimming-pools. His constituents are quite wealthy and have the resources to raise money for large projects such as swimming-pools, which, incidentally, attract a 50 per cent subsidy. Mr Kaus: That is good representation. Mr PALASZCZUK: That is weahh. It is coming from an electorate whose constU- uents have money. Mr Kaus: It is good representation, too. Mr PALASZCZUK: I do not know about that. It could be good representation, but in my area it is difficult to get the money that will attract a subsidy. If the honourable member for Mansfield listens carefully, I will explain why. Mr Henderson: Schools in my electorate do not have swimming-pools. Mr PALASZCZUK: It is about time they did. If the honourable member listens to my speech, he might find out how to get them. The constituents of my electorate are not wealthy and cannot raise the necessary money for large projects such as swimming-pools and, therefore, miss out on Govemment subsidies. That is an iniquitous state of affairs. Not one school in Inala has a swimming- pool. Through its p. and c. association and dedicated teachers such as Ray Cooper and Glen Graham, for over 15 years the Inala State School has worked to raise approximately $20,000 for a swimming-pool. As the cost of a swimming-pool exceeds $120,000, they will be retired by the time enough money is raised to attract the subsidy and finally have a swimming-pool built for the children. The other Inala schools are a long way behind the Inala State School. The only school in my electorate with a swimming-pool is the Acacia Ridge State School, and I pay tribute to the school for making maximum use of its swimming-pool seven days a week. Because of our climate, most of our leisure activities are geared to the water, so it is very important that children learn to swim. It is scandalous that the Serviceton South, Serviceton, Inala, Inala West, Richlands and Richlands East State Schools and the Inala and Richlands High Schools have to share the one council pool in the Inala area. I note that the Police Academy has a pool, but I do not believe that it is more important for police cadets than children to learn to swim. When I was a teacher I remember taking children before and after school to the local pool to train for school and interschool swimming carnivals. Members can imagine the problems that were encountered when children from four schools used the pool at the same time. If only six of the schools in my electorate had constmcted swimming-pools, as is the case in the Mansfield electorate, the Government's contribution by way of subsidy would have been $360,000. Schools in Inala will never receive that amount, because it is impossible for parents and citizens Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1085

associations in the Inala area to raise $60,000 each. Once again I could apply the well- used cliche that the rich schools get richer and the poor schools get poorer. Perhaps if this Government, through its Budget, remedied some of the problems that I have outlined, the quality of life of the average Queenslander, and more importantly, the people in my electorate, would be vastly improved. Mr COOPER (Roma) (7.32 p.m.): I believe that that was the second speech made in this Chamber by the member for Archerfield. I listened to his maiden speech not so very long ago. In his maiden speech he launched a savage attack on the business community, which is the very provider of jobs and the dynamo of the productive sector, and in doing so he stamped himself as one of the knockers. He has now broached the subject of swimming-pools for Inala schools as if that would solve all the area's problems as far as the quality of life of its residents is concerned. Mr Palaszczuk: No, I didn't. Why didn't you listen? Mr COOPER: I did listen to the points raised by the honourable member. I point out to him that my area is not one of the wealthy areas which he is so down on and likes so much to attack. Through sheer hard work in fund-raising the little school in the WaUumbiUa area raised $70,000 in only 18 months to build its own swimming-pool. That is how it is done. Nothing is given to anybody on a plate, and nothing ever will be. People must work for what they receive, and that is something the honourable member might as well learn. As far as I am concerned, most of what can be said about the Budget, both for and against, has already been said. I have decided to precis the Budget as far as it affects western and mral areas, in both a particular sense and a general sense. I will demonstrate that the Budget has great depth and substance as it will affect all areas of the State. It has reinforced the decentralisation policy that this Govemment has pursued for so long, at least to the extent that it is practicable and possible to do so. Opposition members have not produced an alternative Budget. They have taken the easy way out. It is easy to knock. They find it easier to attack the Govemment's Budget than to present their alternative for our examination and for examination and consideration by the people of Queensland. We heard the usual litany of doom and gloom from the member for Mount Isa. As we have just seen demonstrated by the member for Archerfield, that attitude is typical of ALP members. The member for Mount Isa urged support of the mining companies. That is a mockery. Many years ago when the mining industry moved into full swing under this Government's guidance, the ALP criticised the Govemment for not gaining enough for Queensland and Queenslanders. Opposition members accused the Government of selling the farm, raping the State and failing to secure sufficient royalties. With sheer hypocrisy, Labor members have been accusing the Govemment of securing too much for the people of Queensland in its attempt to make the railways pay and to improve the quality of life for all Queenslanders. In no way can the Govemment win. The mining industry may be finding it tough right now, but measures have been instituted to provide relief No-one could expect the Government to forgo large sums in revenue and, at the same time, continue with much-needed developments and improvements such as railway electrification and improved port facilities. The mining industry has not been left without assistance. It has been granted about $3m in concessions over three years. This year, Mount Isa Mines was exempted from the 6 per cent rati freight increase. Opposition members have not said very much about that. The Govemment is quite prepared to look at the situation on an annual basis. Meanwhile, mining companies have been granted all the assistance initially asked for. If other industries asked for as much, the State's financial position would be untenable. I believe that enough is enough. I ask the mining industry to think of the sugar industry and the cattle industry, which have been through hard times and know exactly what they are like. Nothing is rosy at all times. 1086 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem) The honourable member for Bundaberg asserted that the Government brought down a three-year Budget. His assertion is hogwash. Planned spending for the next three years is forward planning. It is absolutely essental for capital works. I applaud the Government's move and tmst that it will continue such budgeting. The honourable member raved on about Federal funds bailing out Queensland. In my opinion, it is Queensland's money coming back to Queenslanders. It is Queensland's entitlement, not the Federal Government's generosity. Even more money is due to Queensland, particularly in funds for Medicare, roads, the sugar industry and soil conservation. We have not heard very much about that from Opposition members. In a very magnanimous switch, the honourable member for Bundaberg acknowledged that major expenditure is to be carried out in his electorate. The people of Bundaberg have done very well in spite of their member. The honourable member, in his customary hypocritical fashion, then reverted to whinging and knocking. If the electors of Bundaberg could only hear what he says in this Chamber, I am sure that they would know what to do with him at the next election. I intend to give a precis of the Budget and how it will affect my area in the next few years, thereby illustrating the depth and strength of the Budget. Over $1 billion is to be spent on education. That is the largest single item of expenditure and one of the most important. I am sure that Opposition members will concede that. This year's allocation is 15.7 per cent higher than last year's allocation, and compares favourably with an average budgeting increase of 9.6 per cent. The increase should be measured against likely cost increases of about 6 per cent. The allocation for education recognises the importance the Government places on education and the youth of Queensland. Roma is to get a new primary school, which could well follow the concept of a middle school with Grades 4 to 10. According to the Deputy Premier and Minister Assisting the Treasurer, it will cost about $4m. It is likely to be constmcted west of the Roma High School. When plans are completed, it will have the potential to cater for a mini-TAFE-type institution. The whole concept of education in Roma is excellent and very exciting, and further improvements will be made as time goes by. In the future, Roma could well be the site of a pilot scheme for education. It is important that a TAFE institution be established at Roma. In Queensland, technical and further education institutions provide about 400 courses in about 2 500 subjects, and about 111 000 people are enrolled. I look forward with interest and expectation to the new concept in Roma. Parents and citizens associations are to receive $2.5m through the school-based grant scheme to assist in the purchase of art equipment, music and so on. That represents a 33'/3 per cent increase and, no doubt, will help alleviate the pressure on the associations. 1 am afraid that on occasions, parents and citizens associations have been the meat in the sandwich. Over the years, principals have all received quite generous school-based grant scheme funding. Quite often, p. and c. associations are called on to provide materials that they should not have to provide. The allocation in the Budget wiU go a long way towards alleviating that situation, and I know that it has been very weU received. Textbook allowances have been increased by $ 1.1m, and that represents an average increase of 12 per cent. The total cost for textbook allowances this year wUl be almost $10m. This allocation will assist parents and parents and citizens associations alike. The Budget has allocated $lm to enhance the school bus transport scheme at a minimum rate of 60.2c per kilometre and 140.4c per kilometre will be the maximum rate. The provision of school bus transport services has been a problem, especially in the western areas of Queensland, and the people out there will receive this news happily. Following a detailed review of the Department of Education, an additional $283,000 has been allocated to the department to introduce the new scheme of tuition, hostel and Supply (Financial Statement) 4 October 1984 1087

