COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES

SENATE Official Hansard

WEDNESDAY, 16 OCTOBER 1996

THIRTY-EIGHTH PARLIAMENT FIRST SESSION—FIRST PERIOD

BY AUTHORITY OF THE SENATE CANBERRA CONTENTS

WEDNESDAY, 16 OCTOBER

Petitions— Telstra: Privatisation ...... 4207 Radio Triple J ...... 4207 Australian Broadcasting Corporation ...... 4207 Ramsar Treaty ...... 4207 Commonwealth Dental Health Program ...... 4207 Notices of Motion— DIFF Scheme ...... 4207 Sessional Orders ...... 4208 DIFF Scheme ...... 4208 Days and Hours of Meeting ...... 4208 Doctors ...... 4208 Privacy ...... 4209 Order of Business— First Speech ...... 4209 Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport References Committee .... 4209 Live Sheep Trade ...... 4209 Parliamentary Elections ...... 4209 Visit by US Nuclear Warship ...... 4209 Social Security Legislation Amendment (Further Budget and Other Measures) Bill 1996— First Reading ...... 4210 Second Reading ...... 4210 East Timor ...... 4211 Joshua Slocum ...... 4211 Committees— Scrutiny of Bills Committee ...... 4211 Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances—Report ...... 4211 Workplace Relations and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1996— Second Reading ...... 4213 East Timor ...... 4248 Matters of Public Interest— Northern Territory ...... 4249 Howard Government ...... 4252 Chiswick Research Centre ...... 4255 Parliament House: Demonstration ...... 4257 Regional Development: New South Wales ...... 4260 Ministerial Arrangements ...... 4262 Questions Without Notice— ‘Wright Family’ ...... 4262 Budget 1996-97 ...... 4264 Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade ...... 4265 Trade Unions ...... 4265 Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade ...... 4266 Mobile Phone Towers ...... 4267 Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade ...... 4267 East Timor ...... 4267 Howard Government ...... 4268 ATSIC: Special Auditor ...... 4269 Howard Government ...... 4272 East Timor ...... 4273 Minister for Industry, Science and Tourism ...... 4273 Lindsay By-election ...... 4274 Howard Government ...... 4275 Personal Explanations ...... 4275 Questions Without Notice— Howard Government ...... 4276 CONTENTS—continued

Ministerial Statements— Defence Policy Initiatives ...... 4282 Inhumane Weapons Convention ...... 4288 Documents— Auditor-General’s Reports—Report No. 10 of 1996-97 ...... 4290 Department of the Parliamentary Reporting Staff—Annual Report . . . 4290 Committees— Scrutiny of Bills Committee—Report ...... 4290 States Grants (Primary and Secondary Education Assistance) Bill 1996— First Reading ...... 4291 Second Reading ...... 4291 Social Security Legislation Amendment (Budget and Other Measures) Bill 1996— First Reading ...... 4293 Second Reading ...... 4293 Workplace Relations and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1996— Second Reading ...... 4296 Ministerial Statements— Inhumane Weapons Convention ...... 4303 Telstra (Dilution of Public Ownership) Bill 1996— Second Reading ...... 4303 First Speech ...... 4307 Telstra (Dilution of Public Ownership) Bill 1996— Second Reading ...... 4313 Personal Explanations ...... 4319 Telstra (Dilution of Public Ownership) Bill 1996— Second Reading ...... 4319 Documents— Department of Social Security—Annual Report ...... 4328 National Health and Medical Research Council—Annual Report .... 4329 National Health and Medical Research Council Grants 1996 ...... 4329 Australian Competition and Consumer Commission—Annual Report . 4329 Australian Tobacco Marketing Advisory Committee—Annual Report . 4329 Export Finance and Insurance Corporation Australia—Annual Report 4329 Australian Institute of Marine Science—Annual Report ...... 4329 National Science and Technology Centre—Report of Activities ..... 4330 Australian Institute of Marine Science ...... 4331 National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme . . 4333 Adjournment— Legal Aid ...... 4334 Legal Aid ...... 4335 Judicial System ...... 4335 Electromagnetic Radiation ...... 4336 Sir George Pearce ...... 4337 Howard Government ...... 4338 Sir George Pearce ...... 4340 Documents— Tabling ...... 4341 Questions On Notice— Labour Market: Training Programs—(Question No. 163) ...... 4342 Ministerial Staff—(Question No. 193) ...... 4342 Creery Wetlands—(Question No. 196) ...... 4343 SENATE 4207

Wednesday, 16 October 1996 Australian Broadcasting Corporation To the Honourable the President and Members of the Senate in Parliament assembled. The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. The Petition of the undersigned draws the Margaret Reid) took the chair at 9.30 a.m., Senate’s attention to our serious concerns at the and read prayers. Government’s announced funding cuts to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, and in PETITIONS particular the impact these cuts will have on the maintenance of ABC services to regional Australia. The Clerk—Petitions have been lodged for We are of the view that the loss of $65 million in presentation as follows: funds will decimate the ABC and force it to commercialise by seeking corporate sponsors. This Telstra: Privatisation in turn will destroy its independence and quality. To the Honourable the President and Senators, and We urge the Senate to reject these funding cuts to the Speaker and Members of the House of and place ‘our ABC’ on a financial footing that Representatives assembled in Parliament: will ensure its viability and continuance of existing The petition of the undersigned citizens respect- ABC services and programs. fully shows that: by Senator Reynolds (from 3,412 citizens). As members of the Australian community, considering: Ramsar Treaty the strategic important of Telstra in the To the Honourable President and Members of the national economy; Senate in Parliament assembled. the high levels of foreign ownership in the rest The petition of the undersigned citizens of of the telecommunications industry; Australia in Geelong requests that the Senate the growing importance of communications examine the proposal to set aside land currently services to the lives of all Australians; protected under the Ramsar Treaty in order to provide for a chemical storage facility at Pt Lillias. the threat that privatisation poses to the Further, we request the Senate to examine whether universal availability of both present and future the proposal to set aside an area alternate to the communications services; one now nominated by the Ramsar Treaty is in We believe that it is in the national interest for accordance with the requirement of that Treaty. Telstra to be kept in full public ownership. by Senator Cooney (from 393 citizens). We therefore call on the Federal Government to abandon its proposal to privatise Telstra, the Commonwealth Dental Health Program nation’s chief telecommunications provider, and to To the Honourable the President and Members of explore alternative means of funding its environ- the Senate in Parliament assembled. mental policy. The humble petition of Citizens of the Nillumbik And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever Shire and Surrounds draws to the attention of the pray. Senate that the closure of the Commonwealth by Senator Bourne (from 905 citizens), Dental Health Program will result in considerable pain and suffering to those people who are Health Senator Carr (from 1,059 citizens), Care Card holders and their dependents. Senator Cooney (from 935 citizens) and Your petitioners therefore pray that the Senate restore the Commonwealth Dental Health Program Senator Robert Ray (from 1,591 citizens). for Health Care Card holders and their dependents Radio Triple J in the 1996/97 budget. To the Honourable the President and Members of by Senator Panizza (from 15 citizens). the Senate in Parliament assembled. The petition of Petitions received. the undersigned shows that the potential funding cuts to Radio Triple J will drastically affect ser- NOTICES OF MOTION vices and public broadcasts to the youth of Austral- ia. DIFF Scheme Your petitioners therefore ask the Senate to Senator FORSHAW (New South Wales)— retain the current level of funding for Triple J. I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, by Senator Lundy (from 311 citizens). I shall move: 4208 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

That there be laid on the table, no later than 18 tee, the committee was unable to fully November 1996, by the Minister representing the report on terms of reference (d) and (e) of Minister for Foreign Affairs (Senator Hill), the its inquiry; following documents or information: (b) recognises that it is important for these (a) the five possible parliamentary questions outstanding issues to be finalised; (PPQs) concerning the Development Import (c) notes the Minister’s own views, as express- Finance Facility (DIFF) scheme held in the ed to the House of Representatives on 7 office of the Minister for Foreign Affairs October 1993, where he stated that it was (Mr Downer) on 17 June 1996; appropriate for a minister to appear and give (b) the four additional PPQs concerning the evidence to a Senate committee; and DIFF scheme provided to the Minister’s (d) invites the Minister to stand by his princi- office on 27 June 1996; ples and appear before the Senate committee (c) a list of all government-to-government rep- as previously requested. resentations on the termination of the DIFF scheme made by other governments from 2 Days and Hours of Meetings March 1996; and Senator CAMPBELL (Western Australia— (d) a list of cables received by the Department Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the of Foreign Affairs and Trade concerning Environment and Parliamentary Secretary to representations on the termination of the the Minister for Sport, Territories and Local DIFF scheme or reporting the results of Dr McCawley’s visit to Asia in June 1996 Government)—I give notice that, on the next (including originating post and date received day of sitting, I shall move: in Canberra); the distribution of those cables (1) That the Senate shall sit on the following to ministers and the Prime Minister (Mr days: Howard); and the responses or queries made Monday, 18 November to Thursday, 21 by ministers or the Prime Minister to the November 1996 Minister for Foreign Affairs about those cables. Monday, 9 December to Thursday, 12 Decem- ber 1996 Sessional Orders Friday, 29 November 1996 Senator CAMPBELL (Western Australia— Friday, 13 December 1996. Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the (2) That on Friday, 29 November 1996 and Environment and Parliamentary Secretary to Friday, 13 December 1996: the Minister for Sport, Territories and Local (a) the hours of meeting shall be: Government)—I give notice that, on the next 9amto1pm day of sitting, I shall move: 2 pm to 3.45 pm; That the sessional orders in force at 30 Novem- ber 1995 continue to operate. (b) the routine business shall be: (i) Government business DIFF Scheme (ii) At 3.45 pm, adjournment. Senator FORSHAW (New South Wales)— (3) That the procedures for the adjournment I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, specified in the sessional order of 2 Februa- I shall move: ry 1994 relating to the times of sitting and That the Senate— routine of business shall apply in respect of this order. (a) notes that: (i) the Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr Doctors Downer) has refused to provide docu- Senator WOODLEY (Queensland)—I give ments and information requested by the notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee relating to the move: Minister’s decision to cancel the Develop- That the Senate— ment Import Finance Facility scheme, and (a) congratulates the Minister for Health and (ii) because of the refusal by the Minister to Family Services (Dr Wooldridge) for mov- provide the information and documents ing to improve opportunities for young requested, and as the Minister has refused doctors and to address the shortage of rural an invitation to appear before the commit- doctors; and Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4209

(b) calls on the minister to enter into negotia- department notified my office that they had tions with the states found some messages. I take the opportunity Senator Ferguson interjecting— to correct the record with respect to that Senator WOODLEY—I missed that aspect of the answer that I gave. interjection. There were other matters raised in relation Senator Ferguson—You should give us a to concerns over the Democrats’ use of their warning of a good notice of motion. Internet page. I still have those concerns, but this is not the appropriate time to raise them Senator WOODLEY—I do it regularly. It and I will raise them at another time. goes on: to ensure that additional training opportunities ORDER OF BUSINESS for specialists doctors and improved contracts for hospital doctors are made available. First Speech PRIVACY Motion (by Senator Campbell)—by Senator VANSTONE (South Australia— leave—agreed to: Minister for Employment, Education, Training That consideration of the business before the and Youth Affairs) (9.26 a.m.)—by leave— Senate this day be interrupted at approximately On Monday I asked the Australian Democrats 5 p.m., but not so as to interrupt a senator speak- a question in relation to their Internet page ing, to enable Senator Coonan to make her first speech, for a period not exceeding 30 minutes, and in it indicated that I did not believe we without any question before the chair. had received any communications that had their source from that Internet page. Perhaps Rural and Regional Affairs and I will make that a bit clearer, Madam Presi- Transport References Committee dent. The Democrats’ Internet page indicates in a number of areas that, if you want to send Motion (by Senator Woodley) agreed to: a protest, you should click on a particular That business of the Senate notice of motion No. word on the screen and the protest will be 1 standing in the name of Senator Woodley for sent. today, relating to the reference of matters to the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Commit- I raised a concern that we had not received tee, be postponed till the next day of sitting. the protests and asked whether what the Democrats were in fact doing was using the Live Sheep Trade Internet to improperly collect issue based Motion (by Senator Margetts) agreed to: mailing lists. Having raised that question in the Senate, I took the opportunity of raising That general business notice of motion No. 245 standing in the name of Senator Margetts for today, the matter with Senator Kernot later that relating to the live sheep trade, be postponed till night, because I think privacy principles and the next day of sitting. the use of the Internet are a genuine matter of concern to everybody. She indicated to me, Parliamentary Elections not in these precise words, that this was not Motion (by Senator Brown) agreed to: a matter that she had direct knowledge of, but that she would investigate the matter. And she That general business notice of motion No. 220 did, promptly. standing in the name of Senator Brown for today, relating to section 44 of the Australian Constitution, She sent me a letter yesterday before be postponed till the next day of sitting. question time indicating that she believed we had received some messages from an Internet Visit by US Nuclear Warship page—if I can be forgiven for being unchari- Motion (by Senator Brown) agreed to: table, a peculiarly small number of messages. That general business notice of motion No. 260 I then took the opportunity to go back to my standing in the name of Senator Brown for today, department and say my office had been relating to the nuclear-powered or armed warship advised by the Democrats that they had sent USS Carl Vinson, be postponed till the next day of something. A further search was done and the sitting. 4210 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

SOCIAL SECURITY LEGISLATION Before March 1993, compulsorily preserved AMENDMENT (FURTHER BUDGET superannuation and rollover assets were exempt from the social security income and assets tests AND OTHER MEASURES) BILL 1996 until age pension age. From March 1993, all First Reading superannuation benefits held in superannuation or rollover funds have been exempted from these tests Motion (by Senator Campbell) agreed to: until age pension age. This initiative involved That the following bill be introduced: a bill for estimated additional outlays of $4.1m in 1992-93, an act to amend the law relating to social security, increasing to $17.1m in 1995-96. and for related purposes. Given that superannuation savings are generally not Motion (by Senator Campbell) agreed to: subject to compulsory preservation after a person reaches the age of 55 and retires, people in these That this bill may proceed without formalities circumstances (including people who may not wish and be now read a first time. to retire but who have poor prospects of returning Bill read a first time. to work) can access their superannuation savings if they choose to do so. Consistent with the treatment Second Reading of other savings, the Government considers that a person’s superannuation savings should be taken Senator CAMPBELL (Western Australia— into account in working out how much income Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the support can be paid. Environment and Parliamentary Secretary to Accordingly, from 20 September 1997, the assets the Minister for Sport, Territories and Local test exemption of assets held in superannuation and Government) (9.42 a.m.)—I table the explana- rollover funds by social security pensioners and tory memorandum relating to this bill, and allowees under age pension age will be removed move: for people aged between 55 and age pension age after 39 weeks on income support since turning 55. That this bill be now read a second time. For income test purposes, affected customers’ I seek leave to have the second reading superannuation and rollover assets will be added to speech incorporated in Hansard. their other financial assets and assessed under extended deeming rules. Leave granted. The anticipated savings from this measure are much The speech read as follows— greater than the estimated costs of the 1993 initia- This bill contains several important measures tive. One reason why the latter estimated costs are announced in the 1996 Budget for the social significantly smaller is because they reflected only security portfolio. the additional costs of exempting non-compulsorily preserved superannuation and rollover assets from Madam President, in most cases, single people who the social security assets and income tests until age share accommodation face lower costs through pension age. However, a significant reason for the economies of scale, compared with the costs of difference is because of the extent to which cus- living alone. The Government has decided to set a tomers who are effectively retired, invested in new maximum rate of rent assistance for single superannuation and rollover funds as a means of people who share accommodation from 1 July avoiding the operation of the assets and income 1997. The new maximum rate for single sharers tests. will be two-thirds of the maximum rate for singles living independently. Neither the assets nor income test treatment of annuities and pensions, including allocated annui- However, a number of groups will be exempt from ties and pensions, will change. These products will the new rate. These groups comprise the following: continue to be assessed under existing rules. This single people with dependent children; situation is, however, presently under review. boarders and lodgers; Madam President, the Government is committed to nursing home residents; and ensuring that social security customers receive their rightful entitlement. At the same time, the Govern- people who live alone in caravans, mobile homes ment considers that the Australian taxpayer has a or vessels. right to expect that the Government will do all it In certain situations, people who live only with can to minimise the scope for overpayments. their non-dependent children will also be excluded. Overpayments often arise during holiday periods Madam President, the second measure contained in such as Easter when social security allowance the bill deals with the treatment of assets held in payments are programmed in advance to be paid superannuation and rollover funds. automatically on predetermined days that are earlier Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4211 than usual if the customer’s normal payday falls on maritime history with a sail through a holiday. This can result in overpayments for the Sydney Heads of a fleet of 12 replicas of holiday period, some of which are not recoverable. the Spray, and To that end, the third measure contained in the bill (ii) the National Maritime Museum for com- provides for a modified application form for certain memorating this historic event with the social security and youth training allowances to be unveiling of a plaque at the Museum by submitted before payment. The modified form will its Chairman, Kay Cottee AO; require a declaration of any changes anticipated for (c) notes that: the remainder of the payment period. If any overpayments arise for the payment period, they (i) generations of Australians have been will be recoverable. inspired by Joshua Slocum’s remarkable voyage and that, in recent years, Austral- I commend the bill to the Senate. ians have established a number of single- Ordered that further consideration of the handed circumnavigation world records, including Kay Cottee as the first woman, second reading of this bill be adjourned until and Jon Sanders as the first to complete the first day of sitting in 1997, in accordance double and triple single-handed and non- with the order agreed to on 29 November stop circumnavigations, and 1994. (ii) David Dicks, a 17-year-old Western Australian, in the week beginning 13 EAST TIMOR October 1996, entered the Indian Ocean Motion (by Senator Brown) agreed to: on the final leg of a voyage to circum- navigate the globe in a quest to be the That the Senate— youngest person to complete a solo non- (a) congratulates Bishop Carlos Belo and Mr stop circumnavigation; and Jose Ramos Horta on their unremitting work (d) wishes David fair winds and smooth sailing in support of independence for East Timor for the duration of his voyage to Fremantle. and the recognition of their contribution by the award of the Nobel Peace Prize; DOCUMENTS (b) notes that a report by the Indonesian Com- Scrutiny of Committees Legislation mission on Human Rights accuses the Indonesian Government and security forces Senator COONEY (Victoria) (9.44 a.m.)— of deliberately provoking violence in Jakarta On behalf of the Standing Committee for the in July 1996, following the ousting of the Scrutiny of Bills and the Chair of the Stand- Leader of the Indonesian Democratic Party, ing Committee on Regulations and Ordinanc- Mrs Megawati Sukarnoputri; and es (Senator O’Chee), I present a position (c) calls on the Australian Government: paper by the Working Party of Representa- (i) to support self-determination for East tives of Scrutiny of Legislation Committees Timor; and throughout Australia, entitled Scrutiny of (ii) to represent forcefully to the Indonesian national schemes of legislation. Government Australia’s support for de- Ordered that the report be printed. mocracy and the rule of law in Indonesia. Senator COONEY—I move: JOSHUA SLOCUM That the Senate take note of the document. Motion (by Senator Campbell) agreed to: The constitutional framework within which a That the Senate— nation goes forward into the future is crucial to its welfare. Australia’s constitutional (a) notes that the week beginning 13 October development is always in process, perhaps in 1996 marks the 100th anniversary of the arrival in Sydney Harbour of the first man most dramatic form through the decisions of to sail alone around the world, Joshua the High Court. It is essential that the consti- Slocum, in his 36-foot yawl the Spray; tutional development of the nation is antici- (b) congratulates: pated by the various parliaments around Australia. (i) the Slocum Spray Society of Australia and its President, Tony Fountain, for One of the developments that has been commemorating this important event in going on for some time is the growth of 4212 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 national schemes of legislation. It is a process Australia have attempted to develop a scheme that will become more and more pronounced whereby members of parliament can have an as time goes by. National schemes of legisla- effective say in the making of this common tion are schemes like the Corporations Law legislation or, once it is made, to have an which guides the way our companies and effective say in how it goes through parlia- securities are controlled throughout Australia. ment in the same way they would if legisla- Legislation with respect to these schemes is tion discrete to their individual parliaments passed in the various states and territories and was processed. at the Commonwealth level. Such legislation We have before us today a discussion guides the way we go about our corporate paper. It is hoped that all parliamentarians business. will read it. It is hoped that after they read it Another uniform scheme is the censorship they will make suggestions to the committee scheme which controls the censorship of about how this problem may be solved—that various material in Australia. Another scheme is, the problem of ensuring parliamentarians is the consumer credit code. That is an inter- have an effective say in the making of esting scheme in the sense that the Common- national legislative schemes in a way that, in wealth is not part of it but the states and the opinion of ministers, does not violate the territories are. This is an illustration of the essence of the agreement that they have growth of common schemes throughout this reached. It is an important matter. As a nation. They can only become common committee we hope that some productive legislative schemes when they are agreed to ideas are advanced. by the governments of various states and I would like to mention the people who territories or the Commonwealth. have had something to do with the production Ministers or heads of state come together at of this important report at some time. This SCAG, the Standing Committee of Attorneys- report will be seen Australia wide. These General, or COAG, the Council of Australian people have done outstanding work. I will Governments, and agree upon a common start by noting and praising the work done by legislative scheme that is for the good of the secretary of the Standing Committee for Australia. That is a good process. We do not the Scrutiny of Bills, Mr Peter Crawford. It is cavil with that. The effect is that once good to see him in the chamber. He was ministers gather around and come to an assisted and guided by Professor Jim Davis agreement on a common piece of legislation from the Australian National University and it is then a problem whether the parliament Mrs Margaret Lindeman who works for the can have a sufficient say in the standard and Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny status of that legislation and the way that of Bills. legislation has been brought forward. The I present this report jointly with Senator particular concern that the scrutiny commit- O’Chee. He would no doubt want to mention tees have is that there might be in that legisla- the people who helped him. The secretary of tion, innocently of course, provisions which Senator O’Chee’s committee, David Creed, take away from human rights and human Professor Douglas Whalan from the Austral- liberties. ian National University and Janice Paull from There is no effective way for the various the Senate Standing Committee on Regula- parliaments around Australia to look at the tions and Ordinances have all done great common legislation which has been agreed to work. by the ministers. The ministers do not want Others who have been involved with this what has been agreed to unravelled. If it is report are Ms Louisa Pink from the Queens- unravelled months and perhaps years of work land Scrutiny of Legislation Committee and will be lost. They want the legislation to stay her assistant Lisa Shuttleworth, Tom Duncan as it is. They are concerned that parliament from the Scrutiny of Bills and Subordinate would undo the bill before it becomes an act. Legislation Committee in the ACT—Madam The various scrutiny committees around President, you would be pleased to hear him Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4213 mentioned because he comes from the place a very important document. I seek leave to that you represent so well—Mr Greg Hogg continue my remarks later. from the Regulations Review Committee of Leave granted; debate adjourned. New South Wales and Ms Helen Mason and Ms Tanya Coleman from the Scrutiny of Acts WORKPLACE RELATIONS AND and Regulations Committee of Victoria, my OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT home state. Both Ms Mason and Ms Coleman BILL 1996 have done outstanding work in this area. Second Reading I would also like to mention Mr David Debate resumed from 15 October, on Pegram from the Legislative Review Commit- motion by Senator Kemp: tee in South Australia, Ms Wendy Peddle That this bill be now read a second time. from the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Subordinate Legislation in Tasmania, Mr Senator REYNOLDS (Queensland) (9.55 Stuart Kay and Ms Jan Paniperis from the a.m.)—Yesterday I talked about the particular Joint Standing Committee on Delegated impact that the deregulation of the labour Legislation in Western Australia, Ms Melina market would have on women and that pro- Newnan and Mr Keith Kendrick from the posed deregulation, as indicated in the bill, Standing Committee on Uniform Legislation would disproportionately affect women. I was and Intergovernmental Agreements in Western backed up in my comments by a book that Australia, and Ms Helen Allmich from the had been prepared which looked specifically Subordinate Legislation and Tabled Papers at this issue. It states: Committee from the Northern Territory. Because women have generally relied more heavily on legislation to protect them from the It can be seen that these people, from all adverse effects of the market, labour market regulations have been necessary to remedy market round Australia, have done quite magnificent failures and distortions which are likely to affect work in getting this report together. I think women more than men. they have made a great contribution to the Removal of such regulations, especially those constitutional development of Australia. dealing with labour market discrimination, could leave women exposed to important disadvantages. I also mention Senator Colston and Senator They would be subject to unequal hiring and Troeth, who have been chairs of my commit- promotion standards, unequal opportunities for tee and who have done work in this area. The training and retraining, unequal opportunity for following people are no longer there but they occupational mobility, unequal pay for equal work ought be remembered: Mr Victor Perton—an and/or unequal likelihood of being retrenched. outstanding figure in this area—in Victoria; The danger is that deregulation sanctions and Mr Jon Sullivan in Queensland; Mr Adrian encourages bad practices. The weakening of the Cruickshank in New South Wales; and Mr protective framework and institutional safeguards may very well open the floodgates for more serious Tony Benneworth in Tasmania. exploitation with no guarantee that standards will be reinstated by employers of their own accord I also mention the present chairs of these even in the long term. committees: Rosemary Follett, from your territory, Madam President; Mr Doug Shedden I think that quote is very relevant to this from New South Wales; Mr Rick Setter from debate. I remind honourable senators that this the Northern Territory; Mr Tony Elliott from comes against the background that I men- Queensland; Mr Robert Lawson from South tioned yesterday of John Bradford, a member Australia; Mr John Loone from Tasmania; Mr of the coalition, calling for the abolition of Peter Ryan from Victoria; Mr Bruce Donald- the Affirmative Action Agency, not to men- son from Western Australia; and, of course, tion the ministry for the status of women. Mr Phillip Pendal from Western Australia, I think that all the gains that have been who has been a great driving force behind this made and the fact that you, Madam President, scheme. All these people are people who now preside over this chamber are very much ought be put on the record as contributing to a reflection of the change of attitudes in the 4214 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 community—a change of practice. But not all me and, I am sure, to other senators. It made women have yet benefited from these changes the point that, notwithstanding some of the of attitudes and changes of practices. We clarifications the minister had made, it still cannot assume that just because there have remained concerned about these issues: been so many changes—with women partici- We believe that the legislation will widen the pay pating much more in the workplace, being equity gap. involved in non-traditional areas of the work- place—it is a trend that will continue unless At present the ratio of women’s earnings to men’s earnings, the hourly rate, stands at 83.3 per cent. In there are protective mechanisms in place. spite of this evidence of structural inequality in the Those protective mechanisms include the work force, the draft legislation substantially Affirmative Action Agency and, certainly, the reduces the pay equity provisions of the Industrial Industrial Relations Commission maintaining Relations Act of 1988 by restricting provisions to its watching brief over award conditions. equal pay rather than equal remuneration. This means that the over-award rates and conditions are In the time remaining, I would like to not subject to equal pay provisions. That has not address a particularly good submission by the been emphasised enough in debate. National Pay Equity Coalition to a Senate I see that my colleague Senator Rosemary committee. Not only did it have an excellent Crowley has just come into the chamber. I am submission—I will come to the executive sure she will be pursuing this issue because, summary in a moment—but I will later seek although many honourable senators on this leave to incorporate or table its bibliography, side of the chamber have raised it, it has not because it contains 37 articles and reports, been an issue that the government has wanted seven wage cases and five Australian Bureau to debate publicly. of Statistics publications. It is a very useful reference. The National Pay Equity Coalit- There is no evidence to suggest that a ion’s submission raises serious concerns about deregulated industrial relations system will the likely impact of the proposed new indus- contribute to improving the labour market trial relations bill on women workers. position of women. To the contrary—both domestic and overseas research proves that a The book draws on a wealth of research— substantial loss of pay equity occurs with a which is why I will seek leave to incorporate movement to enterprise and individualised the bibliography—which shows that, the more bargaining systems. On this point it is import- deregulated the labour market, the more ant to note that the highest pay equity ratio women are disadvantaged. In the last decade achieved by women in Australia, 84.6 per there has been a significant shift in the indus- cent, was prior to the onset of enterprise trial relations system from national wage bargaining. cases and conditions regulated by awards to one where more and more decisions affecting The patterns of enterprise bargaining that people’s working lives are determined by their have taken place reveal that a significant bargaining power at workplace level. The number of agreements exclude women and proposed system, the National Pay Equity that women are more likely than men to be Coalition argues, is not deregulation but covered by agreements that provided for an reregulation, and reregulation in the interests increase in working hours. Despite this evi- of employers. It is cloaked in rhetoric about dence, the legislation does not provide for choice and freedom for women but under the scrutiny of the proposed Australian workplace proposed bill women will be less able to agreements through the Australian Industrial access their rights, less able to protect their Relations Commission to ensure that women existing entitlements and less able to improve are not disadvantaged in the process. their labour market position. There is substantial evidence to prove that The National Pay Equity Coalition, after it women will be disadvantaged by the restric- had participated in its presentation to the tion on the ambit of awards. At present the Senate committee and had had some consulta- minimum requirements for awards excluded tions with minister Peter Reith, wrote again to a number of areas—I detailed them earlier in Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4215 my speech—which have a key impact on Bennett, L. (1994). Women and enterprise bargain- working women. ing: the legal and institutional framework. Journal of Industrial Relations, 36,(2), 191-212. The changes proposed by the government Boreham, P., Hall, R., Harley, B., & Whitehouse, will have a serious effect on all workers, but G. (1995). Gender equity and enterprise bargain- particularly on women workers. I reiterate ing: some empirical evidence. Paper for presenta- them: weakening the power of the Industrial tion at the National Social Policy conference, 5—7 Relations Commission to set employment July 1995. conditions and to vet workplace agreements, Bryson, L. (1994). Women, paid work and social both of which changes seriously limit the policy. In N. Grieve & A. Burns (Eds.), Australian commission’s capacity to protect those most women: Contemporary feminish thought. Mel- in need and particularly women; and reducing bourne: Oxford University Press. the coverage of awards to a bare minimum of Callus, R. Morehead, A., Cully, M., & Buchanan, conditions, which means that women will lose J. (1991). Industrial relations at work: The Austral- ian Industrial Relations Survey. Canberra: AGPS. important protections relating to hours of work, including the operation of part-time Dabscheck, B. (1995). The struggle for Australian industrial relations, Melbourne: Oxford University work, meal and clothing provisions, sexual Press. harassment and equal opportunity procedures Department of Industrial Relations. (1993). Work- and conditions above the standards such as place bargaining: the first 1000 Agreements. paid maternity leave. Canberra: AGPS. The Minister Assisting the Prime Minister Department of Industrial Relations. (1994) Women for the Status of Women, Senator Jocelyn and workplace bargaining: Checklist for equity in Newman, has been outspoken in a number of workplace bargaining. Canberra: AGPS. areas of importance to women, and I com- Department of Industrial Relations. (1995). Annual mend her for that, but has not been vocal on Report 1994, Enterprise Bargaining in Australia. Developments under the Industrial Relations Act. this issue. I wonder to what extent she was Canberra: AGPS. consulted. Finally, removing the commission’s Department of Industrial Relations, Employment, powers to deal with discriminatory over-award Education and Training. (1993). Women and payments, which remain a key component in enterprise bargaining: A review of NSW enterprise women’s battle to achieve equal pay in bargaining agreements: The Survey. Sydney: practice, will put the onus on individual DIRETFE. workers to make complaints about discrimi- Department of Industrial Relations, Employment, natory or otherwise unlawful agreements. That Education and Training. (1994). Enterprise bar- puts the worker in the position of having to gaining: Productivity and equity 5 steps for women. prove that discrimination and prove that Sydney: DIRETFE. disadvantage. Dickens, L., & Colling, T. (1990a). Why equity won’t appear on the equity agenda. Personnel The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT Management, April, 48-53. (Senator Patterson)—During her speech Federal Race Discrimination Commissioner (1993). Senator Reynolds sought leave to incorporate State of the nation: A report of people from non- a document. Is leave granted? There being no English speaking backgrounds. Canberra: AGPS. objection, leave is granted. Gregory, R.G. (1993) ‘Aspects of Australian and The document read as follows— US Living Standards: The Disappointing Decades 1970-1990’ Economic Record 69 (204), pp61-76. References Hall, P., & Fruin, D. (1994). Gender aspects of Monographs, Articles and Reports enterprise bargaining: the good, the bad and the Alcorso, C., & Hage, G. (1994) Bargained away? ugly. In D.E. Morgan (Ed.), Dimensions of enter- Enterprise bargaining and non-English speaking prise bargaining and organisational relations. background women workers. Policy paper 2, UNSW Studies in Australian Industrial Relations, Granville: ANEWSBA. Monograph No. 36, Kensington: Industrial Rela- tions Research Centre, University of New South Australian Centre for Industrial Relations, Research Wales. and Teaching. (1993-). Henry, M., & Franzway, S. (1993). Gender, unions Agreements database and monitor report. and the new workplace: Realising the promise? In 4216 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