travel allowances for children in remote areas. That was spelt out very clearly today by the member for Burdekin. His speech was a blueprint of how the scheme will be of benefit to children in remote areas. The existing schemes covering living at home and Uving away from home allowances, remote area allowances, senior remote area scholarships and conveyance allowances will be discontinued. The new scheme, which has been aUocated $3.1m, will streamline the allowances system and demonstrates the Government's genuine concem for those living in remote areas right throughout the State. I pay tribute to the Isolated Children's Parents Association for the tremendous work and effort that it has contributed to bringing forward this scheme. The per capita grants to non-Government schools will be increased by an average of 12 per cent. Primary grants will be increased by $384 per annum and secondary grants will increase by 6 per cent to $620. That increase is over and above the 4 per cent increase promised by the Government in the election campaign in 1983. It also demonstrates the Government's support for freedom of choice in education. I was interested to note the allocation for computer education in schools. That allocation was a bone of contention. I am not a computer expert myself, but 1 am keen to learn. It will be very beneficial for children if they can learn the operation of computers at an early age. I think that some people have become too concerned about the provision of computer education for children at an early age because, once children are given the opportunity, they will pick up the skill fairly easily. As has already been pointed out, schools with enrolments below 600 will be allocated one senior level network of 15 microcomputers. Secondary departments with students in Years 11 and 12 will receive one reduced senior level network and schools with students in Years 8, 9 and 10 will receive one reduced junior level network. Each reduced network will comprise five microcomputers. For primary students in special schools, a maximum of $500 will be provided to assist in the purchase of microcomputers. I have had many requests from parents and citizens associations to push for this kind of assistance, and I am pleased that that provision has been made in the Budget. The scheme that was introduced in 1983 using flyinggang s to upgrade and maintain schoolgrounds was very well received throughout the education system. Every school in my electorate has requested that the scheme be continued, and I am pleased that it has been mentioned in the Budget. I turn now to special education programs. Early Educational Intervention Programs for children with special needs will be significantly improved from January 1985. The programs will accommodate children whose severe developmental delays place their educational futures at risk. Special education programs for severely handicapped children wiU also be expanded in the 1985 school year. Funds will also be increased for education to prepare youth for employment through work experience programs, applied studies programs in areas such as catering, horticulture and business studies and in linked courses involving schools and TAFE colleges. Additional staff are to be appointed to the instmmental music program. Funds have been allotted for the second phase of the program for musically outstanding students, which is called the MOST program. This phase will focus on the intensive musical development of students in their own regional centres. Roma boasts a Priority Country Area Program band, and I will be keen to watch it benefit from this program. There is every reason to be hopeful that the replacement of the home economics and manual arts buildings at the Wallumbilla State School will come about in the very near future. The local people have been pushing for their replacement for the past 20 years. I believe that their representations wUl achieve results very soon. As to employment—the general thmst of the Budget is towards major capital works and, consequently, job creation. Youth employment initiatives will complement the major ones and open up employment opportunities with specific reference to youth. 1088 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO I welcome the increase in allowances for apprentices who attend block-release training. A review of prevocational and pre-employment training will be conducted to ascertain the extent to which those courses meet the needs of industry. Recommendations wiU be made as to the manner in which the courses can be improved. As to traineeships—an investigation is under way with a view to developing that concept. It is intended to formulate a realistic and progressive policy on traineeships, and that will assist in the implementation of a formal but flexible training program in the areas in which it is needed most. Many inquiries into youth employment have been held throughout the State under the auspices of the Minister for Employment and Industrial Affairs (Mr Lester). One such inquiry was held in Roma, and it was very successful. As a result of the inquiry, it is proposed that an allocation of $2,000 will be made available in individual cases to assist local groups in developing employment opportunities at the local level. Emphasis will be given to the establishment of trainees and traineeships in various industries. A traineeship, or mini-apprenticeship, will be proposed in a number of industries for a structural, contractual training arrangement, with negotiated special training rates of pay, of approximately two years' duration. Industries in which initially attention will be given for the development of traineeships will be tourism, hospitality, horticulture and related fields, retailing, and plant operation. Two years is a realistic and useful time span and will give the job-holder a far greater chance to develop. A further element of the youth employment package will be a pilot self-employment venture scheme, for which a combination of loans and grants up to $5,000 will be made available in individual cases for projects that have definite long-term prospects of generating employment opportunities. A special allocation of $400,000 has been made for youth employment initiatives. They are all good initiatives. The private sector, particularly small business, will be expected to play a major role. In my area, it is already keen to do so. A committee has been formed and it is working in close contact with the Minister concerned. I turn now to health and hospitals. The Roma Hospital redevelopment project is on the continuing program. This year, a further $312,000 has been allocated to it. The cost of completion is estimated at $4m. A project manager has already been appointed to give added efficiency to the redevelopment. That will ensure that medical services in the west are of the highest standard and, of course, the hospital will be economically efficient. I am pleased to say that the hospital at the Woorabinda Aboriginal Community, which is in my electorate, will be renewed at a cost of half a million dollars. The matron and staff at the hospital will be extremely pleased when they are given that news. Presently, ambulance services are funded on a doUar-for-dollar basis on eligible collections. Funds allocated for ambulance brigade endowments are expected to increase by 12.26 per cent, to an outlay of $16.9m. In 1978-80, the allocations totalled $8.8m. A report from the interdepartmental committee that was formed by the Govemment during 1983-84 to examine the operation of ambulance and fire brigade services has been received and will be considered during the current year. Those services are taking a keen interest in the outcome of the report, and I will keep those services in my electorate fully abreast of the developments. The sum of $4.7m has been approved for home nursing service organisations, to cover an approved number of positions, which presently stands at 478, for nurses who are employed by the Blue Nursing Service, St Lukes, St Vincent de Paul, Queensland Bush Nursing and others. It is proposed to increase the number of subsidised nurses by nine to 487. The present subsidy rate is $9,531, and the element of subsidy that is not automatically increased in line with wage increases rose by $125 per annum from I July 1984. Supply (Financial Statement) 4 October 1984 1089 The sum of $3.2m is allowed for expansion of activities under the Community Health Program, and $4.2m is allowed for expenditure on medical aids for the disabled. It is interesting to point out some of these initiatives to Opposition members, who continually knock the Government's initiatives and claim that the situation is very bad. In my opinion, primary industry is stiU the most important export-eamer and warrants very serious attention. For some time the Government has been concemed about the cost of transferring property from parents to children. The full rate of transfer is difficult to justify when the transaction is simply in the nature of change of ownership from parent to child. A concessional rate will be introduced. We will be interested to hear the details later. It is even more important for something along those lines to be introduced as the Federal Government more than likely will reintroduce death duties. It is a most iniquitous tax which cripples livelihoods built up over generations. Mr Comben: That is not true. Mr COOPER: The honourable member should wait and see what the Federal Government brings in after the election. Earlier tonight reference was made to the Young Farmer Establishment Scheme, which was introduced in 1982 to facilitate the acquisition of farm properties by suitably qualified young people. Since its inception, loan appUcations from 53 young people have been approved. It is estimated that a further 20 loans will be approved in 1984-85. Estimated expenditure in 1984-85 is $2.5m. That will bring total expenditure under the scheme to $9.4m. It is a very useful scheme and certainly worthy of expansion. As to the farm water supplies assistance service—it is worthy to spell out that under the Act the Queensland Water Resources Commission can provide technical and financial assistance to land-holders to undertake water conservation, irrigation and drainage projects on individual properties. It is estimated that about 2 000 land-holders will receive technical assistance in 1984-85 and that about 200 land-holders will receive financial assistance. During 1984-85 advances to land-holders are expected to reach $2.3m. The target date for complete elimination of tuberculosis and bmcellosis is 1992. The Government supports the drive for complete eradication. The program this year wiU involve expenditure from the Commonwealth and State sources of $21.6m, including $1.5m in freight rebates payable to land-holders involved in restocking. That is an 89 per cent increase on last year. There are problems with restocking and destocking programs, especially in remote areas, and they have caused a great deal of concern. At least the Queensland Government is taking a sympathetic view to implement that most necessary program. As to soil conservation—I express concern about the delays in getting soil conser­ vation officers in place. It is not an easy matter. That concem is shared by a number of Government members. In 1984-85 Roma wUl get another soil conservation officer. If office accommodation is a problem, the problem must be overcome. Soil conservation needs to receive a much higher priority, and I believe that it will in future. However, this State is hamstrung by the lack of Federal concern. Last year the Federal Govemment allocated $lm to soil conservation. Only $100,000 of that sum came to Queensland. This year $4m has been allocated. Queenlsand can expect about $600,000 as its share. That is a miserly sum when compared with Queensland's contribution of about $6.4m last year for soil conservation, land resources services and soil conservation research. This financial year the figure could reach $6.7m. However, it does not include such items as agricultural scientific research and related fields. As to local government—I have been a member of the local shire council for the last nine years. I intend to remain on the council. It is a tier of govemment that is very close to the people. It serves a very useful purpose. It is well worthy of consideration from State and Federal Governments. In 1984-85, a total of $47.9m wiU be made available to local authorities under various assistance schemes. That is an 18 per cent 1090 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem)

increase over the allocation for the previous year and is in addition to $29m set aside in the department's Loan Fund allocation. To assist local authorities with capital works, $15m has been allocated to the special assistance scheme. The Government could consider increasing the subsidy rates on loans and revenue at least to their levels some years ago. That special assistance scheme will be very well received. Last year it was of tremendous assistance to local authorities. I sincerely hope that it continues in the near future. The pensioner rate subsidy scheme wUl continue at a cost of $ 14.6m in 1984-85. Subsidies provided relief for 126 000 pensioners last year. The current maximum of $140 per annum will continue. It is expected that the number of pensioners to benefit will increase. Under grants and endowments, the amount paid to the Keep Australia Beautiful Council is to be increased by 23.6 per cent to $60,000. That will enable the council to maintain the momentum it has built up in its Tidy Towns competition. The difference in the appearance of the towns in my electorate as a result of the competition has been remarkable. Very healthy competition occurs between them, and their beauty has been enhanced considerably. $309m is budgeted for permanent main road works, and almost $450m for maintenace and contingencies. As soon as figures are available, I will be very keen to note the allocations for the five local authorities coming within my electorate. As I said in my Address in Reply speech, I am concerned about the state of the roads and about their deterioration. That, in the main, is due to a paucity of Federal funding. The problem of road reconstmction is immense. The Government must face it and overcome it, as it has done before. Road construction, it is accepted, is expensive. It is trite to say that Queensland is a vast State. For years. Federal Governments have failed to recognise adequately the seriousness of the problem. The chickens are now coming home to roost. In this year's Federal Budget, allocations for road grants increased by only 6 per cent, although costs have risen by 7 per cent. The allocation to Queensland from the Bicentennial Road Development Fund has been reduced from $96.2m last year to $91m this year. That reduction of 5 per cent is unbelievable in view of the condition of the State's roads. The indexation of the 2c a litre levy on fuel should be directed to road-funding. Instead, it is hived off into consolidated revenue. It is estimated that in the years that the bicentennial fund is to operate, a total of $500m will be distributed to Queensland. Those funds are urgently needed. In my opinion, the deterioration of the roads will continue apace unless a far more realistic approach is adopted and the facts are recognised. I welcome the news that the role of the Small Business Development Corporation is to be expanded. The provision for the corporation has been increased from $337,000 to more than $638,000. Staff will be doubled, counsellors will be appointed and a wide range of informative publications will be prepared. I intend to promote that initiative in my area, and I will endeavour to bring the corporation closer to westem businesses. In the next Budget, the Government will also consider providing further enhancement of the corporation's activities. This year's allocation is the first stage of the proposed expansion. That is a far-sighted move, and I welcome it. The Roma electorate has many justices of the peace. The department is concemed that people who are appointed as JPs have not been fully aware of their duties and obligations. Funds have been provided this financial year for the preparation and printing of a manual for use by JPs. The manual will set out their duties and responsibilities, including taking affidavits and sworn complaints, issuing summonses and warrants, and witnessing signatures. The response so far to the correspondence course has been significant. More than 800 have enrolled already. The interest in my electorate is obvious. Although the provision of 100 additional police officers may fall short of the number required, it is a step in the program of expansion. Those additional police will cost Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1091 $2.8m. In addition, the costs of accommodation and other indirect costs must be allowed for. I hope that the expansion will continue. I have a tremendous rapport with the police of Queensland; I hope that that will continue. A special allocation of $ 1.5m has been made available for radio and communication equipment to supplement normal departmental purchases. That injection of additional funds will ensure that an effective and economical radio communications system is extended to all areas of the State, and will provide a sound network capable of meeting police needs well into the next decade. The improved system will, amongst other things, provide back-up emergency capability for police officers operating in remote areas of the State. Staffing will always be a problem. The move should alleviate that to some extent. The State Emergency Service is to receive $2.9m, which is an increase of 27.3 per cent. Membership is now in excess of 21 000. Grants to local authorities to assist with administration are up 23 per cent, to a total annual amount of $ 190,000. The service will also be utilising a special allocation of $100,000 to engage additional wages staff and for additional needs associated with the growth in numbers of volunteers. $60,000 has been set aside to expand service activities, including recruitment of additional volunteers. It is very commendable expansion of a service that is vitally important to all Queenslanders. I pay tribute to all that the Racing Development Fund has done for racing throughout the State and particularly in my electorate. The method of advancing funds on a non­ repayable basis began in July 1981. That initiative was a catalyst for the commencement of a massive capital works constmction program at all major and most small racecourses throughout Queensland. Roma, Springsure, Dingo, Duaringa and Bluff have benefited greatly. Future moneys from the fund will be used to repay major capital costs and to ensure the ongoing development of public facilities in all three codes of racing. Injune wUl soon be making a submission and I wish it well. Many smaU country communities are having difficulty in keeping pace with life itself and innovations such as the improvement of course facilities in these small areas throughout the State has had a profound effect on the people and given them a new lease on life. I commend the Minister and the Govemment on pursuing such a course. An amount of $13.39m has been provided for advances from the fund in 1984-85 and a further $50,000 has been made available for the operation of the Racing Appeals Tribunal. Western air services are always of concern to people in the west. TAA flies into the area on six days a week and Coddair flies in on three days a week. It is very reassuring to know that subsidies totaling $1,134,000 have been allocated for the provision of these services. They will ensure that rural areas receive a quality air service that will link the western centres to the main coastal routes. Until 30 April 1985 the Commonwealth Government will match the subsidy dollar for dollar. Discussions with a view to extending that subsidy beyond that date are now under way. A long-term agreement is essential to provide a stable and economic service. The railway administration building in Roma is to be replaced at a cost of $150,000. The building has been a problem for 20 or 30 years and it is extremely reassuring to know that the money has been allocated in the Budget. The people out there are most pleased about it. That may not seem a huge sum of money but it will go a long way towards providing the superintendent (Bill Haywood) and his staff with some really decent facilities, something that they have deserved for a long timeu I have put in a tremendous personal effort to achieve this result and I rate it as a winner. Honourable members will just have to ask the blokes out there how they feel right now. After all the years they might be a little cynical but I assure them that the money has been allocated. The Minister for Transport (Don Lane) is to be commended for finally recognising that need. Welfare and children's services are important in the entire electorate as well as throughout the State. Roma is to get a Youth Employment Support Scheme centre. I first made representations to the Minister for Welfare Services, Youth and Ethnic Affairs 1092 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem) before the October 1983 election, so that is a quick and useful result. The Minister has recognised that Roma can be a pilot area. The broad objective of the YESS centre is to assist physically, socially and educationally disadvantaged young people to cope with the problems of both unemployment and employment. The scheme is to be expanded from two centres to seven and I am pleased that one of them will be in Roma. The centre will have a staff of three. In addition to the funding of YESS centres, $150,000 will be made available in 1984-85 as grants to community projects. In 1983-84, $63,200 was made available to 19 community projects and the Youth Leadership Award Scheme, the Youth Leadership Training Grants and the Youth Assistance Scheme will all continue in 1984-85. The Department of ChUdren's Services will have a Budget allocation of $39.86m, an increase of 20.6 per cent. A special provision of $300,000 has been made in the Budget in recognition of the effect of current adverse employment conditions in the family unit and on children in particular. In addition, a further $600,000 will be made available to the department to increase rates of assistance payable to various organisations and persons in need. That expenditure again places emphasis on the Govemment's determination to assist the young. On the subject of sport, two new initiatives will get under way this year, and $100,000 has been provided to start the Inland Sports Talent Identification Scheme as well as grants for the staging of State championships in regional areas. Once again I will put in a plug for Roma, as it is ideally situated to stage such events. Those initiatives will be well accepted in my area, and I will be closely following their progress. There are currently eight schemes of sport assistance, and it is quite appropriate that I spell them out. They are: junior coaching subsidies; subsidies for the provision of capital facilities; grants to state teams towards travelling costs; grants for staging national championships in Queensland; subsidies to State governing bodies towards administration costs; subsidies for the employment of State directors of coaching; subsidies towards seminars for officials, and the gifted sportsperson scheme. Yet members opposite continually say that this Government does nothing for sport. In 1984-85 funding will include a special provision of $750,000 towards subsidies for sporting facilities and coaching programs, as part of the Govemment's commitment to provide an additional $2m in this area over three years. The Government wiU provide a total of $4.73m in 1984-85, a 23 per cent increase. I am a great believer in sport as a character-builder, and I will continue to support and encourage funding where it will be effective. In conclusion, I believe that this Budget has reached into every area of the State in a most fair-minded and equitable fashion. Its effect will be ongoing and will give added stimulus and encouragement to a broad range of industries and individuals. I commend the Premier and Treasurer and the Deputy Premier and Minister Assisting the Treasurer on the Budget, and I support it. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Davis): Order! Before calling the honourable member for Everton, 1 point out to members that there is far too much audible conversation in the Chamber. Mr MILLINER (Everton) (8.7 p.m.): Mr Davis, it is a pleasure to speak in this debate while you are presiding in the chair. There is no doubt that you carry out your office in a dignified manner. Over the past few days we have listened to the debate on the Financial Statement. My leader, the honourable member for Sandgate, initially highlighted the problems in this Budget. It is interesting to note that very few Government members have raised the issue of the increases in charges that have occurred recently. About three days after the Budget was introduced a large number of increased charges were published in the Government Gazette. The Government says that this is a low-tax State, but what it does not say is that it is a Government that is continually increasing charges at a rate well above the rate of inflation. Supply (Financial Statement) 4 October 1984 1093

It has been interesting to hear Government members continually complaining about the lack of funding from the Federal Government. Govemment member after Govem­ ment member has said that if the Queensland Government had received more money from Canberra everything in the garden would be rosy. A Govemment member raised the problem of soil erosion, which is a grave problem confronting mral industries. We on this side of the Committee are vitally concemed about our primary-producing friends. As a matter of fact, a number of members on this side of the Chamber come from the land, so we have been well briefed on the problem of soil erosion. The honourable member for Brisbane Central was bom and bred in the country and has a great feeling for our country friends. Mr R. J. Gibbs: In fact, he was a Labor candidate for the seat of Cunningham. Mr MILLINER: That is right. He was a first-class candidate in Cunningham, mainly because of his primary-producing background. It is unfortunate that he was not successful, because there is no doubt that he would have been a wonderful representative. He is obviously quite knowledgeable on the problems of primary producers, particularly those relating to soil erosion. Mr Cahill interjected. Mr COMBEN: I rise to a point of order. The member for Aspley is obviously interjecting from other than his usual place in the Chamber. I would like your mling on that, Mr Davis. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Davis): Order! The honourable member is quite right in bringing that to my attention. The honourable member for Aspley should return to his usual place if he wishes to interject. Mr MILLINER: As I was saying before I was intermpted, the member for Brisbane Central has put forward a solution to the problem of soil erosion. He has always said that corrective measures, such as contour ploughing, can go a long way towards overcoming soil erosion. Virtually every tree on the Darling Downs has been cut down by farmers. If trees had been replanted over the years they would have gone a long way to controlling soil erosion. Because soil erosion is a real problem for mral communities, I hope that the Governments can get together in making a contribution to overcome it. Mr Lingard: That is why your side throws dirt all the time. Mr MILLINER: The honourable member should study what the Federal Liberal leader has been doing recently, and he will realise how much dirt he has been trying to throw. Mr R. J. Gibbs: He could not throw a reasonable pass at Lang Park. Mr MILLINER: That is so. The honourable member very rarely threw a pass at Lang Park. If he had improved, he may have done better than he did in the game of Rugby League. I was disappointed by the lack of information in the Budget documents. I am always interested in the Enterprise Queensland campaign undertaken by the State Government. No-one objects to Government representatives going overseas to seek the best for Queensland manufacturers and the State, but it is interesting to note that, every time the Queensland Government embarks on an Enterprise Queensland campaign, the Premier flits away overseas for a couple of weeks, returns to the State and announces that billions of dollars will be coming to the State. On only very rare occasions do we see a report tabled in the House concerning the long-term benefits of these overseas jaunts. I am not a suspicious type, but it occurs to me that the Premier has probably been to England to visit a gaol and get a bit more advice from his good friend, Dr Oskar. It 1094 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem) could well be that the next Enterprise Queensland campaign tour will he to the United States, so that the Premier can get advice from his other good friend, Milan Brych. Mr Lingard: Tell us what the honourable member for Cairns is doing this week. Mr MILLINER: I think the honourable member for Cairns is promoting the Caims area by being involved with the solar-powered bicycle, which is travelling from Caims to Brisbane. He is doing a tremendous job in promoting his area. I am disappointed with the Government's record in imposing stamp duty. In the Budget introduced about 12 months ago the Government removed the stamp duty on stock exchange transactions. The idea embodied in that exercise did not work. The removal of the stamp duty was designed to attract all stock exchange business to Brisbane. Mr R. J. Gibbs: It was to tum Brisbane into the financial capital of Australia. Mr MILLINER: That is what it was designed to do. Share transactions were supposed to flock across the border to Queensland. Queensland was to become the financial capital of the nation thanks to the removal of stamp duty on stock exchange transactions. The Govemment reintroduced the stamp duty on stock exchange business. Over the years, National Party members have paraded round the country advocating a flat tax. If the Govemment was fair dinkum about flat tax it could lead by example and introduce a few flat taxes, but that has not happened. I should say that one of the problems confronting people purchasing their first home is the stamp duty on the purchase price. Over the years, stamp duty revenue has increased substantially. That has been caused partially by the inflationary trend. As the price of houses increases, so does the stamp duty. It is to be hoped that stamp duty for first- home-purchasers will be removed. That would go a long way towards assisting young people to purchase their first home. It is the great Australian dream, that all people will own their own home. Tragically, that dream is turning into a nightmare because of the high cost of housing. The Govemment will have to take a number of steps to overcome the problems of home-ownership. One of the forward steps it could take would be to develop land and lease it back to the purchaser of the land so that the land-cost component would be removed. This is not new; it has been advocated before. Similar action was taken by the Government with miners' homestead leases. The advantages are obvious. It costs about $20,000 to develop a block of land. If the land component of $20,000 is taken from a house and land package worth $50,000, the cost is reduced to about $30,000. More people can borrow $30,000 than $50,000 from lending institutions. That is a constmctive way in which Governments could assist young people and others wanting to purchase their first home. After a number of years, when these people have got themselves on a sound financialfooting , the Govemment could then offer those people the land at market value. That would assist in placing people in their own homes. As I said, the cost of home-ownership is forcing many people into alternative types of housing. Governments must come to grips with the fact that an increasing number of people will be living in caravan parks. If one considers the American situation in which people live in trailer parks, in the very near future the by-laws covering caravan parks in this State will have to be standardised. All honourable members have heard about tenants being forced from caravan parks overnight, and that will be a continuing problem with which Govemments must come to grips. Mobile housing will become more popular. Three or four years ago I recall that there was on display a manufactured home set up in the Queensland Institute of Technology grounds. The Federal Department of Housing and Construction, in conjunction which State Housing Commissions, developed this manufactured house. I am disappointed that the project has not gone ahead because everything that can be done should be done to reduce the cost of housing. Supply (Financial Statemem) 4 October 1984 1095

Mr FitzGerald: What will the BLF do about that? Mr MILLINER: It has nothing to do with the Builders Labourers Federation. It is disappointing that that project has not gone ahead and that the manufactured house did not become a reality. Tourism, without doubt, is one of the growing industries in this State. I firmly beUeve that, in the not too distant future, it will be Queensland's largest industry. Unfortunately, I do not believe that the State is preparing adequately for that event. The training of personnel involved in the tourist industry is very important. It is unfortunate that one of the major training institutions for the tourist industry is at Gatton. Mr FitzGerald: There is nothing wrong with Gatton. Mr MILLINER: I am not knocking Gatton. Mr R. J. Gibbs interjected. Mr MILLINER: That may be the opinion of the member for Wolston, and I will not comment on that at this stage. Mr FitzGerald: It is an excellent environment. Mr MILLINER: I do not disagree; the college at Gatton has a nice environment, but it is hardly the place to train people for the tourist industry. Let us face facts. People should be trained for the tourist industry in areas that attract tourism. Mr FitzGerald: They have to get practical experience. Mr MILLINER: Of course trainees need practical experience, and that is why I am saying that the training institution should be in a tourist-oriented area. One could hardly call Gatton a tourist destination. A need exists to establish training facilities up and down the coast. Because there is an ever-increasing number of international tourists coming to Australia, the tourist industry must be able to cater for them. I certainly hope that Griffith University graduates who have learnt Japanese will be able to act as interpreters for Japanese tourists. Mr FitzGerald: You and other Opposition members are against the Iwasaki scheme. Mr MILLINER: I am not talking about the Iwasaki scheme; I am dealing with the number of tourists who come to Queensland from overseas. Mr FitzGerald: Japan. Mr MILLINER: Japan and other countries. They are coming to Queensland, and this State must be able to cater for them. If those tourists can be catered for properly, other tourists will follow. There would be nothing worse for a tourist than arriving in a foreign country and not being able to speak the language or read the signs. To say the least, he would be very uncomfortable. I have no doubt that Queensland's inability to cater for foreign tourists would deter a number of Japanese and other tourists from coming to Australia. A co-ordinated approach needs to be adopted in the training of people in the tourist industry. Mr Eaton: If a load of tourists were brought here to Parliament House, they would not understand anything, anyway. Mr MILLINER: They certainly would not understand Govemment members. Perhaps Chinese tourists would have a chance of understanding them. 1096 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem)