B. Probert & B. Wilson (Eds.), Pink collar blues: This pivotal legislation makes clear the Work, gender and technology. Carlton: Melbourne government’s view about a whole lot of University Press. things—in particular, their view of how the Katz, H. (1993). The decentralisation of collective world ought to be. They have introduced into bargaining: A literature review and comparative this community a budget that is without any analysis. Industrial and Labour Relations Review, doubt a Thatcher-Tory budget. The Workplace 47, (1). Relations and Other Legislation Amendment Kumar, P., & Acri, L. (1992). Unions collective Bill is exactly in sync with that. It is legisla- bargaining agenda on women’s issues: The Ontario tion that is ideologically driven. It is a bill experience. Industrial Relations Quebec, 47, (4), designed to reduce the power and the rights 623-653. of workers. It fits absolutely with the changes Junor, A., Barlow, K., & Patterson, M. (1993). in the budget that do away with many ser- Service productivity: Part-time women workers and vices and hard won gains for many people in the finance sector workplace. Equal Pay Research Series No. 5. Canberra: AGPS. the community. National Pay Equity Coalition. (1994). Submission Prime Minister Howard promised that he to the 1994 Review of the Wage Fixing Principles. would have a country that will be comfortable Sydney: National Pay Equity Coalition. and relaxed. Under this bill, most workers National Pay Equity Coalition. (1995). Submission would certainly cease to be relaxed, and many to the 1994 Review of the Wage Fixing Principles. of them would be much less comfortable, Sydney: National Pay Equity Coalition. even in terms of ‘comfortable’ meaning National Women’s Consultative Council. (1992). ‘reasonably paid’. Women and enterprise bargaining: Who benefits? Final Report from an NWCC Forum, Canberra: The other important thing about this piece AGPS. of legislation is that it will not create one new Owens, R. (1994). The new industrial relations: a job. It will do nothing to help the unem- feminist critique of the law. Paper presented at a ployed, and this government does not put a colloquium, The New Industrial Relations: An figure on the number of unemployed. It Interdisciplinary Critique. Centre for Applied cannot do that because it has policies that Philosophy, Flinders University, 23-24 September, 1994. have already seen an increase in the number of unemployed, such as direct cutbacks in the Peetz, D., Preston, A., & Docherty, J. (Eds). Public Service, but also policies that are quite (1993). Workplace Bargaining in the international clearly intent on seeing the unemployed context. Canberra: Department of Industrial Rela- tions. figures rise—hence no commitment to any estimate of getting the numbers down. At Probert, B. (1992). Award restructuring and clerical least Senator Vanstone, the Minister for work: skills, training and careers in a feminised occupation. Journal of Industrial Relations, 34, (3), Employment, Education, Training and Youth 436-454. Affairs, in a moment of forgetful honesty, said that if they do not get the figures down Probert, B. (1995). Part-time work and managerial they will not be re-elected. But even she strategy: ‘Flexibility’ in the new industrial relations framework. Canberra: AGPS. baulked at putting a figure on it. Senator CROWLEY (South Australia) This government’s Tory-Thatcher budget (10.06 a.m.)—For the record, I am not listed has hung the unemployed out to dry. I know to speak at this time. Senator Reynolds said that when I once before made that comment that she felt sure that I would want to reiterate in debate in this place Senator Newman was all that she said, and indeed I do. I thank her up on her feet protesting that that was not the for her contribution to this debate. The Work- truth. That just meant that it stung her. It place Relations and Other Legislation Amend- stung her because it is true. The unemployed ment Bill 1996 is, as the government has have been forgotten. Their numbers will only made clear, an absolutely pivotal part of its increase under this government and its poli- policies. That is why the Labor opposition is cies, and this piece of legislation will ensure so strenuous in fighting it. that their lot is even worse: there will be not Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4217 one new job created by this piece of legisla- Yes, indeed, Professor Blainey, but did you tion. count what happened to the women? The Senator Hogg—That is right. reason that so many men went into the work force was because so many women came out Senator CROWLEY—My colleague of it, and I am surprised that a historian of Senator Hogg assists me here by reiterating Professor Blainey’s standing did not actually that that is absolutely the case. The unem- make that point. How do you measure unem- ployed are ignored and forgotten. This piece ployment? How do you measure full employ- of so-called primacy legislation, pivotal ment if you are not talking about labour force legislation, will do nothing to help the unem- participation and if you are not talking about ployed. It will not create one job. the huge contribution of women to the work The legislation has a goal of cooperative force in this country during the war—if you workplace relations. That is the language, and are not talking about large numbers of the yet what it will be doing is building on and jobs being taken by men after the women designing secret agreements between employ- were removed back to the home? That is what er and employee. You will not know what is on the agenda again. your workmate is getting, and that is not Sometimes we talk about Mr Howard taking good for cooperative workplace arrangements. us back to the 1960s. Personally, I think we should go back to the 1950s and, after reading It will do away with many of the things that that article by Professor Blainey, I believe the workers and the union movement have that, no, it is right back to the 1940s. ‘A fought for for 100 years. It will remove equal woman’s place is in the home’ is certainly the pay provisions and the award protection for view of a large number of the government, part-time and casual workers, most of whom particularly those in the Lyons Forum. And are women. Indeed, I am very pleased to we were assisted in our thinking about what follow my colleague Senator Reynolds be- they have to say by the Queensland member, cause this legislation is very damaging to Mr Bradford, who has come out in the press women workers in particular. When you put over the weekend saying that we should that with this government’s policies of in- abolish the Affirmative Action Agency and creasing the costs of child care, despite the Office of the Status of Women because earnest promises that they would not, and if women are too advantaged in this country and you put it with their policies to have a modest men are disadvantaged. There is another tax benefit for families where one spouse is example of very conservative thinking hauling at home—usually the woman—you see a us back into the past, and here is this piece of package of policy, secret not overt, in which legislation that is making its contribution to this government would like to see women out exactly that. of the work force and back into the home. This government also boasts the importance I noted over the weekend that there was an of so many women being elected to parlia- article by Geoffrey Blainey saying that the ment in the coalition ranks, and I am on the decade of the century was the decade of the record as saying, ‘Well done.’ I have been 40s. Certainly, if you have to have a decade one of those people who congratulate women that encompasses the Second World War, it being successful in parliament, but I certainly is not without significance. As I read it, one make a clear distinction between a Labor of the points that Professor Blainey wanted to woman and a Liberal woman and Labor make about the significance of the 1940s— policies and Liberal policies— and maybe the article did not do full justice to him—was that, despite all those men who Senator Minchin—There is a big differ- returned to Australia, all those people out of ence. the forces coming back to Australia, some Senator CROWLEY—Because the Liberal hundreds of thousands, there was no loss of women that you are so boastful about over employment; they were just absorbed into the there, Senator Minchin, are very quiet on this work force and ‘Wasn’t that fantastic!’ issue. 4218 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT persuasion and argument to finally get an (Senator Patterson)—You are tempting me equal pay commitment and you lot over there to have a go. have deleted it. Go out and tell that to the Senator CROWLEY—Here they are—and women of Australia, and tell them that all the I will come to what Senator Patterson had to women on the government bench are doing it. say in a minute—all these women, voting to Ha! That is what I say—ha! disadvantage women. They will be in here in Senator Calvert—Say it again. the next little while voting to see the costs of child care increase. How are they going to say Senator CROWLEY—I can’t because to the women in their electorates that that is Hansard can’t spell it three times in a row, a good thing for women? Already the com- Senator. They can, but I will not ask them to. munity is outraged about the increased costs You actually boast about your increased of child care and the costs are only pre- representation of women. As I say, all you are figured at this stage. Not one, not two but doing is asking those women to—and seeing three major promises in child care have been them—vote for the abolition of gains for broken just like that—broken without a flick. women. What is the government going to do? There are a couple of points that I want to Increase the costs of child care. And what is pick up from earlier contributions. I had the that going to do? Make it so much harder for opportunity of listening to Senator Patterson women to go to work, to study, to train, to re- speaking in this debate. I suppose it is prob- enter the work force. And who is voting for lematic that she is now doing chair duty and, it? All the women on the coalition benches, therefore, unable to respond at this time. It is who do not have the strength or the numbers not for that reason that I want to draw atten- to persuade their Liberal colleagues that that tion to Senator Patterson’s comments. is not good for women. First of all, Senator Patterson talked about We know there are a few whispers of the problems of closed shops—that if you are division over there. If it is not from the Lyons not in a union you do not get a job. Well, Forum it could be from the John Stuart Mill Senator Patterson, I am sure that there are group—not a faction, you understand, but just situations like that in Australia, but come with a different way of thinking about the world. me to the small businesses and the big busi- It must be fun when you have your little party nesses around Australia that are closed shops room brawls. to anyone who smells of a union. How dare you suggest that there is only fault in one Senator Minchin—Nothing like yours. direction. There are thousands of people who Senator CROWLEY—No, absolutely not. cannot get near employment if they have a Ours are factionalised, civilised and proper. union card. There are closed shops absolutely We accommodated it years ago. What is preventing and proscribing anybody from a more, Senator Minchin, we put policies for union—even a worker who is a member of a women on the political agenda. You have union—from coming into that workplace let succeeded, and we congratulate you for some alone giving the opportunity for union repre- of your successes, but we do not congratulate sentatives to visit those workers. I note that you for getting women into parliament to vote a lot of the gains— down the achievements for women. That is what you are doing. Just you wait until the The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT people in the community say to coalition (Senator Patterson)—Senator Crowley, I women members, ‘Why are you voting to would prefer it if you do not use the word make child care cost more? Why are you ‘you’. Could you use ‘Senator Patterson’ and voting, under this piece of legislation, to do direct it through the chair. If I have to be away with award protection for part-time and impartial you can be too. casual workers? Why are you voting to take Senator CROWLEY—I thank you for this away the equal pay commitment?’ It has assistance, Madam Acting Deputy President, taken 100 years of union movement graft, who is, for the record, Senator Patterson. You Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4219 are quite right. Every time it says ‘you’ the business. I note, for the record, that it was record should note that it should be ‘Senator Senator Schacht, as minister responsible for Patterson’—who proposed this quite curious small business, who proposed and introduced argument that there are closed shops, that this legislation dealing with unconscionable is a bad thing and that the coalition’s indus- conduct. The coalition failed to address it, trial relations legislation change, the Work- even though that would have been of great place Relations and Other Legislation Amend- benefit to small business. It depends on the ment Bill, is somehow going to free up size of the small business—and, having workplaces from being closed shops. If you looked at all your share dealings over the last can give us a guarantee that the closed shops day or so, it seems that many of you travel that will not let a non-unionised person in very closely with very large business indeed. will be equally matched by closed shops that That is a spurious argument of Senator Patter- will not let anybody who has a union card in, son and I sincerely hope she does not use it that might be a gain. But we know you do not again. mean that. The next person I want to take issue with The next point that Senator Patterson made is Senator Troeth who actually argued that in her contribution was to use that very what we were suggesting in debate was that disappointing argument: nobody in the Labor women would be incapable of making or Party has ever been in a small business; negotiating an agreement for themselves. That therefore, they cannot talk about it because is about as stupid a remark as it is offensive they do not know what they are talking about. from Senator Troeth. Women are very capa- As a doctor, I have often thought that argu- ble, in certain circumstances, of negotiating ment would mean that I could never talk agreements. It was Senator Troeth and her about the pain of a broken leg, having not had colleagues on the other side who regularly got one myself. It is a nonsense argument and stuck into the Labor government, complaining Senator Patterson knows that. that women would be disadvantaged in all She went on to illustrate the point by saying sorts of situations if they had to, for example, that nobody on the Labor side should talk return to the work force after some years out about small business because none of them is of the work force. in them and they do not know what they are Those opposite also seem to contradict talking about. She then went on to talk at themselves entirely if you consider the case great length about the evils of unions, about of a 16-, 17- or 18-year-old young woman which she knows nothing, of which she has going for her first employment after leaving never been a member and about which she school. What is her capacity to satisfactorily has, in the past, made points about how she and on her own negotiate an agreement when would not be a unionist. If Senator Patterson she no longer has the protection of an award? wants to argue that we cannot talk about Where does she go? Does she ring up some- small businesses because none of us has body and say, ‘I’m going off for my first job experienced them—and I would not test the interview; I need to know the legislative facts of that statement—then strictly, accord- requirements and the terms of the possible ing to her own logic, she cannot talk about agreement that I can negotiate?’ Most young unions because she has no knowledge of people going for work are desperate for a job, them. will settle for what is offered to them and will Senator Patterson can make her points about certainly not be in a position to bargain on unions and, equally, the Labor Party can their own behalf. You know and have argued make its points about small business. What in this place, as I have, the difficulties facing the Labor Party did with its previous legisla- women returning to the work force after years tion was to move towards enterprise agree- out of it. They are people who are not fully ments and freeing up the labour market, confident and not people who, with all the freeing up opportunities in the workplace and assurance, can go in and negotiate a fair encouraging small business as well as large agreement for themselves. 4220 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

Senator Reynolds has spelt out how bad this The Women’s Christian Temperance Union legislation is over a variety of areas, but in and the Women’s Suffrage Movement were particular it is very tough on women. It both very political organisations, not the removes the equal pay provisions and it will bunch of wowsers that they have been label- remove the award protection for part-time and led since. They were arguing for equal pay, casual workers, most of whom are women. a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work and How can you argue that this legislation will safety in the workplace. They were asking for advantage women? something more than sixpence for a shirt manufactured by piecework. They were Already, thousands of women in the com- arguing for better health conditions and munity know that what you say is not what educational opportunities for their children, you mean. The legislation’s attack on women the same sorts of things that 100 years on we and the increased cost of child care—to say have to argue for again—protection and rights nothing of any other changes—are two chan- for workers, protection and rights for women. ges alone that send the message to women that they would be better off going home. In South Australia we are revisiting that That is what the coalition Howard government fight a whole century on. If anyone is inter- wants. ested, go and look at the debates and under- stand that what I have said is exactly true— Women in the community have said, ‘We 100 years ago women were arguing and have employment, we have job opportunities, fighting for wage justice, wage protection and we like our part-time work, we like mixing decent employment. This legislation, if it work and family responsibilities, we like passes, will make all those battles start being professional women, we like being again—wage justice for women, safety in the horse trainers, we like being jockeys, we like workplace, protection of awards—for all the doing all of those things. We want the ser- conditions and terms that women have strug- vices of child care to support us and, no, we gled to get. do not want legislation that weakens our hand, that removes our equal pay, that disad- In particular, this legislation damages vantages us and loses us the benefits we have women. It does not give them protection, and been trying to win over years and years of the women on the other side should be voting argument.’ In particular, they do not want less against it. (Time expired) money. Senator COOK (Western Australia) (10.26 ‘No worker will be worse off,’ Mr Howard a.m.)—Madam Acting Deputy President, I too promised. Mr Howard is delivering another rise to oppose the Workplace Relations and broken promise. It is rhubarb, and everybody Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1996. I do will know that, because not only will people so as a senator who has had a lifetime’s have lost conditions and protections, they will experience in industrial relations, and as a not get so much money. Other speakers in senator who, for three years, was a minister this debate have spelt out particular examples. for industrial relations. The Victorian nurses are one case in point. Quite clearly, they have less money and are This bill should be defeated because it worse off. breaches a rock-solid guarantee by the Prime Minister (Mr Howard) that nobody will be I want to finish by saying that it has taken worse off. It should be defeated because it over 100 years of fighting to get this far, and opens the door to cutting youth wages and to see that wiped out by this piece of legisla- introducing a $3 per hour youth wage. It tion would be a tragedy. In my state of South should be defeated because it removes the Australia, in 1890, the first working women’s fairness that is entrenched in the existing union was formed. In 1891 the Liquor Trades industrial relations system. It should be Union was formed, as were a number of other defeated because it does not recognise the unions. In my state in 1894 the women won legitimacy and desirability of employees the right to vote and stand for parliament. organising and bargaining collectively. Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4221

It should be defeated because it proceeds distorted. That language does not corroborate from a fundamentally flawed assumption that the true meaning of English. It is used to the parties to the employment relationship allay worry. It is used to gull the unwary. It have equal bargaining power. It should be is used to confuse the ignorant. And it is used defeated because it severely restricts the to reassure the apathetic. central role of the Australian Industrial Rela- The language used to sell this bill is almost tions Commission in the industrial relations as evil as some of the clauses in this legisla- system. It should also be defeated because it tion. That is the immediate problem that the undermines the award system as the dynamic electors of Australia have in trying to work framework for the protection and advance- out the truth here. If they believe the language ment of wages and conditions. used to flog this legislation in the community, It should be defeated because it removes they will be absolutely misguided as to what workplace and enterprise bargaining from the this legislation does. protection of the Australian Industrial Rela- I just think there is a real case for some tions Commission. Further, it should be truth in advertising or truth in politics about defeated because it will aggravate problems what really is at play rather than what people of inequality for women, young people and claim to be at play. This bill is predicated on those most vulnerable in the labour market. It a number of principles. They are that it will should be defeated because it fails to provide uphold the rights of individuals, that it will a core framework for the prevention and encourage greater productivity, that it will settlement of industrial disputes. streamline dispute settlement and that it will It should be defeated because it emphasises be in the national good. Those who wrought the punishment of industrial action rather than this legislation and explain it use those princi- its resolution. And it should be defeated ples and invoke the majesty of those ideals as because it fails to ensure that Australia’s their defence. The trouble is it does not labour standards meet those of our interna- deliver on any of them and while this bill is tional obligations. For those reasons, this bill called reform one could hardly call something should be defeated. It should not be with- reform when it makes the situation worse. drawn and rewritten so much as simply While it is continually bruited abroad as withdrawn. reform, people think it may have elements of The outcry against this legislation is in good. itself enough to condemn it. Legislation that I wish I could find some elements of good promises to promote industrial harmony but so I could balance my remarks from a con- which attracts such division in society obvi- sidered point of view and say, ‘On one hand ously cannot succeed in its goal. Therefore, there are all these bad things but there are on its immediate face it is plainly legislation some elements of good.’ That would be a which is provocative, divisive, bringing a lack reasonable position to take. I cannot find of harmony and cooperation, and reintroduc- those elements of good in this legislation to ing confrontation into the Australian work- try to find a balanced position. I am therefore place. put in a position of having no alternative but That is an example of what is happening to reject the legislation. The truth of this now. If this bill were to pass into law, that is legislation does not fit the facts and so those what would happen in practice. That is not in who have promoted it have decided that the Australia’s interest. There has to be a way of facts are expendable. bringing the parties back together and having Let me go to the details so I do not just say a more common view, a greater consensus that as rhetoric. It is said that this bill will about the way forward in industrial relations, introduce greater wage flexibility. In fact, that than this legislation provides. is true. Greater wage flexibility will be intro- One of my greatest problems with this bill duced by this bill, but it will be flexibility for is the language used to sell it and the lan- wages to fall, not rise. There might be occa- guage used to explain it. That language is sions on which some wages for workers in 4222 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 very strong bargaining positions, in key We also know that not all employers are positions of the production process, are able going to be unscrupulous. There are many to use their bargaining power to lift wages. employers in this country who are committed But for the vast majority of Australians, this to achieving a good outcome for their work- bill means that the flexibility that is bruited ers. The problem for those employers is that abroad and claimed as a key feature of this they are undermined by this bill too, because bill is the flexibility for wage cuts, not wage if they are in competition with employers who increases or greater recognition of productivi- are unscrupulous and who will drive down ty. wages and exploit workers, and produce a product or a service at the end of the day It is said that this bill will introduce greater because of that exploitation, which is cheaper choice for individuals and, therefore, on the than the employers who want to do the right basis of freedom of choice this bill should thing by their work force, the good employers pass. That choice takes the form that you can go out of business and the bad employers choose an award or a contract or an individual succeed. They succeed because they have contract. The fact is that those words are exploited their workers and cut their wages. meaningless and superficial. They are used They have reduced their costs and made a because they have an appeal and seemingly bigger profit; and they have driven their embody a good ideal. But the truth is that you competition off the block. When one talks cannot consider choice without considering about flexibility and greater choice one has to the bargaining strengths of the participants in bear that in mind. the process. We are told that this bill will ensure that Last week we saw a key example of what third parties do not interfere in the bargaining bargaining strength looks like. We saw an process. The third party, unspoken but ma- advertisement for 40 apprentices in New- levolently referred to here, is of course a castle—and 1,900 people applied for those union. A union exists to protect and represent jobs. For the individual choice argument to the interests of its members and not to do it hold, any one of those 1,900 people who are individually so much as as a collective. If that trying to obtain employment as an apprentice body is unable to speak in this bargaining has to be assumed to have equal bargaining process, the bargaining power of which I power with the employer who will engage spoke a moment ago is unequal. If all of them. They can then stand up for their rights those 1,900 apprentices who applied for the and demand higher wages if they believe their 40 positions in Newcastle last week were productivity and contribution to the workplace represented by a common bargaining agent, justify it. namely their union, and it could negotiate a reasonable wage all of them would be com- Can anyone seriously comprehend that any peting equally for those 40 positions, knowing of those young people seeking the job of an that the wages and working conditions were apprentice—the 1,900 of them—has an equal not a factor. bargaining position with their employer in those circumstances? That is an extraordinary If you remove that union from the equation, proposition yet we are told that this is a those people are competing on their merit as freedom of choice. The assumption is, there- potential employees as well as bargaining fore, that all of those 1,900 young people are away their rights and reducing their cost. That free to make a choice. In reality the free is a key case of exploitation. So when we choice they are entitled to make in these hear this argument about third parties not circumstances—the only one they have open interfering, that means we are shifting the to them—is a choice of accepting what is bargaining strengths away from the two offered or accepting unemployment; and that parties being in balance to one in which one is no choice at all. When we hear those words party is predominant and the other is open to ‘greater freedom of choice’ one has to bear exploitation. Workers in those situations have that in mind. limited choices. Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4223

It is said of this legislation that it will allow per head through sophisticated technology unions to compete for members—but compete than individuals can possibly achieve. with whom? It will mean competing with their employers as this legislation is set out It is said of this bill that the Industrial because if it is true—as it is—that the clarion Relations Commission continues. It does in cry of unions is ‘Unity is strength; together name only, not in fact. The Industrial Rela- we can bargain’ then the clarion cry for tions Commission that was given birth in unscrupulous employers is ‘Divide and con- Australia over 100 years ago by the troubles quer.’ That means that the so-called competi- of the 1890s is an industrial relations com- tion for members, which sounds on the face mission that we will not recognise in future of it to be a reasonable thing to do, means if this legislation proceeds. That Industrial that you undermine the strength of unions by Relations Commission was built on three dividing and conquering them, and by separat- basic precepts which have endured and stood ing out the members individually and dealing the test of time. Its determinations are based with them away from the collective and away on the principles of justice, equity and the from their common good. Thus, you again substantial merits of the case. succeed in the goal of reducing wages. The argument here is that it does not matter how poor or lacking in strength you are; if It is said of this bill that Australia will there is a process of arbitration, the merit of become a more productive nation and will your case and your claim can be determined. focus on productivity, and that that will be a The rich and powerful are equal to one good thing. It is a good thing to focus on opportunity to put their case on merit and the productivity. Historically, in labour produc- poor and weak are equal to one opportunity tivity and capital productivity, this nation to put their case on merit; and an experienced enjoyed record rates of productivity growth arbitrator, used to the practical way of life, under the previous government. By interna- decides. Essentially, that is the theory of tional comparisons within its peer group arbitration as we know it. economies of the OECD, Australia’s produc- tivity growth has been growing much faster This system and the so-called system that than that of many other countries. So what is will continue arbitration will remove the the problem? The problem is that this is powers of that umpire, take away their whis- claimed to be an increase in productivity by tle, restrict them to a narrow area of law and making people work harder—not by making prevent them from determining issues that people work smarter, not by being better affect the working lives of men and women trained and skilled and thus better able to and employers and companies in this country work the complex and sophisticated plant and across the board. That will mean a limitation equipment to deliver high quality services, of power. The Industrial Relations Commis- but, rather, by working faster and harder as in sion as we know it will not continue. the concept of the old days of the industrial It is said of this bill that no worker will be revolution. That is stupid. worse off. We know that young workers will be worse off. We know that women workers The psychology of this bill is, in fact, will be worse off. We know that workers in against greater productivity. To achieve positions of weak bargaining power will be greater productivity these days, it does not worse off. Before this election, the Prime matter whether individuals work harder. That Minister said that no worker would be worse is determined by the speed of the production off. That was obviously not a core promise; line. It means that if we are going to work it has been devalued. We already know that smarter as a country, manufacture high quali- workers will be worse off. To see that work- ty, sophisticated consumer products and ers are genuinely worse off, one only has to deliver high quality, sophisticated services, look at the comparisons of the state jurisdic- the emphasis must be on training in the use tions in Australia where look-alike legislation of the plant and equipment to produce more has been passed and is now applied 4224 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

I have done a quick survey of some of the be exploited and there could be a basis for more outrageous claims of what this legisla- common cooperation. That was the basis on tion is about. When one applies the search- which we amended legislation. It was optional light of practical reality, they are revealed as and it was free. No force or coercion was empty, hollow, misleading and argumentative applied. There was opportunity and induce- in the sense that they are trying to con people ment. If people did not want to take it then and not explain to people what the legislation there was a managerial task to find a way in is about. which they could. I said that in the 1890s Australia went This legislation introduces force and coer- through an upheaval in its industrial relations cion. It introduces a system to force people system. It did. The outcry that rang across the out of awards. One only has to look at the nation then was ‘There must be a better way. statistics of some of the look-alike states like We can’t be continually racked with the major Victoria and Western Australia to see how disputes that go on endlessly with no possi- that has happened. We have had a system that bility of resolution and with the bitterness of has served this nation well, has evolved over their aftermath that endures endlessly. We time, has been modified to the circumstances, can’t do that.’ Australia then created the has worked well, was predictable and under- system of arbitration. That has evolved over stood, was known about and was not broken. time. It is predictable, understandable and is That will all be cast out and a new system, what Australians know as the way to indus- which has created major problems elsewhere trial justice. That is what we are used to. It is in Australia, will be introduced. a system that works. The old cry ‘If it ain’t This is not an academic argument, though. broke don’t fix it’ does not apply. This There is an empirical test here. There is basic system ain’t broke and it does not need to be evidence now as to the differences between thrown out and recast through this legislation. the system that Labor had and the system that this coalition government proposes to intro- This system always needs improvement; it duce. It is none other than a report by the always needs to be upgraded according to the Department of Industrial Relations into circumstances. Over time the arbitration enterprise bargaining in Australia, the annual system has been, and during the last period of report in 1995, which is a voluminous docu- the Labor government it was. It was broad- ment, too complex to go into now. ened and deepened and made more flexible to meet the needs of Australia’s economy mov- Essentially, it is able to compare how many ing into the global economy and reduced workers went into enterprise or workplace levels of protection in this country. It was bargains at the federal level under the indus- done in a way in which it protected the rights trial regulation of the former government and of Australians but with a safety net protection how many and what type of bargains they that ensured that no-one could be exploited, went into at the state level under the Kennett while the opportunity and encouragement was government and the Court government, how there for workers to choose collective bargain- those bargains operated, what the satisfaction ing as a way of collaborating with their level was and what the productivity outcomes employers to increase the productivity of their were. company and, by increasing their productivity, The unequivocal finding is that the system get a greater income for that company on the that we had worked; that 60 per cent of basis that shareholders and management, workplaces with 10 or more employees under workers and employees would share equally the federal system went into those bargains, and fairly in the increased productivity that compared with hardly any, unless they were those that provide the investment, those that forced, at the state level; that 75 per cent of provide the managerial skills and those that all those employees that went into those provide the practical workplace skills to make bargains expressed a high level of satisfac- a product or deliver a service participated in tion; and that, from October 1991 to April so the shares would be equal, no-one would 1996, 8,000 federal agreements were ratified. Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4225

So the system is working. The arguments that jeopardy, what hope in real terms have people we need to make a revolutionary change are in the community got, particularly those not justified and the proposals here therefore younger people who will be very much the should be scotched. I reject the legislation. victims of this new system? If the federal (Time expired) cabinet cannot get their enterprise agreement Senator BOB COLLINS (Northern Terri- right, what chance has anyone else got of tory) (10.46 a.m.)—It occurred to me, when doing so? They will be vulnerable indeed. I was considering comments that had been As Senator Cook and others have said, the made by various senators about workplace real core of this entire operation, and we all agreements during this debate on the Work- know it, is to strike down the award system place Relations and Other Legislation Amend- in Australia, to remove that safety net which ment Bill, and the reality of those documents underpins employer-employee relationships in in the real world in terms of, for example, the Australia, and to substitute a free-for-all. It is points that Senator Cook has just been mak- not a new argument. It is as old as politics ing in respect of young people who will not itself. In fact, the arguments of protection— have access to the significant resources that tariffs, if you like—or marketplace rules go are provided by trade unions and so on, that back hundreds of years. the reality of what will actually happen in Madam Acting Deputy President, as you respect of employees’ real knowledge of those would know, one of the fundamental debates, agreements at that level of the community particularly in places like Great Britain, for could not be exemplified any better than by hundreds of years was that the market should the current debate that we are engaged upon, set the rules for labour. This is a very ancient which has so far claimed the scalps of two conservative argument. There is nothing new government frontbenchers. Were the rules to about it. The repercussions, of course, of apply fairly, as of this day, as of this moment, letting the marketplace rule in respect of the it would certainly equally claim the scalps of conditions and pay of employees who did not the Minister for Industry, Science and Tour- enjoy the same negotiating strength as the ism, Mr Moore, and of the Deputy Prime people who sit on the other side of the table Minister, Mr Tim Fischer, without going any from them has been well known in the past further through the cabinet. and no doubt will be revisited in the future. In real terms—and I reflected on this when It has been very largely a product of the I went back through the Cabinet Handbook situation in New Zealand and, without ques- again this morning—the code of conduct of tion, in terms of the debate that led up to their the Prime Minister (Mr Howard) for his election, was instrumental in bringing about ministers is their workplace enterprise agree- the result that we have now had; that is, that ment. Those are precisely the conditions this prosperity which New Zealand has en- under which they are employed, the rules with joyed in terms of its overall economic statist- which they will have to comply. It is clear ics has not been enjoyed by the majority of from this current debate that few of them the population in New Zealand, who have in have even bothered to read it and those few fact been used as the pawns to produce some who did bother to read it have clearly not of that wealth, none of which they are the understood it. beneficiaries of. In fact, as the leader of the Senator Conroy—They ignored it. Labour Party and the potential new Prime Senator BOB COLLINS—Or ignored it. Minister of that country has observed in the In terms of that ministerial enterprise agree- past few days, all of that national prosperity ment, if this country’s arguably leading is not much good at the end of the day when citizens, that is, the federal cabinet, have so people are still needing assistance to feed much trouble understanding their enterprise their families. agreement that it has already cost two of them There have been some interesting contribu- their jobs in consecutive 24-hour periods and tions to this debate and a great deal of the has placed a whole heap of others in real traditional anti-union rhetoric. I thought the 4226 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 point was very well made by my colleagues union and if I don’t pay those dues, will I still Senator Reynolds and Senator Crowley, who get the wages and the conditions?’ In respect spoke a short time ago, and who talked about of my workplace, the answer to that was, these one-way rules that apply in the debate ‘Yes, you will—if you want to ride on the on industrial relations. We on this side of the backs of the rest of us who actually provide house are continually being accused of not our union dues out of our salaries in order to being in business and never having had help you secure the wages and conditions that experience in small business. I am not quite you get.’ I am pleased to say that in all sure what a doctor’s surgery is if it is not a cases—certainly while I was there—that was small business, but these epithets are constant- an argument that won the day, and there was ly thrown across the chamber in an attempt to a 100 per cent union membership in that make a platform for saying we should there- workplace. fore not discuss these issues. It does not stop There is no question that there are a lot of the same people, who constantly give you the workers who are quite happy to accept the impression they would not sit in the same benefits—and they are significant—that the room as a union official and certainly would resources of an organised and professional never join one, going forth at great length union can bring to a workplace without about the sins and omissions of unions. having to endure the obligation of paying the I had the opportunity of being a workplace dues. That is certainly one of the reasons for union delegate when I worked for the CSIRO. the decline in union membership. Even though it is a long time ago, there is Other speakers have canvassed a whole one thing that I can still remember from those range of issues to do with this debate which days in terms of the real position in the world I will not go over again. I want to highlight in respect of conditions. one potential negative result for workers if People go on at great length about the this legislation is carried through this house. declining membership of unions in Australia. This legislation will have an extremely detri- That is a fact of life, and it is a fact of life mental effect on workers in the part of the that the unions have to grapple with. I certain- world where I come from and, Madam Acting ly know from first-hand experience as a Deputy President Reynolds—if I may be workplace union delegate one of the reasons forgiven for addressing the chair directly— for that declining membership, but I am where you come from, that is, in the more pleased to say that it did not happen in the remote and regional locations of Australia. small workplace that I was involved in. None of the conditions that workers have Nevertheless, one of my jobs was to discuss had unions fight for and achieve over many with new employees the work that the union years and that are provided for them in did on their behalf, to discuss the dues that northern Australia will be protected if this would need to be paid—whether they wanted legislation passes through the Senate in the them deducted from their salary, et cetera— way it is currently drafted. The conditions and, indeed, to discuss whether they wanted will be all up for grabs and will be all, poten- to join the union at all. tially, dumped. There is no question at all, There was a reaction which I often got considering the track record of the negotia- during those discussions. After I had ex- tions that I am very familiar with in northern plained that there was an annual round of Australia, that the first reaction of many discussions between the union that represent- employers will be to dump the conditions and ed us in terms of our wages and conditions, the enterprise agreements in this brave new after I had discussed the fact that the union world. was always available as a resource when What we are talking about are things like employees needed it and after I had particu- the district allowance, accommodation assist- larly discussed the wages, conditions and ance and airconditioning subsidies that are service that we negotiated, one question that provided in remote locations in northern I would be asked was, ‘If I don’t join the Australia, where climatic conditions, I con- Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4227 fess, are very stressful at certain times of the benefits and conditions in remote localities, year. We are also talking about the annual none of which will be protected under the recreation leave air fares that are provided as workplace relations bill that we are debating part of awards and the additional recreation now. Just to give honourable senators who leave, which we have had in the Northern may be interested an idea—probably in most Territory for as long as I can remember. All cases I think they would be completely of those additional benefits to workers will be unaware that these things exist—of just how up for grabs. Also, there are the fares out of far-flung these effects will be, I want to make isolated localities for specified purposes—that the point that these remote locality benefits is for medical, dental and specialist treatment are not confined to the Northern Territory. A or on compassionate grounds—which are also number of them are linked to areas of Aus- commonplace. None of those will be protect- tralia that qualify for district allowance, and ed if this legislation passes through the Senate that is how the link is made in the awards. as it is currently drafted. I will just give the Senate a few examples I have received just in the last week letters of places to show how many workers will from territorians who have been in the posi- potentially be affected by this bill going tion of having to utilise these additional through—I am sure a lot of senators will not benefits for medical treatment. I am actually be aware of them. These places include talking about real people—not the Wright Broken Hill, Burke, Cobar, Coonamble, family; the manufactured, fictional family of Moree, Narrabri and Walgett—all of which Senator Vanstone. I am actually talking about are in the more remote regions of the state of real people with real experiences who have New South Wales. It also includes places like only recently been alerted to what might Atherton, Ingham, Innisfail, Mareeba, Roma, happen. I might add that they have been Sandy Cape, Townsville, Tully, Charters alerted by the activities of the Community Towers, Charleville, Cairns, Bowen, Biloela and Public Sector Union in the Northern and Ayr—all in Queensland. They all have Territory, by the submissions that were given award conditions, none of which are protected to the Senate committee which sat in Darwin by this legislation. Other areas include Ce- and by the publicity that ensued. duna in South Australia, Queenstown in I received these shock, horror letters from Tasmania, and Wilsons Promontory Light- people—and this is the way it happens in the house in Victoria. It is getting harder to find real world—who suddenly realised for the remote locations in Victoria but, nevertheless, first time that none of these conditions which they are still there. Of course, there is a long were part of their awards would be guaranteed list in Western Australia, as you would under this new legislation. One letter de- expect, Madam Acting Deputy President. All scribed in graphic detail the serious problems of these places have significant additional that one family would have been in had they provisions in their awards, none of which are not been able to exercise the condition they protected. had for getting an air fare out of the Northern I will give the Senate an example of the Territory in a medical emergency. Due to our airconditioning subsidy that is provided as small population we do not enjoy a number part of awards. Let me tell the Senate it is a of specialist services—such as oncology, for significant expense if you live in the north. example—that the more popular centres of Again, there is a long list of communities in Australia have. Those additional benefits can Western Australia that receive this subsidy, be fully justified and, in the past, they have including Broome, Carnarvon, Dampier, been justified and approved by the Industrial Derby, Exmouth, Halls Creek, Karratha, Relations Commission as a result of the hard Kununurra, Port Hedland and so on. It also work that the unions have done collectively applies to many localities in the Northern on behalf of us all in the Northern Territory. Territory and in Queensland. There is also a I might add that education fares assistance whole range of localities that currently enjoy is also on that quite long list of additional additional leave. All of these areas are con- 4228 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 tained in the evidence before the Senate public hearings throughout Australia into the committee inquiring into this matter. That is Workplace Relations and Other Legislation why I do not need to go into it any further in Amendment Bill 1996. During the course of here. the public hearings, government senators often As I said before, the reason I wanted to raised the situation in New Zealand to support raise this particular aspect that has not been this government’s agenda. My colleagues on canvassed before in this debate is that, when the other side often referred to New Zealand’s you consider the very large number of remote experience since the introduction of the localities in Western Australia, Queensland, Employment Contracts Act 1991 to support New South Wales and South Australia, I their case. They would have us believe that would put a very large sum of money indeed they actually know what they are talking on the fact that the majority of senators in about. I quote Senator Crane: here—certainly on the government benches— I have also been to New Zealand and I have had a would be completely unaware that so many look at New Zealand. workers in their electorates are going to be He goes on to say: potentially disadvantaged by the lack of It is absolutely true that wages in New Zealand protection of these conditions. I am sure that from 1994 until now are less . . . I prefer to use not I would win that bet. stagnated but stabilised in terms of that drop in unemployment from 12 to six per cent. I do not I have to confess to the Senate that I have think the participation rate is relevant to that, but lost a few other bets in recent days. The the important thing is that during that particular Senate Hansard actually bears record to the time New Zealand has got on top of its current bet I had in here—I think it was in Septem- account problem— ber—with the Leader of the Opposition in the Senator Crane also said: Senate (Senator Faulkner). I bet him $5 that When we say it has not gone into work as it has Senator Short would not resign in the next six gone into profits, it has gone into balancing the months. I did this on the basis that I am in budget in New Zealand, and that is incredibly the habit of putting small sums of money on important to us all. bets that I hope I will lose. I did pay the $5 That is a bit convoluted and rambling, but I to Senator Faulkner. think we got the point in terms of what he But I was so encouraged by the investment was trying to say. that the following day I had a standing bet Let us have a look at the reality. I refer to with Senator Faulkner as a job lot covering a report called ‘The report of the study pro- the entire ministry, including parliamentary gram on structural adjustment and social secretaries, at $5 a head and lost another $5 change’. The preface to this report was on the following day. I have now paid to written by three academics. They are Mr Fred Senator Faulkner the $10 that I owe him. I Argy, a visiting fellow in the public policy think it is an extremely good investment in program at the ANU; Professor Fred Gruen terms of the good governance of Australia at from the Centre for Economic Policy Re- $5 a head. I am doing rather well. I am search at the ANU; and Professor Bettina prepared to place a large bet—and I think I Cass, Professor of Sociology and Social would win—that very few senators and I Policy at the University of Sydney. These are might say many government members that respected academics with no axe to grind and represent these areas in the House of Repre- they clearly disputed the wisdom of Australia sentatives would be totally unaware that the heading down the same path of industrial legislation that they are so enthusiastically reform as New Zealand. pushing through this parliament will so They noted that the economic results in severely disadvantage the workers in their New Zealand, ‘taken in isolation’, may be regions. (Time expired) regarded as impressive, but to favourably Senator MACKAY (Tasmania) (11.06 compare the New Zealand economic reform a.m.)—I was a member of the Senate Eco- path with that of the previous Labor Austral- nomics References Committee that held ian government is premature, based on the Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4229 evidence and proper analysis. Their report young people and women. It has seen the makes three main points: demise of proper industry policy and planning First, New Zealand’s better growth performance and led to extreme hardship where awards appears to be due more to a more rapid accumula- have disappeared, and with them paid rates tion of raw factors of production (capital and and fair working conditions. labour) rather than to relative improvements in resource utilisation or in the quality of human Workplace based training has dried up to a capital. trickle—sound familiar?—and a level of skill shortage has developed: so alarming that The New Zealand factor and labour produc- changes to immigration levels are being tivity growth have not been good, not even considered to solve this problem. This is matching Australia’s performance. New somewhat ironic given the debate that is Zealand’s reforms have had little impact on going on in Australia at the moment. efficiency and that is not a good sign. They state: It was in no small part due to the detrimen- tal effects of the Employment Contract Act Secondly, much of New Zealand’s recent strong economic growth can be attributed to temporary that the New Zealand parliament was held to factors. be undemocratic and profound changes have been made to the electoral system. The first These experts claim, quite rightly, that a lot election in New Zealand under MMP was of New Zealand’s recent growth is merely a held on Saturday. The result in this election catch-up period. New Zealand’s economy mirrored the recent polling, with one excep- performed so poorly in the 1980s that a tion. Labour polled seven per cent more than period of improvement was inevitable and this most pundits predicted. cannot be attributed to the New Zealand process of economic reform. The third and Senator Ferguson—They got up to 28 per most telling point is: cent. It was brilliant! The potential gains from New Zealand-type reform Senator MACKAY—Hang on, I have not need to be weighed against the social costs. finished, Senator. This bill, like the New Zealand employment Obviously, people wanted a change from the act, the keystone of their reform package, is Nationals’ policy of industrial relations. Even a short-sighted or visionless quick fix. It is the Nationals’ splinter party, New Zealand about providing a pool of cheap labour. It is First, had a pre-election policy of reforming about increasing profit for a few—and at the Employment Contract Act. whose expense? It can be shown that some It all points to the people of New Zealand New Zealanders have benefited significantly seeking changes to their labour market. That during the period of short-term economic is what they wanted. They wanted change. recovery—at the top end, might I say, similar Over 66 per cent of people in New Zealand to the United States. But, as this government voted for parties that promised reform to this would like to do with this bill, New Zealand legislation and this system. went too far. I quote from the report: I hope my colleagues opposite are getting The main losers have been the already disadvan- the message loud and clear. It is also going to taged—low income earners and recipients of social be an unpopular vote for the government. It welfare. is going to lose the government votes. Now What did New Zealand do to achieve this that is fine for us on this side but, in the stunning result? They dismantled arbitration meantime, a lot of people are going to get and collective bargaining and replaced this hurt and suffer. That is the major point. with individual employee contracts. They During the Senate hearings, we heard allowed the market and social wage safety evidence on how the Employment Contract nets to be eroded. Does that sound familiar? Act has been working and why it was intro- The New Zealand Employment Contract duced in New Zealand. Tony Short, from the Act is responsible for lowering the standard school of law of the University of South of living of thousands of Maoris, migrants, Australia, told the committee he spoke to the 4230 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