I am disturbed by the amount of money that is spent on the racing industry. Recently, we witnessed the unsavoury ring-in scandal, which is another matter. However, many questions remain unanswered. Mr FitzGerald: How much does the Treasury get out of the racing industry? Mr MILLINER: It gets a great deal from the racing industry; but it puts a lot of money back into the racing industry. It is interesting to note that probably the Queensland Government spends more per horse on racing than it spends per person on health and education. Mr FitzGerald: We get more out of it. Mr MILLINER: The honourable member for Lockyer has clearly displayed the attitude that is adopted by Govemment members; they want a return on everything. The Government cannot be expected to get a return on education, health and welfare. Mr Booth: The Queensland Government got $28m out of the racing tax, and it put a lot of that money back into racing. Mr MILLINER: It put most of that money back. However, I would have thought that the honourable member for Warwick would like more money to be spent on junior sport in his area. The money that the Government is receiving from the racing industry should be spent over the entire sporting spectmm instead of on racing alone. The amount of money that has been spent on the Albion Park complex, which is used once a week, is disgraceful. Mr Veivers: $16m. Mr MILLINER: It is scandalous that that sum of money was spent on a complex that is used one night a week for hamess racing. I would rather see the money spent on junior sport in my electorate of Everton. Junior sport needs a tremendous boost, and it could be given that boost by the expenditure of money that is devoted to racing. I am pleased to see that the number of police officers in Queensland will be increased. Of course, the increase is not big enough. I suppose that there can never be enough police officers. Nevertheless, I am pleased that more police will be appointed, because crime certainly seems to be on the increase. A couple of weeks ago, "The Bulletin" published an article that underlined the problems that burglary is causing for our society. As the level of unemployment increases, or, at least, does not drop, crimes such as burglary will be an ever-increasing problem. Mr FitzGerald: Don't you think drugs have a lot to do with it, too? Mr MILLINER: I do not deny that. All I am saying is that burglary is an ever- increasing problem, so even more police are needed. I am very pleased with the co-operation that I have received from the Mitchelton Police Station. Its officers are very co-operative and are doing a tremendous job. Honourable Members interjected. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Davis): Order! The Chair will not tolerate cross-firing in the Chamber. Mr MILLINER: Thank you, Mr Davis. It is very difficult to concentrate with that continual cross-firing at the back of the Chamber. As I was saying, the police officers at the Mitchelton Police Station are very co­ operative and they do a tremendous job. I am pleased that the Albany Creek Police Station has been opened, because that has resulted in a reduction in area of the Mitchelton police district. Previously, the Supply (Financial Statement) 4 October 1984 1097 Samford area was included in the Mitchelton police district. That meant that if an incident occurred in the Samford Valley, for example, a police car had to be despatched from Mitchelton to that area. That meant, in tum, that a large area of the metropolitan area did not have police protection for the time involved. I am very pleased with the redrawing of the boundaries of the police districts in my part of Brisbane. I am concemed about the environment. Over the years, litter has undoubtedly been a major problem. Several people have advocated that there should be deposits on drink bottles and cans. I do not think that that really works. Greater encouragement should be given to bottle banks and other such schemes. In the past, plastic bottles have posed an environmental problem, because very few people want plastic drink bottles. It is pleasing, therefore, that recently a process for recycling that material has been developed. Far more encouragement should be given to organisations to become involved in projects that control litter by the provision of bottle banks and the like. I congratulate those community-spirited organisations involved in the collection of aluminium cans and bottles. Today, many problems confront youth, as a number of members mentioned by interjection. In many instances, those problems have been brought about by youth unemployment. Mr FitzGerald: Do you say that a Year of Youth, or something like that, would be good idea? Mr MILLINER: It would be a very good idea to help youth wherever possible. Mr Muntz: Do you think that more youth employment support schemes should be established, such as the ones that exist at present? Mr MILLINER: We already have CYSS schemes. I will deal with them later. An ever-increasing break-down in the family-unit has led to the problem of homeless youth. That problem is not prevalent in my electorate. Fortunately, those who, because of a family break-up or some other reason, could be categorised as homeless youth are able to catch an electric train and be in Fortitude Valley or in the centre of the city within 15 to 20 minutes. They are the areas in which they tend to congregate. The problem of large groups of homeless youth wandering round the streets does not occur in my electorate. Together with a number of other persons in my electorate, I have tried recently to do something about families in crisis. The buildings of the former Enoggera boys' home have lain idle for a number of years. Although proposals have been advanced to do something with that complex, nothing has been done. It is unfortunate that the Gov­ ernment did not purchase the complex. There is no doubt that it could have been used as a crisis care centre for homeless youth and families in crisis or as a women's shelter. Not enough money is spent on such projects. More needs to be spent on women's shelters. The incidence of wife-bashing is increasing. There is, therefore, a need for the establishment of women's shelters. The Minister for Welfare Services, Youth and Ethnic Affairs referred by interjection to CYSS schemes. Twelve months ago, I was invited by a local group to attend a meeting at which a discussion took place about the formation of a CYSS group. Following that meeting, an application for a grant was made. The application was successful and the Enoggera region CYSS was formed. There is no doubt that that scheme makes a great contribution to the community by assisting young people who are in the unfortunate situation of being unemployed. Assistance is given to them to gain work skills and confidence to handle interviews, and so on. The CYSS with which I am connected is involved in activities other than assisting young people to obtain employment. It is sad but tme that a number of young people today find it difficult to become motivated to seek employment. The Enoggera CYSS

64164—37 1098 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO

teaches young people self-sufficiency. I place on record my appreciation of the project officer. Ken Cullen, the group of tutors and the community-minded peopk who have made themselves available to serve on the committee. The Federal Government has recognised the problems of unemployment. One of the most successful programs implemented by it is the Community Employment Program. I have been involved in two projects under the program on the Sunshine Coast. Although that might be some way from my electorate, my association with the Coolum area goes back to 1968, when I was involved with the life-saving movement. Mr R. J. Gibbs: You used to cut a fine, bronzed figure on the beach. Mr MILLINER: I did. Grant Kenny would have been envious. The CEP has made a tremendous contribution to the area. The Coolum Surf Club is now in the process of constmcting a substantial complex at a cost of about $600,000. Of that, $420,000 has been supplied by the Commonwealth. Constmction involves 33 jobs, and when the building is finished, four or five permanent jobs will be available that would not otherwise have been created. As I pointed out earlier, I am extremely interested in junior sport and youth clubs. I pay a tribute to a gentleman who lived in the Mitchelton area. Unfortunately, a couple of months ago he died as a result of a car accident. I refer to Mr Syd Loder, who was the founding president of the Mitchelton Youth Club. He remained its president for about 26 years. At the time of his death, he was well into his 70s, but he maintained an active participation in the club. As well as being the president, he was always working round the club. His death was a very sad loss not only to the club but also to the community in general. Transport is one of the problems in my electorate. There is no doubt that the electrification of the railway line between Femy Grove and the city has been very successful. The increased patronage on the line has been incredible. Members receive complaints continually about savage increases in fares by the State Government. On my last calculation, the fare increase on the Femy Grove line in the past few years has been 100 per cent. In anybody's language, that is a massive increase. Inflation has been nothing like as high as that. A number of people who Uve a distance from the stations drive their motor vehicles to them. Following the increase in patronage, parking at the stations is an ever-increasing problem. The Govemment should seriously consider extending the parking facilities. Mr Davis: You are spot on again. Mr MILLINER: The member for Brisbane Central would weU know that I am right. Having formerly been engaged in the transport industry, he recognises the impor­ tance of providing car-parking at railway stations. I hope that, in the not-too-distant future, the Minister for Transport will give serious consideration to providing more car- parking at railway stations. The provision of health care is important to the Government and the community. Ambulance services are a part of health care. The conditions under which ambiUance officers have to operate in country areas are disappointing. In a number of country centres that I have visited, a lone ambulance officer is on duty at week-ends. If he is called out to a road accident, unless he can find a passing motorist to assist him, he has to handle the case himself The Govemment should take a professional approach to ambulance services and provide sufficient trained staff. I recognise that those presently employed in the service do a tremendous job. The Govemment should do something about trying to retain medical students who drop out during the six years of their course and train them to be ambulance officers. I am reliably informed that even in the sixth year of medicine there is a tremendous drop-out rate. That people get that far in a course and do not continue with it is a tragedy. What can be done with five years of Supply (Financial Statemem) 4 October 1984 1099 medical training? It is worth virtually nothing. The Government should take people who have discontinued their medical studies and train them sufficiently to be ambulance officers. With the move towards paramedics, those people could be accommodated in the ambulance service. In the past six months the need for liver transplants for babies has been to the forefront, particularly the case of Paul McKee. Public appeals have had to be launched to get sufficient money for the liver transplants for these babies. Mr R. J. Gibbs: It is a downright disgrace. Mr MILLINER: Yes, it is. Because of the sympathy that went out to the McKee family, the first appeal was very successful. 1 can understand that. The second appeal was not as successful as the first. Unfortunately, the third appeal is proving to be a disaster. Mr FitzGerald: We need a unit in Queensland. Mr MILLINER: Of course; there is no doubt that Queensland needs a liver transplant unit. 1 have checked the newspapers and discovered that Queensland appears to be the only State in which public appeals have been launched to provide for the medical treatment for these babies. Tremendous importance should also be placed on bone marrow transplant units. Those who are tragically suffering from leukaemia are forced to go to Sydney for bone marrow transplants. The time has come when society should demand that those facUities be provided in this State. Both bone marrow and liver transplant units should be set up. As much money as possible should be injected into medical research so that, hopefully, break-throughs in a cure for cancer can be achieved. Education is a matter of grave concern to all honourable members because it plays a very important role in the deveolpment of young people. I am disappointed at the amount of money that p. and c. associations are forced to raise to provide basic school facilities. The expenditure of money is an ever increasing problem; the bottom of the barrel has to be reached some time. The Government should do everything possible to assist p. and c. associations in their fund-raising ventures. One way to do that is by the provision of things such as tennis-courts. One of the schools in my area has very successfully used its tennis facilities for fund-raising. The parents and citizens association sealed the two tennis-courts and installed lighting and made them available for hire to the community after school hours and on week-ends. It has been a most successful fund-raising venture I believe that, if the Government looked at the concept of providing sporting facilities that could be used by the community after hours and made the proceeds from the hire of those facilities available to parents and citizens associations, it would go a long way towards assisting those associations to purchase school equipment. The Government also needs to look at supplying computers to schools. Other members have touched on that subject. I notice that the Government intends to do something about it, and the Federal Government has also become involved. Apart from providing computers there is a need for the Government to do something about making the parents of schoolchildren familiar with computers. I know that there are very few parents who really know anything about computers, and I doubt whether any member could tell me very much about them. These days schoolchildren go home and talk about computers, so it is important that parents have an understanding of the equipment that their children are using. Mr Davis: You think there will be a change from an apple for the teacher to an Apple for the school? 1100 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO

Mr MILLINER: I certainly hope that that change occurs, because it is important that computer facilities be provided. I am particularly pleased about the increased provision of facilities for TAFE colleges, although all members know that the Federal Government is providing most of the money for TAFE colleges. I was pleased recently to attend the opening of the TAFE college in my electorate, because there is no doubt that it will provide a tremendous increase in facilities for the area. The Grovely college is an extension of the Ithaca TAFE college and will be concerned mainly with training young people in horticulture. Green- keepers for bowls and golf clubs and school groundsmen will be trained at the college. I am particularly pleased that the students at the college will use the Grovely State School for their practical training. That is a commonsense approach. When TAFE colleges are looking for areas in which their students can practise their skills, they should consider schools and other public areas. As was pointed out by the Leader of the Opposition, we on this side of the Committee are particularly disappointed with this Budget. There was great tmmpeting about the $600m that would be spent on capital works, but when we had a closer look at the Budget document we found that that was not the case. We are particularly disappointed about that, and certainly hope that, in the future when this Government brings down a Budget, it is a true and accurate reflection of what the Government intends to do. Mr HENDERSON (Mount Gravatt) (8.44 p.m.): I am pleased to speak in support of the 1984-85 Budget. I congratulate the Premier and Treasurer (the Honourable Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen), the Deputy Premier and Minister Assisting the Treasurer (the Honourable Bill Gunn) and other Ministers on producing a sound economic document. The Budget shows the excellence of financial management which characterises the National Party in Queensland, and is a model for the rest of Australia. I was very interested in the editorial in the "Telegraph" of 24 September 1984. 1 wish to read it to the Committee and so incorporate it in the record. It is headed, "Ring the Bells", and reads— "Politicians need a referee. Otherwise, the public seems certain to be going to the polls with an extremly hazy idea of the differences between the two major political parties. It is in the community interest that any election is fought between rival political parties using as weapons their different ideals and appeals. Such a totally pure election would be impossible. Nevertheless, party platforms and political aims should be to the fore in any battles for votes. That is certainly not the case in this pre-election period. Even before a date has been set the warring parties are at each other's throats in a bitter exercise in personal abuse, such as this country has rarely experienced. The next election, whenever it is held, seems certain to be remembered as one of the all-time bitter fights, similar in invective and emotion to the elections involving Billy Hughes and conscription, Lang and the banks and Menzies and the Communist peril. Politics never has been a calling for the thin-skinned. As even the most infrequent party host knows, the divisions formed by political differences are too wide to be bridged. Nowhere is this more true than in the present political climate. The danger is that voters will go to the ballot box with their eyes filled with smoke. Political platforms have been abondoned. There is no discussion on whether one brand of political philosophy will do better than another. Suggestion and innuendo have replaced such high-flown arguments. Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1101

Thankfully, it is not too late. The Prime Minister, Mr Hawke, has yet to announce an election date. There still is time for the political parties to package a cogent argument to put to the voters. Hopefully that will happen. Invective and emotion, jeers and tears, are all very well, but they are hardly a sound base on which to decide the country's future direction." In yesterday's "Telegraph", Mr R. J. Webb of Jimboomba responded with this letter— "Sir.—I have frequentiy admired the basic good sense of your editorial writers and have just as frequently regretted that a smaller circulation carries with it the danger of that editorial voice being drowned out by larger and more vociferous journals. In this instance, I refer to your editorial of September 24, in which you draw attention to the abysmal state to which Australian politics has fallen over these past few months. Yoii assert that the general voting public is confused as to the merits of the major rivals in the political arena, because the respective philosophies are being distorted by having to be seen through the smoke-screen of vicious personal insults and ugly innuendo. Personally, I would go further. I agree that Canberra politics has surely sunken to its lowest ebb since Federation with the result that, in the autumn of my years, for the first time 1 begin to feel the onset of actual shame to be an Australian. I have stood in the arcaded cloisters of the Australian War Memorial in Canberra and looked at the bronze panels of the Roll of Honor, upon which are inscribed 102,000 names of the young Australians who have died in the defence of our democracy. One hundred and two thousand young people who have died, and died horribly, so that these guttersnipes may be free to hurl their loathesome invective at each other in the now gmbby name of Australian politics. One hundred and two thousand young lives that have been lost in vain and the grief created by their passing for those they loved and who loved them, callously ignored in the shadows cast by the blinding glare of self-interest. There are those who might weep for the future of this country, but those tears might well also fall on arid soil if we cannot begin to replace the cancer of blind hatred with reasoned argument. I sincerely submit that Australia at present teeters on a knife edge of common sense and the slighest slip now will create wounds than just never wiU heal." Mr R. J. Gibbs interjected. Mr HENDERSON: I am not interested in fixing the blame. I am interested in fixing the problem. I believe that the electorate is sick and tired of mud-slinging and trial by innuendo, smear and personal abuse. Perhaps as members of Parliament we need to look carefully at ourselves and lift our standards. The media can help for it seems that many members work on this simple principle: the bigger the smear, the bigger the headlines. That is a sad reflection on members of Parliament. Over dinner tonight, one member shared with me the fact that one of the past members of this House, who received considerable press publicity, worked on a simple principle. His principle was: "Give me a grain of truth, and I will build a mountain of 1102 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO assumptions." The same member told me that, as he was leaving the Chamber after one debate, he turned round and said to another member, "There wasn't much tmth in that speech," to which the other member replied, "No, but there were a hell of a lot of headlines." That is a sad reflection on the level to which politics has sunk. Mr R. J. Gibbs: Like poking your tongue at a cane toad. That is what you did. Which is the bigger joke—that or you? Mr HENDERSON: That is the subject of possible court action at present, so the member for Wolston should be careful. I will briefly highlight some features of the Budget. It stresses employment. Employ­ ment creation in the public sector will be characterised by five initiatives. Firstly, 1 155 additional teachers will be employed, including 173 in TAFE colleges. Secondly, the equivalent of 400 additional full-time teachers will be engaged on a temporary basis to provide relief for teachers on leave. Thirdly, 100 additional police officers will be employed. Fourthly, hospital staff establishments will rise by 461 and funds have been provided to enable hospitals boards to increase average staff levels by 750 in 1984-85. Finally, additional wages staff will be employed in several areas. They include teacher aides, cleaners, groundsmen and park rangers. Education wiU receive a massive boost. The Budget provides $2.5m or a 33Vs per cent increase in school-based grants for equipment, effective from I July 1984. Almost $l.lm has been allocated for an average 12 per cent increase in textbook aUowances. At least $lm has been provided to enhance school conveyance schemes, and $3.5m has been provided as part of a $7.5m program over three years to provide computer networks in all secondary schools. For primary schools, a subsidy up to $500 will be provided to assist with computer purchases. The special works program provides for a number of improvements. Ten new high schools and major works at five others will be undertaken. Seventeen new or replacement primary schools will be built. New pre-school facilities will be constmcted in 79 centres. Major special education works will be constmcted at 22 centres and on top of that will be the ongoing program of the Department of Works. As to health services—the Govemment is moving to establish a liver transplant unit in Queensland. This will be done, hopefully, with the assistance of the Commonwealth Government. It will be welcomed by all Queenslanders. Water resources will receive considerable assistance. Many major water resource projects will be completed up to five years earlier than expected because of the $100m special works boost. Individual projects to be funded under this program include the Bundaberg Irrigation Project, the Eton Irrigation Project, the Gyranda Weir, the Lower Mary River Irrigation Project, the Proserpine Dam, the Mareeba-Dimbulah irrigation works, the Barker-Barambah Creek Irrigation Project, the Burdekin Falls Dam access road, the Lockyer Valley recharge weirs and weirs on the Mackenzie River. These projects are subject to further investigations and discussions with land-holders. An extra $100m for roads will be spent to link the Gateway Bridge to the Bmce Highway and Pacific Highway over the next three years. I turn now to a problem that confronts many Australians. I join a growing band of Australians who are becoming alarmed at the mushrooming mortgage that Australian Governments are placing on tomorrow. Every man, woman and child in Australia has a price of $5,000 on his or her head. This position has arisen because successive Australian Governments have borrowed much more money than they collect in revenue. Therefore, each Australian has a share of the public debt hanging over his or her head. We cannot escape that fact. We are all in it together. At the end of June 1984, the total public debt in Australia stood at $76 billion. That figure represents an almost unbelievable rise of 55 per cent on what the public debt was only two years earlier. This mountainous debt must be serviced. In the 1982- 83 financial year, $47 out of every $100 raised by the Government was used to meet Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1103

the interest bill. By the end of June 1984, that figure had risen to $67. That figure is correct; $67 of every $100 is needed to service the national public debt. The public sector debt is made up of the borrowings of the Commonwealth Govemment, State Govemments and local authorities. The Queensland State Govemment underwrites the borrowings of local authorities; hence Queensland's State debt includes guarantees given by the State Government for debts incurred by local authorities such as the Brisbane City Council. I reject repeated Opposition claims that Queensland has the largest public sector debt in Australia. I call the attention of honourable members to the speech made by the honourable member for Surfers Paradise in which he pointed to the absurdity of the Opposition's claims. To put the cost of those total borrowings into their correct perspective—the interest bill for this year, which is estimated at $9.65 billion, will be more than twice what the Commonwealth Govemment will spend on education, namely, $4.5 billion. Furthermore, it represents more than half of the $ 18 billion that will be allocated for social security and welfare. We would be indescribably foolish and negligent in the extreme if we did not acknowledge that the public sector debt is becoming a major fiscal burden not only at Commonwealth Govemment Budget level but also throughout the whole of the public sector. The outlays as a whole in the recent Commonwealth Budget increased by approximately 13 per cent. However, interest on the public debt increased by 29.4 per cent, which is approximately 2.3 times the increase of outlays. The size of the interest bill at Commonwealth level in 1984-85 is expected to be $5.6 billion. It is staggering to reflect that 15.4 per cent of forecast income tax revenue wiU be needed to service the debt. To put it another way, 9.8 per cent of the total income of the Govemment will be needed to service the debt. However, as large as the Commonwealth interest bill is, it represents only 58 per cent of the total interest bill in the public sector. The remaining 42 per cent is owed by State and local authorities. Sadly, Australia's national debt has put this country on the same road as Mexico, Brazil and the Argentine. Govemments cannot continue to mn this nation into debt. If they do, ultimately they will mortgage the future for the children and grandchildren of present Australians. Governments cannot continue to rob tomorrow in order to spend today, nor can they delude themselves much longer that Australia is a rich country that can sell its way out of fiscal chaos. Every other country that is now in trouble believed exactiy the same thing, and clearly it was wrong. Let us hope that Australia is not wrong. Recent comments made by the Honourable Barry Jones, the Commonwealth Minister for Science and Technology—for which, I might add, he was severely reprimanded by the Prime Minister—clearly show that the Government plans major new tax initiatives in 1985. The restmctured tax scales mean that early in 1985 most wage-eamers will find themselves in the 46c in the dollar tax bracket. Hence, the Govemment's illusory tax cuts, which were widely tmmpeted in the recent Federal Budget, will probably evaporate ovemight—but not until the forthcoming Federal election is over. The magazine "Australian Business" dated 10 October 1984, on page 26, features a most disturbing article titled "Labor's post-election tax plans" How is Canberra planning to fiind the national debt, now $76 biUion and growing by $7 billion in Commonwealth deficit, plus Aussie Bond borrowings, and so on? The article says it all. It is a timely warning for all Australians. It states— "The broad strategy of the Hawke Government's tax reforms, due to begin next year, has already been decided. A majority of Labor's parliamentary caucus has agreed to a new tax regime which includes: Capital gains tax which will probably allow for inflation and deductions for capital losses. Extending the prescribed payments system (PPS) into new areas where cash payments are common—like restaurants, entertainment and taxi industries. At 1104 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem)