New Zealand minister for labour at a confer- basic minima—taking from workers rights and ence in 1990. When he asked the minister conditions already bargained and fought for. what arguments persuaded him that this The working men and women of Australia industrial reform was the way New Zealand can be forgiven for believing Mr Howard. could go, the minister simply could not They did not know at that stage of the game answer the question. that coalition promises come in two forms— The question was then answered by the core and non-core. This is obviously a non- chief executive officer of the employers core promise—a promise the coalition be- federation, who basically said, ‘Our members lieves it does not have to keep. wanted it.’ That was the primary reason for This bill does not give workers the right to the legislation. They wanted the legislation for choose a current award and it clearly gives a reason: because it provides a pool of labour primacy to Australian workplace agreements which is cheap, a pool of labour which they over awards. You may ask what workplace can exploit in a relatively unfettered way. agreements will give workers. I will tell It is clear that this legislation was intro- you—uncertainty in wages, uncertainty in duced purely for ideological reasons, not for working hours, an imbalance in bargaining the benefit of average New Zealanders. Let us power and the threat of ‘no sign, no start’. look at what it has ‘achieved’—I say some- They will not get the choice that the coalition what facetiously—for the workers of New bleats on about. Zealand. I would enlighten senators as to some of the practices taking place in New Let us look at some very real examples of Zealand, again from evidence given to the what could and would happen if the coalition Senate hearing. A local supermarket hired is successful with this bill. A year 12 student children for weekend and evening work. They who worked as a casual shop assistant told were paid from $1.40 to $2.00 per hour for the Senate committee: that work. Is that what we want to happen in ...Iwent in to work one day to find that my Australia? I and those on this side of the name was not on the roster. I approached my manager only to be told that if I wanted hours I chamber do not want that to happen. had to sign a workplace agreement ...asubstan- Tony Short gave an example of an employ- tial reduction in my wages. I could not see any er on New Zealand’s South Island, a Mr alternative so I did sign the agreement and immedi- Schwartzberg ,who inserted a clause in the ately I had an abundance of work. contract for his employees which stated that Upon reflection, this young woman changed employees have to go to the bathroom in their her mind and indicated that she wanted that own time. I am not sure how you would agreement cancelled. This act resulted in her measure that. It is unbelievable, but true. being taken off the roster and receiving no Nobody seems to dispute that the deregula- hours whatsoever. She now has no job and no tion of the labour market has seen real wages money. Another case—and this person con- fail to keep up with inflation. For the vast tacted my office—is that of a person who is majority of employees in New Zealand, the a qualified mechanic with 10 years experi- Employment Contracts Act has been a failure. ence. The Employment Contracts Act has created a Senator Conroy—A good choice. new class—the working poor. Is this the path we want Australia to take? I hope not. This is Senator MACKAY—It is the sort of the path this bill is leading us down. choice that you would make, but it is not really a choice, is it? I would like to remind senators of a state- ment made by the Prime Minister, Mr How- Senator Conroy—No choice at all. ard. Mr Howard said that the current award Senator MACKAY—It is no choice at all. system will remain in place and be available This qualified mechanic was asked to sign an for all workers. Clearly, that is another broken agreement. In this agreement his rate of pay promise. Mr Howard should have said that he was that of an unqualified person, not a planned to reduce workers’ rights to a few tradesperson with 10 years experience. After Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4231 speaking to his prospective employer about are confidential and shrouded in secrecy. This this situation he was told, ‘If you’re not government proposes that workplace agree- happy, don’t bother coming in to start there ments do not require a pre-agreement review. are plenty of people out there who need jobs.’ We on this side of the chamber say that This is an appalling situation. workplace agreements must be reviewed in It is clear there is no choice for employees public by the Industrial Relations Commission whose employers require them to sign a and comply with a genuine no disadvantage workplace agreement as a precondition on test. being offered a job. Unfortunately, these I will give a case in point. In Western cases—and I can assure you that there are too Australia, under similar legislation, an em- many like this—clearly show that the ployee had an agreement that said he had five government’s proposal that workplace agree- days sick leave. The minimum conditions are ments can be entered into before employment 10 days sick leave. How could this agreement commences can only lead to intimidation of be registered? How could this agreement be workers, diminution of wages and exploitation valid? The employee’s union wrote to the of workers. The signing of an agreement Western Australia Commissioner of Work- before you get the job is a very real concern place Agreements, and the reply was: for workers. The only choice this gives them You will appreciate that confidentiality provisions is take what you are offered or remain unem- prevent me acknowledging or otherwise indicating ployed. This is the government’s idea of whether or not there is any such workplace agree- choice. This is the level playing field the ment, registered or otherwise. government has been talking about. With workplace agreements accorded these This government seems very keen on secrecy provisions, how can unions represent employees signing employment contracts the interests of their members? How can before they are offered a job. Why? It is leave workers ensure that they are actually getting workers with little bargaining power and out a fair deal? These secrecy provisions are only on their own without the protection of an in place to ensure that the erosion of workers’ award or a union. The only reason workplace wages and conditions are kept hidden, are agreements are elevated in status is so that kept secret, so people do not know what is individual arrangements are accorded sup- going on. remacy over awards and primacy over any Another way this government has devised other sort of legislation, including state to further isolate workers and deprive them of legislation. bargaining power is this bill’s right of entry The emphasis of this bill is to take what provisions. In their submission to the Senate little bargaining power workers may have references committee on the Workplace through the process of collective bargaining Relations and Other Legislation Amendment and give it as a thank you for their support to Bill 1996, the International Centre for Trade those who already possess considerable power Union Rights set out a number of fundamental over workers in this nation. This government objections to the bill’s implementation. Objec- would like to see an end to collective bargain- tions to this bill put forward by the centre ing and an end to the protection of workers concerned the breaches of international law through the award system. This bill in its that this bill will entail, particularly in relation present form will clearly allow unscrupulous to the right to strike, the undermining of the employers to design workplace agreements organisational autonomy of trade unions, and which will remove the fair terms and condi- the dismantling of trade union structures and tions which workers in this country have the right of entry. fought long and hard for. In relation to the right of entry, the Interna- What are government members saying? tional Centre for Trade Union Rights submit- They are saying that workplace agreements ted to the Senate committee that ‘the provi- will be vetted and, not to worry, it is all okay. sions relating to right of entry are clearly and These are the same workplace agreements that directly in breach of international law’. The 4232 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 majority of the Senate committee agreed that union regarding an occupational health and there is strong evidence to support this objec- safety matter, employees were subjected to tion. questioning as to who called in the union. Under the current situation, right of entry This went on for a month after the matter had gives the union official the right to enter been settled. workplaces for the purpose of ensuring that When John Howard proclaimed that the workplace award obligations are followed. coalition would govern for all Australians, This right is fundamental to a union’s ability some Australians could be forgiven for believ- to protect its members’ interests, ensure ing that Mr Howard meant ‘all Australians’. compliance with workplace awards and It is not all Australians; it is some Austral- maintain contact with its members. In relation ians. It is privileged Australians. It is those to the union’s right of entry, the majority of who have actually got the power currently. the Senate committee conclude: That is what this bill is about. The limits the bill proposes to place on existing The coalition’s workplace relations bill is right of entry arrangements should be rejected. more concerned with shoring up business The majority of the committee noted that: alliances rather than providing an equitable . . . right of entry plays an important role in outcome for all. Considering the number of ensuring compliance with workplace awards and shares people opposite have in business, I agreements, at no cost to the government. guess that is a reasonable outcome if you are It is free. This, the majority of the Senate a government. committee submitted, gives: Senator Herron—That’s how companies . . . comfort to business competitors who can be employee people. more confident that they are not being undercut by unscrupulous operators. Senator MACKAY—Oh! What we are Basically, it is bad business, apart from seeing from the coalition with this bill is a anything else. The majority of the committee total contempt for working women and men also said: of Australia which, in effect, amounts to a disenfranchising of workers’ rights by stealth. This compliance function will be severely curtailed The coalition would like the people of Aus- by the proposed need for a written invitation, and a proposed requirement that this invitation or a tralia to think of this bill as a reform of certificate obtained in lieu be shown to the employ- industrial relations. However, it is quite clear er. These limitations seem burdensome and bureau- that the intent of this bill is not to reform but cratic, and could permit intimidation of employees. to herald a return; that is, a return to the days I think that is putting it mildly. Clearly, the when employers dictated the rights and threat posed by this bill to employees is the conditions for employees. very real possibility of workplace intimidation Senator FERGUSON (South Australia) by some employers—not all employers, (11.26 a.m.)—I listened intently to Senator probably not a majority of employers, but Mackay’s contribution to this debate, hoping there is a proportion out there who will use it. perhaps that I might hear something new The coalition’s proposal limits the right of because, having travelled with Senator entry in number of ways. It can only be Mackay for a period of four weeks on the exercised where one or more employees who industrial relations inquiry, I have heard most are members of the union invite it to enter the of it before. I do not know whether it has workplace—therefore clearly allowing for something to do with her coming from an identification of the employee. This will lead island state, but she seems to have an ob- to workers being too scared to talk their session with New Zealand—an obsession unions about breaches, too scared to talk to which I have heard quite often in question anybody—their fellow workers—about time and at other times. breaches. I can understand her obsession with New A woman contacted my office stating that Zealand because, as she said in her speech, she was concerned that after contacting her the Labor Party in Australia and the Labour Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4233

Party in New Zealand have a lot common: progress that has been made in industrial relations they are both polling roughly less than a third towards enterprise bargaining. of the vote. She considers it a great improve- Let me say— ment when the New Zealand Labour Party Senator Jacinta Collins interjecting— gets up to 28 per cent of the vote, with the likelihood of providing a Prime Minister from Senator FERGUSON—If we are going to that sort of popular vote amongst the people. hear one side of the story— I think the analogies that Senator Mackay The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT drew with New Zealand are misplaced. She (Senator Reynolds)—Order! Senator Collins, did so on the basis that the Australian Work- if you are going to interject, would you please place Relations and Other Legislation Amend- resume your normal seat. ment Bill is based on New Zealand experi- ence when, in fact, we know that is simply Senator FERGUSON—I am pleased that not the case. Senator Collins is here because it shows that some of these issues that are raised are actual- Senator Mackay chose to quote various ly hitting on a raw nerve that prompts Senator people who gave evidence at our inquiry. Collins and Senator Mackay to interject. But Many of those people were specially hand- can I say that Professor Sloan, in her evi- picked to be there and there were some others dence, said that the bill actually represents who, because of the nature of their position, quite modest changes. I think even the Demo- were there anyway. crat senator on our committee said that it was Senator Neal—Are you attacking the a natural— witnesses who appeared before the commit- Senator Neal—You think, or you know? tee? Senator FERGUSON—If you read the Senator FERGUSON—I would like to evidence you will find that he said that it was quote somebody else at the inquiry, somebody a natural progression from the 1993 bill that whose opinions perhaps Senator Mackay is we move on in the area of industrial relations not so keen on. reform. I am pleased that Senator Collins is Senator Neal—You are in contempt of the here because, although I did not have the committee, are you? opportunity to hear Senator Collins’s speech, Senator FERGUSON—I listened to Sena- I read what she had to say. A couple of things tor Mackay in silence, but I can say see that Senator Collins said need to be refuted. From I must be touching a very raw nerve for some of the comments that she has made, I Senator Neal to interject so much. I would certainly do not know how she draws the like to quote from some of the evidence that conclusions that she does. we had in inquiry from Professor Judith One of the things she said was that my Sloan, and Senator Mackay will remember desire to attend another committee hearing, a her. We have had her quotes; perhaps we will hearing of the Public Works Committee, have some from the other side. Professor compromised the program of the inquiry. To Sloan said early in her evidence that she suggest that my attendance at another com- wanted to make a number of general com- mittee hearing of this parliament compromised ments. She said: the program of the inquiry is beyond the The first is that the bill is 300 pages and the realms of any probability or believability explanatory memorandum is about 200 pages, I because this committee can continue at any think. Perhaps it may not be a convincing proposi- time as long as there is a quorum. I reject tion to all of the senators— outright the suggestion that I compromised I think she was referring to Senator Jacinta the program of this inquiry. Collins, who just walked in, and Senator Senator Jacinta Collins—I didn’t say you Mackay— compromised. but this bill actually makes quite modest changes. It is a bill which is basically a gradual transforma- Senator FERGUSON—That was the word tion. It basically builds on the kind of patchy that you used. You said that my desire to 4234 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 attend compromised the program of the her colleagues to Poland, Hungary and Ber- inquiry. That is not true. I refute that sugges- lin—a delegation, I might add, that I enjoyed. tion. She also said in the same section of her I also enjoyed the company of your col- speech that Senator Chapman was in the leagues. If a person who goes on a parlia- United States when we concluded the public mentary delegation in this place is to be hearings. He certainly was, having attended, reflected on in this way— I think, just about every day of public hear- Senator Jacinta Collins—In what way? ings for 17 days. For the last two days he was on a pre-arranged visit to the Republican Senator FERGUSON—You said that you Convention in the United States, which had were afraid that I was going to be overseas been arranged a long time in advance. while the bill was being debated. So you were making insinuations— Senator Collins says that Senator Chapman was in the United States when we concluded Senator Jacinta Collins—Deal with facts— the public hearings and she reflects on the not insinuations or inferences. senator’s absence in a way that is not proper. Senator FERGUSON—I do not mind For 17 days Senator Chapman went to, I interjections but it is very difficult to talk think, every day of the hearings. So to sug- over a constant barrage from the other side. gest that any government members of the The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT committee compromised the hearing in any (Senator Chapman)—I was going to suggest way needs to be refuted, and it was. that Senator Collins remain silent to allow Senator Jacinta Collins—You started it. Senator Ferguson to make his remarks. You started improper conduct. Senator FERGUSON—Can I just raise two Senator FERGUSON—Senator Collins other issues, because I have promised the says that we started it. I presume that she is whip on this side that I will not speak for referring to mention that was made of Senator more than 10 minutes. I refer to the Sherry’s non-attendance for two weeks while committee’s inquiry because it was spoken of he was on holiday in Bali. If this bill had at length by Senator Collins; Senator Mackay gone to the correct committee, if it had gone referred to it at length as well. There has been to the legislation committee, Senator Sherry an attempt in Senator Collins’s speech to would not have had to be put on this commit- suggest that she acquiesced to no-one in the tee to replace another senator. Senator Sherry course of this inquiry. On the final night of would have been a member of this committee our hearings when we had the President of the as a member of the legislation committee, and ACTU attend and respond to matters that had so would Senator Cook. Many would not been raised, and when I asked her a question have had to be replaced. There is a suggestion about the ACTU’s involvement and organisa- that Senator Sherry was desperate to be on tion of this inquiry, she said she objected to this hearing and reference was made as to the question. After I asked her why she how important it was that the shadow minister objected to the question it is fair to say that was on the inquiry. Let me say that in my she admitted that yes, she did see it as their time in this place shadow ministers have role to play an important part in the running rarely been on committees. For Senator of this inquiry. They are not her exact words Collins to use the example that a shadow but they are words that she used. minister was needed—and the shadow So right from the start to the finish of this minister then cleared out for two weeks—I whole inquiry and since this bill has been am afraid is drawing a very long bow. introduced, the Labor Party, and the ACTU in Further on in her speech she said she was particular, have seen this as an opportunity to very pleased to see that I had returned be- try to build up their falling stocks, to try to cause she was afraid that I was going to be somehow recruit a greater membership be- overseas while the bill was being debated. I cause their membership force has fallen to an am not sure what she was implying, but I was all-time low. All it has done has been to show part of a parliamentary delegation with two of that the ACTU’s involvement in this inquiry Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4235 certainly was far greater than its involvement The average economic growth during the in any other parliamentary inquiry that I have period of the Labor government was 3.7 per been involved with. The talk about 1,000 cent and only 2.2 per cent while John Howard submissions—people with form letters—that was Treasurer. Employment growth was 2.3 many people, responding out of the 2.3 per cent on average over 13 years of Labor million union members throughout Australia and employment growth under Howard as is an indication of just how much concern Treasurer was just 0.8 per cent. there is amongst workers in Australia with In the area of industrial disputes, during the this workplace relations reform bill. The best period of Labor, 200 working days were lost thing we can do is get on with it and get this per 1,000 employees. And what is the record bill passed so that people in Australia will of Howard while he was Treasurer? have far greater opportunity than they have had over the past 13 years of a Labor govern- The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT ment. (Senator Chapman)—Order! I think the correct terminology is ‘The Prime Minister’. Senator NEAL (New South Wales) (11.37 a.m.)—I rise in opposition to the bill. I must Senator NEAL—I take your guidance, Mr say that I was quite amused by Senator Acting Deputy President. I apologise for that Ferguson’s reference to ‘falling stocks for the omission. While Mr Howard was Treasurer, Labor Party’. In light of what has been three times as many days were lost by indus- happening over the last week in this chamber trial dispute as during the period of Labor, I would have thought that it was a term that that is, 600 working days per 1,000 employ- he might have avoided to save himself and ees—not a very proud record and not some- his friends further embarrassment. thing that I would be harking back to. The Prime Minister (Mr Howard) would Mr Howard is obviously nostalgic for this have us believe that there is currently an era. He is nostalgic for a period of confronta- environment of economic decline, racing tion, dispute and disharmony that he remem- wages growth and seething industrial dispute, bers from when he was Treasurer, when he and that this is a situation that has existed last held the reins of government. The vehicle since Labor won government in 1983. I just that he is using to return to this era is not want to put on the record Senator Panizza’s only his style of leadership but also this reference to my husband. He seems to have workplace relations bill. a particular obsession with him but I am glad This bill reduces the assistance previously to have his name put on the record. provided to workers to enable them to negoti- Mr Howard justifies his attack on the ate on an equal basis with employers. Austral- working families of Australia on this basis. ian workers are not greedy. They want He states that the scales are tilted in favour of just four simple things: a job, decent working employees and that he is just fixing the conditions, fair remuneration for the work that playing field up by tilting it in favour of they have done, and job security. This bill employers, which is going to put them on an undermines these four essentials. equal basis with workers. Nothing could be Mr Howard, the present Prime Minister, further from the truth. made a rock solid guarantee that no-one The period of 13 years of Labor govern- would be worse off. This must be one of the ment was marked not by industrial uproar and non-core promises that Mr Howard made dispute but by tranquil negotiation and co- because he certainly has shown by this bill operation between industry and workers. The that he has no intention of keeping it. The bill results achieved by the accords were an is complex, convoluted and long, and neither increasing social wage which took into ac- workers nor business will benefit. It will count both take-home wages and social create further administrative difficulties for benefits. The period was marked by employ- business and, at the same time, nurture and ment growth, increasing productivity and encourage industrial unrest. The bill threatens micro-economic reform. reasonable wage rises, promotion on merit, 4236 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 employee redress for unfair treatment at the utter disregard for international conventions hands of employers, and existing conditions. that the Australian government has signed—a I am not able to deal with the bill as a very distressing and humiliating course for me whole in the time available, but there are a as a member of the Australian parliament. number of changes that I really think need It is particularly sad to see that this conser- particular attention and maybe have not been vative Australian government is one of the focused on by previous speakers. The first is few governments of the world that is in the undermining of the principle of equal pay. accord with the Taliban of Afghanistan in I must confess that, despite ideological differ- pushing back the gains already achieved by ences with people on the other side, I would women. have thought that there were certain principles Senator Herron—Who has more females that are sacrosanct. But this bill and this in parliament? provision certainly indicate to me that that is no longer the case. Senator NEAL—The quest for equal pay for equal work has been an arduous one for This bill repeals the power of the Australian women in Australia—and I have to take up Industrial Relations Commission to make that interjection by the good senator who orders in relation to over-award payments to suggests that somehow, if they have more ensure that employees covered by the orders women in parliament, that is a substitute for will have equal remuneration for work of fair and equal conditions for women. Let me equal value. What that really means is that the tell you that it is not. The women of Australia commission can no longer ensure that men expect to be treated equally in terms of pay and women are paid the same amount. and other provisions. No matter how many This occurs by schedule 8 of the bill which women you have in parliament, women will repeals division 2 of part VIA of the Indus- not put up with these sorts of changes. trial Relations Act 1988. The effect of this schedule is to repeal schedule 6 of the Indus- The changes that have occurred for women trial Relations Act, which contains the Inter- in Australia have not come naturally. They national Labour Organisation’s Equal Remu- have been extraordinarily difficult and have neration Convention 1951 on Equal Remu- been brought about by endless activity and neration for Men and Women Workers for incremental change. Women did not receive Work of Equal Value. equal pay until 1969. The principle of equal pay for equal work across different jobs was Schedule 8 of the bill also repeals schedule not endorsed until 1972. 7 of the Industrial Relations Act, which contains the ILO’s Recommendation on Equal Senator Herron—Shame! Remuneration for Men and Women Workers Senator NEAL—You are right. It is a for Work of Equal Value. It also repeals the major shame. It is an even greater shame that use of the ‘Anti-Discrimination Conventions’ now in 1996 this government should see fit in definitions contained in the Equal Remunera- this bill to reverse that some 24 years on. tion Convention, the Convention on the Women still receive less in wages than men. Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination The Senate economics committee report stated against Women, the Convention concerning that in 1992 women still received only 84.5 Discrimination in respect of Employment and per cent of the total wages received by men. Occupation, articles 3 and 7 of the Interna- It is apparent that a larger part of this tional Covenant on Economic, Social and differential is made up of over-award pay- Cultural rights and it repeals the use of ‘Equal ments and cash benefits such as bonuses, Remuneration Convention’ in definitions. work cars and entertainment allowances. What all this means is that this government Women earn only 54.7 per cent of men’s no longer intends to comply with international equivalent over-award payments. These over- conventions with regard to wages equality. It award payments are exactly the provisions is a particularly sad thing to see this govern- that this bill overrides and says that the ment pursuing. It is showing complete and commission can no longer deal with. Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4237

It seems extraordinary to me that, in the ment of compensation. In other words, if a face of evidence that women are still not business that is not doing as well as might treated equally in the workplace, this govern- have been expected has not paid to a worker ment sees fit to further undermine the quest wages that it should have fairly paid or has for women to be treated equally and to have unfairly terminated the employment of a their work and talents equally recognised. worker, the worker will not be compensated. Currently, the Australian Industrial Relations It is quite extraordinary that in the industrial Commission has the power to make orders to arena principles such as this should be applied ensure there is equal remuneration for women when they are not applied in any other forum. in straightforward wages or in over-award Can you imagine if a plaintiff suing someone payments. The fact is that women will be for unlawfully injuring them was told that seriously affected by the repeal of this power. they would not be successful in their claim The present situation where women receive because the defendant’s financial position was only 85 per cent of wages received by men not particularly good? I do not think that will slip further and further as time passes and would be seen as reasonable by most people as their over-award payments are not kept and I certainly do not see that as being equal to those of men. reasonable in the industrial arena. There has been some suggestion by the The third restriction that is being introduced coalition government that the Human Rights by the bill is that the court has no power to and Equal Opportunity Commission will review, vary or set aside the contracts made somehow be able to fill this gap. But the fact by independent contractors. There will be no is that the Human Rights and Equal Oppor- independent industrial courts looking at these tunity Commission does not make industrial contracts—a major change from the present instruments and will not be able to in the situation. Workers entering into these sorts of future. Further, there is some debate that their contracts will be open to unfair conditions orders are not enforceable. The fact is that the and to dismissal virtually at a whim. Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Com- These are only two areas that I have dealt mission will not be able to take on the role of with. There is a vast array of others and I the Industrial Relations Commission in pre- hope that, from the length of the debate and venting the slide of women’s wages back- from the amount of interest that is being wards. shown in this bill, all the areas will be can- The second area of this bill that I find vassed. Unfortunately, some will be missed, particularly offensive is the changes in rela- but at least it will draw to the attention of tion to unfair dismissal. There has been some members of the community what is occurring argument put forward that, in fact, there are as a result of this bill and how they may well no major changes to unfair dismissal and that be affected. the remedies remain much the same. What the Labor will be putting forward a number of bill does in amending the Workplace Rela- amendments to the bill generally. But, in tions Act 1996 is to reduce the number of relation to the areas I have raised, there will people it applies to. The commission will not be major objection. I am hoping that that will have jurisdiction over employees that are not be dealt with at a later stage. In my view, the federal award employees, Commonwealth industrial relations system under Labor and public sector employees or territory employ- presently has worked effectively in the inter- ees. Many employees will not be covered by ests of both employers and employees. It the commission even when their state remedy seems unfortunate to me that this government is inadequate. should see fit to return industrial relations to Further, the commission’s power to com- unrest, disharmony and dispute when cooper- pensate unfairly dismissed employees is ation and negotiation are a much more effec- constrained. The commission must, under this tive way of getting things done. bill, have regard to the viability of the Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queensland) employer’s business when assessing for pay- (11.51 a.m.)—This Workplace Relations and 4238 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

Other Legislation Amendment Bill 1996 is specific policies in addition to our general perhaps the most important piece of legisla- philosophy. tion that has come before this chamber, In spite of this massive endorsement for the certainly in my time in the parliament. There Liberal Party and the National Party at the are many things that I would have liked to last election, we have a situation now where have spoken about in this debate, but for the reforms and the legislation that we reasons which I will mention briefly I have pledged to bring in have been hijacked by been asked to curtail my remarks quite con- people, like the Greens and the Democrats, siderably, as have all of those on the govern- who received virtually no support from the ment side. Australian public. It is because of this selfish As all honourable senators will know, the self-indulgence—if that is not a tautology—of coalition was elected by a huge majority at the Greens and the Democrats particularly, the last election. In my state of Queensland, chatting away on matters in which Australians the Labor Party is left with two electorates generally were not interested at the election, out of 26. That showed what the people of and because the Labor Party keeps regurgitat- my state thought about the Labor Party, it ing their tired old union line of class hatred, indicated what they wanted done and it arguments that really belong to yesteryear, indicated their support for our policies. that we are curtailed in what we on this side have to say. In the Senate generally, at the last election, the coalition received a unique vote of confi- Why are we curtailed? The passage of this dence and achieved an almost unique victory bill is the thing most commonly spoken about such that in this chamber we now have the everywhere I go in Queensland. No matter quite unusual situation where the coalition has where I go, no matter what problems are 37 seats, nine more than the Australian Labor confronting people, they always say to me, Party. Even if you add to that the Labor Party ‘Can you get that workplace reform bill hangers-on, the Australian Democrats, the through?’, because that is the underlying coalition still has more seats in this chamber element of what will get the country going than have the Labor Party and their hangers- and address the unemployment problem. on, the Democrats, combined. Wherever I go, wherever my colleagues go, it is the most raised matter. That is why I will Given the way this chamber is elected, that curtail my remarks—to get this bill voted on is quite unusual. Even if you add to that the and get it into operation so that Australia and left wing of the Labor Party, the Greens, they all Australians can benefit. still do not have more senators than the In the few minutes I have left I want to coalition has. That indicates the way in which mention briefly a couple of things. Firstly, all the people of Australia voted for the coalition of the arguments put so concisely and well in because they wanted us to implement our this debate by my colleagues I support. policy. Secondly, I want to mention that this bill, In my home state, the Liberal Party in the when it is passed, might bring about a change Senate received some 680,000 votes and the to the quite scandalous situation in the sugar National Party some 288,000 votes, a total of industry whereby the AWU holds that indus- almost a million votes. The Democrats, by try to ransom, insisting on compulsory union- contrast, could not get a quota in my state— ism; otherwise the cane will not be harvested. Hopefully, this bill will address that particular Senator O’Chee—With their leader! problem. Senator IAN MACDONALD—And, in Thirdly, an approach was made to me and spite of the best efforts of the ABC, could not to a lot of my colleagues—and, I am sure, to even get a quota. My own vote in the last people on the other side too—by a Christian Senate election was some 30 times greater group, the Brethren, which has some real than that achieved by the Tasmanian Greens. concerns, not about our legislation, but about We were elected because of a number of industrial relations generally. They have said, Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4239 as I put to Mr Reith, that some concessions Where the illogicality comes about in should be made in this bill, as has happened Senator Ray’s comments is that the actions in the past, to ensure that the unions do not that he complains about, this driving down of interfere in workplaces in a way that inter- conditions and driving down of safety stand- feres with people’s religious beliefs. I hope ards, all happened under your government, that Mr Reith is able to take that into account. under the great workers’ government, under the Labor government—and Senator Ray Senator Jacinta Collins—The master- complains about it. If you people knew so servant relationship. Do you support the much about it, why didn’t you do something master-servant relationship? about the working conditions? So that argu- Senator IAN MACDONALD—I am ment is quite illogical. I indicated to Senator talking about legislation that the New South MacGibbon that in my contribution I would Wales Labor government has supported. If make a brief reference to that. your interjection is arguing with the New I note in passing that I do not think the South Wales Labor government, you should Labor Party have declared their interest in this make that point. debate. This debate, from the Labor Party’s The next point I will briefly mention— point of view, is all about enhancing and although I did want to talk about it at more retaining the powers and privileges of the length—is that of the terrible waterfront union movement—and all the rorts they are situation, one which, hopefully, can be over- involved in. Mr Deputy President, would you come by this bill. The people working on the believe that Senator Carr, Senator Childs, waterfront, the wharfies, are getting average Senator Conroy, Senator Cook, Senator wages of $75,000 and their supervisors some Evans, Senator Foreman, Senator Forshaw, $90,000. Consequently, the ordinary, average, Senator Gibbs, Senator Hogg, Senator Lundy, battling Australian—the sort of person who Senator Mackay, Senator McKiernan, Senator will be voting in Lindsay on Saturday—pays Murphy, Senator Neal, Senator O’Brien, more for all of the goods that come into Senator Schacht and Senator Sherry all came Australia because of present waterfront prac- to this parliament out of the union movement. tices. I certainly hope that with the passage of There is nothing wrong with the union move- this bill ordinary, average Australians, battling ment— Australians, can get a better deal on the goods Senator Jacinta Collins—I did, too! they buy because the enormous add-on costs Senator IAN MACDONALD—There are currently incurred across the waterfront will some others. I am sorry if I have missed them not be there. out; I do apologise. It shows the narrowness A colleague from Queensland, Senator of views that come from the Labor Party and MacGibbon, has asked me to refer briefly in the way the Labor Party are so determined to my presentation to a pretty illogical argument oppose this so that the privileges and powers put by Senator Ray in his speech. I mention of their old union colleagues can be retained. it because Senator Ray usually can be relied I would have hoped that they would at least upon for at least logical arguments in this have had the courtesy to get up and declare chamber. But in his contribution to this debate their interest in this matter before the debate he said, according to the AAP report, in began. relation to the Seaview Air disaster, that the This bill, when it is passed, will bring back aeroplane company exploited the vulnerability some freedom of choice to workers. If they of pilots in order to drive down conditions want to join a union they will be perfectly and safety standards. He later went on to say entitled to and will do so with the encourage- that unscrupulous employers would misuse ment of all senators on this side but if they do their powers over employees for commercial not want to join a union they will not be gain. He also said that, currently, this exploit- forced to. That is about freedom of choice; ation is illegal and able to be scrutinised by that is what the Australian nation and the union presence. Australian psyche are all about. 4240 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

It saddens me to see that the Labor Party The parliament has accepted that the bal- are so determined to keep that choice away ance of interests would otherwise be unfairly from the workers. With those few remarks in tilted in favour of employers. But this bill the brief time available to me I want to urge takes us back to prior to 1904, by rejecting senators to support this bill in its entirety so the years of development of industrial rela- Australia can get going, so the economy can tions practice in this country. This bill ele- get the boost it needs and so we can look vates once again the individual employment forward to better employment figures in the contract to a place where it is the pre-eminent future. method of regulating industrial relations. Senator CHRIS EVANS (Western Austral- The protection provided by our industrial ia) (12.02 p.m.)—I rise to speak in opposition relations system is to be removed to allow the to the Workplace Relations and Other Legisla- free interplay of market forces. The bill goes tion Amendment Bill. This bill represents the much further than merely providing the repudiation of principles that have been at the choice the coalition members claim. It sys- core of my beliefs and political activity since tematically dismantles any protection against I was a high school student. Not in response the power of the employer in the relationship to Senator Macdonald, I had prepared to say by undermining collective bargaining, restrict- that I declare proudly my membership of the ing the rights and roles of trade unions, United Firefighters Union of Australia and the emasculating the role of the industrial com- Miscellaneous Workers Union of Australia. mission and shrouding the agreement process- My interest is not a pecuniary one; it is not es in secrecy. as some coalition members have suggested I cannot in this speech discuss the areas that part of some plot to protect union power and I think will be the key issues of debate in the influence; it is a reflection of my experiences, Senate when we get commence the committee my beliefs, my philosophy, my ideology and stages of this bill because I am unaware of my prejudice. The right to organise and take what concessions the government has made in collective action is essential to the develop- its secret negotiations with the Democrats. So ment of the Australian trade union movement I have to stick to generalities at this stage and the Australian Labor Party. I believe that because, unlike Senator Macdonald, I know in unity is strength. I recognise the value of as everyone else does that the bill will not be collective action; that in a less than perfect passed in its entirety. world where power is a factor, individuals, by The fundamental dispute in this debate, in combining together, can assert their rights my view, is the withdrawal of legislative with greater effect and success without dimin- support for the encouragement and promotion ishing the rights of any individual member of of collective bargaining and the bill’s replace- that group. ment of that approach by giving primacy to Australian society has developed with that individual workplace agreements. Those of us principle as one of its cores. The Conciliation who support collective bargaining start from and Arbitration Act and its successors have the premise that an individual employee or since 1904 had among their primary objects prospective employee is at a power disadvan- the encouragement of the formation of trade tage in negotiating employment conditions unions of employers and employees. For 93 with their employer. By joining together in a years the Australian Senate has held that union workers can bargain collectively with Australian workers need the protection of their employer and a more equal power trade unions and need the right to bargain relationship is established. That is why, as collectively. That has been a view shared by part of regulating industrial relations in this both sides in the parliament. Parliament has country, we have always provided positive continued to insist on ensuring these encouragement for the formation and activi- protections against the unfettered making of ties of unions. As a counter measure we have employment contracts between Australian always then sought to regulate their activities workers and their employers. and make them accountable. Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4241

Employers and those who represent their cases of highly skilled workers who might interests have long feared the impact of the have skills that are in demand this is not combination of workers and collective action. always the case; but at a time of 8½ per cent The English combination acts were designed unemployment, it is the case for most workers to prevent workers combining in order to in Australian society. advocate their rights. Civilised society has Therefore, those that argue for individual long since recognised the fundamental import- employment contracts without an award or ance of collective bargaining in redressing the safety net argue, in my view, for the institu- unfair power balance faced by individual tionalisation of unfair bargains in the work- workers in dealing with their employers. place. They represent sectional employers Australia’s international obligations to encour- interests and not the broader community age and promote collective bargaining are interests that this parliament should be con- clear and unequivocal. These obligations cerning itself with. include support for the principle that collec- tive representation and collective agreements Many other provisions of the bill serve to or awards should be promoted and encour- confirm the point that there is no obligation aged, and have primacy over individual on the employer to bargain at all let alone in representation and individual agreements. good faith. The bill severely curtails workers’ ability to seek third party intervention in the Secondly, that employees and their unions case of a dispute, a worker’s right to take must be lawfully able to engage in industrial industrial action is curtailed and the rights of action to support and advance claims made in unions to organise are severely restricted and the bargaining process. Thirdly, in keeping limited. The bill is about removing the 90- with the principles of freedom of association year-old protection of workers from exploit- and the right to negotiate freely about terms ation in individual bargaining situations where and conditions of employment, the scope of the employer enjoys superior bargaining collective agreements ought not to be restrict- power. ed by the authorities. It is not purely for parochial reasons that I This bill clearly fails to give effect to these now turn to a discussion of industrial legisla- principles and fails to honour Australia’s tion in my own state of Western Australia. international obligations. The bill instead There are a number of good reasons why a gives primacy to individual contracts of discussion of the experience in WA under the employment. These individual contracts are State Workplace Agreements Act 1993 and no longer an adjunct established over and the Minimum Conditions of Employment Act above award entitlements but will be encour- 1993 are highly relevant. aged as a superior method of regulating industrial relations. The framework of the bill Firstly, the provisions of those two acts are provides encouragement for the development similar to those contained in the workplace of Australian workplace agreements negoti- relations bill. Secondly, John Howard’s stated ated without the involvement of unions and view is that he ‘would like to see, throughout largely without the involvement of the Indus- Australia, an industrial relations system that trial Relations Commission. is largely similar to what the coalition govern- Conservatives always seek to represent this ment has implemented in Western Australia’. attack on workers’ rights to act collectively as Thirdly, the workplace relations bill provides redressing the imbalance that they claim was that a registered agreement in a state juris- brought about by the power of unions. If they diction overrides a federal award. are to justify this bill, they must do more than Therefore, the bill not only seeks to reflect assert that unions are too powerful. They must the system of primacy of individual contracts establish their case that an individual worker contained in the WA act, it gives further or job applicant in seeking an employment effect to that system by providing for it to contract with an employer is not in an un- operate additionally in the place of any equal bargaining position. I accept that in federal award. The bill will institutionalise 4242 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 and encourage individual work contracts the unskilled is quite different. Their experi- permitted under the WA legislation. ences under workplace agreements are more Fourthly, the claims made on behalf of this those of having been exploited, having their bill are largely the same as those made on conditions reduced and having very little behalf of the WA legislation at the time of its ability to negotiate those conditions. introduction. Claims, I might add, that are not The key issue advocated on behalf of this seriously argued by anyone these days. Pre- bill, as with the WA legislation, is this argu- eminent among those claims are that: the ment about choice. In Western Australia the employees will be offered choice and flexi- legislation was much heralded as providing bility in the workplace; and that no employee choice for employees. But a legal opinion will lose wages or be worse off as a result of written by Ian Viner QC and Regno Le Maire the legislation. The WA experience clearly QC for the trades and labour council clearly proves that those claims cannot be met. The established that there was no protection and experience of WA workers is quite different no choice for employees under the WA to that claimed by proponents of this bill. legislation. They could sign or resign; they There is a difficulty in establishing the case could sign a contract or not accept a job; and either way based on the experience in West- no recourse was available to them. Our ern Australia because of secrecy provisions experience has been that there has been no similar to those contained in this bill. It is recourse for these individuals. very hard to get a clear analysis of the impact Large numbers of people in Western Aus- of workplace agreements in Western Austral- tralia have gone public on their experiences ia. I and my office have done a lot of work under the individual contract system explain- collecting case studies, examining their impact ing where they have been refused a job and comparing them with the relevant awards. because they refused to take a workplace A number of other groups have tried to do the agreement, or where they had their conditions same. But you have to search out and get diminished as a result of being forced to sign private access to those agreements because a workplace agreement if they wanted to take they are not publicly available. or retain a job. It is now common to see signs I want to make it clear that there is a in shop windows which make it clear that if dichotomy in experience of workplace agree- you want to apply for a job in that particular ments under the WA legislation. The first shop or establishment, you will be required to group is that in highly unionised, well paid sign a workplace agreement. employment areas where a number of employ- No-one seriously argues any longer that ers have successfully bought out the role of there is a choice for employees in Western unions. They have gone to a group of workers Australia. They either take the agreement, and said, ‘In return for you signing individual which is in many cases inferior to the workplace agreements, we will increase your award, or they do not get or keep the job. total rate of pay and conditions instead of the Many employees are now faced by standard- award or agreement system that was in place.’ ised contracts drawn up by organisations such That has been the experience in a number of as the WA chamber of industry. All the mining company operations. It has largely employer does is fill in the amount of the occurred in cases where there were highly hourly rate and hand it to the employee. Some unionised work forces on very good wages contracts are less than a page long and barely and conditions. Some of those people would cover the most basic conditions. It is clearly see the system as having delivered them established that the contracts in place in benefits because their individual contract is Western Australia provide for a ‘sign or now superior to that of the award. Employers resign’ situation or a ‘sign or no job’ situation have decided, to rid themselves of unions, by in terms of individual workplace agreements. paying, in some cases, a very high price. This bill gives legitimacy to those contracts. There is a real dichotomy in the system This bill seeks to replicate them and it seeks because the experience of the low paid and to give force to their operation in Western Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4243