present the 10 per cent deduction at source scheme covers the building, transport and cleaning sectors. Greatly widening the indirect tax net to catch virtually all goods, except essentials, and some services. About two-thirds of consumption spending is on services which are almost untouched by indirect tax so the potential revenues are enormous. Yet to be decided is whether to impose an across the board value-added tax (VAT) to embrace goods and services or extend the sales tax base into those areas not covered and then slug services with a fresh tax. Further income tax cuts to offset the indirect tax increases." We hope! I turn now to the Queensland Government's funding for schools. I have listened for some time now to a number of Opposition speakers commenting on various aspects of Queensland education. I must confess, however, that the most extrordinary statement that I have heard in a long time was the recent claim by one Opposition member who said, "What is important is that as the level of education is increased the duration of unemployment is diminished." That comment, along with others made by that honourable member, argue a thesis that the ability of people to obtain employment is related to the levels of education that they have received. It is true, and I do admit, that there is a tendency among employers to select potential employees from among the ranks of the better educated. Assuming, of course, that such a pool exists, I feel, however, that the honourable member failed to consider the real proposition, that is, that the duration of unemployment depends principally and almost wholly upon the general state of the nation's economy. At present, approximately 9 per cent of the Australian work-force is without employment. Let us assume that every Australian has a university degree. I put it to this Committee, and especially to honourable members opposite, that, were that the case, 9 per cent of the work-force would still be out of work, with each worker also possessing a university degree. That is a statement of fact. The simple raising of education standards does not create per se a single job or diminish the length of unemployment. There is not one school in Australia that can create a single job, nor is there a single school in Australia that can diminish the level of unemployment. I repeat that the raising of education standards does not create employment. At times it simply means that there are better educated unemployed. I remind the Committee that increased standards of education may make an individual more employable; it does not create employment. Hence, I am reluctantly forced to conclude that the proposition— what is important is that as the level of education is increased, the duration of unemployment is diminished—is patently false. Rather, the proposition should be: what is important is that as the level of economic activity is increased, the duration of unemployment is diminished. That is the correct proposition. It is time for people in general to recognise that staying at school longer may make people more employable, but if jobs do not exist, any amount of education is not going to get anyone a job. Job creation is the role of Government; it is not the role of schools. I notice also that honourable members opposite continually claim that the undeniable fact that per capita spending on education in Queensland is below that of some other States establishes the proposition that the Queensland Govemment cares less for the education of Queensland children than the Governments of some other States care for the education of their respective children. It is an established fact that the cost of home purchase and/or construction in Brisbane is much less on a per capita basis than it is in Sydney and Melbourne. Are we to assume, therefore, that Brisbane homes are inferior to those in Sydney and Melbourne? Can we legitimately assume that we care less about the standard of our housing? I note also that Queensland's per capita spending on clothes is less than it is in the rest of Australia. Can we legitimately assume that Queenslanders care less about their standard Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1105 of clothing than do other Australians? Each of my questions invites the very definite answer, "No, of course not." It really does not take much intelligence to see that the amount of money spent on a product reflects a complex array of interrelated variables. There exists in some regions variables that do not exist in other regions. Quite obviously one such factor is constmction cost. Schools in Queensland cost less to construct than do schools in other States. In Queensland, we do not have to worry about the massive costs involved in heating schools in winter. Plainly, school authorities in southern States such as Tasmania do have that worry. Their costs are very high indeed. I am continually surprised at the simplistic use of statistics by the Opposition. Per capita spending on education is not a measure of the difference in standards of care about education. All it shows is that factors vary from State to State. Until those factors are compared individually State by State, the per capita spending on education proves nothing—except, perhaps, the tmth of the longest-held belief, which is that fools msh in where angels fear to tread. I have visited many schools in other States. If members feel that the Bremer State High School is atrocious, I invite them to visit some of the schools in inner Melbourne or in the western suburbs of Sydney. By comparison, Bremer would be considered adequate indeed. I am not denying that things could improve. Mount Gravatt High School and Holland Park High School, both of which are in my electorate, are in need of substantial repairs and refurbishing, which are slowly being effected. I accept that we cannot endlessly raise State taxes and that other priorities, such as roads and hospitals, exist. The work will be done, but it will take a little time as funds become available and as projects with higher priorities are completed. Still on the matter of statistics—I have noticed an interesting relationship that honourable members may reflect on. Over successive years the amount of money that the Government has spent on education has increased. Over the same number of years the number of National Party members in the Queensland Parliament has increased. Could we therefore argue that as the electorate becomes better educated it votes National? I turn now to a totally different topic. It is one that costs our nation millions of dollars every year, principally in hospital and medical costs. Our society is not infrequently referred to as the consumer society. Perhaps it could more accurately be termed as the throw-away society. We began with the throw-away wrapper. Soon we had throw-away cans and bottles. The next step saw throw-away razors, cars, television sets, washing machines, nappies and so on. Not surprisingly to some, we have now arrived at the ultimate indecency—throw-away people. Each year tens of thousands of Australian children are literally thrown away by the activities of a group of people who are getting away with murder. I refer to the Australian abortionist trade. The time has come for those who are concerned for children to demand action from our Governments to hah that criminal activity. The time is now. As caring Australians, we have a duty to examine closely legislative action to protect the rights of the unborn child. To that end, it is time for us to examine again past attempts aimed at stopping that criminal activity. We need men and women of conviction prepared to sponsor legislation to protect the unborn child. What should we aim at in such an attempt? First, we aim at providing full legal protection for unborn children. As with all life, we must at the beginning assume that life itself is sacred; hence the need to do all things possible to maintain and safeguard all human life, principally by outlawing any unjustified interference adverse to the continuing development of every human being, both born and unborn. Two key presumptions must form the foundation-stone on which all contemplated legal action must rest. The first is the presumption of life in the unbom child and the second is the presumption of development in the unborn child. The first presumption would establish both that life exists in every unborn child and that, in the natural course of events, life shall continue to exist in every unborn child. The second presumption 1106 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem) would establish that life in an unbom child is part of a continuous course of human development and that, in the natural course of events, every unbom child shall be bom alive. Any person who interferes with a pregnancy would, therefore, be required to establish the contrary on the balance of probabilities. If that could not be established, such person would be guilty of a criminal offence. The next step would be to establish legally the status of personality in every unbom child, which could be done by defining in an Act of Parliament that every unbom child shall have the status of a person. As such, the unbom child would, of necessity, have the capacity to be considered as the subject of the object of rights, duties, privileges, powers, liabilities, immunities and other fundamental concepts usually associated with legal relationships. Thus, to all intents and purposes, the personality of the unbom child would be equivalent to the personality of the new-bom child. The next step would be to establish the rights of the unbom child. That could be done by legislating to the effect that every unbom child shaU have the right to continued life and uninterrupted development. Further, it would be necessary to establish legally that the unbom chUd shall be entitled to independent representation in all matters related to his continued existence. That would be done by defining categories of people who, having responsibilities to the unbom child, shaU have the right to consultation in the event of any emergency arising. As a consequence of the above, it would be necessary to define categories of responsibilities. Mothers would have legal responsibilities to ensure that everything reasonably possible would be done to maintain and safeguard the continued life and uninterrupted development of the unborn child. Fathers would have the same responsibilities, plus the added responsibility of assisting the mother, especiaUy in the area of finance during the pregnancy. In addition, it would be necessary to define the responsibilities of the medical profession, counsellors and, indeed, anyone who may be reasonably expected to influence the continued life and unintermpted development of the unbom child. It seems to follow logically, therefore, that every person bound by any duty under any provision of the proposed legislation would have every power and privilege to enforce at law the performance of every duty owed by any person to the unborn chUd. Needless to say, it would be necessary to recognise that emergencies and exceptional circumstances do arise. For example, the life of the mother could be imperilled by her pregnancy. That would, however, only be a legally permissible excuse if, firstly, objective evaluation suggests that the circumstances will not diminish in seriousness with the passage of time, secondly, evidence for the lack of an altemative treatment of process and, thirdly, objective evaluation of the degree of certainty with which it can be ascertained that serious, permanent injury to the mother will result. Abortion would, therefore, be an exceptional procedure and it would be necessary for medical evidence to establish that it was not reasonably possible to maintain both the life and safety of the mother and the safe delivery of the child. Regardless of the reasons advanced for abortion, it would be necessary to establish all of the above. That is especially important in the area of the mother's mental health which, somewhat sadly, is the all too frequently used cop-out today. Legislation along the lines proposed above would effectively take away this much-abused excuse. Finally, a legal register of all abortions must be kept. It would include the names of all consultant surgeons, etc., together with the number of abortions excused or performed by each. That would make it possible to isolate those people who may be involved in excessively large numbers of abortions. They would then become the subject of a rigorous review by an independent tribunal. To some, the above may appear unduly harsh. Indeed, to use the favourite catchcry used today, they may appear draconian, but that is not a reason for those of us who believe in every child's right to life to quit. That is precisely what our critics expect and want. If criticism is our excuse for not doing something, we end up doing nothing. The Supply (Financial Statemem) 4 October 1984 1107

time has come to stop this despicable industry which is literally getting away with murder. I suggest that those with a sincere interest in this topic read the unsuccessful Status of the Unborn Child Bill, which was recently introduced into the New Zealand Parliament. I believe that it would be of enormous benefit to honourable members. In conclusion, I wish to congratulate the Wynnum Manly Seagulls for winning the Brisbane Rugby League premiership. I am saddened to think that the honourable member for South Brisbane lost a $200 bet on that match, but anyone who backed Souths must really have been blind indeed when it came to Rugby League. I am certain that he would agree that the best team won, and I certainly hope that Mr Gibbs buys him a drink out of his winnings. Mr Fouras: Winners can laugh and losers have to please themselves. Mr HENDERSON: I hope that the honourable member has the $200 to hand over. Mr COMBEN (Windsor) (9.16 p.m.): In view of the concluding comments made by the honourable member for Mount Gravatt, I should advise the Committee that the member for South Brisbane (Mr Fouras) has already assured me that next year Souths wUl be premiers. The member for Salisbury (Mr Goss) has confirmed that statement and seconded the motion. I am told that they will both be playing in the side. Mr FitzGerald: How could you believe him? He's wrong all the time. Mr COMBEN: I would much rather believe the member for South Brisbane than anyone on the right of the chair in this Chamber. The honourable member for Mount Gravatt raised the subject of borrowings by State Government and semi-Government bodies. He said that Queensland's massive borrowing figure, which will reach $1.7 billion this year, is incorrect when compared with the figures of the other States because Queensland includes in its figures the borrowings of statutory authorities. Just by pure chance I happen to have here the figures for statutory authority borrowings in all the States. They do not present any rosier a picture than if one looks at just the overall State Government and semi-Government borrowing figures. Let us look at the borrowing figures of statutory authorities. They are as foUws—

State $m Queensland 905

New South Wales 666

South Australia 170

Western Australia 834

Tasmania 131 Members will note that the New South Wales figure is two-thirds that of Queensland. As regards Western Australia, I remind you, Mr Booth, that it is not long since a Labor Government took over in that State and it has not yet been able to get the statutory bodies under control. It is obvious, even on those figures, that Queensland is still over borrowing by a massive amount, and that is not a healthy state of affairs. In an article in "The Courier-Mail" in June this year senior officers of the Treasury Department were quoted as saying that they were not even sure just what the State's borrowings were, but that they could not be less than $4.6 biUion. That is, an amount of more than $1,800 is owed by every Queenslander. That is the amount borrowed directiy by the Government and by bodies whose debts are guaranteed by the Government. 1108 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem)