Australia so that even a federal award proper- days, Christmas Day or whenever the one rate ly obtained can be overridden by a worker is applicable. So while the hourly rate might signing an individual contract placed before be slightly higher, the total remuneration them by an employer. The government is package at the end of the week for a worker seeking by this bill to institutionalise and in a job which does not involve working further spread the workplace agreements Monday to Friday, nine to five, is consider- experience we have had in Western Australia, ably lower. an experience which leaves no choice to The places where these contracts have employees, which leaves them in a totally become popular have been in those sorts of unequal bargaining position and which has industries where workers are working unso- seen many thousands of Western Australian ciable hours. They are not getting rewarded workers exploited. for those unsociable hours. They are entering The other claim often made in support of into agreements which provide only for a base the bill is that no worker will be worse off. hourly rate to be paid on all occasions. For But this bill does nothing to provide that, they are often employed as casuals. They minimum conditions for those on workplace are employed as casuals despite the fact they agreements in Western Australia that will be might work 40 hours or more a week and recognised under the bill. The list of they might have worked for the employer for minimum conditions contained in the bill to many years. apply to AWAs do not apply to individual What we are seeing is the total downgrad- contracts operating in Western Australia and ing of conditions in Western Australia, the which are recognised and given primacy by abolition of penalty rates, overtime rates, this bill. There are no provisions for a no annual leave—a whole range of conditions disadvantage test applying to those WA that we would consider minimums and which contracts and there are no provisions for the federal government in this bill says ought providing for conciliatory, arbitral or judicial to be minimum conditions in terms of the review of those contracts. operation of AWAs. As I said, the secrecy provisions make it The TLC commissioned report confirms very hard to do a proper analysis of Western that pattern of activity and confirms that Australian experience, but two reports have workers, despite on occasions getting slightly been completed. One is by the Commissioner higher hourly rates, are in fact having their of Workplace Agreements, Summary Statistics total package largely reduced, which has an and Other Information, June 1996. The other enormous impact on their way of life. A large is a WA TLC commissioned report by the number of them are having to work a huge Australian Centre for Industrial Relations number of hours as a result of signing the Research and Training compiled in late 1995. contract. As I say, they are largely employed The Commissioner of Workplace Agreements’ on a casual basis. This trend has been con- report claims that the majority of agreements firmed by the Workplace Agreements Com- provide for a higher rate of pay. I think he missioner, who indicated, by way of a letter claims that is the case in 83 per cent of to the West Australian on 12 February 1996: workplace agreements. ...insome of the cases the agreement offered was Although I cannot check the figures because less than award wages and conditions and that this of the secrecy provisions, I suspect they are trend was increasing in industries that employed probably right. My experience of looking at casuals on a regular basis. agreements is that what usually occurs is that Clearly, in Western Australia, those with low the contract replaces the penalties, the over- bargaining power are having inferior work- time and all the other conditions applicable place agreements forced upon them. The under the award with a flat hourly rate. So it young, women, migrants and unskilled work- is easy for the employer to offer a slightly ers all face accepting contracts that diminish higher base hourly rate because that is the award conditions if they are to work. This bill only rate payable on all occasions. On Sun- incorporates that system into the federal 4244 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 framework and seeks to replicate it in those tions in promoting individual contracts and states which currently do not have a similar then pretend a collective bargaining system system. still exists. A fundamental clash of principles Finally, I wish to address some remarks to is at stake. There is no win-win situation for the role of the Democrats in this debate. I am the Democrats and the Liberals here. One not one of those who seek to constantly must lose or one must sell out their principles. denigrate the role that the Democrats play in (Time expired) this chamber, but they must recognise the Senator MURRAY (Western Australia) fundamental conflict at the heart of this bill. (12.22 p.m.)—Possibly no issue is guaranteed As I said earlier, this bill is about repudiating to get a unionist and an employer hotter under the right to collectively bargain and the right the collar faster than the prospect of changes of unions to organise. It seeks to overturn 90 to workplace relations. I make that statement years of encouragement and protection of with some confidence, having spent the first those rights and, in place, elevate the individ- seven weeks of my time as a senator sitting ual work contract. on the Senate committee inquiring into this I know the Democrats have determined that bill. they have a political imperative to let this bill pass. They have decided they will not deny That committee proved to be an incredibly the government its Telstra sale and also its valuable experience. For anyone with an open industrial relations legislation. They have mind and the interests of our society at heart, announced they will give the government it provided a conduit for concerned unions, their bill largely intact. It is obvious that the business and community groups—and a wide secret negotiations they are holding with the range of concerned workers and individuals— government on the package have not gone as to participate in Senate decision making on a smoothly as hoped. I must say I am not vitally important piece of legislation. surprised. That is because the core principles of this bill must be anathema to the Demo- The Democrats approached the committee crats. They have been the self-styled cham- process with an open mind, with a genuine pions of the battler. They have claimed to desire to identify the strengths and weakness- represent those in society without power—the es of the current system and to make recom- unemployed, the consumer, the student, the mendations which improve the current act and social security recipient. the proposed bill. In analysing the evidence, we started from three basic principles already They have argued for countervailing inter- alluded to by Senator Kernot. They were vention in the market to protect the weak and support for a strong award system, support for those without power on numerous occasions. an independent umpire in the Australian They have done this so often that Senator Ian Industrial Relations Commission and support Macdonald often refers to the Democrats as for John Howard’s pre-election commitment the fourth faction of the Labor Party. I know that no worker be made worse off as a result how much that hurts both of us. But it does of the government’s reforms. From those reflect the fact that we agree on some of those principles and based on that evidence, I fundamental principles. submitted a supplementary report to the John Howard cannot claim victory in his Senate committee report outlining the Demo- long campaign on industrial relations without crats’ response to the workplace relations bill. the core principles of the bill surviving the Senate. The Democrats cannot give him what It was these recommendations which we he needs without abandoning the philosophy carried into our consultations with the they have championed in the Senate for years. Minister for Industrial Relations, Peter Reith. This fundamental attack on basic employee They are the recommendations which I be- rights which are recognised by the ILO and lieve will, if accepted, ensure that an unfair all civilised society cannot be ameliorated. and unbalanced workplace relations bill You cannot patch over the inherent contradic- becomes a positive and evolutionary piece of Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4245 reform legislation worthy of the support of the AIRC as the umpire and watchdog. This is Senate. particularly important in the vetting of Aus- As Senator Kernot has said, our discussions tralian workplace agreements. Workers, with the government do not preclude a full particularly the two-thirds of workers not debate of the bill in the committee stage in represented by unions, need to know that they the Senate. Some senators in the second are not being dudded by their industrial reading debate, out of inexperience, inadequa- arrangements. Every conservative state but cy or irrelevancy, have been motivated to Victoria has provided pre-approval vetting of question this consultative process. We felt that workplace agreements, and this bill should private consultations with the government also do so. The fact that the bill as it stands have been essential to permit open and frank does not do that is one of the worst failings dialogue with them designed to overcome the of Mr Reith’s package. many conflicts that arise from our often The president of the Victorian Employee opposing philosophies. I can say that, after Relations Commission has been very critical over 45 hours of meetings over eight weeks, of the lack of vetting of agreements under her we have comprehensively canvassed all major act. Many employees, she argues, believe that elements of the bill. The outcome of this agreements which have been lodged with the consultation and the amendments which we commission have been approved by it when expect to flow from it will be fully disclosed this is not the case at all. As a result, many when they are finalised before the committee employees end up accepting substandard debate commences. conditions in the mistaken belief that they I want to briefly outline the 10 most essen- have been approved. Mr Reith’s bill, requiring tial ingredients for a bill to be passed by this AWAs to be merely lodged with the employ- Senate with Democrat support. The first key ment advocate, would result in similar principle is a fair, up-to-date, enforceable and misunderstandings. user-friendly award system. The award system Our third key principle is providing an must be capable of covering the essential appropriate interchange between the state and elements of the employment relationship. In federal systems. The Democrats have in the areas like public sector employment, this past supported the fast-track arrangements for should be able to take the form of a paid rates employees to move from the substandard award covering all conditions of employment Victorian system to the federal industrial and the actual rates of pay. relations system. That process of transfer of We support the strengthening of the award workers is now almost complete and should modernisation process commenced by the be allowed to conclude. The fast-track provi- previous Labor government. The process in sions also included the ability to obtain this bill is more effective than Labor’s section interim federal awards for pre-election where 150A process. We support a process that will state award coverage was threatened. These lead to awards which are easier to understand provisions also remain of value. and easiest to apply. The government has put The bill as its stands seeks to not just up a model of award modernisation and appeal these provisions but to allow state simplification which we believe at this stage agreements to override federal awards. These is too draconian. It appears to leave out many provisions create major problems for the matters which are necessary for the effective Democrats, as was outlined in the speech by operation of awards. Because the section 89A my colleague Senator Allison. list of allowable award matters also acts as a Our fourth area of concern is the ability of limiter on the arbitration powers of the com- unions to organise effectively and responsibly. mission, it also fails to ensure that the com- This bill contains a range of anti-union mission can intervene to correct employment provisions which will make this much more conditions which are harsh or unjust. difficult. The proposals to do away with the This leads to the second key Democrat conveniently belong rule and open up union principle—maintaining the central role of the coverage—to severely restrict union rights to 4246 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 enter and inspect workplaces—will make life low all act to do this and should be taken out extremely difficult for unions. of awards. Industrial action could dramatically increase Provisions which would significantly im- as unions try to prove how hairy chested they prove the lot of part-time workers—the are as they seek to poach members off each guarantee of regularity of hours and pro rata other. Combined with the proposals to set up entitlements—should be required in all awards enterprise branches, the confusing disamalga- and agreements by the legislation. That way mation provisions and the open-ended allow- we can prevent the casualisation of part-time ance of new unions to open up, union offi- employment. cials can expect to be tied up in legal wran- In relation to young workers, the Democrats gling in the courts for years as a result of this in 1993 supported the insertion of the provi- bill. sion in the current act giving the parties three The Democrats support freedom of associa- years to eliminate junior rates in awards. It tion and the removal of compulsory unionism, remains, in our view, a fundamental unfair- but an orderly conduct of trade union affairs ness that a 15-year-old worker can be paid remains an essential element of a workable just half the salary of a 21-year-old, working industrial relations system in Australia. In the side by side and doing exactly the same work. committee stage we will be seeking a fairer We believe that junior wages should be balance for the rights of trade unions. replaced by wages rates determined on the basis of skills, schooling, experience and The fifth key principle is the establishment work value under the supervision of the of a decent no disadvantage test for AWAs Industrial Relations Commission. My col- and certified agreements to ensure that work- league Senator Stott Despoja has already ers are not worse off as a result of entering outlined our views on this. into agreements. We believe that such a test In relation to independent contractors, the must have three elements. It must firstly Democrats believe that there should be access ensure that the conditions in the agreement, to a low cost dispute resolution process, considered as a whole, are not inferior to the allowing contractors and other small busines- conditions provided in the award. The test is ses to challenge unfair contracts. Such a the one currently applied to certified agree- jurisdiction could be modelled on the provi- ments. sions in the New South Wales and Queens- It must secondly ensure that the workers land acts—inserted, I might add, by conserva- have genuinely agreed to the agreement. This tive governments. The prospect of repealing goes further than the government’s proposed the provisions in the Industrial Relations Act very narrow test of looking at whether the for independent contractors and replacing agreement was entered into under duress. It them with nothing but the common law is, in looks at the whole negotiating process instead. my view, simply bad policy. It must thirdly not discriminate against or The seventh key principle is enforcement. unfairly exclude different classes of workers. The Democrats believe that the flip side of The special interests of disadvantaged workers allowing responsible unions to organise should be taken into account. without undue restriction is that irresponsible The sixth key principle the Democrats unionism, irresponsible industrial action, is believe must be reflected in the legislation is subject to appropriate and effective directions. the protection of particular groups of workers The commission does now have the power to with special needs. I would list three groups make orders, but too often unions have of workers—part-timers, juniors and inde- ignored commission orders. The Democrats pendent contractors. Awards should not be believe that the powers of enforcement of allowed to restrict access to part-time employ- AIRC orders need to be strengthened. ment to suit the whim of trade union officials. We are also prepared to review the oper- Quotas, minimum hours which are set too ation of current secondary boycott provisions high and maximum hours which are set too inserted three years ago to ensure that they Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4247 are working effectively. In doing so, we The tenth and final principle is ensuring would always insist that the enforcement that the bill improves the balance between provisions properly balance the commercial work and family responsibilities. The overall considerations of the employer and the indus- package of principles I have outlined will go trial considerations of the dispute, particularly some way to achieving this, but more pro- boycotts that are essentially primary in nature. active measures should also be enacted to We will oppose the extension of secondary ensure that this important object of the bill boycott provisions to cover consumer and actually means something. This we believe environmental boycotts and primary boycotts. should be developed as an effective role of To pick up such provisions in the Trade the employment advocate. Practices Act or the Industrial Relations Act The Democrats will be proposing a number and to threaten environmental protesters or of amendments in the committee stage. These consumer lobbyists with injunctions, contempt are still being developed in discussions with of court and civil damages is, in our view, a the government, the Department of Industrial draconian restriction on the right to peaceful Relations, the ACTU, the ACCI and others. protest and must be opposed. We aim to ensure, through our consultations The eighth key principle is ensuring that the with government and through our amend- industrial relations system is responsive to the ments, that the bill is fair and balanced while needs of small business. I have already moving reform of industrial relations and spoken about the need to put some teeth into workplace practices forward. the modernisation of the award system. Given We want to ensure that the capacity for that the majority of small businesses rely on productivity improvement is maximised by the award system for key information about this bill, while also ensuring that workers and the labour market, this is vitally important. their families are adequately protected. That But I think we should also be encouraging balancing act is not an easy one. I do not small business to improve their workplace expect to win any popularity contests by relations and arrangements through formalised attempting it. My aim, and the aim of the but low cost enterprise bargaining. Small Democrats, is to ensure that the review of this businesses wanting to negotiate an agreement legislation is governed by good policy and at present face high potential costs engaging practicality, not by ideology or political consultants or employer bodies to assist them. grandstanding. I am confident that the result The absence of unions from this sector—90 of the committee stage review by the Senate per cent of small business employees are not will be a much fairer and more workable bill in unions, just as 70 per cent of small busi- than the one presently before us. nesses are not in employer organisations— Senator CALVERT (Tasmania) (12.37 means deals are often done in an information p.m.)—I had not intended to speak on this vacuum to the detriment of both parties. The bill, but since the minister, Senator Hill, will Democrats believe that a pro-active employ- be coming into the chamber in a couple of ment advocate, geared specifically to the minutes, I think it is appropriate for me to needs of this growing non-unionised sector, speak rather than to finish the debate off now. could play a major role in encouraging and I make a couple of points. I did attend the mediating quality enterprise agreements for hearing on this bill in Hobart. I was certainly small business. impressed by the evidence given by the The ninth key principle, also important to Tasmanian Chamber of Commerce. They put small business, is reform of unfair dismissals. forward some very telling points. I was rather The Democrats support the thrust of the amused—and this seemed to be the case government’s legislation, provided the govern- around a lot of the other hearings—that the ment guarantees that the system will still be local unions had private meetings with the open to Victorian employees. There are only Labor members of the committee outside to a few minor technical issues which we will put their points of view rather than put them deal with in the committee stage. inside. I did take note of the excellent evi- 4248 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 dence that was given by the Trades and Senator CALVERT—Well, you go and Labour Council in Hobart. I am just trying to talk to the small businesses, Senator Forshaw, think of a name. and see what they have to say. The major Senator Foreman—Don’t you know them complaint they have about the industrial all? relations laws are the unfair dismissal laws. They are working against small business. I Senator CALVERT—I do not know them seek leave to continue my remarks later. all by name, Senator. I was just trying to think who has taken over the position of Leave granted; debate adjourned. secretary to the Trades and Labour Council EAST TIMOR down there, replacing Jim Bacon. Senator HILL (South Australia—Leader of There have been something like 13 speakers the Government in the Senate) (12.40 p.m.)— since we started re-debating this bill. Most of Mr Acting Deputy President, I simply want to them, naturally, have come from the opposi- seek leave to have incorporated a few com- tion side. Obviously, as has been said before ments on behalf of the government in relation in debate here on vested interests, most of the to a motion that was passed earlier this day, senators on the other side do have a trade which was a motion moved by Senator Brown union background, so it is not unusual that congratulating Bishop Belo and Mr Jose they should be commenting at length on this Ramos Horta on their Nobel prize. Unfortu- bill. nately, Senator Brown has, as a result of that Senator Jacinta Collins—Come on! You resolution, sought to misrepresent the govern- must know something about the bill. ment’s position on East Timor. I think it is Senator CALVERT—Yes, there is a lot important that the government’s position, about the bill. The unfair dismissal laws are although it is well known by all, is neverthe- certainly in need of change. Like my col- less restated on the record. league, who I heard earlier— Leave granted. Senator Jacinta Collins—You have to be The statement read as follows— able to say more than him on the bill. The Foreign Minister offered congratulations to the Senator CALVERT—Oh, no, Senator Ian Nobel Laureates upon hearing of the award’s Macdonald was making the point that, wher- conferment ever he goes in Queensland, he gets a lot of . the Government shares with the Laureates a people asking about that. To those senators commitment to a peaceful East Timor over on the other side who may be interested, We hope this award will stimulate the parties I relate the story of a hairdresser next to my concerned to make further efforts to resolve office. outstanding differences. Senator Jacinta Collins—That is a touchy For its part, the Australian Government will subject—the hairdressers. continue to support efforts to reach a just and internationally acceptable solution of the East Senator CALVERT—The hairdresser had Timor issue an employee who was working in his shop Successive Australian Governments have recog- and stealing money. He dismissed her, she nised Indonesia’s sovereignty over East Timor since took him to the tribunal and he had to re- 1979. instate her. Unfortunately, the same thing There has been no change to the Government’s happened again further down the track. It policy on East Timor including the East Timorese ended up that he went to court twice. He is right of self-determination. From the outset, in now being charged. It has cost him the best 1975/6 Australia made it clear that it did not part of $30,000. Those kinds of things just approve of the way in which Indonesia incorporated East Timor into Indonesia, but we do acknowledge have to be taken out and that is why these that any form of self-determination will need the unfair dismissal laws are creating such a cooperation of the Indonesian Government problem for small businesses. . how that might be exercised is a matter for the Senator Forshaw—What a lot of garbage. UN, working with the parties concerned Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4249

This Government believes—as has its predecessors It is of course a matter for the Indonesian Govern- over the last 17 years ment to take follow up action on the Commission’s Report . that the best means of bringing about positive change in East Timor and encouraging peace . the Australian Government urges the appro- is by recognising the reality of Indonesian priate authorities in Indonesia to take the sovereignty Commission’s findings fully into account and pursue outstanding issues identified in . that in no way indicates approval of the way the Report. Indonesia incorporated East Timor into Indonesia MATTERS OF PUBLIC INTEREST . nor does it derogate from the Government’s The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT recognition of the valiant efforts of (Senator Childs)—I call on matters of public Timorese who fought alongside Australian interest. soldiers during World War II. Northern Territory The Government’s policy towards the East Timor issue includes acknowledgment of the continuing Senator TAMBLING (Northern Terri- right of the East Timorese to self-determination tory—Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister The Government believes that there are several for Social Security) (12.42 p.m.)—I would aspects of the currently unsatisfactory situation in like to take the opportunity today to address the territory which clearly need to be addressed by the issue of statehood for the Northern Terri- the Indonesian Government tory. As a senator for the Northern Territory, . including a significant reduction in the size I am pleased to take this opportunity—and I of the military presence; enhanced religious will seek leave at the end of my speech to do tolerance and administrative arrangements this—to table the final draft constitution for which accord more influence and autonomy the Northern Territory, which has been pre- to indigenous East Timorese. pared by the Northern Territory Legislative The Government has emphasised to the Indonesian Assembly’s Sessional Committee on Constitu- Government that East Timor is an issue of concern tional Development. I will also seek leave to to Australia and made clear that the Coalition table an accompanying speech that the chair- Government would take a constructive, results- oriented approach to the issue. man of the committee, the Hon. Steve Hatton MLA, delivered in the Northern Territory . the Government will continue to support parliament when the final draft constitution efforts to reach a just and internationally was tabled in August. acceptable solution of the East Timor issue My interest in tabling the final draft consti- The Government welcomes the publication on 12 October of the final report of the Indonesian tution and Mr Hatton’s speech in this place is National Human Rights Commission (KOMNAS twofold. Firstly, it is to inform my fellow HAM) on the 27 July takeover of the headquarters senators and members of the House of Repre- of the Indonesian Democratic Party (PDI) and the sentatives of the progress the Northern Terri- subsequent rioting in Jakarta tory parliament has made in the area of The Commission’s report gives a considered and constitutional development. Secondly, and carefully weighted assessment of the background more importantly, it is to highlight the futility to the 27 July events, comments frankly on its of the current debate surrounding the proposal causes and details breaches of several basic human that the federal parliament override the North- rights that occurred in the disturbances. ern Territory parliament’s legislative capacity The Commission’s Report includes sensible recom- in light of the Territory’s current move to- mendations concerning follow up action in a wards statehood. I refer very particularly to number of areas; in particular it calls for the debate that is currently being proposed in . accounting for the whereabouts and well- the House of Representatives on the matter of being of the 23 missing; explaining the five voluntary euthanasia. deaths and charging those responsible; assistance to those who lost property or Upon attaining statehood, the parliament of business and asking that any arrests, deten- the Northern Territory will be within its tions and interrogation be carried out in full rights, as all states currently are, to legislate conformity with the law. without interference from the federal par- 4250 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 liament. Given the constitutional maturity of of Aboriginal people under an orderly and mutually the territory that I would argue very strongly recognised system of governance and laws by for, I envisage—as do my Northern Territory which they lived and defined their relationships between each other, with the land and with their parliamentary colleagues—that statehood for natural and spiritual environment. the Northern Territory will not be too far over the horizon. This will be the first Australian constitution to acknowledge the prior existence of Abo- This is certainly a view held strongly by the riginal society. Chief Minister of the Northern Territory, Shane Stone, whose leadership in recent years Throughout the consultative process, the has steered the Northern Territory on a new committee received a great deal of representa- and determined course towards statehood. tions from Aboriginal people who were concerned about the implications statehood I would now like to take some time to would have on issues such as land rights and examine a number of the unique features of the protection of sacred sites. In order to safe- this final draft constitution before revisiting guard existing Aboriginal interests and rights the significance of the Northern Territory’s from amendment by future state parliaments constitutional maturity in relation to this of the Northern Territory, the committee has parliament. borrowed the concept of ‘organic law’ from The Northern Territory has a proud history the Papua New Guinea system of government. of constitutional development as progressed In the transition towards statehood, the by the Northern Territory Legislative Assem- committee has envisaged that existing bly since its inception in 1974. At that time, Commonwealth acts pertinent to the interests I was personally involved in the Northern of Aboriginal people, for example the Land Territory parliament as a member of the initial Rights Act, will be transferred across to the working party on constitutional issues which Northern Territory and be enacted as organic involved the federal and Northern Territory law. The concept of organic law, as it applies parliaments. in this context, was explained by Mr Hatton In 1978, self-government was achieved in his tabling speech as follows: under the Everingham-Perron leadership. . . . such a law can only be amended in the future Since 1985, the Northern Territory Legislative with bipartisan support under a special majority in Assembly’s Sessional Committee on Constitu- the parliament, and following extensive opportuni- tional Development has published a number ties for public debate and after inquiry and report of discussion and information papers in the by a standing parliamentary committee. lead-up to the tabling of the final draft consti- The final draft constitution also suggests that tution. Mr Hatton said when tabling the docu- Aboriginal customary law be recognised as ment in August: having the same constitutional status as The process of constitution-making should be an common law. With Aboriginal people consti- open, democratic process, with maximum oppor- tuting over 25 per cent of the population of tunity for input by all the community. the Northern Territory, this is a very import- Many of the unique features of the final draft ant initiative. Customary law remains an constitution are a testament to this open integral part of the lives and social order of consultative process—acknowledging the many Aboriginal people in the territory and, territory’s cultural diversity and, perhaps most as such, should be recognised within the importantly, acknowledging the affinity the constitution of the Northern Territory. The Aboriginal people of the area have with the final draft constitution states that Aboriginal Northern Territory. The first paragraph of the customary law ‘shall be recognised as a preamble reads: source of law in the Northern Territory’. In Before the proclamation of the colony of New his tabling speech, Mr Hatton explained: South Wales in 1788 and since immemorial all or . . . this is not a ‘two law’ concept. Rather, it is most of the geographical area of Australia that now designed to recognise that the Aboriginal people in constitutes the Northern Territory of Australia (the the territory are presently faced with two systems Northern Territory) was occupied by various groups of laws, one recognised by our existing constitu- Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4251 tional system and one that in the main is not people, in my mind demonstrate the absolute presently recognised, and can put these people in commitment of the Northern Territory parlia- a position of double jeopardy. The challenge before ment to responsible government. This final us is to bring these two systems into a form of mutuality and reciprocity within a common consti- draft constitution enjoys strong bipartisan tutional framework, a gradual harmonisation of support within the Northern Territory parlia- laws, but without any undesirable or unfair side- ment and is a testament to the maturity of the effects. Northern Territory Legislative Assembly. Perhaps one of the most unique features Overall, the current system of government proposed by the committee in this final draft will, for the most part, continue unchanged by constitution is the incorporation of a series of statehood. The same Westminster model rights. Whilst these rights do not constitute a consisting of the legislature, executive and bill of rights as such they do enumerate a judiciary will remain, as will the unicameral number of rights which will in future go a parliamentary model for the Legislative long way to ensuring Aboriginal people and Assembly. The committee has envisaged that people who practice different cultures have in the transition to statehood, the current their place in what will be an open and Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act will tolerate system. I note the 15th item of the be repealed and the final draft constitution preamble reads: enacted. Disruption to the current system will The people of the Northern Territory are concerned be minimal, with the fundamental and most to preserve a harmonious, tolerant and united important difference being that the federal multicultural society, and to this end, it is desirable parliament will no longer have the power to that no person should be unreasonably denied the interfere in Northern Territory legislation. right— (a) to use his or her language in communicating I am confident that fellow senators and with others speaking or understanding the members of the federal parliament will ac- same languages; knowledge the hard work that Territorians (b) to observe and practice his or her own social from all walks of life and all political persua- and cultural customs and traditions in common sions have contributed to its development. with others of the same tradition; and The concept of Northern Territory statehood (c) to manifest his or her own religion or belief in enjoys overwhelming support not only within worship, ceremony, observance, practice or the territory but right across Australia, and teaching, this support is growing. Australians are and that within the framework of such a society, obviously familiar with the territory’s track the people of the Northern Territory recognise that record of nearly 20 years of responsible the Aboriginal people of the Northern Territory are entitled, under and in accordance with this constitu- government and are receptive to the message tion and the laws of the Northern Territory, to self that the territory has proven itself more than determination in the control of their daily affairs. a worthy candidate for statehood. Part 7 of the final draft constitution deals The Northern Territory economy and specifically with the protection of Aboriginal population is growing faster than any other land rights and Aboriginal sacred sites. Part jurisdiction in Australia. With an average 8 is titled ‘Rights in respect of language, growth rate of 5.4 per cent over the past social, cultural and religious matters’. Whilst decade, its growth is more than double the I acknowledge the problems associated with national average and is comparable with the the incorporation of a bill of rights into other growth of the newly industrialised countries constitutions, I believe the particular rights of South-East Asia—the world’s fastest grow- enumerated in this draft constitution will ing region. The territory is perfectly posi- serve all territorians well, securing the future tioned on the edge of this region to link of a multicultural, multiracial community. Australia with what is widely anticipated to The various provisions incorporated into the be the economic hub of the world for the next final draft constitution, which secure the two decades. interests and rights of the broad cultural With an estimated merchandise trade sur- spectrum of people, specifically Aboriginal plus of $768 million, or 15.2 per cent of GSP, 4252 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 and with 67 per cent of exports channelled of isolated instances where ministers were directly to Asia, the Northern Territory has required to resign. Indeed, in nearly all of already developed major inroads to the Asian those cases there was no fundamental breach marketplace. However, relative to the poten- of guidelines or principles. But, in accordance tial trading opportunities, this is really just the with Westminster traditions, the ministers beginning of what is anticipated to be a long nevertheless took the honourable course. The period of strong, steady growth for the North- record of the Labor government contrasts ern Territory. markedly with that of the previous Fraser In conclusion, I recommend that all senators government, where it became almost a month- and members obtain a copy of the final draft ly occurrence for ministers to be required to constitution for the Northern Territory and resign their commission for breaches of give serious consideration to the points I have conflict of interest or of misleading the raised today. Whilst in the short term this parliament. parliament may very well be able to overturn When John Howard, the now Prime the legislation of the independent jurisdictions Minister, set out to be holier than thou, when of the Northern Territory, in the longer term he established his code of ministerial conduct, any such attempt will prove futile. he said to the people and to the parliament I am very pleased to table the final draft that he would expect nothing less than abso- constitution for the Northern Territory and lute adherence to those guidelines that he laid also a speech by the Chairman of the North- down. What have we seen within a period of ern Territory Sessional Committee on Consti- only six months since the government came tutional Development, the Hon. Steve Hatton to office in March? We have seen at least five MLA, dated 22 August 1996. ministers be in breach of those very guide- lines. Ministers Anderson, Herron and Short, Howard Government Parliamentary Secretary Gibson and now Mr John Moore. Who knows? There may well be Senator FORSHAW (New South Wales) more to come as the days pass and events (12.56 p.m.)—Today I rise to discuss a matter unfold. of great public interest and importance—that is, standards of parliamentary and political Faced with this situation of these ministers integrity and leadership. Events of recent being in breach, the Prime Minister has been days, involving the shareholdings and con- left floundering. He has failed to act, notwith- flicts of interests of certain ministers of the standing that day after day proof has been Howard government, demonstrate clearly that given of conflicts of interests and of non- when it comes to the crunch, the Prime adherence to or breaches of the code of Minister, Mr Howard, is all talk and no conduct. The Prime Minister failed to act until action. forced to do so by circumstances and by Mr Howard has long trumpeted that he is a embarrassment caused to him and to his person who demands and expects the highest government. standards of integrity and honesty in public What do we get still from the Prime life. It was John Howard who went to the Minister? We get pathetic attempts to defend people on 2 March claiming that he would the conduct of his ministers—conduct which raise the standards of politics and of parlia- should be condemned. But, more so, we get mentary debate in this country. I do not a pathetic counterattack—a disgraceful at- accept for one moment that the standards of tack—by members of the government upon honesty and integrity of former ALP govern- opposition members simply because they ments under Prime Ministers Hawke and happen to be members of trade unions. They Keating were anything but of the highest attack people because they are members of order. They were governments of high integri- trade unions, as if that meant that you are ty and high standards. The record shows some lower form of human being and not fit that in over 13 years of ALP governments, to represent the people in the parliament, or from 1983 to 1996, there were only a couple indeed in any form of public life; that, some- Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4253 how, if you have been a trade unionist, you stood up and defended the right of indigenous have never had a real job or a real commit- Australians and Australians of ethnic back- ment. ground to live in a tolerant society free of We do not attack members of the opposi- racial abuse. tion because they happen to be shareholders When Voltaire proclaimed those noble or because they happen to be company direc- words, that he would defend to the death the tors. We happen to believe in, and have right of people to put alternative views, I advocated through all of our existence, the cannot imagine that he ever had in mind that importance of the private sector in the econ- that involved defending those who would seek omy of this country. But what we will attack to attack and demean people simply on the is the hypocrisy and the failure to comply basis of the colour of their skin. Voltaire with standards of conduct demanded of believed in the dignity and the equality of all ministers. It is nothing short of pathetic and people. That is what is at issue here and that disgraceful for members of the government to is what the Prime Minister should stand up single out people in the opposition simply for. because of their membership of trade unions. I might say in passing that I note in today’s I remind members of the government that press that there are now some moves towards people such as Lech Walesa, Nelson Mandela a bipartisan approach which would involve or Caesar Chavez have proudly spoken of the Prime Minister in endorsing the recent their membership of trade unions—and I do statements of the Governor-General calling for not think anybody would ever suggest that a recommitment to the principles of reconcili- they are not people of integrity and commit- ation. If that comes to pass, I certainly believe ment. that would be a vast improvement on the Similarly, on the issue of the disgraceful recent failure of the Prime Minister to stand racist rantings of the member for Oxley, Ms up and be counted on this issue. Pauline Hanson, the Prime Minister has failed My concern—and the public concern about to demonstrate the leadership necessary, and this issue—also extends to what is happening has singularly failed to stand up for the very within the Liberal Party itself, particularly in principles that he espouses and that I believe the south-east region of Sydney in the federal he adheres to. But it is not a question of Mr electorates of Cook and Hughes for which I Howard’s beliefs so much that is at issue happen to be the duty ALP senator. It ap- here; it is the question of his responsibilities pears—and is certainly acknowledged by as Prime Minister. He has declined until very spokespersons within the Liberal Party—that recently, I understand, to condemn in any real extreme right wing elements have infiltrated way the outrageous, divisive, inflammatory, the Liberal Party in that area. Some very scurrilous, despicable, erroneous and racist dangerous elements appear to be gaining views of Ms Hanson. Despite numerous calls influence and control. I refer to an article in for the Prime Minister to speak out, he has the Sydney Morning Herald of 27 July and I declined. Rather, he has responded by saying would like to quote a few paragraphs from it. that he believed in freedom of speech, and The article is entitled ‘P-plate Libs in race that he actually believed this had somehow for power’ and it deals with the young mem- been suppressed under previous governments bers of a new right wing faction seizing and he was going to stand up for it. control of Liberal Party branches in south-east Frankly, the right to free speech is some- Sydney. The article says: thing to be defended, as Voltaire so correctly The Mother’s Day massacre of the Menai branch— put it many years ago. But the right to free Menai being a suburb in the Sutherland speech does not involve the right to attack shire— people because of the colour of their skin or as party moderates have described the May 12 their ethnic background. And it is about time meeting, has highlighted an internal storm that that the Prime Minister, instead of just waxing some believe could threaten the factional stability on about the right of free speech, actually of the party in New South Wales. Moderates in the 4254 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 party have become increasingly concerned about of the fact that this time which is allocated for the growing influence of a new right-wing faction, debate during lunch on Wednesdays is allo- known loosely as the Team, whose activities centre cated for non-contentious matters. There has on the south-west of Sydney. They believe the activities could tip the tenuous balance of factional been an enormous amount of leeway given to dominance to the right wing of the party. Senator Forshaw. Now he is canvassing matters which might well be criminal. Not The article also says: only are they ill-founded; I think it is very While more senior members of the party’s right rude and abusive of the processes of the wing watch from the bleachers, indirectly benefit- ing from any advances their younger colleagues can Senate. muster, left-wing leaders have trouble on their Madam ACTING DEPUTY PRESI- hands. DENT—There is no point of order, Senator There have been numerous complaints to party O’Chee. headquarters, including allegations of infiltration by Senator FORSHAW—Thank you. These extremist right-wing groups such as shooting enthusiasts and members of Australians Against are non-contentious matters. There is no Further Immigration (AAFI). contention between the Labor Party and the The Herald has been given a list of electorates Liberal Party. All the contention happens to where branch control has allegedly been taken over exist in the Liberal Party. The article con- by the right-wing group, including Wollongong, tinues: Cabramatta, Fairfield, Campbelltown, Granville, St Though party leaders say there is no evidence of Marys, Mt Druitt, Smithfield and Bankstown. such infiltration, they do not deny the factions are It seems that they are encircling your area, at war. Senator Woods. The article goes on to say: Because the senators opposite have endeav- Allegations of sneaky tactics and branch stacking oured to deprive me of my time I will cut have come thick and fast in recent months. short my quotation. I will just quote this One branch meeting was allegedly called in a paragraph: national park at noon on Christmas Day; at another The issue was broken wide open this week when 45 gun enthusiasts signed up to join the Sutherland an opposition frontbencher, Chris Downy— Young Liberals. There have also been accusations He is a member of the state opposition in of party officials being threatened physically. New South Wales. Other claims, unsubstantiated, are more sinister; in Bankstown there have been allegations that party Senator Conroy—Which faction? infighting might be linked to an arson attempt at Senator FORSHAW—I think he is a left the home of a prominent party member— winger— Senator Tierney—I rise on a point of told the Herald he would resign from the party order. Madam Acting Deputy President, I unless the State executive moved to deal with the wonder if you could direct the speaker to stop problems in Sutherland. In a letter to Liberal MPs misleading the Senate with out-of-date infor- across Sydney, Downy and the Federal member for mation. Hughes, Danna Vale, claimed there had been attempts to destabilise the branch and conference Madam ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT by a group of ‘agitators’ who lived outside the (Senator Patterson)—Order! There is no electorate. point of order. ‘This explosive local issue, and others like it, are [diverting] our focus in retaining marginal Liberal Senator FORSHAW—It is obvious that seats,’ the letter said, ‘We cannot be left spending Senator Tierney does not believe in the right our time playing petty games with a small group of of free speech. I will complete that quote: destabilising factional hacks whose activities are . . . prominent party member and local councillor, destructive to the functioning of our branches.’ Clive Taylor. Police have so far found no evidence As my time is drawing to a close—and there to back Taylor’s claims. is far more to come with respect to this Senator O’Chee—I rise on a point of story—I would just indicate that there are order. Madam Acting Deputy President, I dangerous elements being recruited into the have been listening with great forbearance, branches of the Liberal Party in the elector- but Senator Forshaw should be made aware ates of Cook and Hughes. And this is not the Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4255

Labor Party saying this. This is coming attack upon me and supposedly outrageous directly from members of the Liberal Party comments that I have made. I say to Senator and parliamentary representatives of the Tierney that I made no such comments. What Liberal Party in the area. Frankly, there has I did was, in fact, quote comments made by been no sign to date that the Prime Minister people who are members of the Liberal Party. has done anything to curb this activity and it The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— is about time he acted to get rid of these Senator Forshaw, that is not a point of order. dangerous elements. Senator Tierney, take your seat for a moment. Senator Woods—Madam Acting Deputy Under standing order 191, you have an President, I raise a point of order. It is similar opportunity when Senator Tierney has fin- to the one raised by my colleague Senator ished to make an explanation if you feel you O’Chee. This is really a gross abuse of this have been misrepresented in Senator Tierney’s period, which is very clearly set aside, by speech. It is not appropriate for you to call a understanding, in the standing orders for non- point of order at this stage. You were disor- controversial matters. What Senator Forshaw derly in doing so. I call Senator Tierney. is attempting to do is to raise controversy, stir the bucket and pour a bit of mess around the Senator TIERNEY—Thank you very Liberal Party, with no substance whatsoever. much. I acknowledge that Senator Forshaw It is very clear that this is an abuse of this says he is quoting certain material, which is current period of time, and really he should very out-of-date material and which has left be directed to address matters of public a very misleading impression on the Hansard interest which are non-controversial. record. What we have, with a number of people and groups argy-bargying for influence The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT— in a party, is obviously a quite normal pro- Senator Forshaw, would you take your seat cess. For you to blow that up as being some for a moment. There is no point of order. I sort of takeover is absolutely outrageous. We have been advised that the question of wheth- are very well aware of what has happened in er or not this is a controversial issue is not the ALP over many years. You just have to appropriate here and that issues of a contro- ask Peter Baldwin what happens to people versial nature can be raised. There has been who get involved in factions in the ALP. So an agreement that there will be no divisions I think it is very stupid of you, Senator, to or quorums called; but the question as to actually bring this up, given the record of the whether a person can or cannot raise a contro- ALP in this matter. I will leave it at that, versial issue is not set out in the standing because I am here to speak on another matter orders. So Senator Forshaw is in order, and I that is actually quite important. have to rule that there is no point of order. Senator Forshaw, I think you have nine The matter I wish to raise in this debate seconds left now. So I call Senator Tierney. relates to the field station, Chiswick, outside Your time has expired, Senator Forshaw. Armidale, which is part of the CSIRO. What I want to do is put the cause for not only the Chiswick Research Centre retention of Chiswick but the expansion of this excellent facility. This issue began in Senator TIERNEY (New South Wales) June this year, following a decision by the (1.11 p.m.)—Madam Acting Deputy Presi- CSIRO bureaucrats, which initially was to dent, I came into the chamber to speak on close the station altogether. This decision led another matter; but I cannot let this occasion to howls of protest from the local area be- pass without making some comment on the cause of the enormous contribution that outrageous comments by Senator Forshaw. people at the Chiswick Research Station have What he is talking about—and he does not made to the northern New South Wales area. know what he is talking about— They have carried out vital research in rela- Senator Forshaw—On a point of order, tion to drought effects and the drought toler- Madam Acting Deputy President: Senator ance of particular pasture species. The estab- Tierney has just stood up to engage in an lishment of temperate pasture species has also 4256 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 been investigated. They have done excellent New England in Armidale and federal and work in soil fertility and soil science research. state MPs all made deputations and represen- They have carried out world leading research tations to keep this excellent research facility in animal production and reproduction and open. other matters relating to that, including animal Following the representations of a number health, bacterial and viral disease and the of coalition MPs, the Minister for Science and effects of parasites. Technology, Peter McGauran—to his great It seems strange that the CSIRO has decid- credit—revised this decision. Minister ed to close such an excellent facility. I believe McGauran came to Chiswick in late Septem- the original advice from the CSIRO on this ber and announced that the facility would matter was flawed. I would like particularly remain open indefinitely, initially with a to note for the Senate that the CSIRO’s action staffing of 20, which has now been revised up ran totally counter to a committee inquiry and to 35. The minister, when he did come to report to the Senate which was tabled at the Armidale, set out a long-term plan to retain end of 1994. Chiswick in that area. The plan involves the attraction of more private funding and col- The effects of such a closure in the New laborative research projects so that they can England area were going to be quite major. It build on the number of the 35 staff that are involved the loss of over 70 staff, including left there. The government, the CSIRO, senior scientists and technical staff. It in- industry and the community are now working volved the removal of on-site property based together to secure the future of this excellent research and evaluation of products for the research facility, and I welcome the minister’s wool and the beef industries. It would involve announcement. the curtailment of vital long-term applied research projects and, curiously, the transfer Two weeks ago, shortly after the minister’s of many of those projects to Prospect, in the decision was made public, I met with all the middle of Sydney. Here we have a field stakeholders in Chiswick, and regional people station that involves research and involves did greet this news with great relief. It is field trials in controlled environments in a another example of the coalition being flex- rural area, yet much of this research was ible and listening to the concerns of people in going to be moved to Sydney—a very curious rural and regional Australia, which is quite a decision indeed, particularly when you con- change after the last 13 years of Labor sider that the facilities that were actually built government—particularly, a change from the at Chiswick, with the new laboratories, were decision of the New South Wales Labor only three years old. It was with some pride government to close the vet lab in Armidale. that I looked through those labs three years I do not see that government revisiting that ago in their final stages of construction. Not decision. What we have done is in great to use this facility that has been set up in a contrast. rural area seems a most curious decision Following discussions with senior research- indeed. ers at Chiswick, I believe that the staff level When the original plans to close Chiswick should be increased from the announced level were announced, Dr Malcolm McIntosh, the of 35 to ensure its long-term viability. I have Chief Executive Officer of the CSIRO, was spoken to the minister about that, and will inundated with protests from the New Eng- continue to make the case for Chiswick with land and north-west region of New South increased staffing. The minister, I assure the Wales. Local government councils, including Senate, is listening to that argument and that Armidale and Tamworth, carried out major is a possible outcome. protests. The mayor of the rural shire of There are excellent reasons why this overall Dumaresq, which surrounds Armidale, Coun- facility should remain in place with viable cillor Peter Monley, led the charge to save staffing numbers. Firstly, there is value in Chiswick—to his great credit. The New South applied research in primary industry carried Wales Farmers Association, the University of out by the CSIRO in the country on property Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4257 that it owns. It is central to the Chiswick sion by the CSIRO. The current decision to research effort. It is crucial, particularly with keep Chiswick open with 35 staff leaves the applied research, and this cannot be carried research effort weakened. Of the 35 remaining out in the centre of Sydney, at Prospect. staff, just six are research scientists. Important Chiswick and its associated properties must research projects of great value to Australia be retained. Research on pharmaceutical may need to be terminated or severely re- products for animals requires an intermediate duced in the current situation. For example, stage to assess the impact of the product, and integrated parasite control in sheep and cattle, it must be carried out in a controlled environ- which has produced international cutting-edge ment where the scientists can actually monitor research, may under the plan be relocated to the research. This cannot be done effectively Prospect; a project examining the relationship by the CSIRO on private farm animals. between stress and immune competence in beef cattle is being severely downsized; and To take one example, there is research by the sustainable grazing system project is to the CSIRO on an agent that would de-fleece close, and it will be tragedy if that decision sheep. There are real risks, if products like goes ahead. This project, which is now 50 this are not evaluated properly, of chemical years old, has been carried out on lands near residue problems and animal welfare issues. Chiswick, and it is irreplaceable in terms of The evaluation of this de-fleecing agent the way the history of the sustainable grazing showed a major side effect which would not system has developed. It should also be have been picked up in laboratories: you had retained, particularly the world-class work of to do field station research to see it. The Dr Jim Scott of UNE and soil biologist Dr product did de-fleece the sheep, but it also Kath King. induced spontaneous abortions in pregnant ewes. Obviously, if you had not had the field I have pleasure in putting the case for trials, you would have ended up with a continuing a strong federal government and product on the market that would have had private sector investment in Chiswick, as the that sort of effect. work is too valuable, and the commitment of those researchers is too dedicated, to be Secondly, the case for retaining Chiswick overlooked. Some scientists who have accept- relates to the collaborative research projects ed a redundancy package will, fortunately, that are carried out by the CSIRO in the New remain in the Armidale area, and the oppor- England district and the University of New tunity is there for those people to be re- England; and the case for keeping that col- employed if Chiswick does expand further. laborative research going is overwhelming. The two institutions—the CSIRO and the I close by thanking the minister for the University of New England—have been turnaround in the position and the leadership involved in collaborative research in this area he has taken in keeping this world-class for over 50 years. Both institutions have research facility open. I urge that the govern- derived huge advantages, with young re- ment now move on from this position and searchers gaining valuable field experience that, as well as getting private assistance, it within the CSIRO. We need to retain that link bring back to Chiswick a number of those and the link with cooperative research centres, world-class projects to make this a viable because it is in the synergy between these long-term research facility into the next sorts of bodies that new developments take century. place and Australia helps maintain its world- Parliament House: Demonstration class record in groundbreaking research. This Senator ABETZ (Tasmania) (1.24 p.m.)— is particularly the case in relation to primary The matter that I wish to raise in the matters industries. of public interest debate this afternoon is the I believe the minister will, over time, ever mounting and growing bill occasioned by further review the staffing levels at Chiswick. the taxpayers of Australia as a result of the Let me place on record some powerful argu- ACTU’s activities here at Parliament House ments which I hope affect the eventual deci- on 19 August 1996. 4258 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

The reality is that the damages bill to be hardly the sort of behaviour that one would faced by the Australian people will now, in expect. Out of those 116 who have reported my estimation, exceed $1 million. That is a injuries, 74 members have submitted accident huge sum of money. Honourable senators and injury claim forms and 12 have com- would be aware of my interest in this matter pleted Comcare claims. In addition, as at 17 because on 21 August 1996, only two days September, 560 hours of compensation leave after those events, in this very debate I ad- has been utilised by members. dressed the Senate about my concerns as to I sought to ask the Australian Federal what had happened on the previous Monday. Police when they could give us a final figure At that time I pointed out that our Parliament as to the costs that the taxpayers will have to House is a symbol of the Australian way of pay as a result of the riot. The answer which life and our democratic process, and that any they provided was: assault on our parliament is, in fact, an attack It is not possible to provide details of the costs to on our way of life and our democratic pro- be incurred by Comcare at this time as it may be cess. It is an attack on our freedoms. I dealt several years before the extent of injuries and with the matter on the basis of principle. claims are fully known. Madam Acting Deputy President Patterson, So the people of Australia will not know the if I recall, you asked a question of the Presi- damages bill that they face, courtesy of the dent of the Senate in relation to the damages ACTU, for approximately another few years. bill that was known at that time, and it was in Simply, the cost of overtime and penal- the vicinity of $90,000. I then used the ties—just that alone—that had to be paid opportunity of the Senate estimates committee because of the events on 19 August 1996 to determine how much actual damage had occasioned to the Australian taxpayer an extra been occasioned to Parliament House itself. payment of some $78,800. Damage to police That questioning revealed that the damage to property was $1,341.91. Damage to the Parliament House and the gift shop amounted personal property of police officers was to slightly in excess of $300,000. When I got estimated at $1,894.95. Travel costs for the that information, I issued a media release investigations which are still under way were headed ‘Outrage as riot bill tops $300,000’. $2,347.40. They are the costs that can actually I can tell you, now that I know that that be quantified. figure was a very conservative estimate, I am a lot more outraged because of the costs that There are, however, a lot of unquantifiable the Australian taxpayer will have to bear. costs at this stage, such as the cost of medical treatment and the Comcare costs, which You will recall that we were advised in this undoubtedly will be huge because personal Senate that a damages bill of $91,000 to injury claims may well flow in consequence Parliament House was determined by Madam of the broken ribs and other injuries sustained President some time ago. She then advised, by the 116 officers who were injured courtesy through the Senate estimates process, that that of the ACTU inspired rally. Up to 17 Septem- figure would more likely be $300,000. I then ber, 560 hours of leave had been taken by had occasion, through the Senate estimates various police officers. The cost of the inves- process, to ask the Australian Federal Police tigation and the prosecution costs, to date and as to the costs that were occasioned by them ongoing, are still not known. We already have in relation to the riot. I have got to say to actual costs in the vicinity of $400,000. It you, Madam Acting Deputy President, that would be fair to say that, after all the legal the statistics are quite horrific. costs, investigation costs, prosecution costs, One hundred and sixteen officers were medical costs and compensation costs are injured in the riot at parliament. Chances are paid, all of which are not quantified at this that most of them would have been members stage, the Australian taxpayer could well be of the police union, and there they were being looking at a bill in excess of $1 million. attacked and bloodied, their ribs being broken, The people of Australia need to be remind- allegedly, by fellow trade unionists. It is ed that that occasion of the $1 million that Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4259 they will be paying courtesy of the ACTU Standing out front, an older demonstrator was was described by their secretary as one of the handing out merchandise from the shop in which most successful rallies ever held by the I accepted the goods. I did not vandalise the place, nor meant to take what was not mine. Being my ACTU. One wonders how Mr Kelty and the first rally, I felt carried away with what was others in the trade union movement judge happening around me. I apologise for my behaviour success. One would have thought that the and consider it to be inappropriate and have extent of the havoc and cost to taxpayers of enclosed the merchandise I was handed. I have not the ACTU riot might have made the trade enclosed my name in fear of prosecution. union movement engage in at least some Another person who wrote to the Australian apology and acknowledge what they were Federal Police had this to say: involved in, but they seem to have no shame To whom it may concern: and no concern for the odium which the ACTU and Labor must carry for their in- I am writing this letter to apologise. First I will tell you why I’m apologising. It started off when I was volvement. bored because it was my first rally I have ever been Whilst it is quite clearly on the public to and I had nothing to do. So I went up to the record that people such as Jennie George and front door when everyone started pushing and I Bill Kelty are unwilling to apologise, we do ended up in the souvenir shop where this lady was now know that there are genuine trade union- passing the souvenirs to everyone and she passed me a couple of things and then I went back outside. ists within the community who are prepared When I got home I realised what I had done so I to apologise and who are desperate to disasso- wanted to return the stolen goods to you. ciate themselves from the trade union move- ment and the extreme elements within it. To If those participants have the capacity to say highlight that, as a result of Senate estimates that what they were involved in was wrong— inquiries, I was provided with certain infor- Senator Neal—How did you get the letters mation which included this letter from a trade that went to the Federal Police? unionist. I will read it into the record: Senator ABETZ—Senator Neal is asking Dear Mr Speaker, how I got these letters. A very simple process, As a member of a union, I was appalled at the Senator Neal: have you heard of the Senate behaviour and the destruction caused by those estimates process where you can ask ques- involved in the demonstration at Parliament House tions, the questions are taken on notice, and last week. I was also disgusted at the comments by then the department responds to you? The Mr Kelty about the demonstration and, as a result of this, I have resigned from the union. department responded to me and provided me with those letters. It is a very simple process. Enclosed in this letter is a cheque of $117, which is the amount that I owe the union as I have to give Undoubtedly, the shadow minister for con- three months notice and dues when you resign. sumer affairs does not know about one of Therefore, instead of giving these dues to the these important Senate procedures. But I union, I am redirecting the money to the parliament should not distract myself with that embar- to help pay the damage that the union caused to our rassing interjection from Senator Neal. House. The point I want to make is this: that That is a view, I suggest, which is reflected person who wrote said they were bored, they by many trade unionists right around this did not know what they were doing there— country. What was also revealing was two and you cannot blame that person for being letters that were sent to the Australian Federal bored. Just imagine having to listen to Police, by people who will remain nameless, speeches from Kim Beazley, Senator Kernot, indicating what their involvement in the rally Jennie George, Bob Brown—it would drive and violence was. This is a letter dated 19 anybody to distraction. But it would not August, which you would recall was the day excuse the behaviour that was undertaken. It of the so-called rally, more aptly described as is interesting to note— a riot. The letter reads: I participated in the rally on the 19th of August Madam ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT 1996. Whilst standing outside Parliament House, a (Senator Patterson)—Order! Senator Abetz, riot broke out in which windows were broken. I suggest you call those people by their titles. 4260 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

Senator ABETZ—Of course—the honour- The government is putting up fees for health able leader of the Labor Party, the long-term and associated medical expenses, for our Leader of the Opposition, the honourable Kim children’s education and for aged care. Beazley, and the Leader of the Australian The government has particularly attacked Democrats, Senator Kernot. That allows me regional Australia by targeting regional to highlight yet again those people’s involve- programs and closing government offices in ment in this rally, and that the honourable regional areas. The coalition abolished the Leader of the Opposition used most extreme Department of Regional Development and this language in addressing the crowd, using the has sent a big signal to regional Australia, word ‘hate’ at least half a dozen times— particularly to regional areas such as the saying that the Liberal Party hated our Abo- Central Coast, that to this coalition govern- riginal community, hated students, hated ment the people of regional Australia are not workers, hated women. He was, of course, important. Frankly, I am a little bit surprised completely oblivious of the fact that the vast at the lack of interest in this issue that the majority of women voted for us and that, for National Party, the coalition partner, has the first time, the Liberal Party scored more shown. The major preoccupation of the No. 1 votes out of the students than the National Party and its leader, Mr Fischer, Australian Labor Party did. Oblivious to all seems to have been ensuring that the fuel that, he used that highly inflammatory lan- rebate was retained for its constituency. But, guage. at the same time, regional and country areas In those letters, there was no hint, no of Australia have been ignored. In fact, the suggestion, that those people’s involvement whole department of regional development was as a result of anger at John Howard or has been abolished. the Liberal Party’s policies. Rather, they were part of a rent-a-crowd shipped there by the Previously the Labor government provided ACTU to try to swell the numbers. If these $150 million for the regional development ordinary citizens have the decency to apolo- organisations, RDOs. For the short period of gise for their activities, why on earth can’t the time that these organisations existed they leadership of the ACTU, the Labor Party, the were quite successful. The Orana gas pipeline Democrats and the Greens, who inflamed the was established by the Orana Regional Devel- crowd, have the capacity to apologise in a opment Organisation (ORDO) with just similar manner? $2 million. This RDO covered the Riverina and Orange areas and was able to secure from Regional Development: New South Wales the New South Wales government Senator NEAL (New South Wales) (1.39 $42 million. As a result of receiving those p.m.)—I would like to speak this afternoon on funds it was able to construct a pipeline. The a matter of some particular importance to areas now receive natural gas at a cost which New South Wales residents at large, but is comparable to that in the metropolitan areas particularly to residents of the Central Coast, of Sydney. that is, the issue of regional development or, Regional development is particularly im- should I say, the lack of interest in regional portant for the Central Coast as a unique and development by this coalition government. fast growing area north of Sydney. The cuts The budget was very much bad news for the to regional development funds have really regions. The government pushed the purported hurt the people of the Central Coast but do positives of the budget but, at the same time, not seem to have caused a concern to be the tarnished items, the items that were going recognised by this coalition government. The to be damaging to the community at large, Central Coast Regional Development Organi- were kept hidden. sation—relatively new—received approxi- Tax rebates and other initiatives made mately $150,000 and was expected to receive families feel they were getting freebies, but further funding before the election. That has there is no such thing as a free lunch, as I am changed, of course. No further funding has sure the community will learn as time passes. been provided for RDOs whatsoever. Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4261

The RDO on the Central Coast was instru- million for flood mitigation. The government mental in trying to find further employment then announced in the budget—lo and be- opportunities for young Central Coast resi- hold—that the Department of Regional Devel- dents. As you are probably aware, youth opment would be abolished. But it failed to unemployment is a particularly large problem transfer the responsibility for funding for in areas outside major cities and certainly is flood mitigation to any other department. a growing problem on the Central Coast. Losing the funds provided by the federal Unemployment has risen 2.6 per cent over the government is not only a tragedy, it is an last month generally on the Central Coast, to extra loss for the area of the Central Coast. 9.1 per cent. Youth unemployment in just one Previously, the funds provided federally were month has risen 4.5 per cent. Yet the vehicle matched by both the state government and for doing something about this problem, the Gosford City Council. This means that the Central Coast RDO, has no longer been Central Coast community was three times provided with funding. worse off last year as a result of this decision. I would like to say a little bit about Bob All levels of governments acknowledged the Kennedy, who has been the chairman of the difficulty of dealing with flooding problems, RDO on the Central Coast since its formation particularly in the area of the Central Coast and who continues to attempt to do something which has had a rapid increase in urbanisation about the problem of youth unemployment, and a level of infrastructure development that despite the fact that the RDO is no longer it really is not capable of keeping up with. funded. Bob Kennedy is the managing direc- The Gosford City Council has budgeted to tor of Masterfoods on the Central Coast, one provide its one-third of the funds for the of the largest employers. necessary flood mitigation works but, alas, in As well as running an effective and suc- light of the federal government’s failure to cessful business which continues to employ recognise the problem and continue the large numbers of people, he sees fit to spend funding—as had been provided by the Labor his time and energies in furthering the inter- government for the last few years—the funds ests of the community and has shown particu- available are not going to deal with the lar concern for the generation of employ- problem. ment—in particular, the generation of employ- Work is necessary in the Wingello, Narara ment for our young people in the area. Des- and Erina Creeks. Failure to deal with these pite the RDO being no longer funded, Bob problems will mean that businesses and Kennedy has continued, along with other homes are once again flooded—certainly a members of the organisation, to run a forum situation that I would not have thought this and allow young people to have a voice and government would like to see. to play a role in seeking out opportunities for The Gosford City Council now has to over- job promotion. haul its total drainage program in light of this At the same time as the coalition abandoned funding shortfall and will have to reschedule. the Department of Regional Development, it The problems that were going to be dealt this abandoned significant job programs on the year will not be dealt with for many years to Central Coast. Also, through a convoluted come. Flooding on the Central Coast is a process, the government has cut flood problem, but it is only one of a multitude of mitigation funding in regional areas. The problems that regional areas have. I highlight government had flood mitigation programs in it today because it indicates the priorities of the Department of Primary Industries and this government. Despite it being a coalition Energy for both urban and rural areas. Prior government which includes the National Party to regional development being wound down, and, despite what would be a normal assump- urban flood mitigation was transferred to the tion that the National Party would be seeing Department of Transport and Regional Devel- the interests of rural and regional areas as opment. Included in this transfer was funding uppermost in their priorities, we see that for the Gosford City Council amounting to $1 regional areas are being forgotten. Putting this 4262 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 matter on the record, I would hope that the QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE minds of those allocating funds might recog- nise the assistance required and give regional ‘Wright Family’ areas the priorities they deserve. Senator CARR—My question is addressed I have just received exactly 263 letters on to the Minister for Education, Employment this issue of flooding on the Central Coast and Youth Affairs. Minister, will you apolo- with people explaining their concerns about gise to the Senate for the stunt you pulled in flooding and how they see themselves affect- the Daily Telegraph of 25 September which ed. I would like to table them in the Senate. featured ‘the Wright family’, a family you now admit never existed but which received The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT a front page headline ‘Millionaires on Wel- (Senator Patterson)—Is leave granted? fare’? I ask whether that is not a clear breach of the ‘Guide to Ministerial Responsibility’, Senator Woods—Come on. which dictates: The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT Ministers must be honest in their public dealings (Senator Patterson)—Senator Neal, the and should not intentionally mislead the Parliament convention is usually to ask the duty minister or the public. and if leave is not granted— In light of your statements to the Senate Senator NEAL—I am happy to provide the estimates committee that ‘I would like to see parliamentary secretary with a copy. They are the Wright family take their case public all on identical terms, but signed by different whatever their name is’, when were you parties. informed that the Wright family was bogus? Why did you not apologise to the Senate last The ACTING DEPUTY PRESIDENT Wednesday when you wrote to the education (Senator Patterson)— Leave granted. I just estimates committee on this issue? Will you want to remind honourable senators that this now apologise for misleading the Senate and is the second time today since I have been in further admit that the most conspicuous bunch the chair that that formality has not been of millionaires getting paid by the taxpayer pursued. I would suggest to all honourable are on the government front bench? senators that they follow the procedure that has been adopted in the Senate of showing Senator VANSTONE—In response to the the other side before they wish to table or last part of Senator Carr’s question, I do not incorporate an item as it would facilitate the know whether any of my colleagues are proceedings of the Senate. millionaires, so I cannot help him in that re- spect. Let me come to the matter of the Senator Woods—Quite right. Wright family. You quite properly raise, Senator NEAL—That is the finalisation of Senator Carr, some information provided to my remarks. Thank you. me by the department, which was passed on to the Senate estimates committee, in which Sitting suspended from 1.50 p.m. to it was indicated that this information was 2.00 p.m. based on an actual family. That information was put together to convey to the community MINISTERIAL ARRANGEMENTS what the purpose of the actual means test Senator HILL (South Australia—Leader of was. the Government in the Senate)—by leave—I You will be familiar with the actual means inform the Senate that the Assistant Treasurer, test, which goes further than an asset test and Senator Kemp, will be absent from question further than an income test. It was intended to time today. Senator Kemp is in Brisbane to convey, and did convey, what that test does. open a national conference of the Association It catches out people who are able to artifi- of Superannuation Funds of Australia. During cially reduce their incomes and arrange their his absence I will take questions relating to affairs so as to enable their kids to get the portfolios of Treasury and Finance. Austudy and other benefits. That was the Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4263 purpose of the exercise—and you were there, Opposition senators interjecting— Senator Carr. You will acknowledge, I am The PRESIDENT—Order! Stop the clock. sure, the occasion or occasions—I think it There is far too much noise in the chamber. was plural but it may not have been—when I received complaints yesterday that some I turned to one of the departmental people answers were not able to be heard because of and raised the question of whether this was an the volume of the background noise. actual family. That was the story; that it was based on an actual family. Senator VANSTONE—The matter having been raised that there was some error, the We discovered some days later—I could not department went to great lengths to try to tell you exactly which day—that there was correct the information, to ensure that we had some error in the information. As I under- the right information. I thought it appropriate stand it— to let the Senate committee know because it Opposition senators interjecting— was the Senate committee which had been Senator VANSTONE—Don’t get your- inadvertently given the wrong information. selves too carried away. We were contacted That is, I think, contained in the remarks you by Social Security, either Senator Newman’s made about ‘intentionally misleading’. Your office or the department, indicating that some job is that, when misinformation is provided, of the calculations as to the social security as soon as you discover it, you have to get on benefits that would have been available were to it and get the right information, which in not spot-on. this case took a bit of time, draft an appropri- ate letter and send it to the Senate committee, Senator Bolkus—Not spot on! which I did. (Time expired) Senator VANSTONE—I would not laugh Senator CARR—Minister, will you also too much, if I were you, because the message apologise for misleading the Senate for your we wanted to convey was that this test gets at use of the bodgie figures included in the people who can artificially arrange their analysis of this bogus family, because a affairs so as to be able to get benefits. With- question on notice at the estimates committee out the exact dollar figure, the benefits that confirmed that the family received only $6 a family would have been able to get I am now fortnight in parenting allowance, not $229 as informed were not in the vicinity of $20,000 claimed by you on the front page of the Daily but more like $15,000. Telegraph? Is this not another example of you Senator Neal—Ha, ha! scandalously misleading the Senate, the public and the media and yet another example of the Senator VANSTONE—If senators opposite coalition’s failure of honesty in government, get any joy, as Senator Neal apparently does, and a clear breach of the Prime Minister’s in saying ‘Oh, ho, ho, someone could have code of conduct which dictates that ‘any got $15,000 worth of benefits’ then they are misconception caused inadvertently should be not with me. On the advice of that we obvi- corrected at the earliest opportunity’? ously wanted to check all of the information. We were then told that what the department Senator VANSTONE—Senator, I have had done was taken an actual family but had indicated to you that there was misinform- added a couple of kids to it. ation both in the calculation of the benefits and in that the family was based on an actual Opposition senators—Ha, ha! family and it had been added to. I have told Senator VANSTONE—You might think you that I wrote to the committee, correcting this is funny but I am trying to give Senator that information. I perhaps should have added Carr an answer to what I take to be a fairly that I put at the bottom that I apologised to serious question. The department said that it the committee. I also apologise to the Senate. was based on an actual family but that then If you do not take it that apologising to the some children were added. As to the reporting committee that was given the incorrect infor- in the Daily Telegraph, you may well already mation is enough—and I think it is—and you know, Senator Carr but if you do not— think it should be to the Senate as a whole, I 4264 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 unreservedly apologise. That is why I went to went out of government; the $10 billion the bother of writing to the committee and deficit that he, Mr Beazley, left; and the $180 providing the correct information. If there is billion of debt. And yet Mr Beazley still any more information I can give you with today says, ‘We need to see how deep and respect to this, I am quite happy to do so. But serious the problems are.’ It is not surprising the bottom line, Senator Carr, is that the that they were thrown out of government. information is intended to convey the truth of It is interesting, however, that, although Mr the matter, which is that— Beazley and the Labor leadership might not Senator Bolkus—The bottom line is that know how serious the problems are, within you made it up. That is the bottom line. It is the Labor Party they do. Since the election, a fraud. You lied, and you know that you there have been two studies done. The first I lied. want to refer to was from the New South The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator Bolkus, Wales Labor Party Committee. Its report withdraw that remark, please. included such people as Leo McLeay and Laurie Ferguson. What they pointed to as the Senator Bolkus—I withdraw that remark. reasons for Labor’s defeat included: rampant Senator VANSTONE——Without an insecurity; wage stagnation and sacrifice of actual means test you will have millionaires conditions for every wage increase and unem- getting Austudy for their kids. (Time expired) ployment. Budget 1996-97 It is not surprising that the last one is Senator FERGUSON—My question is mentioned again. These are all the things that directed to the Leader of the Government in apparently Mr Beazley, the now leader of the the Senate, Senator Hill. I refer the minister Labor Party, wishes to overlook. They went to a recent statement by the Leader of the on to include real wages decline. How often Opposition, Mr Beazley, who said, ‘We, the did we say from the coalition side of the Labor Party, are not yet in a position at the chamber, that under Labor real wages were moment to fully devise alternatives’ to eco- declining? But they refused to accept it. nomic and social policy. He said. ‘We need Denial, denial and more denial. And there is to see how deep and how serious the prob- still denial from Mr Beazley. lems are.’ I ask the minister: how does this Add to that study by that body of the New admission sit with Labor’s decision to sabo- South Wales Labor Party the one that has tage key elements of the coalition’s first been done by the federal Labor Party. It said: budget, which has been overwhelmingly We failed to recognise or redress a deep-seated endorsed by the Australian community, and mood of community anxiety and grievance. This what will be the consequences for the people related to factors with immediate impact on fami- of Lindsay and Australia generally if these lies, youth, unemployment, waiting lists for hospital proposals succeed? beds, leading to scepticism about the more remote big picture issues. Senator HILL—Madam President, that is a very good question, if I might say. Is it not Which, of course, the Labor Party was so astounding that after 13 years in government carried away with at that time. There you Mr Beazley, a senior minister throughout that have it again. Out of its own federal report, period, retired as finance minister and then there is emphasis on Labor’s record: unem- said, a few months after being beaten: ‘We ployment, youth disadvantage, waiting lists need to see how deep and how serious the for hospital beds and a scepticism and a problems are.’ That in fact is part of the disappointment that led to voters leaving the reason that they were defeated. They were not Labor party in droves. prepared to face up to the reality of the Even after that, even still refusing to face problems they created: problems of record up to that reality, the Labor Party expects a unemployment—unemployment up to 1 former minister to be voted back in at this by- million unemployed and 27 per cent youth election coming up in Lindsay. On what basis unemployment, Senator Carr, when your side do they deserve that when they are not even Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4265 prepared to face up to the reality of the area of their portfolio responsibilities. It is not circumstances in which they were overwhelm- Mr Fischer’s view that he held shares that ingly thrown out of government only a few would conflict with his area of portfolio months ago? They have not faced up to their responsibility. If he wants to, however, volun- failure, they have not been prepared to look tarily sell his shares—to perhaps avoid the at alternatives, they are not deserving of a consequence of your coming in here and vote in Lindsay and they will not get it. suggesting there is some breach of conflict— he is perfectly entitled to do so. Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade Senator FAULKNER—Madam President, Senator FAULKNER—My question is I ask a supplementary question. Why did Mr directed to Senator Hill, representing the Fischer hang on to his shares for so long in Minister for Trade. Is it a fact that the defiance of the Prime Minister’s guidelines, Minister for Trade, Mr Fischer, wrote to the in obvious breach of the Prime Minister’s Registrar of Interests of the House of Repre- instructions? Why did he only get rid of these sentatives on 1 August advising of the sale of shares when he was panicked into doing it by his interest in Clyde Engineering? Is it also a being exposed by the Labor Party and in the fact that the Minister for Trade, Mr Fischer, media? wrote to the Registrar of Interests of the Senator HILL—I thought I made it clear House of Representatives on 14 October that there has been no defiance. There has advising of further share divestments, includ- been no breach of the guidelines and he has ing his interests in BHP? When did he sell not been panicked. these shares, and why? Minister, is it a fact Trade Unions that on the John Laws program Mr Fischer stated that he only sold these shares in the Senator CRANE—My question is directed last couple of days and that he only sold these to the Minister representing the Minister for shares because he was ‘not going to allow this Industrial Relations. What is the government’s mob on the other side with their smear attack position on the provision of federal funding any chance to besmirch me’? (Time expired) to trade unions? Does the government’s Senator HILL—The letters to the registrar position match that of previous Labor admin- of interests will presumably show up in the istrations? If not, why not? consequence of changes to the register, so I Senator ALSTON—This is a very relevant am not sure why I am being asked that question when one talks about conflict of question. If you want me to go back and interest. What we have here is the most check the dates, and ask him whether those massive and undemocratic conflict of interest dates are correct, I will do so. On the question that you could ever imagine. Let me just as to when he sold any shares, I think that he explain this to you. Between the time that you is probably at this very moment giving that were elected to government in 1983 until the detail in the House of Representatives. But, time you went out, $92 million was granted again, if you want me to go back and ask him by your lot to the trade union movement, and when he sold shares and how many he sold, $130 million in terms of tax exemptions to then I will do that. The only part of the the union movement. In 1992-93, the Labor question is really the third part—and that is government granted $5.6 million to 18 trade the ‘why?’—and the attempt of the Labor union bodies and $2.2 million of that came Party to imply that he is selling these shares back through the revolving door. By 1994-95, because there is some conflict of duty. $16.5 million was going to the trade union That is not the case. Mr Fischer accepts his movement. obligations under the guidelines of ministerial You ask yourselves: what do the unions get responsibility. I remind you that those guide- out of this? They get a great deal. Not only lines say that ministers are required to divest did they have a place at the cabinet table but themselves of all shares and similar interests they were also able to stop industrial relations in companies or businesses involved in any reform dead in its tracks, they made sure 4266 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 there was a closed shop on the waterfront, no shape or form are you doing anything they kept their very own shipping line to run other than representing the wishes of your as they pleased and they had appointments on masters. That is where the real scandal is in the boards of the ABC, Telstra, the Reserve this country. I can assure you it will not be Bank and the Council for the Order of Aus- allowed to continue much longer. tralia—in other words, all those areas of political significance were absolutely domi- Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for nated by an outfit that claims to represent less Trade than one-third of the workers of Australia. Senator SCHACHT—My question is What do we have sitting on the other side? directed to the Minister representing the The trade union movement at prayer. Their Minister for Trade. In light of the fact that the prayers have been answered because you have Minister for Trade owned shares in BHP for 19 trade union members out of 28 in this six months while discharging his ministerial place—totally unrepresentative of the com- duties, I ask the minister: did the Deputy munity. It is an absolute disgrace that you Prime Minister promote the interests of BHP even purport to come in here and represent in a visit to Indonesia in September? Did the the public interest. You do not; you are doing Deputy Prime Minister promote the interests what your masters tell you. It is absolutely of BHP in a visit to Vietnam in August this clear that you are a wholly owned subsidiary year? Did the Deputy Prime Minister meet of the trade union movement. You will do with the President of BHP Chile, Mr Juan what your masters tell you to do. You will Salazar, in June this year during a visit to not even get up and declare your interest Chile? Did the Deputy Prime Minister sign a when the Telstra bill comes on. I have no joint communique with the Venezuelan doubt at all that you will report back and get Minister for Trade in June in relation to a your instructions. substantial BHP investment in Venezuela? Senator Bishop is a classic example. He put Did the Deputy Prime Minister tie himself to in a submission to the Telstra committee in a BHP deal in relation to ANL’s trans- his capacity as a union representative and Tasman routes during a visit to New Zealand then received it as a member of the Senate in September? How do these conflicts differ and, of course, sees nothing wrong with that. from the conflicts of interests that brought They are so used to being the puppets of the about the resignations of Senator Short and union movement that they simply do whatever Senator Gibson? they are asked to do. This is the most disgraceful conflict of Senator HILL—I certainly hope that the interest that we could find in our society: the Minister for Trade went about the business of ordinary Australians are simply not able to be promoting Australian companies when he was represented by one half of the Senate cham- overseas. That is his job. BHP, as you say, ber. When you look at the fact that you have senator, is the ‘Big Australian’, and I guess a few other odds and sods apart from the that we are very proud of its achievements unionists, I would have thought Senator Ray and the wealth that it has enabled to flow to has a lot to answer for. He can not only so many Australians. We on this side of the install the left wing in power in the Senate chamber wish BHP well and hope that it but also ensure that more and more unionists continues to be profitable. keep pouring through the doors. Since the last We also wish Mr Fischer well and hope election on 2 March, seven out of seven new that he continues to sell Australia’s interests senators on the ALP side are trade union as effectively as he has done in the past. members. There is obviously no connection with that It is an absolute disgrace. If you are serious and the unfortunate circumstances in which about conflict of interest, you will refrain Senator Short and Senator Gibson resigned— from voting on the IR bill because you simply and, Senator Schacht, you know that as well do not have an open mind on the subject. In as I do. Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4267