That is an enormous amount for which every Queenslander is responsible. It is the legacy of 27 years of conservative mle. Ultimately all those debts will be repaid either in direct taxes paid by Queenslanders or by increases in charges for such things as power and water. Certainly we in the Brisbane area know all about increased charges for electricity. Recently, after electricity bills were delivered in the Windsor electorate, the telephone in my electorate office rang constantly. People were saying, "My bill has gone up by something like 30 per cent." It was horrendous to see the concern shown by battling pensioners, those people who have steered Australia on the right course for a long time. Mr FitzGerald: Did you give them the correct figure that it had risen by? Mr COMBEN: Yes, I told them the correct amount of the increase. I also told them that it was a direct result of the National Party in this State having taken over the supply of electricity. Tariffs have increased ever since. Mr FitzGerald: It wasn't 30 per cent, was it? Mr COMBEN: Some bills have increased by 30 per cent through the combination of the increased tariff and the winter period. But there has been a massive increase in electricity charges. Almost every Government member represents a country electorate. They should try talking to people in the city. The honourable member for Pine Rivers is not saying anything. She knows what comments were received in her electorate office. In the financial year 1982-83, the latest for which even incomplete figures are available, public sector borrowings in Queensland increased by more than 22 per cent, while Government receipts, affected by the drought and the economic slump, increased by only 8 per cent. Mr Alison: What did you get for maths at school—a zero? Mr COMBEN: No, I got a two; I wrote my name cortectly. However, I got more than the Premier and Treasurer and the Deputy Premier and Minister Assisting the Treasurer, because their figures certainly do not add up. The major borrower in this horrendous state of affairs was the State Electricity Commission, which, in that financial year alone, borrowed $824m. I would not mind knowing where all the borrowings are going, because a fairly good profit is certainly being made on the electricity bills in the city. It is interesting to note that the Liberal members are not saying anything about electricity charges. Nothing but silence is coming from them because of their knowledge that everyone in their electorates is concerned about electricity charges. They are keeping quiet because they are trying to get back into the Government. Queensland Government officials have, in the past, disputed the Federal figuresfo r borrowing in Queensland. It is interesting to look at those Federal figures prepared by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. They show that, this year, the State Government faces interest payments alone of nearly $290 for every man woman and child in the State. Although the Queensland Government may dispute the figures because of the Queesland practice of collecting security deposits from major developers to finance necessary infrastructure, the Australian Bureau of Statistics counts those deposits as debts because they have to be repaid even though they are offset against expected payments to the States such as rail freights. As much as the Government might try to wriggle off the hook, it is certainly responsible for borrowing of that type. In the past, the Treasury has explained away the claimed deficit figures by referring to the unique method of financing development in this State under which companies were required to deposit large sums of money for infrastmcture. But the figures show quite cleariy that borrowing is continuing at a high level, despite the breakdown in Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1109

development spending in Queensland over the last year. The Australian Bureau of Statistics estimates that, this year, the Queensland Government will borrow $679m directiy. That is more than three times the borrowings of the New South Wales Government, which is estimated to need to raise only $193m. That is what the healthy State economy that the Government tells us about is based on. I should like to know of any person in the National Party who has an overdraft four times as large as anyone else's who can say, "I am healthier." It does not work like that. This year, more than $240m will have to be repaid unless the loans can be refinanced in the 1985-86 year. The figure then wiU be $233m. Mr FitzGerald: Have you an overdraft? Mr COMBEN: Yes, 1 do have an overdraft. Members of the Labor Party have drawn attention to the deficit cover-up. Earlier this year, the then Leader of the Opposition (Mr Wright) said that the Premier and Treasurer (Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen) was attempting to mislead Queenslanders over the State's tme financial position, and that the Premier and Treasurer was trying to wriggle out of his and his Government's inept management of the State's finances. He went on to say that the State Electricity Commission's accounts revealed the Premier's irresponsible handling of the Treasury. That theme could well be continued today relative to the management of the Budget that we are discussing. In August of this year, the Premier, in responding to the Federal Budget, said that Queensland had been treated with contempt in the Federal Budget. Sir Joh described the Budget as scandalous and hit out at the Federal Govenment's $30m allocation for the defence of the America's Cup in Perth. He went on to say that Queensland's primary producers had been fleeced to the bone by the Federal Government. He also said, "There is nothing for primary industry. It is not even mentioned." Those were the Premier's comments on the help in the Federal Budget for primary industry. Let me turn my attention now to the Federal Budget. Mrs Chapman interjected. Mr COMBEN: I heard the member for Pine Rivers interject. I remember that she interjected during my speech in the Address in Reply debate on 28 August when I mentioned the Federal Budget. I will speak again about some aspects of the Federal Budget. Just after the Federal Budget was delivered, a headline in the "Daily Sun" claimed that the Budget was a shot in the arm for farmers. 1 notice that, now that I am about to speak about the way in which farmers will benefit from the Federal Budget, members on the other side of the House are silent. That is not surprising, because they know that I have facts and figures showing that the Labor Party helps farmers, which the State Government's Budget has not done. The brucellosis and tuberculosis eradication campaign received a boost in funds of $ 16.5m. As promised, wool promotion received a 30 per cent rise to $26m. Government Members interjected. Mr COMBEN: Government members such as the member for Flinders, who is a large wool-producer and a very wealthy man, would be pleased to hear about that allocation. That assistance comes from an allegedly socialist Government which is helping primary producers in the private sector. The wheat finance fund is to be wound up, and the $52m collected in 1983-84, wUl be repaid to growers with interest totalling $7.6m. That is not a bad state of affairs under a socialist Government that never helps primary industry! Perhaps Government members can tell me why the Federal Government has been helping primary producers? 1110 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO

Mr Stephan: How many strings are attached? Mr COMBEN: No strings are attached, because the Federal Government wants to help every person in this State. We on this side of the Chamber are really the only members of a national party in this State. We are the only ones who represent everyone's interests. Government members claim that they represent the interests of all Queens­ landers, but they are sectarian and sectional in their interests. Mr Veivers: Mr Ahern has his glasses back on. Perhaps he hasn't been able to stand the strain. Mr COMBEN: As the member for Ashgrove said, the Minister for Industry, Small Business and Technology has put his glasses back on. They improve his appearance. The member for Mourilyan stated earlier that $4m will be provided by the Federal Government for soil conservation programs. That allocation has been increased from $lm— an increase of 300 per cent. Perhaps members opposite can tell me where in the State Budget the Government has allocated any money to soil conservation programs. The Federal Government has gone out on a limb to provide money so that all Australians, including land-holders, are given a proper deal. A new program for fisheries management will receive almost $2.5m under the Federal Budget. Rural research programs will receive a $5m increase, bringing the total to $27m, and $125m is to be spent on market development grants. That is an increase of $ 10m. Investment and depreciation allowances have been widened. Trade promotion expend­ iture, including the overseas promotion of mral products, is up $3.4m. Mr Stephan: What does that mean? Mr COMBEN: It means that primary producers are being given Govemment assistance to promote overseas the products that they cannot sell. The wheat marketing authority, the Wool Board and other mral industry groups are all receiving assistance. Mr FitzGerald: What did Hawke do in Japan for the beef industry? Mr COMBEN: Mr Kerin did a good job when he went over there. The Federal Government has been assisting primary producers in every way. Government members are agrarian socialists of the worst type. They expect to have a free hand in the market till they get into their own little cabbage patches. Even when they want to sell cabbages, they expect the Federal Government to become involved. Under the Federal Budget, a bureau of rural resource will be established. Policies of that type will put the rural industries in this State back on their feet. No attempt has been made in this National Party Government Budget to do that. The Govemment does not care a damn about the rural producers of Queensland. The Labor Party is not talking about short-term gains, such as the good season last year. It is talking about making rural Australia once more competitive and productive and returning it to its rightful place as a leader of the Australian economy. Mr FitzGerald: Will you come up to my electorate and campaign for the Labor Party at the next election? Mr COMBEN: If the member for Lockyer campaigns in his electorate on the policies of the National Party, he will not be here after the next State election. So I am quite happy to leave it to him. I turn to the response of the hypocritical National Party Government to the Federal Budget. The Premier and Treasurer was quoted as saying that the Federal Budget was a "vote now, pay later" affair. What is the State Budget? It is precisely that. The Premier said that people could rest assured that after an early Federal election many more taxes would be introduced. In view of what happened just after the State Budget, that was a rather prophetic remark. Supply (Financial Statement) 4 October 1984 1111

Mr FitzGerald: Did you say "pathetic"? Mr COMBEN: Prophetic. Mr Veivers: Would you agree that the Premier is indulging in tribal poUtics? Mr COMBEN: Certainly he is engaging in tribal poUtics. He is looking after the elders of the National Party, who are the only people he knows how to look after. Let me deal with what will come to all Queenslanders from the Federal Budget and compare it with what will come to them from the State Budget. Vast benefits will flow to Queensland from the Federal Budget. For example, $3m will be provided in 1984-85 as the Federal Govemment's initial contribution towards the capital cost of its partici­ pation in Expo 88. Mr FitzGerald: Don't talk about the State Budget, wiU you? Mr COMBEN: I will come to that. The honourable member for Lockyer should be patient. He is scared of what I will say about the State Budget. The sum of $82m is provided by the Federal Govemment for public housing in Queensland, under the Commonwealth and State Housing Agreement. Nothing like that has happened under the State Budget. Under the first-home-owners scheme, Queensland can expect to receive $54m. That means that approximately 16 000 house-holders will benefit from the scheme in 1984- 85. That is another instance of positive help to Queenslanders. Approximately $259m has been allocated for Queensland roads. Subsidies to TAA, basic zone rebates, constmction of a new Family Court buUding in Brisbane, Commonwealth offices and the Burdekin Falls Dam are all benefits for Queenslanders and they show that the Federal Labor Government is a caring, concemed Govemment. It is totally different from the National Party in this State. The Budget that was brought down by the Premier and Treasurer shows that employment growth in Queensland is lagging behind that in other States. The Budget pay-roll tax figures show that the State's economy is not healthy and that econonic recovery is slow. The Treasury Department has shown that it does not share the Premier's false optimism. The Leader of the Opposition highlighted that fact in his response to the Budget. The Premier and Treasurer would have us believe that the Federal Govemment was undermining industry, which was the main source of the State Govemment's revenue. Continually the Federal Labor Govemment is harassed and harangued in this Chamber. Yet it is really doing the job of looking after Queensland. This so-called low-tax Govemment, which professes to be so concemed for the people, is, in actual fact, relying totally on the Federal Govemment. As much as 48.1 per cent of the money that the State Govemment will spend, as outlined in its Budget, will be provided by the Federal Govemment. Government Members interjected. Mr COMBEN: 48.1 per cent. Mr FitzGerald: That is from the Australian tax-payers. Mr COMBEN: Yes, from the Australian tax-payers, not from Queensland tax­ payers. The Queensland Govemment is skimming it off from the southern States. Honourable Members interjected. The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr Booth): Order! I will have less cross-firing in the Chamber. I ask the honourable member for Windsor to address the Chair, and I also ask honourable members to restrain themselves. 1112 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statement)

Mr COMBEN: I address the Chair, and I point out that I was not seeking the protection of the Chair against that rabble. Let us look at what some of the newspapers in this State said about the Budget. The member for Mount Gravatt referred to the editorial in the Brisbane "Telegraph" on 24 September. He said what a good document it was. He seems not to have looked at "The Courier-Mail" editorial of 21 September. It gives the overall theme that one has to go to the fine print in the Budget to find out where the money came from. The editorial states— "The Premier's advisers have put the best possible gloss on a fairly mundane set of accounts." I could not have put it better myself Never have I seen such a mundane set of accounts. My own bank account looks better. It further states— "Much was made, for example, of the $600 million Special Capital Works Program which will create more than '12 000 man years of additional employment directly and about 40 000 man years of employment totally' This sounds fine, until the program is examined a little more closely. It includes $100 million for approaches to the Gateway Bridge, another $100 million for already- announced hospital spending and the same amount for equally familiar water resource projects." The editorial continues— "Although the Government has been saying much about increasing Queensland's technological base, this Budget does little to provide tangible, financial support apart from providing land for technology and science parks. The Department of Com­ mercial and Industrial Development will get an extra $1 million for consultancy programs, loans for developing overseas markets and a Technology Development Program. By comparison, Enterprise Queensland, the Government's self-congratu­ latory propaganda exercise, wiU receive $1.2 million." Those comments appear in "The Courier-Mail", the bastion of free enterprise in this State—a good Liberal paper. The editorial continues— "Queensland's future rests with two major industries, tourism and mining. Apart from a 20 per cent increase in the Queensland Tourist and Travel Corporation's budget, there is not much evidence of an imaginative approach to this important industry." Mr Price: That came from the Feds, too. Mr COMBEN: That is correct. Part of the tourism budget came from the Federal Government. Let us look at tourism in this State. Promotion of the spending of the tourist dollar is taking place in this State, but it is promotion of a tourist industry and a tourist infrastructure along the coast. When one travels throughout the western areas, as I did a fortnight ago, where does one see tourism being promoted in the west? Where is the promotion for the tourist dollar? Where is the Government's creative hand going to make attractive facilities in the west for tourists? Mr Borbidge: Over the past few years, 70 per cent of the growth of tourism in Australia has been in Queensland. Mr COMBEN: I accept that 70 per cent of the growth in tourism is in Queensland, but it is in half a dozen different places along the coast, in multimillion dollar extra­ vaganzas, more of which we are promised by the Queensland Government. Queensland has wide open spaces in the west, with unique flora and fauna. The west has unique aesthetic landscaping appeal and unique towns. Places such as Maryborough, with its urban landscape, should be developed with tourist dollar assistance Supply (Financial Statemem) 4 October 1984 1113