Mobile Phone Towers Senator ALSTON—I have just answered Senator ALLISON—Madam President, my that for you. I am not in a position to quote question is directed to the Minister for Com- from the code. If you do not have the existing munications and the Arts. Senator Alston, you code I will get a copy for you and you can go said yesterday: through it and see for yourself. There is a national code designed to regulate the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for location of mobile phone towers and other trans- Trade mission facilities. They take account of existing health concerns. Senator COOK—My question is directed to Senator Hill, the Minister representing the Can you please tell the Senate whether you Minister for Trade. Minister, is it not a fact refer to the new draft code or the existing that the Deputy Prime Minister intervened in code, and where in particular the code refers the controversy surrounding the withdrawal of to regulation of infrastructure to take account BHP from a $1.25 billion gas pipeline be- of health concerns? tween Iran and Pakistan? Is it a fact that the Senator ALSTON—I do not have either Deputy Prime Minister attacked our major code in front of me at the present time so, ally, the United States, and threatened to take obviously, I cannot quote from them. As you it to the World Trade Organisation as a would know, we have sought to revise the consequence of the US anti-terrorist legis- existing code, to tighten it in a number of lation that would have punished the investors respects, to ensure that it is not simply a in this pipeline? Is it also a fact that the matter for the carriers to decide where they Deputy Prime Minister committed Australia locate transmission towers and other facilities to doing all that it could to oppose this law? of particular significance to local communi- Is it a fact that Mr Fischer raised his concerns ties. The new code is designed to ensure that during a meeting with the US trade represen- there is more accountability and more consul- tative and the US Secretary of State? Is it a tation with the local communities. fact that Mr Fischer said: Australia will continue to lodge its protest over the In terms of the locations of those facilities, principle which sees the US bring in yet another quite clearly, one of the concerns that local non-tariff barrier. communities have is that they might somehow be responsible for radiation at unsafe levels. If it is not a conflict of interest for Mr Fischer That is why we have commissioned the work to directly promote the interests of BHP while that I announced yesterday. We are setting holding shares in the company, what is? aside $4.5 million over the next five years to Senator HILL—That is Senator Schacht’s ensure that we have an independent assess- question rephrased—and you will get my ment of the extent to which there might be answer rephrased as well. Mr Fischer has a any validity in community concern. responsibility to represent Australia’s interests and to represent Australia’s corporate inter- We are not doing what you are doing— ests. I am sure that he would do that both presuming that there is and then going on ably and with determination. He is both an from that to make out a worst case scenario, able and determined trade minister, advancing and talking doom and gloom. We are simply Australia’s trade interests wherever it is having an objective assessment of the facts, possible to do so, and he will do so without all of the scientific evidence, and to the extent fear or favour or without any interest in that that justifies any tighter action in terms relation to personal benefit. That is not what of the location of facilities and towers, we he is about, and you know that as well as I will take that very much into account. do. Senator ALLISON—Thank you, Minister Alston. If I can rephrase this question: are East Timor you willing to say to the Senate that there is Senator BROWN—My question goes to a reference within the national code to con- the Acting Minister for Foreign Affairs in the cerns about health? Senate. Minister, this morning you and your 4268 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 colleagues voted unanimously in the Senate government members for an act of self-deter- to call on the Australian government to mination for the people of East Timor? More- support self-determination for East Timor and over, will the Prime Minister be passing that to represent forcefully to the Indonesian sentiment of this Senate—and government government Australia’s support for democracy members in this Senate—to President Suharto, and the rule of law in Indonesia. I ask: why whose forces are illegally occupying East was the Prime Minister not made aware of the Timor? government’s new backing for self-determina- Senator HILL—That question really is just tion in East Timor? He was clearly not aware repeating the first question but, as I said, the of it at lunchtime. I further ask: will the government believes, as have its predecessors government now move without dissembling over the last 17 years, that the best means to to renounce the completely inconsistent bring about positive change in East Timor and former policy of backing the military occupa- encourage peace is by recognising the reality tion of Indonesia, a fact which effectively of Indonesian sovereignty. That in no way prohibits a self-determination by the East indicates approval of the way Indonesia Timorese people? incorporated East Timor into Indonesia, nor Senator HILL—The only dissembling is does it derogate from the government’s what we just heard then—not only then but recognition of the valiant efforts of Timorese also what we heard in the Senate this after- who fought alongside Australian soldiers noon and what Senator Brown said earlier on during World War II. radio today. We did not vote in that way at The government’s policy towards the East all. Timor issue includes acknowledgment of the We voted, as you know, to congratulate continuing right of the East Timorese to self- Bishop Belo and Jose Ramos Horta for determination in the terms that I put to you in receiving their Nobel prizes—and we do so. answer to your primary question. The govern- It was very generous of you to call me the ment believes there are several aspects of the acting foreign minister, but the foreign current unsatisfactory situation in the territory minister actually has already congratulated which clearly need to be addressed by the them on achieving that prize. Indonesian government. You are well aware We know that there was a little half trick of those matters, Senator. It would be better within the motion, Senator Brown. You can if, in future, you did not seek to mislead the be half smart in this business if you want to, Senate in this way. but it will not get you far. Senator Brown—Madam President, I take The position is that there has been no a point of order. The minister said that I change to the government’s policy on East sought to mislead the Senate. The government Timor, including the East Timorese right to voted for my motion which has been on the self-determination. The position means greater Notice Paper for two days. I ask him to autonomy, as it did under the previous withdraw the imputation that I sought to government. From the outset, 1975-76, Aus- mislead the Senate. tralia made it clear that it did not approve of The PRESIDENT—Order! There is no the way in which Indonesia incorporated East point of order. There is an opportunity later Timor but we acknowledge that any form of for you to speak, if you wish to do so. self-determination will need the cooperation of the Indonesian government. Howard Government Senator BROWN—This morning every Senator ROBERT RAY—I direct my member of the government, because there was question to the Minister representing the no dissembling whatever, voted to call on the Prime Minister. Minister, are you aware that Australian government to support self-deter- Senator Reid this morning told reporters: mination for East Timor. That is black and . . . you are faced with a situation where somebody white. Through you, Madam President, I ask who has been thrifty and diligent, saved and the minister: will you re-endorse that call by invested, is being penalised. Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4269

Are you further aware that on the same If the Labor Party had their way the only people subject Senator Crane said: who would be fit for office are people who are too congenitally stupid to make a quid and make an To be quite frank, I think we’ve been quite investment, and that’s not what we want in this silly...Ithink we should have looked much more country. carefully at it. Is it a fact that the Prime Minister has not Minister, do the Prime Minister’s much owned any shares in the last 20 years? Is it a vaunted guidelines punish the thrifty? Are fact that now the Prime Minister is no longer they silly? Has any government member considering Senator O’Chee as a replacement written to the Prime Minister prior to this for Senator Gibson as the new parliamentary week pointing out the faults in the guidelines? secretary? Isn’t it true that the Prime Minister is now Senator HILL—I am sure there are trade about tailoring the guidelines to fit the behav- union officials who are not stupid. If the iour of his ministers, rather than directing his Prime Minister has chosen to invest other than ministers to behave according to the guide- in shares, that is his business. He, like Senator lines? Bolkus and me, might remember the 1969-70 Senator HILL—I am sure that what Sena- boom and crash, and therefore perhaps have tor Crane was saying was that Labor’s inter- decided to invest elsewhere. pretation of the guidelines was silly. I am sure ATSIC: Special Auditor that that is the case. They do require a very high standard. There is no doubt about that. Senator ELLISON—My question is But that was a decision that the Prime directed to the Minister for Aboriginal and Minister made—and that’s fair enough. We Torres Strait Islander Affairs. The minister are expected to maintain high standards and would be aware of a media statement appar- they are set out in black and white. The issue ently issued late yesterday by Daryl Melham, about thrifty is really what the Labor Party the opposition spokesman for Aboriginal and has been seeking to imply in its questions Torres Strait Islander Affairs, under the concerning Mr Fischer today because what heading ‘Special auditor report clears ATSIC: they have been saying is that a minister Howard should apologize’. Does the minister should not hold any shares. agree with the contents of this statement and how does the auditor’s report reflect on the Senator Bob Collins—Rubbish. handling of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Senator HILL—Well, it does. The implica- Islander Affairs portfolio by the previous tion in what you have been saying is that the Labor government? trade minister cannot, consistently with the Senator HERRON—I thank Senator guidelines, hold any shares. So if he has been Ellison for his question. Senators may recall thrifty and has built up some assets in the that yesterday I was somewhat critical of the form of shares, before taking ministerial shadow minister, Mr Melham, for describing office, he should get rid of them. If that is the report of the special auditor as ‘a political what the guidelines did say, that would be a stunt’ in saying, ‘This special auditor’s report penalty on the thrifty. gives ATSIC a huge tick; a huge clearance.’ Senator Cook—That is wrong. I must confess that it crossed my mind at the time, being charitable, that he must not have Senator HILL—That is correct, Senator. read the report. They do not say that; that is the point. That But I cannot now give him that excuse is why Mr Fischer did not have to sell the because he put out a press release. And, after shares. The guidelines allow shares to be held putting him straight yesterday by pointing out provided there is not a conflict of interest. that the report found that a total of 374 of the Senator ROBERT RAY—I ask a supple- 1,300 organisations funded by ATSIC were mentary question. Do you, Senator Hill, agree either in serious breach, not fit and proper or with another one of your colleagues this requiring immediate and close attention and morning who said: that the 374 organisations received a total of 4270 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

$241 million in their latest ATSIC grant, I quarter of a billion dollars have mismanaged their thought he might have finally got the funding. The audit has found that at least $241 message. Instead, he put out a press release million has gone to Aboriginal organisations under a cloud. which compounded his earlier display of ignorance by again insisting the special And you might accept the Financial Review: auditor found nothing that— A special auditor appointed by the Federal Senator Bob Collins—No, that is a gross Government has called for sweeping changes to the distortion of what the report says. way the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission allocates grants after finding problems Senator HERRON—It was not a gross with funding worth $120 million. distortion because I will quote from it: Opposition senators interjecting— The Australian Securities Commission would be delighted with this level of compliance in the The PRESIDENT—Order! business world. Senator HERRON—I can understand them ...... crying out on the other side, Madam Presi- This report is a huge embarrassment for the govern- dent, because it was under their control—their ment. lack of control—that this occurred...... There should be an apology from the Labor The special audit was expensive and a waste of Party. It once again highlights their complete time. incompetence in government and, in particu- It is in his press release. The only huge lar, this portfolio. I commend to them an embarrassment around here are the people on estimable article in the Sydney Morning the opposite side: the Australian Labor Party Herald. Once again, they should look at their and its shadow minister who, by his refusal to handling of the Hindmarsh Island fiasco. face the facts, has demonstrated just how out Their solution to the problem seemed to be to of touch Labor is with reality. toss fistfuls of dollars around the place in the hope that it would cure the problem. They are I could once again provide the special failures. On 2 March the Australian people auditor’s figures but, instead, it might be showed them that they were failures when illuminating to look at what others have had they were comprehensibly tossed out of to say about the special auditor’s report. The office. And they will not be regaining office Herald-Sun in today’s editorial says: for many years to come if this is the evidence The audit. . . reveals a litany of shortcomings of how they have got the message. They have ranging from unauthorised spending on expensive not got the message yet! cars, houses for directors, holidays and overseas travel, to incompetent, untrained management. Senator Bob Collins—You’re as bad as ...... Pauline Hanson. In fact, you’re worse because you have no excuse. You’re worse than This is a sorry reflection on the degree of supervision that prevailed under Labor. Hanson. The Adelaide Advertiser under the heading, Senator Panizza—On a point of order, ‘Aboriginal misuse of funding widespread’ Madam President: there is a withdrawal to be says: made from over there—and I am sure you Some of the 60 worst offenders, which were in heard it too. New South Wales, Queensland, Western Australia The PRESIDENT—I did not hear anything and South Australia, had bought luxury cars, houses that I would ask to be withdrawn. for directors, holidays and overseas travel without appropriate authorisation. Senator Bob Collins—Madam President, The Courier-Mail in Brisbane under the is an allusion that the Minister for Aboriginal heading, ‘Audit faults 90 per cent of ATSIC and Torres Strait Islander Affairs has similar group’ says: views to a member of the House of Repre- sentatives now unparliamentary? Almost nine in 10 of all taxpayer-funded Abo- riginal organisations responsible for almost a Senator Panizza—That’s not it. Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4271

The PRESIDENT—I will need to check The PRESIDENT—Order! I did not hear the Hansard as to what is reported because at the remark made by Senator Bolkus. I am not the time there were a number of people surprised that I did not hear the remark by speaking. Senator Bolkus. Not having heard it, I am not Senator ELLISON—Will the minister myself in a position to ask him to withdraw. comment on ATSIC’s response to the special There was far too much noise in the chamber auditor’s report? to enable me to do so. Senator Bob Collins—You are worse than Senator Alston—Madam President, I did Pauline Hanson. not ask you to rule on something that you did not hear. I asked that you invite the Hansard Senator Bolkus—Why do you hate black- reporter to read back the relevant part of what fellas? Senator Bolkus said: what I clearly heard and Senator HERRON—I will take that. what he now denies. You are in a position Would you ask him to withdraw, Madam here and now to have the matter clarified. President? And we will see what sort of a liar Bolkus is. Honourable senators interjecting— Senator Bolkus—Madam President, I seek leave to withdraw both what I said and what Senator HERRON—I heard it. the opposition thinks I said. Senator Bolkus—I said why should you The PRESIDENT—Thank you. conduct a hate campaign against the black people. Senator Alston—Madam President— Senator HERRON—No, you didn’t. No, Senator Bob Collins—How many points of you didn’t. He’s misled the House. I take order are you going to run with? Three in a personal affront to that, Madam President. I row? heard what he said. Senator Alston—I will take points of order until such time as I think we have had a Opposition senators interjecting— proper resolution of the matter. Senator HERRON—Do you want me to Senator Bob Collins—No— say it? Senator Alston—Until the President tells Opposition senators interjecting— me that I am not entitled to take the matter Senator HERRON—He said, ‘Why do you any further. hate blackfellas?’ That is what he said. The PRESIDENT—Order! What is the Opposition senators interjecting— point of order? Senator HERRON—Yes, you did—and we Senator Alston—That, Madam President, all heard it. Madam President, I ask him to you are in a position to clarify what Senator withdraw. Bolkus said in the first instance. Not what he Honourable senators interjecting— now cutely says we say he said but what he did say. And you ought to do that whilst the The PRESIDENT—Order! It is absolutely relevant Hansard reporter is in the chamber impossible to hear what is going on in the so that we can determine once and for all chamber with so much shouting from both whether Senator Bolkus is misleading the sides. Senate. Senator Alston—On a point of order, The PRESIDENT—I will check the Hans- Madam President: you had Senator Bolkus ard later, as is the customary way of dealing just deny that he said what I heard and what with such a matter. Senator Bolkus has Senator Herron clearly heard. I ask you to withdrawn and I will check later what occur- invite the Hansard reporter to read back that red. particular part and we will hear what Senator Senator Bob Collins—Madam President, Bolkus had to say. I raise a point of order. I call on the Minister Honourable senators interjecting— for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander 4272 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

Affairs to table that section of the auditor’s Minister, what is the relevance of the size of report that refers to the executive cars and the the shareholding to the requirement for executive houses—because it does not exist. ministers to ‘divest themselves of all shares The PRESIDENT—There is no point of and similar interests in any company or order. There are other opportunities to raise business involved in the area of their portfolio matters that you believe have not been raised responsibilities’? Further, is it true that the correctly. I think Senator Ellison had asked a Prime Minister also defended Mr Moore on supplementary question. Is that the case? the basis that his shareholdings were in related companies rather than a parent com- Senator Ellison—Yes, I had. Do you wish pany? Given that Senator Gibson resigned me to repeat it? because of a decision regarding a subsidiary The PRESIDENT—I would like you to company to the one in which he held shares repeat it because I did not hear what it was. and given that Mr Moore now finds himself in the same situation, why, apparently, is Mr Senator Ellison—I asked the minister: will Moore more deserving of the Prime Minister’s he comment on ATSIC’s response to the loyalty than Senator Gibson? (Time expired) special auditor’s report? Senator HILL—A subsidiary is owned by Senator HERRON—As I said yesterday, the principal company. I think the point you I must place on record my thanks to ATSIC are missing is that the guidelines that I am and to ATSIC staff, who put a great deal of reading and you have been reading do not in effort into supporting the work of the special fact provide for tracing down through invest- auditor. As the Chair of ATSIC, Lois ments in companies that are the subject of the O’Donoghue, said in response to the release issue. The guidelines provide that ministers of the special auditor’s report: are required to divest themselves of all shares The findings in KPMG’s final report offer lessons and similar interests in any company or for improving and streamlining ATSIC’s accounta- business involved in the area of their portfolio bility requirements. ATSIC was committed to using responsibilities. As I interpret that, if the the outcomes of the special auditor process to company in which the minister holds shares strengthen its grant administrations. is the company out of which the conflict The West Australian, under the heading arises, there would be a need to divest. But if ‘ATSIC agrees to help with shake-up in its you are going to get to a situation where you finances’, says: have to explore further within the investments A shake-up is ahead for the Aboriginal and Torres of that company, and that company may well Strait Islander Commission with the cooperation of be investing in another investment company, the commission. The commission has agreed to and trace that through to the investments of follow the recommendation of the federal that company, it obviously becomes ridiculous government’s special auditor report. ATSIC Chair- and they are not intended to be interpreted in man Lois O’Donoghue said she was committed to a ridiculous way. the outcomes of the audit. "Everyone has accepted that the special audit processes have been of Senator FAULKNER—I ask a supplemen- enormous value to ATSIC and to the government." tary question. Isn’t it true, minister, that the Everyone except those opposite, and that is fact is that Senator Short and Senator Gibson because Senator Collins and Mr Melham have were expendable ministers but, of course, all egg on their faces. (Time expired) other ministers are going to be protected, regardless of the extent of their breach of the Howard Government prime ministerial guidelines, because the Senator FAULKNER—My question is Prime Minister knows that the government is directed to the Minister representing the Prime crumbling, he knows that his leadership has Minister. Did the Prime Minister on the 7.30 been exposed as weak and inept on this issue, Report last night say: and he cannot afford any more resignations? The point is whether you control a company in Senator HILL—That is a good little such a way that you can benefit. political speech, but the point is that what this Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4273 demonstrates is the high standards that this criticisms—sometimes very severe criti- Prime Minister requires. cisms—of Indonesia’s human rights perform- Opposition senators interjecting— ance from time to time. We are the first to admit that we would still wish to see further Senator HILL—Even Senator Ray would change in East Timor—a change that includes accept they are very demanding guidelines; a significant reduction in the size of the very high standards are expected. I do not military presence, enhanced religious toler- think that is unreasonable. I think the public ance and administrative arrangements which have a right to expect high standards. What accord more influence and autonomy to indig- the Prime Minister has demonstrated is that he enous East Timorese. will uphold those standards. There is no dispute about that. I think all East Timor parties in this place would agree. Whilst we Senator BOURNE—My question is ad- are still critical on the human rights issue dressed to the Minister representing the from time to time, we also try to give some Minister for Foreign Affairs. Has the minister credit where it is deserved. What has hap- seen statements made by Mr Bob Dole’s pened under President Suharto has been an campaign team in the USA, and presumably unprecedented level of stability and growth endorsed by Mr Dole, which describe the that has brought great economic benefit to Indonesian government as ‘a military dictator- many, many millions of Indonesians. I am not ship and a military junta that has slaughtered trying to discount the other side of the equa- hundreds of thousands in East Timor’? Does tion, but I do think it ought to be put in the the minister agree with Mr Dole’s descrip- context of the whole picture. In relation to the tions? If the Indonesian President were to visit hypothetical question, I can refer that back to Australia, would it be the government’s the Prime Minister, but I think at this stage he intention to maintain consistency by inviting would probably regard it as hypothetical as the head of state of our largest and closest well. neighbour to address a joint meeting of both houses of the federal parliament in the House Minister for Industry, Science and of Representatives? Tourism Senator HILL—I have seen the quotes to Senator BOB COLLINS—My question is which the honourable senator refers. To be directed to the Minister representing the Prime fair, I think they have got to be looked at in Minister. Minister, is it a fact that a total of context. I remind the Senate of what the 81,600 Bligh Ventures shares were traded in article actually said: a single day on 19 July this year? The United States presidential challenger, Mr Bob Dole, has savaged the Indonesian Government for Senator Cook—Really? its handling of East Timor in a bid to score election points over donations by an Indonesian business- Senator BOB COLLINS—Yes, really. And man to the President, Mr Clinton. that a further 40,000 Bligh Ventures shares It went on to say: were traded on 29 July this year, with the price closing at $2.40 on both days? Is it a Desperate to gain momentum against Mr Clinton fact therefore that, if Mr Moore had been in the last weeks of the campaign, Mr Dole’s campaign described the Indonesian regime as . . . willing to accept $2.40 per share, he could have divested himself of his holdings on at And what followed was the quote given by least two occasions since May? Given the Senator Bourne. Unfortunately, those quotes Prime Minister’s view—I might add categori- were apparently in the context of a domestic cal view—that it is not acceptable to delay political campaign that was taking place in divestment in order to maximise profits, and the United States, and obviously it would be the Prime Minister’s even more categorical inappropriate for me to comment on that. view expressed less than an hour ago that he In relation to Indonesia’s behaviour in East had instructed all ministers to comply with Timor, across this chamber there have been the code of ministerial behaviour, will the 4274 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

Prime Minister now take action and direct Mr nations were not as a result of anything the Moore to immediately divest himself? Labor Party did. Furthermore, there was no Senator HILL—I have to confess that, no benefit sought or gained by either Senator doubt unlike most honourable senators, until Short or Senator Gibson. a few days ago I had never heard of Bligh Senator Faulkner—They were exposed by Ventures, let alone knew what the market was us and you know it. for their shares. The point is that Senator Collins continues to refuse to acknowledge Senator HILL—They were not exposed by that there is no conflict of interest in Mr you. They searched their— Moore holding those shares. In other words, Senator Faulkner—Right here in this Mr Moore is voluntarily choosing to dispose chamber and you know it. of those shares above and beyond his obliga- Senator HILL—No. It was not the holding tion under the ministerial guidelines. That is of the shares that led to their resignation; it the key point. was the fact that they had inadvertently taken Honourable senators interjecting— actions that could be interpreted as being a The PRESIDENT—Order! Order! There conflict of interest situation. They did that are too many interjections— voluntarily after their own search. I think that demonstrates that they took a very high Senator HILL—There may be difficulty in penalty indeed. (Time expired) the market. I understood from what I had heard in the last few days that there was Lindsay By-election difficulty in the market, although Senator Senator BOSWELL—My question is Collins is suggesting that there was not. But directed to the Minister representing the Prime that is really irrelevant to the key question. Minister. Is the minister aware of claims that The key question is whether there was a the independent member for Kalgoorlie conflict of interest, and we would argue—Mr brokered a preference deal between the ALP Moore would argue and I would argue—that, and the Australians Against Further Immigra- in his holding those shares, there is no con- tion in the Lindsay by-election? What flict in accordance with the terms of the message does this coalition of interests send ministerial regulations. to Australians? Will the deal alter the Senator BOB COLLINS—Madam Presi- government’s policies in this area? dent, I ask a supplementary question. In Senator HILL—It certainly will not alter response to that answer and the notice with our policies, because we will not make policy which ministers were given that this was a on the basis of short-term political gain, as it serious issue, the Prime Minister said this would seem the Labor Party are seeking to do morning on the ABC Pru Goward program in the Lindsay by-election. All of a sudden, that the opposition had not raised the question despite all the public protestations, it is to of these ministerial guidelines at all at the their political advantage to get into bed with time they were tabled. Minister, given that the this group—a group described by some as an guidelines were tabled by you on 30 April extremist group and described by others as a and that the opposition raised the question of body that includes extremists. I understand— ministerial breaches of these guidelines only a week later, will you now confirm to the Senator Robert Ray—When? Senate that the Prime Minister’s statement on Senator HILL—I will give you some the ABC program this morning was wrong? examples, Senator. I understand Senator Senator HILL—No, there was not anything Boswell’s concern because he is one person that was wrong. It is a serious issue. We do in this chamber who has constantly fought not dispute that. I personally do not think it extremism in any form. I give him credit. Mr is as important as mass unemployment, but Denis McCormack, from this organisation, you perhaps do. I might say, just to correct told the Sydney Morning Herald on 19 March another thing, that the two unfortunate resig- 1994: Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4275

I can tell you there are folk out there buying guns get no benefit and for which I trust you will and bullets. Can you blame people for getting past get no votes. the point of frustration by thinking well it is time? This is the sort of organisation that apparently Howard Government the Labor Party is doing its sleazy deals with. Senator FAULKNER—My question is In the Melbourne Herald-Sun on 15 April directed to the Minister representing the Prime 1994, it was reported that one AAFI candidate Minister. I refer Senator Hill to the Guide on said: key elements of ministerial responsibility, My policies on refugees and illegals is to reopen Prime Minister, Canberra, April 1996 and I the second Yallah meatworks, creating up to 500 ask: did the Prime Minister write this Guide local jobs, and convert them to blood and bone. on key elements of ministerial responsibility; if he did not write it, who did: or did he just But, when asked about it, he said it was a sign it off when someone shoved it under his joke. What a sick joke! These are the people nose? that you are getting into bed with. What did Senator Bolkus say in relation to this organi- Senator HILL—That is perhaps the silliest sation? Just listen to this: Senator Bolkus, question we have had all week if you think when he was immigration minister— the Prime Minister sat down in his study one night with pen and paper and started from Opposition senators interjecting— clause one. The important thing is that the The PRESIDENT—Order! There is too document is published under the Prime Minis- much noise in the chamber. Senator Hill, just ter’s name. The Prime Minister stands by it. wait please. It is almost impossible to hear Senator Faulkner—Who wrote it? you with the amount of interjections. Senator HILL—You would know that. It Senator Alston—It is really hurting them. is published under the Prime Minister’s name. Why else would they be squealing like cut cats? Senator Faulkner—Who wrote this? The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator The PRESIDENT—Order! Senator Alston! Faulkner! Senator HILL—How did Senator Bolkus Senator HILL—This is a document under describe this group that the Labor Party has the Prime Minister’s name by which the now done a deal with to get preferences? He Prime Minister stands. said: Senator FAULKNER—Madam President, It is an anti-Labor organisation— I ask a supplementary question. Given that Perhaps he ought to tell his party leaders there is not a skerrick of evidence that the about that— Prime Minister has ever read this document, With an advance Australia backwards mentality. I ask the minister: did he ever read the docu- ment or just the cover? He then had a sling at Graeme Campbell who apparently negotiated this deal for the ALP. Senator HILL—How profound! This is a Senator Bolkus said: prime ministerial document, published under his name and by which he stands. Madam If Graeme Campbell wants to associate himself President, I ask that further questions be with them, he will be judged by such association. placed on the Notice Paper. The Labor Party will be judged by such association, because it has been reported that PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS this group bought the deal with the Labor Senator BROWN (Tasmania)—by leave— Party. The AAFI had been told that Mr Free On Monday I brought into the Senate a notice could be a useful voice for their views in of motion on self-determination for East caucus, because Mr Free harboured concerns Timor and read it out so that every member about the previous Labor government’s of the Senate could hear and clearly under- immigration and multicultural policies. What stand the motion. Two days have passed and a short-term, shabby deal for which you will the evaluation of that motion has been avail- 4276 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 able not only to the Senate but also to the none. This Prime Minister, who thought this Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr Downer). guide was so important to the parliament and Today the Senate voted unanimously and people of Australia, has done nothing, since without demur to endorse that motion on self- it was tabled in April of this year, to ensure determination for East Timor. that his ministers complied with the guide. The PRESIDENT—Senator Brown, you He went on to say the onus was not on him have been given leave to make a personal as the Prime Minister; the onus was on the explanation. You should not be debating the individual ministers themselves. They had to motion you brought in or what has occurred. take all the responsibility. It is the Prime Senator BROWN—In response to my Minister’s guide but he was not going to do question during question time, the minister anything to ensure that it was complied with said that I had sought to mislead the Senate by those who had taken the Executive Coun- and that my motion was a trick. I want to cil oath. That is the situation that we are make it clear that neither of those things is faced with—a Prime Minister who did noth- true. It is patently a part of government ing about his own guidelines. bungling, if at best, that this situation has Of course, the Prime Minister was willing arisen. Let me say that it was an earnest to take all the credit when these guidelines motion brought in here with great seriousness were brought down. When the guidelines are by me. I believe the vote of this Senate— exposed as a complete fraud, which they have whatever the government says—reflects the been in this parliament by the opposition in fact that the majority of people in this Senate both the Senate and the House of Representa- in their hearts agree with the terms of that tives over the last week, he moves away from motion. them. He now says these guidelines were very similar to those brought down by the Labor QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Party. The much trumpeted guidelines of Mr Howard Government Howard have suddenly changed. He said Senator FAULKNER (New South Wales— when he brought them down, ‘I understand Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (3.07 this is the first time that such a document has p.m.)—I move: been produced. The guidelines that were laid down in this document will be complied with That the Senate take note of the answers given in full.’ Senator Hill said in this chamber in by the Leader of the Government in the Senate, to questions without notice asked by Senator Faulkner April: today, relating to senators’ and members’ interests It underlines this government’s complete commit- and the Prime Minister’s Guide on key elements of ment to high standards of ministerial conduct and Ministerial Responsibility. accountability. The Prime Minister, John Howard, has been Senator Hill said in this chamber: caught, has been engulfed and has been They are very demanding standards—there is no swamped with his Guide on key elements of doubt about that. We accept high standards for this ministerial responsibility. We all remember government. after the election the puffed up self- But, once the Prime Minister has been ex- importance with which Senator Hill came into posed as weak and unable to make his this chamber to present the Prime Minister’s ministers comply with these guidelines, we guide and with which the Prime Minister see a very significant change in rhetoric from presented this guide to the parliament and to the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister says the people of Australia. now, in October, it is up to ministers to We all remember how he waxed lyrical interpret the guidelines correctly and adhere about these guidelines on ministerial responsi- to them. Those are the Prime Minister’s bility. He was asked as recently as this morn- words. He says the booklet that was published ing in a press conference what action he took represents in substance a consolidation of the to ensure that these guidelines were complied guidelines that were adhered to, presumably, with. The simple answer to that question is: one expects, by the former government. He Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4277 said in the House of Representatives on 15 Consistently, when you leave your positions October: and walk through the trade union movement, I wish to say that the guidelines which were you get your little lump sums, your payouts. effectively consolidated by the new government You invest it in real estate and all sorts of when it came to power are guidelines that have things. You do not declare what you are now been in operation for a long period of time. doing. I have very seldom seen any of you He has left the guidelines behind him. We declare an interest on any of the things that have had the sacking of Senator Short, who you voted on in this place. finally fronted up to Mr Howard and said he Senator Crowley did the other day. I am not should go. We have had Senator Gibson hit saying it is the only occasion but that is the the fence as well. Now Mr Moore and Mr only occasion on which I have seen her Howard are exposed as being in a clear declare an interest in a particular aspect. conflict of interest situation, in a government Opposition members interjecting— of ministers of conspicuous wealth, becoming more conspicuous by the minute despite all The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Order on their efforts to hide it. (Time expired) my left! Senator CRANE—That is the only time I Senator CRANE (Western Australia) (3.12 have seen you declare an interest. But let us p.m.)—I too would like to address the propo- just look at a few of these figures and some sition in this motion from the Leader of the of the things that have come back. There are Opposition in the Senate (Senator Faulkner). a few connections over on the over side— Senator Carr—Is this more advice to the grants from the government: $1.253 million. Prime Minister? How much came back to the Australian Labor Senator CRANE—I will give you plenty Party? It was $306,000. Let us try the SDA— of advice. Let me tell you to begin with that $65,000 from the government. How much the greatest conflict of interest that has ever have they put back into the donation to the existed in this parliament lies on the other ALP? It is $446,000. Now don’t come into side of this room. It is the Labor Party in- this place and tell me you have not got a volvement for years in the union movement conflict of interest. You were lining their and the handouts they have given it and the pockets consistently in terms of what you did money that has come back. We heard about in this place. You have lined their pockets. that in Senator Alston’s answer today. Opposition members interjecting— First of all, I want to deal with the honour- The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Order! able position adopted by Senator Short over Those on my left are being an absolute there— disgrace. Senator Bob Collins—Are you saying they Senator CRANE—Thank you, Mr Deputy are silly? President. The problem is that when they cop a little bit back they can’t take it. The only Senator CRANE—I said you were silly, answer they have to things is to turn around and you are. I will read out the whole quote. and yell and scream and jump up and down; It is very easy to take a little quote out of that is their performance and behaviour. That context and put it up before this place, as you is what they have done consistently. well know and have done today. Let us talk about conflict of interest in the Senator Short and Senator Gibson them- case of one particular Western Australian selves came to the conclusion that inadver- politician whom I cannot resist mentioning, tently they had made a mistake. They came that is, the member for Fremantle, Carmen into this place and resigned. You should Lawrence. Just have a little look at her posi- acknowledge that they had looked at the tion, her conflict of interest, and see how she records and then they took that action. Show behaved. Where was the credibility in her a little decency in terms of dealing with what position? Where was she straight with the was a very difficult situation for them. Australian public? 4278 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