from the State Govemment. However, the Queensland Govemment does little to positively develop tourism in this State. As we look to the future, each westem town should have some tourist attraction. One need only look at the excellent work being done in Longreach with the Stockman's Hall of Fame. Mr Price: It is a National Party seat. Mr COMBEN: Of course it is. These seats are the only ones in this State that ever receive a dollar apart from what they receive for tourism. Excellent work is being done at Longreach. One day a major tourist centre wiU be established that will allow Longreach to go further ahead. Nothing is being done at Barcaldine and Blackall. Mr FitzGerald: There's nothing out there. Mr COMBEN: Of course there is nothing out there, because the Queensland Govemment has not put anything out there. It has not given assistance in the form of low-interest loans. Mr Milliner: They have to rely on bicentennial hand-outs. Mr COMBEN: I wiU now deal with roads in the west. The State Govemment does very little about roads. However, there is a massive injection of funds from the Federal Govemment under the AustraUan Bicentennial Road Development Program. Whenever I saw a double-lane highway when I was in the west a fortnight ago, invariably there was a bicentennial sign on it. Mr FitzGerald: The Bicentennial Road Development Fund is collected by the Federal Govemment, but it is funded by motorists through a fuel tax. It does not come directly from the Federal Govemment. Mr COMBEN: These interjections come from members supporting a Govemment that claims to be a low-tax Govemment. On the other hand, it is proud to accept Federal moneys. Federal Govemments have been willing to take the bit between the teeth and say, "Let's go out and develop our nation." Someone has to pay. Those on the National Party side seem to think that we can accept money from the south and rip off the southem States as much as we like. We on this side of the Chamber recognise that there ought to be a fair deal for every Australian. Mr Borbidge: Are you saying that we should have a State fuel tax? Mr COMBEN: I am not saying that. I am talking about moneys from the Bicentennial Road Development Fund. They are being used to develop Queensland, yet the State Govemment wiU never acknowledge that. Time and time again, whenever a bicentennial sign appears, a bigger sign proclaims that the Queensland Govemment is responsible. That is unfair, misleading and typical of what we expect from the National Party Govemment. Tourism should be developed in the west. Govemment members from westem areas should be taking positive steps to overcome the population drift from westem towns; otherwise the west will be full of ghost towns. The potential for tourism is just as great in the west as it is on the coast. Plenty of figures show that Australians are taking more and more holidays in Australia. Generally, they are heading north. People in the south who are asked, "Where do you want to go in Australia?", indicate that they wiU head to Queensland first. It is not because of the Govemment, either; it is because of the natural resources of this State.

64165—38 1114 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial Statemem)

Let us look at what else is beirig said about the State Budget On 21 September, the day after the Budget, "The Australian Financial Review" commented in the foUowing way Mr Borbidge: Who said this? Mr COMBEN: This is from "The Australian Financial Review" of 21 September. It is a pity the member for Surfers Paradise had not tumed his hearing aid up. I have already said that once. The article says about the Queensland State Budget— "It was the sort of rhetoric that more normaUy might have come from a Labor Govemment, the Queensland Premier having spent many years raiUng against 'excessive govemment spending'." He is now saying the same sorts of things which, the article says, a Labor Govemment would have said. It continues— "But Treasury officials yesterday admitted that there were some weak spots in the State's recovery, which they said could amply cope with the pump-priming, and the Premier, while emphasising the program's job creation potential, said almost aU the work would go out to private tender, and also announced some 2,000 other direct govemment jobs, largely in teaching and hospitals. Like his NSW and Victorian counterparts—" he is quite wilUng to take a leaf out of their book— "earlier in the week. Sir Joh had the benefit of the effective wages pause—" a Federal program which has benefited every State, but which this Govemment never acknowledges— "reasonable recovery in economic growth, and factors somewhat special to Queens­ land such as soaring coal rail freight revenue, to aid in framing his Budget." The same article says— "Relying onfris oft-repeated claim that Queensland is afready the 'low-tax State', Sir Joh gave few tax concessions, and instead concentrated on the capital spending." What are the planners within the Govemment saying? Again, "The Australian Financial Review" says— "The program has already raised eyebrows in govemment planning departments, where officers have been staggered by its size." So we do not know whether the Govemment even has the infrastmcture to develop what it says it will do. It is one thing to claim in the Chamber that it wiU do these things. Already in my first year in the Chamber I have heard promises made about projects, but we are nowhere near them yet. Some of the older members in this place talk about the hoary old regulars about the place. Let us look at what has happened to the property-owners and developers in Brisbane. The article says— "Part of it is likely, however, to bring cries of disbelief from commercial property owners and developers in Brisbane, where plans for three new govemment office blocks, one very large, have the potential to destabilise an already over-suppUed commercial market. It is also likely to raise further queries from those who see the Queensland Govemment as far too ready to raise loan capital from domestic and intemational markets, because at least half the planned program cost, and possibly two-thirds according to Treasury, will be borrowed." Once again there is concem about borrowing. That respected joumal in this country is saying that that is too much. However, Treasury officials were quick to claim that the State could well afford the extent of the debt servicing charges envisaged. We on this side of the Chamber want to know how the Govemment will afford it. Mr Borbidge: What is the Federal deficit? Supply (Financial Statemem) 4 October 1984 1115

Honourable Members interjected. The CHAIRMAN: Order! There is far too much cross-firing in the Chamber. Honourable Members interjected. The CHAIRMAN: Order! Honourable members wiU come to order whilst I am on my feet. Mr COMBEN: The interjection just prior to the outburst from the rabble— The CHAIRMAN: Order! I offered the honourable member the protection of the Chair. I resent the fact that he is promoting a further disturbance. Mr COMBEN: Mr Row, I apologise to you for provoking a further disturbance. In an interjection the member for Surfers Paradise asked for a comparison of the Queensland and Federal deficits. Honourable members should know that, since the Federal Labor Govemment came into power, through sound economic management in Canberra, the Federal deficit has been reduced by $3,000m. The Federal Labor Govem­ ment does not fly by the seat of its pants and make promises now that will have to be paid for later, which is the attitude of this Govemment. Mr Price: And the world recognises it Mr COMBEN: That is certainly so. The Treasurer of the nation has received a commendation from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development nations that he is the finance Minister of the year—an award that I would expect a Labor Party Treasurer to receive. Opposition members know that the Federal Govemment practises sound economic management. It is the members of the Labor party who have had to go to the money capitals of the world and tell people that once again, because that nasty Liberal-National Party Govemment has been got rid of, they can now invest in Australia. The coalition Govemment had no economic direction. People have growTi used to sound economic management from the Labor Party in Canberra, which will be there for at least the next decade. In another decade the present Queensland Govemment will not be in power. The way that it is going, it will not be in power in two years' time. Mr Davis interjected. Mr COMBEN: Yes, the previous Treasurer was a Liberal and even today he does not know where he is going. What did the Govemment provide in the Budget for primary industries? The Govemment has complained that the Federal Govemment gave nothing, but I have given members opposite a list of what has been achieved. A "Courier-MaU" headline on the Budget's contribution to primary industries reads, "Big projects, but farmers miss out" That is the Budget from a National Party Govemment. I would not be proud of that. The article by Tony Koch stated that the serious problem of soU conservation did not rate a mention. Mr Littleproud: What did the Feds give? Mr COMBEN: The member for Condamine wants to know what the Federal Govemment did in that area. Mr McPhie interjected. Mr COMBEN: Because he did not like what I was saying, the honourable member for Toowoomba North walked over and "assaulted" me. Oppositions members have got used to the Govemment saying, as soon as a dollar is mentioned, that it is a Federal Govemment responsibility. The Govemment is quick 1116 4 October 1984 Supply (Financial StatemenO to say that the AustraUan Constitution contains States' rights. The Government wants every States' right but it wiU not accept financial responsibility. Problems such as soU conservation are national problems. The Federal Govemment aUocated $4m to soU conservation, but the State Govemment allocated not one cent. And the honourable member is saying that the National Party looks after the man on the land! Mr Littleproud: How much wiU come to Queensland from the Federal Govemment for soU conservation? Mr COMBEN: I expect the money to be divided equally among the States. The honourable member is asking how much Queensland wiU receive. I woiUd like to know how much it receives from this Govemment's Budget. That article also states that about $6.3m has been aUocated, along with $ 15.3m in Federal funds, for the bmceUosis and tuberculosis eradication scheme for cattle herds. The other day the Minister for Northem Development and Aboriginal and Island Affafrs said that insufficent money was available for compensation, yet this Govemment is again relying on Federal funds to protect a State industry. Cattle production is a State industry, and is protected as such under the Constitution, although there are national problems. This Govemment stiU expects the Federal Govemment to supply the money, but it wiU not give the Federal Govemment any responsibility. The Govemment cannot have it both ways. This Budget should have aUocated funds for reforestation schemes; schemes for greening Australia such as those advocated by the Australian Govemment. But not one word appeared in this Budget on that subject. Rural reconstmction is needed in a number of industries. I do not claim to be an expert on sugar production, but the retum to producers today is approximately 3c a kUogram. Yet not one thing is being done in the Budget for sugar producers. In fact, the State Govemment slashed its hand-out to the sugar industry at a time when cane­ growers were experiencing their toughest conditions for a decade. Last year's allocation of $lOm has been slashed in half Govemment members are complaining about the Federal Govemment, but this is not a Federal responsibiUty. Nevertheless, this Govem­ ment is cutting its contribution in half Mr Mackenroth: Do you know what assistance the National Party members give to the sugar industry? When they put sugar in their tea they throw one teaspoonful over their shoulder. Mr COMBEN: As the member for Chatsworth said. National Party members throw away one teaspoonful of sugar. I recentiy had the pleasure of attending a cane-growers' dinner. One of the growers said to me that when he stays at a motel the first thing he does is look for the coffee and sugar that is supplied, throws the sugar down the drain and asks for more in the hope that that wiU boost the sugar industry. That is about the level of support we have come to expect for the sugar industry in this State. Mr Davis: The member for Toowong is on saccarin. Mr COMBEN: He is not on saccarin; he is on something totally different. I think he is on valium most of the time, as are most of his colleagues. Let us look at the additional staffing for emergency services, nurses, poUce and teachers that this National Party Government provided in this Budget. Nurse numbers are to be increased by 461. It was said that there was a record aUocation for health, but what about the Queensland Nurses Union's campaign for an extra 1 500 nurses? Those 1 500 extra staff would not have been loafing; that was the minimum requirement. But this Govemment is not concemed about sick people. A Government Member interjected. Supply (Financial StatemenO 4 October 1984 1117

Mr COMBEN: The Govemment cannot say in one breath that it is a low-tax Govemment and in the next breath say that the Federal Govemment has to give it the money. Let us look at how the Govemment dealt with police staff. In a great move it increased staffing by 100 and allocated $5.8m for police station and residence works. Yet Senior Sergeant Col Chant, the president of the police union, said that he was disappointed with the small increase in police numbers and that it fell weU short of the 525 extra police for which the union had been asking for some time. This Govemment does not care about the average person in the street. He wiU get mugged on the street because there are no police, and when he goes to hospital there will be no nurses to treat him. People wiU be mugged on the streets. That is the oiUy place where the average Queenslander will be able to make a living, because there are not eilough teachers in this State. The increase in the number of teachers fell well short of Queensland Teachers Union expectations on staffing. As has been said many times, this Budget is a farce and a fraud and should be treated with contempt. I certainly support aU the comments made by Opposition members in this debate. Progress reported. The House adjoumed at 9.56 p.m.