Senator West—Your blokes can’t even What is being debated here is the standard remember within six weeks if you have of behaviour applied to the government by the shares. The memories of your blokes are just government, and the standard of behaviour unbelievable! that they promised the electorate they would apply. And what was the relevant section of Senator CRANE—Listen to you—rabbit, that standard, a copy of which I have here? It rabbit, rabbit! Why don’t you rabbit on a little said: bit more? When ensuring that no conflict or— Through you, Mr Deputy President, the and importantly— reality is that we have before us today the fact apparent conflict between interests and duties that Senator Short and Senator Gibson acted arises— with an enormous amount of credibility and an enormous amount of decency. They did the and it says as well— right thing in terms of the position before us ministers are required to divest themselves of all now. But those people on the other side have shares and similar interests in any company or business involved in the area of their portfolio consistently lined the pockets of their mates. responsibilities. The transfer of interests to a family I will quote a couple more examples; it is member or to a nominee or trust is not an accept- interesting to go through them. able form of divestment. It would take half an hour or so to go That is the standard the government imposed through the lot, but when we look at the on itself, and this debate is about whether or LHMWU grant from the government, there not government ministers are maintaining the was a donation to the ALP of $254,000. So standard the government set. We have seen they gave half the money, in round figures, one minister and a parliamentary secretary that was granted by the government straight resign because there was, to use their words, back to the ALP. If that is not a distortion of ‘an apparent conflict’. They resigned, and the the use of public funds I do not know what is. issue is whether other ministers in this government are in conflict, or in apparent Let us look at the AWU since Senator conflict, with the standard that the govern- Forshaw is over there: a $270,000 grant from ment has set. the government, but they were a little more In question time there were questions from miserable—they only gave $56,000 back to Senator Schacht and me concerning the the ALP. Look at the ASU: a $470,000 grant Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Fischer. It should from the government, and they gave $83,000 be said that no-one on our side, and certainly back to the ALP. What a wonderful way to not me as a former minister for trade, is fund your organisation! Let me tell you, that complaining in the slightest that the Minister is coming to an end. (Time expired) for Trade for Australia supports Australian Senator COOK (Western Australia) (3.17 companies overseas. That is his job. We have p.m.)—I want to remind the Senate what this no complaint about that. More strength to the debate really is about and not be diverted into minister’s arm for so doing. the obfuscations and red herrings that have The complaint is, however, that in this case just been drawn across it. This debate is about the minister is clearly as well in breach of the the Prime Minister (Mr Howard) saying to the code of conduct and is promoting the interests electors of Australia before the election that of companies in which he has shares and, he was going to introduce a new code of therefore, stands to be a personal beneficiary integrity and probity in parliament. He waved of the public work and public duty he is around an election promise that he was going performing. The problem is not that he pro- to do this by introducing a code of ministerial motes the companies; the problem is that he conduct. That was what he pledged to the maintains shares in them, and the promotion people of Australia before the election, and he engages in therefore can advantage him after the election he did introduce a code of either directly or apparently. It is the ministerial conduct. ‘apparent’ part of this code of conduct which Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4279 is what caused Senator Short to resign. No- Senator BOSWELL (Queensland—Leader one said he had necessarily benefited finan- of the National Party of Australia in the cially, but there was a substantial question as Senate) (3.22 p.m.)—Senator Cook’s interpre- to whether there was an appearance of him tation of the guidelines is very incorrect. The benefiting. It is exactly the same position for guidelines precisely say that if a minister or former Parliamentary Secretary Gibson. a parliamentary secretary makes a decision But that is not the same position, apparent- that would in any way benefit a company that ly, that this government now wants to apply they have an interest in, then that is a breach. to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Senator Short and former Parliamentary Trade, Mr Fischer, who, in promoting the Secretary Gibson honourably came in here interests of one of his major shareholdings—a and said that in some way they may have company he only divested himself of shares breached that guideline. But that is a long in just the other day—obviously stood to have bow from the situation of the Deputy Prime some advantage. Whether he did it because of Minister (Mr Tim Fischer), who had shares in that advantage or because of the apparent BHP and who never, in any way, made a conflict is not the issue: the fact is he is in determination that affected the price of those breach of the guidelines. shares. If the Prime Minister has any guts, and if Senator Cook, are you telling the Senate the Prime Minister is determined to uphold that the Minister for Trade (Mr Tim Fischer) the promise he made to electors about parlia- should not go on and cheer—we have had mentary conduct and parliamentary probity, some private discussions about this—for then the Prime Minister will insist that the Australian companies? He was cheering for Deputy Prime Minister will now tender his Australian companies overseas, barracking for resignation. The issue here is whether the them and promoting them so they could Prime Minister meant it. promote benefits and jobs for Australia. These are two very different circumstances. The two What we have seen on television and in the people who came in here and honourably media in the last few days is the Prime resigned—I think they were very honourable Minister backtracking and running away from in the decisions that they took—met their the undertaking he gave prior to the election. commitments; they met the guidelines of the He is backtracking and reinterpreting what the Prime Minister (Mr Howard). You are ex- code of ministerial conduct means in order trapolating the guidelines so widely that it is now to protect ministers. He is faced with a getting to the stage of being ridiculous. political problem. He has found that, on his front bench, many of his ministers did not I am sure that the Deputy Prime Minister comply with the standards he set down, and has acted with integrity and honour, and no- some of them have gone. The government is one in this parliament can ever question his in crisis and is haemorrhaging. In order to integrity or his honour because he is an staunch that crisis and prevent that haemor- honourable person. To suggest otherwise is rhage, he now reinterprets the code so that no doing your cause no good; you are discredit- further ones will resign. ing your cause beyond comprehension. That is not a situation that is acceptable. I sat in the parliament for two years when The Prime Minister declared these standards; the then Prime Minister of this country, Mr it is for him to uphold them, and it is for him Keating, went out and used his prime to ensure those ministers uphold them as well. ministerial office to extract a loan from the We know that the Deputy Prime Minister has Commonwealth Bank to involve himself in a shares in BHP, Western Mining, Qantas, piggery that was owned by a foreign govern- TNT, Jardine Fleming, Asia Pacific and a ment. He used his position for three years number of other companies. He divested until we hounded him and hounded him in himself of those just the other day after the this parliament and forced him to resign. You expiry of the Prime Minister’s deadline. (Time guys should hang your heads in shame to expired) come in here and suggest that, in some way, 4280 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 the Deputy Prime Minister of Australia has no different interpretation of a guideline that he integrity, because your Prime Minister led the actually wrote. way in the lack of integrity in this parliament. In question time today, Senator Hill made You know it too well. it quite clear that the Prime Minister is the When has a Prime Minister of Australia author of these guidelines. Yet at lunchtime, ever used his position to go and do a business at the press conference, the Prime Minister deal with Danpork, which is a subsidiary of was saying, ‘As I read them,’ ‘As I interpret the Danish government? them.’ Goodness me! He should not have to interpret them. He should be able to say, Senator Cook—It didn’t happen. ‘These are my guidelines. This is what it Senator BOSWELL—It did happen. Are means.’ But now he is saying, ‘As I read you telling me that the former Prime Minister them,’ because he is under considerable of Australia did not use his leadership posi- embarrassment as a result of the actions of his tion of this country to further his own inter- own party. ests? He did not offer any excuses for it. He Today in the Senate we had quotes from a said it was going to help Australia in the end. backbencher and the President of Senate. The people of Australia do not want the Senator Reid, the President of the Senate, the Prime Minister to use his position to get Liberal senator for the ACT, asked about involved with a foreign government and then, holding shares, said, ‘That, to me, seems a bit on top of that, extract a loan from the absurd. I think we need have to a closer look Commonwealth Bank that is far beyond the at what we are doing.’ The President of capacity of any normal business person to Senate said that. Winston Crane said, ‘To be actually take out from a bank. quite frank, I think we have been quite silly.’ I know that Winston does not count for much Senator Cook—Not true; you’ve got your on the opposition benches, but Winston is facts wrong. saying, ‘We have been quite silly,’ and the Senator BOSWELL—It is absolutely true. President of the Senate says, ‘I think it is You guys have had some success only be- quite absurd.’ cause of the honour of Senator Gibson and With all of that sort of pressure, the Prime Senator Short, who came in here and said, Minister is now trying to think of a way to ‘We may have done something that does not bust and break his own guidelines, which he conform to the guidelines.’ But do not try and trumpeted around the place would take the push your luck, because you are failing parliament to a new standard. He has now miserably. suggested there may be a blind trust estab- Senator SCHACHT (South Australia) lished. The only thing that is blind is the (3.27 p.m.)—Mr Deputy President, I rise to Prime Minister, who now cannot see that Mr support the motion moved by Senator Moore and Mr Fischer are clearly in breach Faulkner. Today we had another bumbling, of his own guideline, which has now been inept effort by the government to try to get quoted so extensively. It states: themselves off their own hook; to try to Ministers are required to divest themselves of all dissemble from their own ministerial guide- shares and similar interests in any company or lines, which were trumpeted before the elec- business involved in the area of their portfolio tion and after the election by the now Prime responsibilities. Minister (Mr Howard) as a new standard of Black and white, without any doubt. You can conduct for government in Australia. Yet, in understand what that says—even, I think, the last 24 to 36 hours, the Prime Minister most people opposite. The question I asked has been dumping on his own ministerial today about Mr Fischer dealt with the fact guidelines. I saw at a press conference held that as trade minister over the last six months only at midday today that the Prime Minister while he held shares in BHP, which he is now saying, ‘As I read the guidelines.’ He admitted in the House of Representatives wrote them! He is now saying that there is a today he only divested himself of earlier this Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4281 week, he made a number of representations there, so she was allowed to keep on for a on behalf of BHP. If he did not have shares considerable period of time. in the company we would all cheer him on If you have a set of guidelines that my and say: ‘That is excellent. That is what you friend and colleague Senator Brian Gibson should be doing.’ But it is a sheer conflict of falls foul of, you have to ask the question: are interest, an absolute conflict of interest, to be the guidelines right? I do not know a more promoting BHP in various countries around honourable person than Senator Brian Gibson. the world while you hold shares in it. I felt the sadness of his announcement yester- Maybe if you were in the old Somoza day very personally. I am delighted that the regime in Nicaragua that would be an accept- Prime Minister (Mr Howard) has announced able practice, but not in a First World, OECD a review of those guidelines, which have led nation. It will be looked on as a pretty shaky to the ridiculous situation where a man who operation—in particular, when he is threaten- has done nothing dishonest, who does not ing to take the Americans to the World Trade have a single ounce of mean spirit in his Organisation, which would help BHP. Imag- body, finds himself in the position of having ine what they would say in America, after Mr to resign. Those same guidelines allowed Costello’s extraordinary performance leaking Carmen Lawrence, who lied under oath, to on Mr Greenspan. We now have an example maintain her ministerial commission. That is of the trade minister owning shares in BHP what we are balancing up today in this de- and on their behalf threatening to take the bate. They are the standards. Americans to the World Trade Organisation. Nobody on the other side has suggested that This is an astonishing conflict of interest. Senator Short or Senator Gibson have lied, nor have they suggested that they sought to Finally, if there is no conflict of interest, if get any ill-gotten profit by their actions— Mr Howard is right with these two ministers, Moore and Fischer, why are they selling their Senator Patterson—Or not disclosed shares? Even if it is late, even six months on, things. if there is no conflict of interest why are they Senator ABETZ—Or not disclosed things. selling their shares? They know that unless They fully declared publicly and openly for they sell the shares, even as late as it is, they everybody to see that they had their cannot get out of the jam that they have shareholdings way before it came to light that placed themselves and their government in. they were in a technical breach. That is the The only thing we need now is two more only thing the Australian Labor Party has resignations—that of Moore and Fischer. been saying—that it was a technical breach. (Time expired) My goodness, the people of Australia Senator ABETZ (Tasmania) (3.32 p.m.)— listening to this debate have the opportunity This discussion is all about ministerial integri- to see two very honourable people resigning ty and the guidelines that have been put down because of a breach of a technicality in the in black and white. The guidelines do not say guidelines, which is in stark contradistinction things such as ‘a minister shall not lie under to Carmen Lawrence and Ros Kelly. Indeed, oath’. As a result, Carmen Lawrence, who the Australian Labor Party know the damage was found to have lied under oath, was that the member for Fremantle did to their allowed to keep her ministerial commission party because in their internal reviews they under Labor Party standards. The reason? say, for example: ‘A number of issues involv- Because it was not somehow in the written ing ministers during the final term of the code. What about the former member for government—Carmen Lawrence, the white- Canberra, Ros Kelly, who, I would submit to board affair—damaged the image of the the Senate, dishonestly misappropriated tens party.’ of millions of dollars worth of taxpayers’ We go to another internal document: ‘Car- money in the sports rorts affair? Under the men Lawrence, Penny Easton affair’. This guidelines as they are written, that is not affair paralysed the government in the second 4282 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 half of 1995. The Australian Labor Party The Government’s commitment to defence realised the damage that the Carmen Law- The Coalition went to the March 1996 election with rence affair did to them. They say so in their clear-cut defence commitments: we said we would own documentation. They ought to hang their keep Defence spending at projected levels and heads in shame. But what is the best form of protect the forces from budget cuts. defence? It is attack. So you attack honour- And we said we would increase spending on the able people like Senator Short and Senator combat elements of the forces by cutting adminis- tration and non-combat activities. Gibson, who have, I would submit, technical- ly breached some guidelines which in my In both cases that is exactly what we are doing. considered view need a great degree of recon- We quarantined the Defence Force from the other sideration. Honourable people like that find spending cuts we had to make to bring down the deficit inherited from Labor. But at 1.9 per cent, themselves in the position of having to re- Defence spending is at its lowest as a percentage sign—but somebody as disgraceful and of GDP since 1938-39. disgusting as the member for Fremantle can At $10.2 billion the 1996-97 Defence budget was lie under oath and retain her ministerial in keeping with the previous government’s spend- commission. That is the difference between ing plan. However, we required $125 million a year the standards of the government and those of for the next three years to be cut from administra- the opposition in this place. I look forward to tion and directed towards improving combat the review, and I look forward to the review capabilities, training and readiness and personnel including the guideline that once somebody retention measures. is found to have lied under oath they will While these steps were necessary, by themselves they do not go far enough to address pressing have to resign their ministerial commission. financial and capability problems in Defence. Question resolved in the affirmative. In order to maintain and increase the forces’ very high level of capability; in order to arm them with MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS the most effective technology; in order to develop the most streamlined command and control proced- Defence Policy Initiatives ures; we need to look at how Defence is structured and how efficiently it is managed. Senator CAMPBELL (Western Austral- Quite simply, we cannot countenance inefficiency ia—Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister in the Defence organisation. Every dollar spent for the Environment and Parliamentary Secre- inefficiently is one we cannot use for improving tary to the Minister for Sport, Territories and our forces. Local Government) (3.37 p.m.)—I seek leave Planning for change to make a statement on behalf of the Minister The Government’s first initiative is called Restruc- for Defence relating to defence policy initia- turing the Australian Army. tives, to incorporate the statement in Hansard The Army’s assessment of its current position is and to move a motion to take note of the that deficiencies in its structure, training and statement and a related document. equipment put barriers in the way of its ability to respond quickly and effectively to defence emer- Leave granted. gencies. The statement read as follows— This plan will make the Army more responsive, more mobile, better trained and better equipped to Today I am announcing two major initiatives in handle a wide range of military contingencies—- Defence policy designed to increase the combat from the defence of Australia to offshore oper- capability of the Army and the efficiency and ations. effectiveness of the whole Defence organisation. Restructuring the Australian Army These measures are designed to build an Australian The Task Defence Force better able to meet the security challenges of the next few decades. Our key defence aim is to develop forces with the capability to defeat any attack against Australian No area of government is more important than interests. maintaining Australia’s defence and security. The speed and scale of change in the post-Cold War era The defence of our air and sea approaches, and our means there is a constant need to reassess our ability to contribute to offshore operations, calls for defence posture and capabilities. a maritime focus for Defence. Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4283

But the Australian Army plays an essential role However, the Army is not one area where credit is both in plans for the defence of Australian territory due to the previous government. Labor did not and in possible contributions overseas. seriously address the difficult issue of Army reform. The Army of the future must be capable of per- forming a more diverse range of missions, with the The Government is therefore setting in train a firepower, mobility and ready access to information series of discrete trials for reshaping the Army required on the future battlefield. which are designed to achieve the following goals. The Challenge We are aiming to eliminate hollowness in Army units, thereby reducing the overall number of units, The Army’s advice—- as well as the advice from and redistributing personnel and equipment so that military and civilian heads from the rest of De- all established units can deploy within shorter fence—- is that its present structure is not well readiness times. suited to Australia’s defence needs. We will increase the number and effectiveness of Some Army units are not adequately prepared for combat troops by strengthening the contribution of combat. In some circumstances the Army lacks Reservist or Part Time soldiers. Most Reserve sufficient combat power to quickly end conflict on personnel will have an initial six weeks full time terms favourable to us. training. Thereafter, ongoing training will be increased to an average of 50 days per year. Some Army units suffer from shortages of trained personnel and insufficient equipment. Elements of Infantry, armour, artillery and engineers will be the force are hollow. While the current structure integrated into Task Forces. This principle is provides a framework for expansion, it would known as embedding. The resulting forces will be require substantial warning time and financial independent and largely self-contained. They will expenditure to mobilise for major conflict. be able to deploy to different regions in Australia and to defend these areas. There are insufficient night fighting devices, command and control aids and mobility available We will create a base for adopting new technology for widely dispersed, mobile operations on the to modernise the force. We will develop proposals modern battlefield where high precision weapons for acquiring new equipment aimed at increasing may be used. the mobility and firepower of the force, including helicopters and fixed wing aircraft and more The present Army structure is inadequate to meet protected vehicles for infantry mobility. the demands of widespread concurrent operations. Higher readiness elements will contain more Full The divisional structure brings together combat Time personnel. We will ensure that Regular forces elements such as infantry, armour, artillery and will be able to be deployed at short notice. engineers into separate organisations with their own command structures. The application of these principles will of them- selves significantly increase Army capability. This arrangement was suitable for the concentrated Capital equipment investment after the year 2000 battlefields of World War Two but it is not neces- will be guided by these principles as well as the sarily suited for modern conflict. lessons learned over the next few years, to further There are also shortcomings in the capability and strengthen Army capabilities. readiness of much of the Army Reserves. The shift from the traditional divisional structure With some exceptions, like the Regional Force towards flatter and more responsive Task Force Surveillance Units, Reserve units are understaffed, structures will create units which will be flexible, poorly equipped and have low readiness levels. capable of a range of independent operations and better able to operate in concert with the Navy and Reform goals the Air Force. The Army problems I have described did not The reconnaissance, mobility and embedded develop overnight. They are the result of more than firepower of the Task Forces should result in a a decade of neglect on the part of the previous versatile structure able to operate effectively in government. both widely dispersed and conventional operations. They should also be able to sustain themselves in I have made a point in recent months of giving the field for longer because those elements needed credit where it is due when the previous govern- to support and sustain combat elements will be ment made worthwhile initiatives. The decisions to readily available. acquire Collins submarines and ANZAC frigates, the Commercial Support Program and the commer- The Plan cialisation of Commonwealth defence industries A number of assumptions underlie the concept I were all valuable reforms. have outlined. 4284 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

Key among these is that the Reserve component The Headquarters of the Reserve 5th Brigade will can be expanded, its standard of training increased be moved from Lidcombe to Holsworthy. It will and readiness improved. take command of the Full Time combat elements In considering reforms of this scale, the Govern- remaining in Sydney after 1st Brigade Headquarters ment has an obligation to ensure that change is moves to Darwin. introduced gradually and with the confidence that In Sydney the Full Time 4th Battalion will be trialling and evaluation will bring. increased in strength and converted to a Regular While we are restructuring, we will retain the commando battalion. This unit will develop a Special Air Service Regiment’s counter-terrorist counter-terrorist capability in the longer term. capability and the Townsville-based Rapid Deploy- In Victoria, the Reserve 4th Brigade will have ment Force at existing high levels of readiness. priority for additional resources. There will be a This will ensure that current options to respond to significant increase in Full Time personnel within short-notice contingencies are maintained. the 4th Brigade. Part Time recruiting, training and Therefore, the Government will trial and evaluate employment practices will be trialled and evaluated these new Army concepts using selected formations in Victoria—- a key activity in defining the most and units. As concepts are proven, they will be effective ways to revitalise the Reserve force more widely applied. nationally. The Reserve 9th Brigade, with units located in both Members may be aware that the plan for Restruc- South Australia and Tasmania, will receive a small turing the Australian Army draws on an internal increase in Full and Part Time numbers as a result Defence study called the Army in the 21st Century. of the closure of the Ready Reserve Scheme. In Restructuring the Australian Army, the Govern- The 13th Brigade will be the focus for revitalising ment has sought to achieve a more immediate Reserve combat units in Western Australia. Within increase in readiness and capabilities, and has eighteen months, we will raise an integrated Full chosen not to reduce the size of Army’s full-time Time/Part Time battalion in Perth with the addition combat force. of a Regular infantry company to the 16th Batta- The Government’s plan achieves a prudent balance lion. Along with the continued presence of the of reform and evaluation designed both to increase Special Air Service Regiment, this amounts to a capabilities now, and to lay the foundations for major increase in the Army presence in Western further strengthening after the year 2000. Australia. On this basis the Army has already begun to At the end of this statement I will table a map restructure. The decision to end the Ready Reserve detailing these changes on a state by state basis. Scheme and to increase Part Time capabilities is an The approximate cost of these initiatives will be integral part of these changes. $60 million in 1996-97; $120 million in 1997-98 The Army’s share of the $125 million annual and $200 million in 1998-99. administrative savings detailed in the Government’s These costs will be met from within the Defence election platform will, over the next three years, budget, reflecting the Army component of savings enhance capabilities including night vision equip- from our $125 million cuts to administrative costs, ment, radios, satellite navigation equipment, laser savings from the closure of the Ready Reserve rangefinders and simulators. Scheme and from reallocations within the Army To increase overall readiness, it will be necessary budget. to raise personnel numbers in the combat force. The Outcome This will be achieved by moving up to one thou- sand Full Time troops from base support areas into By 2000, the Army’s capabilities will be signifi- the combat force and by integrating Full and Part cantly enhanced. Time units. The viability of revitalising Part Time Army forces Planning has commenced to combine the Ready will have been demonstrated in Victoria and Reserve 6th Brigade and the Part Time 7th Brigade southeast Queensland. Full Time personnel will in Queensland into a Task Force to test integration have been redistributed, and a large amount of options. Ready Reserve soldiers will transfer to the essential equipment purchased. A substantial Full Time Army or join Part Time units in their strengthening of units will have taken place in home state. Queensland and Western Australia. The Regular 1st Brigade will continue its move We are aiming to create an Army in which structur- from New South Wales to the Northern Territory. al and technological adaptation is regarded as an In addition to developing concepts for the defence essential norm. of the north, the Brigade will trial unit organisation Following trial and evaluation, the Army will and command arrangements. further modernise after the year 2000 with the Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4285 introduction of a new range of high technology management processes are as efficient and effective equipment. as possible. Defence Efficiency Review I do not want to constrain the work of the Review The second initiative I am announcing today is to Panel by setting any savings figure. However I do establish a Defence Efficiency Review. expect that significant savings will emerge as a result of the Review Panel’s reform proposals. At a time of great financial pressure in Defence, we must ensure that the absolute minimum necessary Savings will be retained by Defence and pro- is spent on administration and that Defence focuses grammed to enhance combat capabilities. on its core functions. It will not be the role of the Efficiency Review to I have appointed a panel of eminent figures from make recommendations about force structure or the public and private sector under the chairman- strategic outlook, that is something being explored ship of Dr Malcolm McIntosh, Chairman of the by other areas of the Defence organisation. CSIRO, to review Defence management and It is, however, the role of the Review to examine financial practices. all major Departmental functions. The Senior Dr McIntosh has been Chief of Capital Procure- Review Panel should test underlying assumptions ment in Defence; Secretary of the Department of about current Defence management processes. Industry, Technology and Commerce; and Chief of I have said to Dr McIntosh that I fully expect that Defence Procurement for the United Kingdom he will find it necessary in some cases to propose Ministry of Defence. He is internationally respected fundamental changes to ensure that Defence for his expertise in defence policy matters. management is as flexible, efficient and effective Other members of the Senior Review Panel are: as possible to meet future strategic challenges. Mr Ian Burgess, Chairman of the AMP Society In setting up this review I have deliberately re- since 1994; frained from too narrowly defining the areas in which—- or the means by which—- Dr McIntosh’s Mr John Stone, Former Secretary of the Treasury panel should pursue its work. and former Senator for Queensland; I have asked the Secretary of Defence, Mr Tony Mr Andrew Michelmore, General Manager for Ayers, and the Chief of the Defence Force, General Business Development, Planning and Technol- John Baker, to provide expert senior staff for a ogy, Western Mining Corporation Resources; Secretariat and for eight or so separate teams Vice Admiral Robert Walls, Vice Chief of the comprising both Defence and non-Defence people, ADF; and each of which will review specific management activities at the direction of the Senior Panel. Dr Richard Brabin Smith, Chief Defence Scien- tist in charge of the Defence Science and Tech- The Reform Task nology Organisation. Among the key areas which will be considered for Terms of Reference closer review are: capital equipment procurement; personnel management; corporate administration; The terms of reference for the Review ask Dr facilities management and holdings; regional McIntosh’s Panel to identify key Defence manage- support; industry policy; provision of advice to ment processes; to assess the efficiency and government; logistics; health and personnel ser- effectiveness of these processes; and to make vices; recruiting; science; training and financial reform proposals ensuring that Defence manage- management. ment: There will be sufficient flexibility in the review to is carried out in the most efficient and effective identify and pursue new areas for investigation manner possible; should they emerge during the study. eliminates duplication between and within No one should doubt the urgency of this study. Defence programs; There are a great many things which the Defence . takes a rigorous approach to defining ‘core’ organisation does very well. The ADF and civilian and ‘non-core’ business; bureaucracy has many highly trained, motivated . makes appropriate use of commercialisation people. options; and’ With this skills base, we maintain one of the most . reflects, where appropriate, modern business formidable and capable military forces in the Asia- practices. Pacific. I have not given Dr McIntosh a specific savings But there is no large organisation in the country target; indeed the Review is not a cost-cutting which cannot be made more efficient through a exercise, but rather one designed to ensure that our rigorous external review. My experience is that 4286 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 people in Defence are keen to see this process structuring plan on a state-by-state basis, and under way and will work hard to ensure its success. move: The Minister for Defence Industry, Science and That the Senate take note of the statement and Personnel and I take this defence reform challenge document. very seriously. We are sure that the non-Defence and private sector representatives on the Senior Senator MacGIBBON (Queensland) (3.38 Review Panel—- who form the majority of the p.m.)—These two statements before the panel—- will add impetus and a fresh perspective to the process. But I am equally confident that the Senate this afternoon are quite significant Defence representatives will give a defining sense statements. They deal with the restructuring of direction to the review. of the Australian army and a defence efficien- The Defence budget papers show that some $2 cy review. In the Australian army, which is to billion of our annual ten billion dollar outlay is be restructured under these proposals, we spent on areas directly designated as combat forces. have very many capable people and some Of the remainder, about $3 billion is spent on new very good capabilities and skills but, overall, equipment, facilities and the modernisation of ADF we cannot put together at short notice an capabilities. effective land combat force. That leaves around half of the budget, $5 billion, The principal deficiencies are threefold, as spent on everything else—- including areas abso- identified by the Minister for Defence (Mr lutely essential for Defence to function, such as logistic support, intelligence, communications, McLachlan): there is a lack of personnel in a medical support, industry programs, recruiting significant number of the combat units; we costs, everything down to stationery and postage have long lead times or training times before stamps. units can be committed to operations; and The task for the Defence Efficiency Review is to there are significant shortages of basic equip- determine what value for money we get from ment in many of the combat units—to say spending in all these areas. I have no doubt that Dr nothing of major shortages of advanced McIntosh’s panel will find as many areas of high- technology equipment, which is increasingly quality management as it will find areas in need of seen as essential on the battlefield. reform. I have asked that the completed report of the This is not an overnight collapse. It is Defence Efficiency Review is handed to me on 10 certainly true that things have got a lot worse March 1997. I will report to the Parliament after very quickly in the last 10 years, but the that time. I have asked the Senior Review Panel to difficulties of creating an effective and afford- propose an implementation strategy giving effect to able land force are very considerable. I do not its recommendations. think they have ever properly been addressed In developing what are two of the largest and most since the ending of the Second World War. ambitious reform proposals in this portfolio for Land operations, even with the highest of some years, it is appropriate for me to record my technology, are always manpower intensive, appreciation of Defence senior management for its work. and you always require a large number of soldiers in comparison to the air force and the The rewards of Restructuring the Australian Army and the Efficiency Review will be the development navy, particularly in a high technology age of a more flexible, efficient and capable defence where the productivity of the individual force—- a defence force better able to protect member of the navy or of the air force can be Australia’s interests into the next century. really very high indeed. I table a copy of an explanatory map showing the The problems in creating an effective and Army restructuring plan on a state-by-state basis. affordable land force are enormous. I am not Senator CAMPBELL—I table the state- implying for one moment that the air force ment by the Minister for Defence on two and navy are paragons of effectiveness at the major initiatives in defence policy designed to present time. They certainly need some increase the combat facility of the army and essential support in many ways but in some the efficiency and effectiveness of the whole senses they are much closer to what we re- defence organisation, together with a copy of quire from them than the army is at the an explanatory map showing the Army re- present time. Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4287

Technology has revolutionised the battle- they went on their annual camps and exercis- field. Since the Cold War has ended we are es. But if the capability of the reserves is to faced with two additional factors. First of all, be increased, then that equipment has to be the range of circumstances under which a provided as of their own right for the units. defence force might be used has expanded. That is a very expensive process that will Secondly, at the same time our Defence Force require the expenditure of very considerable may well be required to stand alone as an sums—and you are getting close to a billion Australian force in certain circumstances, dollars, in my judgment, to do that. You whereas, formerly, up to the start of this cannot put a precise figure on it—no-one decade, the certainty was that we would be can—but that is an inevitable expenditure that acting in concert with similar forces from the country has to meet. Western democracies. The consequences of this are really very Another fundamental objective of the considerable for the ADF. We have a very review is to increase the readiness levels of small defence budget—we spend under half, the combat force. Readiness in itself is very for example, of what our regional neighbours, expensive and, the higher the level of readi- such as Singapore, Malaysia, Taiwan, China ness of a defence unit, the more dispropor- and South Korea spend per year as a fraction tionately the costs rise. We have one unit, the of our GDP. The minister proposes to over- 3rd Brigade, the ready deployment force, come these difficulties by restructuring the which is at as high a state of readiness as it land force elements. is possible to hold a unit. That owes its origins really to one of my friends and former Basically, what is involved is that the colleague, Senator Sir John Carrick, who brigade and divisional structure will disap- instituted some years ago the requirement that pear, to be replaced by task forces, which will 3rd Brigade be held at the high level of roughly be about brigade size, but they will readiness that it is at present. While there is have their own slice of artillery and armour no proposal at all to raise all the combat and increased mobility, both surface and air. forces to a similar high level, the discipline of The magnitude of the changes is very maintaining 3 Brigade at that high level of considerable and costly. Because of the scale readiness will be maintained. of the change, it is inevitable that it will be phased in over a number of years. While the The program is so big that it will be intro- government did a very great thing in holding duced in stages and there will be careful trial the defence vote and not cutting it back the and evaluation of its implementation. In a way its predecessors had each year, the program of this size it will be very surprising commitment is that, while we hold that vote, if there are not changes that have to be made we will not be able to increase it through the in the light of the experience gained, but it is life of this parliament. very important that the integrity of the evalu- ation program is beyond dispute and it is The deficiencies in the numbers of person- objective. I believe that it is imperative that nel in the combat units will be addressed by the assessment of the trial program is carried reorganisation of regular units and expanding out by people who are independent and not the role of the reserves. It is planned that the serving members of the ADF. numbers involved in the combat force will increase. The deficiencies in equipment are to That expertise does exist in the Australian be rectified but the parliament should recog- community. It is important that the assessment nise that this is a very expensive process. of the trial program is done very objectively For many years now, the reserve units, and impartially. The parliament, in this which at present comprise 60 per cent of the statement, is presented with only a brief combat force, have had very little or no outline of what is envisaged—and I look equipment of their own. They have operated forward very much to the details coming on on a basis of regional equipment pools, which the public record in due course and the debate they would draw on for their equipment when that will follow in the parliament. 4288 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

The second statement of the minister, the money can be employed far more effectively defence efficiency review, is a very important in the combat force and giving those people step also. The review willl look at, in a who are going to do the hard work the best general sense and very broadly, the whole of chance of survival in the years ahead. I seek the management practices within the ADF. leave to continue my remarks. There is not an area in defence which is more Leave granted; debate adjourned. deserving of scrutiny than that. I have no problem at all with the way the defence Inhumane Weapons Convention department goes about its operational duties Senator CAMPBELL (Western Australia— or runs its combat forces. From the way the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the air force mans its squadrons, the navy its Environment and Parliamentary Secretary to ships and the army its battalions, I think they the Minister for Sport, Territories and Local are all in good shape, because the operational Government) (3.48 p.m.)—I seek leave to experience over the years has been developed make a statement on behalf of the Minister and tested and we know it works. for Foreign Affairs (Mr Downer) relating to There may be a few cases where people are the Inhumane Weapons Convention, to in- over-ranked and could be dropped a rank, and corporate the statement in Hansard and to we may be able to drop one or two personnel take note of the statement and related docu- off various manning strengths in the light of ments. changed equipment. But, by and large, that Leave granted. side of the house is in good shape. But navies, armies and air forces do not consist of The statement read as follows— combat units alone. They have to be support- I table for the information of Honourable Members, ed by logistic and training establishments, with a view to ratification by Australia, amended Protocol II and new Protocol IV annexed to the acquisition planning groups and many other Convention on Prohibitions and Restrictions on the things. That is the area that has grown expo- Use of Certain Conventional Weapons which may nentially and at great cost to the effectiveness be deemed to be Excessively Injurious or to Have of the Australian Defence Force. Indiscriminate Effects (also known as the Inhumane Weapons Convention) of 10 October 1980. Austral- In one sense, Canberra has become one vast ia is a party to the Convention and participated swamp into which huge resources from the fully in the Review Conference which adopted defence budget have been poured annually. If amended Protocol II and new Protocol IV on 3 you look at the portfolio budget statements May 1996 and 13 October 1995 respectively. that came out last month for Defence, you Protocol II deals with Prohibitions or Restrictions on Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices. Proto- find that army has an incredible figure of 571 col IV deals with Blinding Laser Weapons. lieutenant colonels or colonels in its establish- ment—that is for a very small force. We have Amended Protocol II in the air force something like 475 rank On coming to office, the Government ordered a equivalents with the lieutenant colonel/colonel review of Australia’s policy on anti-personnel landmines. As a result of that review, the Minister level, and 396 in the navy. There is no way for Defence and I announced on 15 April that these figures can be justified. The financial Australia would support a global ban on the cost of this overmanning is vast. We have production, stockpiling, use and transfer of anti- committees looking at committees looking at personnel landmines, a policy we promoted at the committees; we have highly ranked, highly final session of the Inhumane Weapons Convention trained officers, both civilian and uniformed, Review Conference when it met in Geneva shortly thereafter. The new policy also suspended the who simply lack the authority to make a operational use of anti-personnel landmines by the decision. The system is very wrong and it is Australian Defence Force. While Australia has not costing us hugely. used landmines operationally for over 20 years and had never used them except in strict conformity I look forward very much to the report of with international legal and humanitarian norms, this inquiry because I think there are very big it was appropriate for a country with Australia’s savings to be made here in these echelons of strong humanitarian record to demonstrate leader- the Australian defence department. That ship on this issue. Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4289

This new policy was and is a major achievement Third, new prohibitions and restrictions on the in foreign policy and humanitarian terms. It took transfer of mines will help impede the acquisition Australia to the forefront of the international of prohibited mines and the acquisition of mines by community’s efforts to rid the world of these states which are not party to the Convention or do insidious weapons which kill or main some 30,000 not agree to apply the norms it embodies. people a year. Since our announcement, other Fourth, the rules relating to fencing, marking, countries—notably the United States, Germany, the recording and monitoring of manually placed United Kingdom and New Zealand—have moved landmines and the self-destruction/self-deactivation their national positions in directions which we hope standards required of this type of mine have been will contribute to the international momentum in tightened. favour of a total ban. Fifth, the restrictions on remotely delivered mines I believe that tragedies caused by the indiscriminate are stronger, with mandatory recording require- use of anti-personnel landmines concern all Austral- ments, and the requirement that anti-personnel ians who have a conscience. I have received, both landmines of this type be short-lived. in Opposition and in Government, an enormous amount of correspondence from people urging Sixth, the Protocol provides for annual meetings of Australia vigorously to pursue a total ban. the States Parties and a second Review Conference in 2001—measures strongly promoted by Australia We were disappointed that a total ban was not as a means of maintaining pressure for a total ban achieved in Geneva. But the Conference did adopt and for further strengthening of the Protocol as an an amended Protocol II which contains much interim measure. stronger restrictions, prohibitions and other norms and thus provides greater protection for civilians Seventh, the Protocol provides for penal sanctions and peacekeeping forces than does the existing against those violating the Protocol. Protocol to which Australia is already a party. It is And finally, a number of technical improvements an agreement worth having. And while it does not should make a practical difference in the field, such go as far as we wished on anti-personnel land- as a standard sign warning of anti-personnel mines, it is nevertheless a first step in the process landmines and a requirement that mine records be towards a total ban. kept at a level of command sufficient to ensure The fact is that Protocol II of the Inhumane their safety. Weapons Convention is the only international legal The Protocol also assigns clear responsibility for instrument governing the use of and trade in the removal of mines and minefields and provides landmines. In the absence of a complete ban on a framework for greater technological cooperation anti-personnel landmines, the revisions to Protocol on mine clearance. II of the Convention provide interim measures which will lessen the devastating effects of these For the reasons I have just outlined, the arguments appallingly misused weapons. It is also the only are overwhelmingly in favour of our early ratifica- international instrument restricting the use of anti- tion of this revised Protocol. Ratification is support- vehicle and anti-tank mines and so will remain ed by the Australian Red Cross Society, the important regardless of when a total ban on anti- Australian Network of the International Campaign personnel landmines is achieved. to Ban Landmines, and many, many individual Australians and other non-government organisa- The new measures embodied in the revised Proto- tions. The Coordinator of the Australian Network, col are as follows: Sister Patricia Pak Poy, was a full member of the First, the new Protocol II extends the scope of the Australian Delegation to the Review Conference, original Protocol to internal conflicts. This address- as well as to expert group meetings which preceded es one of the most often cited gaps between the old it. Protocol and the reality of anti-personnel landmine The new Protocol will enter into force six months misuse today. after the 20th state party to the Convention has Second, the humanitarian restrictions in the revised ratified it. Australia is keen to be among the first Protocol are considerably stronger—excessively 20 to ratify and we will be encouraging other injurious mines are specifically prohibited, anti- countries to ratify quickly, in addition to our sensing devices and non-detectable mines are continuing campaign to promote greater adherence banned, the need to discriminate between military to the Convention, particularly in our region. and civilian objectives is further emphasised and In international forums, the Australian Government advance warning must be given of the use of all will continue its role of mobilising the strong wave weapons covered by the Protocol. of support for eliminating anti-personnel landmines We believe the aforementioned new provisions will as a weapon of war. Earlier this month, we took reduce the blatant use of anti-personnel landmines part in an international conference of pro-ban states as weapons of terror. and non-government groups in Ottawa which 4290 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 looked at future strategies for achieving a ban. We with the reformed treaty making process which I will also shortly be supporting a resolution at the outlined to the House on 2 May 1996, the Proto- 51st session of the United Nations General Assem- cols, along with accompanying national interest bly which embodies the objectives of the pro-ban analyses, will lie before the House for at least 15 states and obliges others to indicate where they sitting days and be open to scrutiny including by stand on this issue. the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Treaties. As well as continuing to work diplomatically, the Senator CAMPBELL—I table the state- Australian Government has increased its support for ment by the Minister for Foreign Affairs practical measures to tackle the humanitarian disaster caused by landmines. In May of this year, relating to the Inhumane Weapons Conven- I announced a de-mining programme for Cambodia tion, together with copies of the amending and Laos worth $12 million over three years. This protocols to the treaty, and move: latter contribution will make Australia one of the That the Senate take note of the statement and major donors to the United Nations-sponsored de- documents. mining and bomb clearance efforts in the region. The programme includes: Question resolved in the affirmative. $9 million for the United Nations Development Program and Cambodia Mines Action Centre DOCUMENTS project; Auditor-General’s Reports $800,000 for Australian Defence Force technical assistance to the Cambodia Mines Action Centre; Report No. 10 of 1996-97 $1.2 million for assistance by non-government The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—In accord- organisations; ance with the provisions of the Audit Act 900,000 to the UNDP Trust Fund for unexploded 1901, on behalf of the President, I present the ordnance clearance in Laos; following report of the Auditor General: and funds for mine awareness training, particu- Report No. 10 of 1996-97—Performance larly for school children. audit—Follow-up audit—Energy manage- In addition, as I announced at the 51st United ment of Commonwealth buildings: De- Nations General Assembly in New York last partment of Primary Industries and month, Australia is interested in working with other countries to seek to improve de-mining technology, Energy and Department of Administrative with a view to increasing the rate and scale of the Services. de-mining process. Department of the Parliamentary Protocol IV Reporting Staff Whereas Protocol II of the Inhumane Weapons Convention is about remedies, Protocol IV is about Annual Report prevention: preventing, by means of a blanket The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—In accord- prohibition, the use and transfer of laser weapons specifically designed to cause permanent blindness ance with the provisions of the Public Service to unenhanced vision. These weapons are still in Act, on behalf of the President, I present the the developmental phase and to date there is no annual report of the Department of the Parlia- record of blinding weapons being used in combat mentary Reporting Staff for the year ended 30 situations. June 1996. The Protocol is an eminently humane measure which will also contribute to the safety of our COMMITTEES forces in combat situations. It is timely in that it will control such an abhorrent and excessively Scrutiny of Bills Committee injurious weapon before it has become widely Report available on the international market. It has the support of the Australian Red Cross Society and Senator CHRIS EVANS (Western Austral- non-government organisations, including—most ia)—On behalf of Senator Cooney, I present poignantly—those representing blind Australians. the eighth report of 1996 of the Senate Stand- Nothing in the Protocol will affect anything the ing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills. I also Australian Defence Force or Australian industry is doing or planning to do. lay on the table Scrutiny of Bills Alert Digest No. 9 1996, dated 16 October 1996. I accordingly commend the Protocol, along with amended Protocol II, to the House. In accordance Ordered that the report be printed. Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4291

STATES GRANTS (PRIMARY AND To support these changes, the bill will appropriate SECONDARY EDUCATION in excess of $14 billion for the coming quadren- nium under a rationalised set of programmes which ASSISTANCE) BILL 1996 this government believes best meets the needs and First Reading aspirations of those in school-level education. The major part of this funding will continue to be Bill received from the House of Representa- directed to the general recurrent and capital grants tives. programmes. The government has, however, decided to replace a complex array of more than 40 Motion (by Senator Campbell) agreed to: school-related programmes of targeted assistance by That this bill may proceed without formalities a streamlined set of 5 programmes, namely: and be now read a first time. . literacy; Bill read a first time. . languages; and Second Reading . special learning needs; Which are included in the bill before us; Senator CAMPBELL (Western Australia— Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the And two other programmes: Environment and Parliamentary Secretary to . school to work; and the Minister for Sport, Territories and Local . quality outcomes; Government) (3.51 p.m.)—I move: The funding for which is included in other legisla- That this bill be now read a second time. tion. I seek leave to have the second reading A strong determination to secure the foundations of effective learning is behind the government’s policy speech incorporated in Hansard of ensuring that all students are provided with Leave granted. literacy and numeracy skills. The speech read as follows— Illiteracy is the worst form of poverty and a blight on society. The government’s literacy programme The bill provides for this government’s programme of more than $150 million annually is one of the of assistance to the states and territories for govern- government’s most important equity programmes. ment and non-government schools for the 1997- 2000 quadrennium. It succeeds the States Grants The literacy programme subsumes the general (Primary And Secondary Education Assistance) Act support element of the English as a second lan- 1992 which authorised funding for the 1993 to guage programme and the disadvantaged schools 1996 funding period. programme. It will also replace the early literacy programme which was due to end in 1996. The bill fulfils the government’s commitments to promote excellence and achievement through the Funding is to be provided under the literacy provision of quality education and prepare our programme for a new national literacy and numer- young people for an active and productive life both acy strategy directed at improving the literacy and in the workforce and as participating citizens in the numeracy skills of school leavers. The bill will community and global economy. appropriate some $45 million for this purpose for the next three years. The bill fosters a partnership approach with states and territories which recognises both the constitu- Many young people, especially those who are tional responsibility of states and territories for educationally disadvantaged, leave school without education and the Commonwealth’s role in guiding the literacy and numeracy skills essential for further national directions and priorities. study or sustained employment. The main theme of the bill is the importance of Two factors will ensure the strategy’s relevance to choice in providing for improved educational the problems being faced by young people. First, outcomes for Australian students. The bill further it will draw upon the results of the national schools supports the devolution of decision making about English literacy survey which are scheduled to be education to parents and communities to ensure that released early next year. Secondly, it will identify education is responsive to student needs. best classroom practice. The bill will provide choice for better options for All of this will underpin progress towards the future. Australia’s first national literacy goal—that every child leaving primary school should be able to read, This bill provides for significant reform in the write, spell and communicate at an appropriate emphasis, availability and administration of the level. Progress towards this goal will be measured Commonwealth’s schools programmes. by national literacy benchmarks at year three and 4292 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 year five which the Commonwealth government programme. This initiative unites a number of will develop in conjunction with state and territory programmes directed at teacher development, the governments. civics and citizenship programme and the projects The languages programme, which is the second in of national significance programme. The unified the group of priority initiatives, and for which more programme will provide a sharper focus on the than $100 million is included in the bill, provides achievement of quality outcomes in schooling while funding for the national Asian languages and giving recognition to the fact that teachers play a studies in Australian schools strategy and for the key role in the academic and social development of teaching of community and priority languages. children. While the languages programme is directed at the It is vital that teachers have access to quality and teaching of a wide range of languages other than regular professional development opportunities to English, it gives particular emphasis to Asian enhance their expertise and professionalism and the languages and cultural studies. programmes contained in the bill will allow for that to occur. Clearly, it is important to the development of Australia’s trade relations for businesses in this Emphasising the theme of choice, this bill legislates country to have leaders and staff who are proficient a new and more equitable policy for non- in Asian languages and who have an understanding government schools seeking Commonwealth of Asian cultures. funding. This policy replaces the attempts of the previous government to impose a bureaucratic, The special learning needs programme, which is the unfair and inequitable burden on non-government third priority initiative, includes funding for three schools seeking Commonwealth funding. tightly targeted areas addressing the needs of clearly identified clients. These areas are: The application process under the previous . Special education for students with disabilities; government’s new schools policy was bound in red tape as was the process for reviewing the funding . Provision of intensive English language instruc- category of those schools already in receipt of tion for newly arrived migrants; and funding. . Provision of supplementary educational services Furthermore, the labor government’s new schools for students in country areas. policy confined non-government schools approved The bill contains some $636 million over four years for funding since may 1988 to a maximum funding for the special learning needs programme. The level of category 6. This arbitrary restriction has programme will have as its objective the full jeopardised the existence of many deserving participation in schooling of students with specific schools worthy of a higher level of support from educational needs and the subsequent realisation of governments. It also restricted parental choice in their maximum potential in the workforce. non-government schooling for their children, Returning to the theme of choice, the broadbanding especially for low income families. effected by this bill, which has brought together a This government’s policy for newly commencing number of related programmes, will give schools schools will make a school’s entitlement to a degree of flexibility in determining their priorities Commonwealth funding primarily dependent upon which they have never had before. Schools will be state or territory government recognition. There able to respond to the changing needs of students will, of course, be a requirement that schools be and direct their resources to achieving the best run by an incorporated body, be non-profit-making possible learning outcomes for their students. and enter into an agreement with the Common- In addition to the literacy, languages and special wealth. Non-government school funding will, needs programmes, which are directed at particular however, be both simple and equitable. needs in the school community, the bill also The government believes that parents should have provides in excess of $11 billion for general the choice between schools in both the government recurrent grants and some $1.2 billion for capital and non-government sectors and between schools grants, including an additional $30 million for non- in each sector. The government has no precon- government schools capital grants. ceived ideas about the size of either sector. It is The fourth priority initiative which I mentioned important that Australia has a strong government earlier, and for which funds will be included in school sector and a strong non-government school other legislation, is the school to work programme. sector. This programme is intended to make the transition The cost to the Commonwealth of a student from school to work a natural and successful attending a non-government school is more than the process for all students. cost of a student attending a government school. The final initiative, which will be covered by the Conversely, the cost to a state or territory of a appropriation bills, is the quality outcomes student attending a government school is more than Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4293 the cost of a student attending a non-government SOCIAL SECURITY LEGISLATION school. AMENDMENT (BUDGET AND OTHER MEASURES) BILL 1996 This, coupled with the fact that the proportion of students in non-government schools has increased First Reading from 24.4 per cent in 1983 to 29 per cent in 1995, has meant that states and territories have had the Bill received from the House of Representa- potential to cost shift and save on the education of tives. students in government schools. Motion (by Senator Campbell) agreed to: Against this background, the government has That this bill may proceed without formalities decided to preserve for the Commonwealth 50 per and be now read a first time. cent of net recurrent savings to a state or territory Bill read a first time. from students shifting from the government to the non-government sector. Second Reading Senator CAMPBELL (Western Australia— Grants to the states and territories for government Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the schools will reflect the choices of parents between government and non-government schools. This Environment and Parliamentary Secretary to decision is to be effective from January 1997 and the Minister for Sport, Territories and Local operate at least for the 1997-2000 quadrennial Government) (3.53 p.m.)—I move: programme for schools. That this bill be now read a second time. Many of the provisions of the bill are familiar, as I seek leave to have the second reading they also appeared in the States Grants (Primary speech incorporated in Hansard And Secondary Education Assistance) Act 1992. Leave granted. Those provisions have been placed in a more rational structure. This is a reflection of the group- The speech read as follows— ing of some of the previous programmes into the This bill introduces many of the initiatives affecting 5 priority initiatives I referred to earlier. It also the social security portfolio that were announced reflects efforts to reduce the amount of repetition either as part of the Government’s 1996 election prevalent in the previous act. commitments or as part of the 1996 Budget. The Government made election commitments to For the first time, the bill contains provisions to carers. It is now proposed to give effect to these ensure comprehensive reporting on the application commitments by changing the name of carer of financial assistance provided to schools. This pension to carer payment and by extending from 10 will be achieved through a strengthened national to 20 hours per week, the number of hours that report on schooling in Australia with a range of carers may spend in employment, voluntary work, core data showing what our students are learning education or training without affecting their quali- and where the greatest needs lie. This information fication for carer payment. There will also be an will be a key factor in the Commonwealth’s future increase in the number of days in a calendar year, policy responses in the area of schooling. from 42 to 52 days a year, that a carer may tempo- rarily cease caring without affecting their qualifica- This bill provides the bulk of a 5 per cent increase tion for carer payment. These initiatives will in total Commonwealth funding for schools. In commence on 1 July 1997. financial year terms this means an increase from At the moment, youth training and sickness $3.3 billion in 1995/96 to $3.4 billion in 1996/97. allowees receive a rate of $65.75 a fortnight even This demonstrates the government’s commitment if their parents’ income and assets would have to ensuring that Australia’s young people gain the otherwise either resulted in a lower rate or preclud- best possible education opportunities to make the ed them from payment. most of their future. The bill provides for the abolition from 1 January I commend the bill to the Senate. 1997 of this minimum payment for customers aged under 18. The parental income test will then be applied to determine the actual rate of payment. Ordered that further consideration of the This will ensure that there is a more consistent second reading of this bill be adjourned until payment structure for youth, as there is no such the first sitting day of the autumn sittings in minimum for AUSTUDY recipients. 1997, in accordance with the order agreed to The Social Security Act 1991 and the Student and on 29 November 1994. Youth Assistance Act 1973 will be amended from 4294 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

20 September 1997 to consolidate and simplify nance period. The new income maintenance period voluntary work provisions in those acts. rules will ensure that leave payments are treated as A person aged 50 and over who is not subject to an income from the date of payment over a period activity agreement, will be able to satisfy the equal to that for which the leave refers and apply newstart allowance activity test by undertaking to newstart, sickness, partner, widow and parenting approved full-time unpaid voluntary work for an allowances. approved organisation for an unlimited number of Secondly, the maximum length of the liquid assets days per year for at least 32 hours in a fortnightly test waiting period, which applies to claimants of period or by a combination of unpaid voluntary newstart allowance, youth training allowance and work with an approved organisation and suitable sickness allowance will be extended to 13 weeks paid work for at least 40 hours in a fortnightly and will be variable depending upon the person’s period. available funds. Similarly a person aged under 50 who is not The bill gives effect, from 20 March 1997, to a subject to an activity agreement, and who has number of measures relating to people who are sick received income support for at least 3 months will and who claim, or are receiving, certain social be able to satisfy the activity test by undertaking security payments. full-time voluntary work with an approved organi- sation for six fortnights in their first 12 months of A 14 day grace period will be introduced so as to income support. allow a person to renew qualification for sickness allowance, or to renew exemption from the A person will still be required to be available and newstart or youth training allowance activity tests, willing to undertake suitable paid work. through providing the necessary medical certificate The Government made an election commitment to after the expiry of the person’s previous medical improve and tighten administration of the activity certificate. test for unemployment payments. This commitment was made in response to community concerns that The sickness allowance qualification rules will be only those people who are genuinely unemployed amended by removing the loss of income qualifica- and actively seeking to participate in the workforce tion. Also to be amended are the sickness allow- should receive payment. The measures contained in ance qualification rules and newstart allowance and this bill seek, as part of a wider package of initia- youth training allowance activity test exemption tives, to increase community support for assistance rules so that the sole criterion for the continuation to the unemployed by enhancing the integrity of the of sickness allowance, or exemption from the program. newstart or youth training allowance activity test, will be a continuing temporary incapacity for work. The measures will tighten the definition of ‘unsuit- able paid work’ for job seekers, change the non- Lastly, backdating of disability support pension, payment period for activity test breaches, replace newstart allowance, sickness allowance and youth the current deferment period arrangements for training allowance will be permitted through the administrative breaches with rate reduction provi- deemed earlier date of lodgement of a claim, in sions, tighten activity test breach provisions relating circumstances where a sick or disabled person to voluntary unemployment and refusal of a job makes a telephone inquiry about claiming payment offer, reclassify certain breaches as activity test and then lodges a claim formally and qualifies for breaches, extend the non-payment period for payment. moving to an area of lower employment prospects Due to its conceptual and procedural complexity, from 12 to 26 weeks and clarify the operation of the earnings credit scheme is difficult to administer the employer contact certificate provisions. and is also difficult for social security recipients to In addition, amendments are included in the bill to understand. The limited understanding of the change the industrial action provisions in the Social scheme by social security recipients puts in doubt Security Act and the Student and Youth Assistance its value as a significant incentive to take up casual Act to ensure that where a person is unemployed work opportunities. Given this, as well as the as a result of industrial action the person will relatively high costs involved in the administration remain disqualified for payment for 6 weeks after of the scheme, the Government has decided to the industrial action has ceased. abolish the earnings credit scheme in respect of both pensions and benefits. These measures relating to the unemployed will commence on 1 January 1997. The bill also The bill introduces amendments to abolish the contains two discrete measures dealing with waiting earnings credit scheme from 20 March 1997. periods to be implemented from 20 September The Government has also decided to abolish the 1997. employment entry payment from 20 March 1997 First, the unused annual leave waiting period will and the education entry payment for all but certain be abolished and replaced with an income mainte- pensioners from that date. Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4295

Provisions for assistance to widows and partners circumstances. The bill gives effect to that decision were reviewed in the 1996 Budget context in from 1 January 1997 and will result in child response to the need to develop a more rational and disability allowance being treated consistently with integrated social security system, simplify the other social security payments. payment structure and improve services to custom- The bill provides for the amendment of the com- ers. pensation recovery provisions of the Social Security As a result, the bill gives effect to a number of Act so as to include age pension as a compensation measures designed to provide common payment affected payment. The proposal will only apply to conditions for older women without recent age pensioners who receive compensation for workforce experience, who either are a dependent economic loss. Age pensioners who receive com- partner or who lose the support of a partner later pensation for non-economic loss only would not be in life, as well as ensuring common payment affected. The proposal would only affect an age arrangements when customers attain age pension pension if the compensation is received on or after age. 20 March 1997 and the person’s provisional First, qualification for widow allowance will be commencement day for age pension is on or after extended to women who are aged at least 50 years 20 March 1997. of age and who were widowed, divorced or separat- The compensation recovery provisions of both the ed after turning 40 years of age. Social Security Act and the Student and Youth Secondly, conditions of payment of widow allow- Assistance Act will also be amended from 20 ance and partner allowance will be aligned, includ- March 1997 to enhance the treatment of lump sum ing common phase-out arrangements, a common compensation payments by using a single pension definition of recent workforce experience and cut-out point as the compensation lump sum common access to ancillary payments. preclusion period divisor. Thirdly, qualification for partner allowance will be For compensation lump sum payments received on extended to AUSTUDY, ABSTUDY and Student or after 20 March 1997, the divisor used to calcu- Financial Supplement Scheme partners. late preclusion periods will be changed from the all persons average weekly earnings to the amount Fourthly, there will be an earlier phase-out of above which no pension is payable to a single widow B pension such that there will be no new person under the income test, currently $397 a entrants to this payment and by automatically week. Further, the preclusion period will be applied transferring widow B pensioners of age pension age to the compensation recipient only and not to his to age pension. or her partner. This means that for lump sums Finally, arrangements for customers of age pension received on or after 20 March 1997, recovery of age will be rationalised by no longer granting past payments to partners will not be made, nor widow allowance and partner allowance to people will partners be precluded from receiving any of age pension age and by automatically transfer- future entitlement they may have during their ring widow, partner and mature age allowance partner’s preclusion period. recipients attaining age pension age to age pension. The existing rules will apply in respect of those These measures are to be implemented from 20 compensation lump sum payments received before March 1997. 20 March 1997. The bill provides for the assessment processes for The bill also includes a number of amendments to disability support pension to be tightened to ensure the Student and Youth Assistance Act so as to align that those people whose impairments have only a the compensation provisions of that act with relatively small impact on their overall ability to corresponding provisions in the Social Security Act. work will not qualify for that pension. Rather, they The bill includes a number of amendments that are will receive a more appropriate income support designed to improve the targeting of non-cash payment. To assist in this process, revised impair- assistance to retirees and low income earners, ment tables, which are used to assess whether a restore equity by preventing cards being given to person’s impairment is 20 per cent or more, are people otherwise not entitled and simplify card being introduced from 1 January 1997. administration. The Government decided in the 1996 Budget to The health benefits card will be abolished and limit payment of child disability allowance arrears health care cards will be issued to sickness to a period of up to 3 months where a person has allowees. The "savings provisions" that allow made an earlier claim for a payment similar to people receiving family allowance supplement prior child disability allowance and was qualified to to January 1992 to receive a health care card will receive child disability allowance at the time of this be repealed . These people will now have to test earlier claim. Currently, child disability allowance their eligibility under the normal four-weekly arrears of up to 12 months may be paid in such income test. Similarly, the modified income test 4296 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 and savings provisions that allow certain social speaker, apart from the minister, the Assistant security pensioners to receive concession cards after Treasurer (Senator Kemp), on this Workplace cancellation of pension will be repealed. These Relations and Other Legislation Amendment measures will take effect on 1 July 1997. Bill 1996. There has been a marathon debate The bill provides for the removal of the about this matter, and justifiably so. It is a concessional treatment applied to "deposit conces- sion money", as defined in the Social Security Act very important bill which will affect—in my and the Student and Youth Assistance Act, from 20 view, adversely—hundreds of thousands of March 1997. people within Australia, and not only workers As a result, the "below threshold rate" of extended but also their families. The issue of fairness deeming will apply to the first $2,000 of available will be undermined substantially by this bill. money or deposit money of a person other than a person who is a member of a "pensioner couple" as I realise that, before the luncheon adjourn- defined in the Social Security Act. ment, Senator Andrew Murray of the Austral- The "below threshold rate" will also apply in all ian Democrats was speaking and I was to be cases to the first $4,000 of available money or the next speaker. I apologise to the Senate deposit money of a "pensioner couple". that I was not present at that time because I The Social Security Act and the Student and Youth was otherwise engaged in a situation from Assistance Act will be amended, from 1 October which I could not extract myself. I thank the 1997, to provide for recovery of social security Senate for its courtesy in delaying the debate payments that have been paid to persons in excess until this moment. I will repay that courtesy of their correct entitlement but which are not with a similar courtesy, namely, restricting my currently recoverable as debts. In addition, where possible, the debt creation provisions will be observations to about 10 minutes. If that is a rationalised. message to the minister to come in and respond in about 10 minutes time, I hope he The recovery of overpayments will occur according to the means of a person to pay. This will improve gets it. equity between customers, some of whom are now Mr Deputy President, permit me to make able to retain more than their correct entitlement even though they have ample capacity to repay, some simple observations about this work- while others with limited finances are obliged to place relations bill. Permit me to do so from repay their debts. a perspective of 40 years involvement with Finally, the bill provides for the modification of the the trade union movement and with workers advance payment scheme for recipients of social in a variety of industries, not only areas such security entitlements. The modifications include as administrative and clerical, the commercial removal of a ‘permitted purpose’ as a qualification shops, manufacturing and the wharves, but requirement for an advance payment, reduction of also some of the essential services areas, such the maximum advance amount to $500 and restric- as fire brigades and ambulances. tion of the number of advances payable to a person to one advance in 12 months. This measure will Permit me to do so from a perspective of 35 take effect on 1 January 1997. years of commitment to orderly industrial I commend the bill to the Senate. progress, to peace between employers and Ordered that further consideration of the employees, between union and management. second reading of this bill be adjourned until I have been committed to that, not through the first day of sitting in 1997, in accordance the narrow interest of the trade union move- with the order agreed to on 29 November ment alone, but with a commitment to the 1994. development and prosperity of industry and commerce within Australia. Indeed, the WORKPLACE RELATIONS AND Tasmanian Trades and Labour Council, of OTHER LEGISLATION AMENDMENT which I was secretary for a number of years, BILL 1996 changed its objective from the old one of Second Reading socialisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange to one of encourag- Debate resumed. ing the creation of an economic and social Senator HARRADINE (Tasmania) (3.54 order in which persons can live with freedom p.m.)—Mr Deputy President, I am the last and dignity and pursue both their spiritual Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4297 development and material wellbeing in condi- fairness and equity. We have heard it all, over tions of economic security and opportunity. the years, ‘Fair go.’ That is a common Aus- It was against the background of those tralian comment. The antithesis of fair go is principles that I operated. It was at times at the survival of the fittest. That consciousness some considerable cost. In the 1960s there which is ingrained in our societal views was were a number of key unions which believed there in the last century and it was placed in in what the government now believes, which our constitution in relation to industrial is smashing conciliation and arbitration. They relations. If anybody has read books about believed in exercising muscle to the extent Henry Bournes Higgins they will have seen that ‘survival of the fittest’ was their motto. what was being said both in the debates and That, of course, had detrimental effects on the convention and, probably more important- those who were least able to withstand that ly, outside. There it is in section 51(xxxv) of sort of pressure. the constitution. Section 51(xxxv) is very clear. It says: I am talking about my own state of Tas- mania when, because of shipping disputes and The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, the like, that state was held to ransom. It fell have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with to me and the council, and the supporters that respect to— we had in the council, to uphold fairness and justice for the workers of Tasmania against ...... those who were attempting to smash arbitra- Conciliation and arbitration for the prevention and tion—principally the unions in the shipping settlement of industrial disputes extending beyond and wharf area. But they were very often the limits of any one State. assisted by their employers because the It is that constitutional provision which stevedoring industry was a cost-plus industry, enables this parliament to so act that it is and the greater the cost, the bigger the plus being undermined by the workplace relations for the employers. bill. Yes, the wheel has turned. In my view As far as I was concerned, I believed that this piece of legislation will not affect the there should be balance and fairness, and we fittest workers or the fittest or strongest should not operate on the basis of the spoils organisations, but it will affect the weak, going to the fittest; that is to say, the survival those least able to defend themselves. of the fittest. In fact, in many of those years I believe we have been told by the Prime the whip hand was held by the trade union Minister (Mr Howard) that, if this measure is movement because in many of the industries enacted, no worker, no employee, will be there was scarcity of labour. Now of course worse off as a result. I am prepared to go the government appears to look around and outside this chamber, out the front, and take see that there is not that scarcity of labour, a bet. I will give the minister London to a that there is a surplus of labour in many areas brick on, if he wants, that that will not occur. and that the employers do have the whip In other words, there will not be no worker hand. worse off as a result of the passage of this I think Senator Ray mentioned on Friday legislation, there will be thousands of workers last week the case of that airline where pilots worse off as a result. were doing almost anything to get up hours I am not going to canvass what has been and they were working without pay. As a said. Almost everything possible that could be result of that there were a crash and, tragical- said about this matter has already been said ly, deaths. The commissioner who was chair- by the 40 or so senators who preceded me in ing the inquiry had specific points to make this debate. I am not going to trawl over old about the working conditions that applied in ground but the essence of this bill is to that area which resulted in the endangering of undermine the power of workers who are the lives of the passengers. already weak and to undermine their represen- Deeply ingrained in the consciousness of tatives. An example of why that statement by the Australian people is this concept of the Prime Minister would not be accurate—I 4298 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 do not suggest he is deliberately stating an right of entry provisions and that will affect untruth, but I believe he is very poorly in- a lot of workers or potential workers. formed—is the fact that contracts under state I do not intend saying anything more. My jurisdictions will override the provisions of observation is that this bill is so fundamen- federal awards or certified agreements mean- tally flawed that it ought to be defeated at the ing, ipso facto, as far as Western Australia is second reading. concerned there will be hundreds of people who are immediately worse off. Senator ALSTON (Victoria—Minister for Communications and the Arts) (4.12 p.m.)— Secondly, there is an attack on the organisa- in reply—The debate over the Workplace tions of workers. The membership agree- Relations and Other Legislation Amendment ments, for example, that are commonplace Bill in the Senate over the last few days has now as a result of enterprise bargaining been characterised by a large number of agreements where employers and unions have inaccurate and misleading statements by the negotiated wages and working conditions, job opposition. I will be able to deal with only a security and the like, should also be able to few of these statements in the time available. be incorporated into those instruments under I want to begin by addressing some of the the new legislation—provided, of course, they more general attacks that we have heard on are endorsed by the employees concerned. the government’s reforms. In particular, four Another aspect is the allowable items which statements by the opposition misrepresent the are down to 18 conditions. I do not quite see content of the bill and the intent of the how this will ultimately be regarded as consti- government. They wrongly claim that the tutional. Nevertheless, if this particular bill legislation represents a fundamental attack on purports to be based on the conciliation and the independent umpire, the Australian Indus- arbitration power, I cannot see that that would trial Relations Commission.They wrongly stand up to an appeal to the High Court. claim that the legislation represents a funda- mental attack on the award system. They There are a number of other issues which wrongly claim that it represents a fundamental I just want to mention briefly: the reduction attack on the rights of workers to participate of the powers of the Industrial Relations in collective action. And they wrongly claim Commission to the 18 conditions and the that the government is aiming to force work- removal of the power of the commission to ers currently under awards and collective regulate superannuation, which is a very agreements onto individual contracts. important thing. The government has encour- aged superannuation, but workers ought to Turning to the first of these wholly un- have a good deal of control over where their founded assertions, Senator Sherry, among money will go and that can and should be many others, claimed that the workplace done in many areas within the conciliation relations bill represents an attack on the and arbitration system itself. independence of the AIRC. He is wrong. It is not the government’s policy to attack the The Prime Minister, or one of the ministers, commission. Rather, the government proposes indicated that this measure is required to making a series of changes to the role of the boost employment. It probably will boost commission and, in some cases, actually employment—part-time employment. It will enhancing the commission’s role. cut substantially full-time employment be- The changes to the role of the commission cause the bill removes the ability of awards are consistent with the other changes shifting to regulate part-time work and that is of great the emphasis of the system to agreement concern indeed. making. While there will be less emphasis on Another area mentioned in debate is the arbitration, the commission will maintain an abolition of the ability of the Industrial award safety net of fair minimum wages and Relations Commission to scrutinise workplace conditions, including through determining agreements—AWAs—before they come into claims for safety net adjustments. It will also force. Another one is the restrictions on the oversee the award simplification process and Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4299 review awards to ensure provisions are flex- workplace level. Awards will continue to ible, easy to understand, non-discriminatory provide minimum wages and conditions and and geared to the needs of individual work- the AIRC will have jurisdiction to determine places and enterprises. safety net adjustments. The commission’s conciliation role will Consistent with our policy set out in Better continue and it will have an important respon- pay for better work, awards will be simplified. sibility to encourage the making of agree- This will involve limiting the matters to be ments between employers and employees at included in awards and ensuring that they are the enterprise and workplace levels. The more flexibly expressed, with other matters to commission will have a strengthened medi- be determined at the workplace and enterprise ation role. As part of the conciliation process, levels. the parties will be able to request the commis- Award simplification is important. It is sion to make a recommendation in relation to important in encouraging employers and matters that they cannot agree on. There will employees to agree at the workplace about be an express provision requiring the commis- matters of detail or process that are best sion to make recommendations in such cir- settled at the workplace level. It is crucial to cumstances and where it is satisfied that the deliver flexibility in how award provisions are parties will comply with the recommendation. to apply. It is part of a broader process of If such a recommendation is ignored, the encouraging dialogue at the workplace about commission will be able to refrain from ways of increasing productivity. dealing with matters involving that party—an Award simplification is not—I repeat, not— end of formal bargaining period for a certified a device to reduce wages or key conditions. agreement—which would end the parties’ The allowable matters to be included in rights to take protected industrial action. awards will cover all key matters relating to The commission will have stronger and pay, allowances and conditions of employ- clearer powers to stop or prevent industrial ment. In addition, awards can include provi- action. It will have the power to make orders sions that are incidental to these allowable to deal with disputes between registered matters and essential for the effective oper- organisations over the representation of ation of the award. Labor broke its promise to workers where a business is being adversely simplify awards which it made in March 1993 affected. It will also have the power to re- and again in its Working Nation statement of solve disputes where all attempts to reach an 1994. This government will meet its promise agreement have failed and the disputes threat- of a simpler, more efficient award system. en serious harm to the community or the As well as criticisms of the award simplifi- economy. In addition, the commission will cation process, there has been a lot of propa- have responsibility for unfair dismissal mat- ganda suggesting that teachers, nurses and ters in the federal jurisdiction. I repeat: this is other employees currently covered by paid not a weakened commission or a less inde- rates awards will be made worse off when pendent one, but it is a commission whose they move to minimum rates awards. The role has changed consistent with other chan- truth is they will not have their wages cut if ges proposed in the bill. their paid rates awards are phased out over The second claim made by Senator Sherry time and after consultation with the parties. is that the workplace relations bill represents The process of converting these awards to a major attack on the award system. Once minimum rate awards will occur consistent again, this is not the case. The proposed with the government’s guarantee on take legislation is not designed to attack the award home pay and will be overseen by the com- system; rather, it is designed to ensure that mission. the award provides an effective safety net of One of the main reasons that paid rates fair minimum wages and conditions. At the awards are no longer necessary is that many same time it maintains the focus of the overall of the workers covered by paid rates awards system of award making at the enterprise or have already entered into workplace or enter- 4300 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 prise agreements. For this reason, their paid reasonable limits and is not abused. Similarly, rates awards no longer specify their actual Australian workplace agreements are not rate of pay. This is the case for many teachers about keeping unions out of the bargaining and nurses. In this era of workplace bargain- process; rather, they are about providing ing, the government believes there is no need workers with more choice. Unions can still to continue with different types of awards for represent employees if employees want them different groups of workers. It is true that all as their bargaining agents. However, uninvited awards, including paid rates awards, will be union involvement will be excluded. The new simplified in their scope and reviewed to options available in terms of bargaining streamline their operation. But this will not agents will lead to greater competition and involve reducing the level of existing entitle- encourage unions to provide better service to ments for the allowable award matters. members. The third claim made by the opposition is The fourth claim made by the opposition is that the workplace relations bill represents a that the workplace relations bill is aimed at fundamental attack on the rights of workers forcing workers currently under awards and to participate in collective action. The opposi- collective agreements onto individual con- tion is wrong here, too. The government is tracts. This claim is again incorrect. The not attacking the rights of workers to partici- workplace relations bill is about providing pate in collective action or attacking the employers and employees with much greater legitimate role of unions; rather, the choice about how to regulate their relation- government’s policy is about giving employ- ships. It puts the emphasis on direct work- ers and employees choice in how they handle place relationships and on the mutual interest industrial relations in the workplace. of the employer and the employee. The workplace relations bill will provide More direct employment relationships will employees with the right to take collective give enterprises the flexibility to change and industrial action in appropriate circumstances. adapt to circumstances and maintain a com- Consistent with accepted principles of collec- petitive edge. At the same time, such relation- tive bargaining, the legislation preserves the ships will enable employees to formalise right to take industrial action in relation to arrangements which deliver the flexibility that genuine bargaining for agreements. At the they want. This is not a one size fits all same time, the public will be protected system; it allows people—employers and against any strike action that threatens health, employees—to tailor arrangements to suit safety or lives. In this way, the legislation them. provides a fair balance and protects the interests of employers, employees and the Under this bill the options for agreement community. making will be significantly expanded and In relation to union membership, the simplified. The parties will be able to choose government believes that, just as workers whether they want informal over-award should be free to join a union, so they should arrangements or whether they want to forma- be free not to join. The government is also lise their agreements. They will also be able ensuring that if workers choose to join a to choose whether they want to negotiate union, they have a choice about which union collective agreements with or without union they join. The bill will make membership of involvement or negotiate individual agree- all organisations truly voluntary. Compulsory ments. If they choose the latter, they will be unionism and preference will be prohibited. able to decide whether to bargain themselves This will be achieved by removing matters or seek the services of a bargaining agent. which relate to preference from the jurisdic- Of course, all formal agreements will be tion of the AIRC. subject to statutory requirements to ensure Unions will still have right of entry to that employees are protected. The bill also workplaces. However, the proposed legislation includes significant protection against an will ensure that this right operates within employee being forced to sign the new form Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4301 of agreement, that is, an Australia workplace consistent with our election promise to allow agreement. employees and employers to choose the juris- As well as the general claims made by the diction and the nature of their legal relation- opposition in this debate, there are a number ship. Contrary to some claims, employees will of specific claims that need to be firmly not be forced from federal awards onto state rebutted. The first of these is the claim by a awards. For those who are covered by federal number of opposition senators that the pro- awards and who want to make agreements posed principal object for the new act does under a state jurisdiction, the legislation will not put sufficient emphasis on fairness and the provide access to such agreements. interests of employees. The proposed legisla- The third wild assertion that I wish to tion is clearly based on a fair go for all so tackle was that made by Senator Foreman, that the system is appropriately balanced and who stated that the proposal for junior rates delivers benefits for both employees and of pay means that people will be working for employers. amounts that are no more than social security The objects are not aimed at taking sides. payments. As any reading of the bill shows, Instead, they are aimed at providing avenues juniors, trainees and apprentices will not have for mutual choice, mutual commitment and their wages cut under the government’s mutual benefit. The objects of the new act proposed new arrangements. The Industrial will focus the role of awards on minimum Relations Commission has established award standards and the protection of the low paid; rates of pay for these employees, and it is encourage the determination of terms and those rates that are incorporated into our conditions of employment as far as possible system. by agreement between employers and employ- Juniors will continue to be paid at the ees, either individually or collectively, at the award rate prescribed for their age whether enterprise or workplace level; and protect they are employed under an award or work- freedom of choice in relation to agreement place agreement. That is, no change. Where making and membership of employer and there is an award rate of pay established for employee associations. the particular traineeship, including a national A key part of the proposed principal object training wage traineeship or an apprenticeship, of the bill is ‘respecting and valuing the that rate will continue to apply whether they diversity of the work force’ by helping to are employed under an award or workplace prevent or eliminate discrimination on speci- agreement. That is, no change. fied grounds. There is also a new emphasis on The only area of change is for new assisting employees to balance their work and traineeships and apprenticeships where cur- family responsibilities. rently there is no relevant training award rate The second specific issue I want to address of pay. That will generally occur because a relates to our proposed amendments to section new traineeship or apprenticeship with a 152 of the existing Industrial Relations Act different work-training mix has been devel- which provides employers and employees oped under the modern Australian apprentice- with greatest choice in relation to state and ship and traineeship system. For these, the federal agreements. Senator Sherry has wage will be the most relevant award rate claimed that this amendment breaches the adjusted for time spent in training. The government’s guarantee that no worker will principle that trainees be paid only for their be worse off as a result of the workplace productive work is already used in the nation- relations bill. This claim is clearly nonsense. al training wage, which was agreed to by The amendment proposed to section 152 unions and endorsed by the commission. will prevent a federal award operating where Where the training component is increased employees currently have their employment under a full-time traineeship or apprenticeship regulated by a state employment agreement or to a point where the wage falls below an where employees freely enter into a new state appropriate level, the government will provide employment agreement. The amendment is a top up to the weekly wage for MAATS 4302 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 trainees employed under the new wage ar- al based on a range of discriminatory grounds rangements. The top up will be to the follow- will continue to be unlawful. Awards will ing guaranteed minimum levels for full-time continue to provide a safety net of fair apprentices and trainees: up to $128 for 16- minimum wages and conditions for all em- year-olds, $158 for 17-year-olds and $195 for ployees, and the AIRC will be required to 18-year-olds and above. have particular regard to the needs of the low paid when adjusting the award safety net. These rates are based on the current Employees will have a range of statutory minimum national training wage rates. The protections when they choose to enter into top up levels are substantially higher than the agreements with their employers. The employ- top up levels implemented for trainees by the ment advocate will be there to provide advice previous government and agreed to by the and assistance to employers and employees ACTU. Our proposals in this area will not who want to make use of our new flexibilit- only protect current employment but also ies. encourage more young people to take up In relation to part-time employees, the new traineeships. Under the Brereton laws, junior workplace relations act will ensure that rates cease next year and some employers employees have access to part-time work on estimate this could cost young people 200,000 a regular basis with pro rata benefits. Employ- jobs. ers and employees of the workplace and The final point I wish to make about the enterprise level will be able to agree to debate on the bill relates to claims by a regular part-time agreements. Also, outdated number of senators that the government’s award restrictions on regular part-time em- reforms will adversely affect vulnerable ployment will be removed from awards. employees. Specific concerns have also been Many unions have opposed the introduction raised about the bill’s treatment of equal pay of regular part-time work. Others have includ- for work of equal value without discrimina- ed restrictions such as limits on maximum and tion based on sex and part-time employment. minimum weekly hours and quotas designed I want to assure the Senate that the govern- primarily to protect the interests of full-time ment is committed to ensuring that all work- workers. Workers who have preferred regular ers have fair access to the opportunities to be part-time employment of more or fewer hours provided through this legislation. than allowed for in awards are therefore forced to remain in full-time work, to accept Like all employees, these employees will be casual employment or to remain outside the able to benefit from the broad set of changes paid work force. The new act will increase outlined in the legislation. In particular, they the opportunities for employees to work less will be able to negotiate agreements that than full-time hours while having predictable reflect their individual circumstances. For work hours, greater job security and access to example, workers with family responsibilities the conditions enjoyed by other permanent will be able to negotiate agreements which employees on a pro rata basis. provide for more flexible working hours. In conclusion, it needs to be stressed yet Provision has been made for protection again that, despite the assertions made by the against discrimination in awards and agree- opposition, the workplace relations bill will ments. In a particular case of pay discrimina- provide significant benefits to Australian tion, the proposed workplace relations act in workplaces and will provide increased oppor- combination with existing provisions of the tunities for flexibility for both employers and Sex Discrimination Act 1984 will ensure that employees. In addition, by creating opportuni- equal pay for work of equal value without ties for innovative enterprise agreements that discrimination based on sex applies to awards, improve productivity, all Australians will be agreements and over award pay. the winners. Australia will continue to fully meet its Question put: international obligations in this area. Dismiss- That the bill be now read a second time. Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4303

The Senate divided. [4.33 p.m.] MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS (The President—Senator the Hon. Margaret Inhumane Weapons Convention Reid) Ayes ...... 39 Senator MARGETTS (Western Austral- ia)—I seek leave of the Senate to recommit Noes ...... 26 —— the motion that the Senate take note of the Majority ...... 13 statement by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, —— Alexander Downer, in relation to the Inhu- AYES mane Weapons Convention. Abetz, E. Allison, L. Leave granted. Alston, R. K. R. Boswell, R. L. D. Senator MARGETTS—I thank the Senate. Bourne, V. Brownhill, D. G. C. Calvert, P. H. Campbell, I. G. I seek leave to continue my remarks later. Chapman, H. G. P. Coonan, H. Leave granted; debate adjourned. Crane, W. Eggleston, A. Ellison, C. Ferguson, A. B. TELSTRA (DILUTION OF PUBLIC Ferris, J Gibson, B. F. OWNERSHIP) BILL 1996 Heffernan, W. Herron, J. Hill, R. M. Kernot, C. Second Reading Knowles, S. C. Lees, M. H. Debate resumed from 9 May, on motion by Macdonald, I. Macdonald, S. MacGibbon, D. J. McGauran, J. J. J. Senator Newman: Minchin, N. H. Murray, A. That this bill be now read a second time. Newman, J. M. Panizza, J. H. * Senator SCHACHT (South Australia) Parer, W. R. Patterson, K. C. L. Reid, M. E. Short, J. R. (4.37 p.m.)—I rise on behalf of the opposition Stott Despoja, N. Tambling, G. E. J. and, I believe, the large majority of Austral- Tierney, J. Vanstone, A. E. ians to oppose the Telstra (Dilution of Public Woodley, J. Ownership) Bill. A majority of the Environ- NOES ment, Recreation, Communications and the Bishop, M. Bolkus, N. Arts References Committee made a number Brown, B. Carr, K. of recommendations, of which the fundamen- Collins, J. M. A. Colston, M. A. tal one was that Telstra should not be sold. Conroy, S. Cook, P. F. S. In this bill, we have a proposal by the Cooney, B. Denman, K. J. Evans, C. V. Faulkner, J. P. government to sell one-third of Telstra—for Foreman, D. J. * Forshaw, M. G. approximately $8 billion, the government’s Gibbs, B. Harradine, B. estimate—and one-third of that will be sold Hogg, J. Lundy, K. to foreign interests. The Senate committee Mackay, S. Margetts, D. report on this bill made it quite clear in a Murphy, S. M. Neal, B. J. number of areas that this bill is unnecessary O’Brien, K. W. K. Ray, R. F. Reynolds, M. Schacht, C. C. and that this public asset is worth keeping in public ownership for a range of social and PAIRS economic reasons. Kemp, R. Crowley, R. A. O’Chee, W. G. Childs, B. K. One thing that surprised all the members of Troeth, J. McKiernan, J. P. the opposition, including the Democrats, on Watson, J. O. W. Sherry, N. the Senate committee was that we waited for Woods, R. L. West, S. M. the government to produce a major reason— * denotes teller major empirical evidence—to justify the sale Question so resolved in the affirmative. of Telstra. And we waited and waited. Bill read a second time. DOCA, the Minister for Communications and the Arts (Senator Alston), Telstra, the Ordered that consideration of the bill in finance department and other supporters of committee of the whole be made an order of privatisation ended up quoting one report, the the day for the next day of sitting. 1992 World Bank report Privatisation: the 4304 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 lessons of experience. DOCA’s submission these thousands of companies overwhelmingly described the World Bank report as ‘perhaps were privatised because they were losing large the most compelling overall review of the amounts of money. So what is the comparison effects of privatisation and its relationship with Telstra? Telstra is not a loss making with liberalisation’. DOCA also said ‘this is company. It is a profitable company, per- the only comprehensive study we are aware forming very well in public ownership. It was of that covers a range of privatisations and performing very well when the previous also attempts to analyse the outcomes on the government introduced the GBE reforms to basis of comparisons to reasonable counterfac- how publicly owned companies should run tuals in each case’. The Department of themselves, and of course has since the Finance also placed great significance on this introduction of competition in 1991-92 by the report, referring to it as a major study and previous government. Every proponent of quoting at length from its conclusion. privatisation admitted under oath at the What does the 1992 World Bank report inquiry into the sale of Telstra that the most refer to? It refers to 6,800 privatisations significant improvement occurs when you around the world in about the last decade and introduce competition. The privatisation issue a half. Of these, 4,500 were in the former is really only a little bit on the side where a German Democratic Republic, the old East few percentage points may occur. Germany, and 6,100 were in Eastern Europe When I questioned the Department of altogether, Latin America and the Caribbean. Finance and DOCA, could they give us As an example of the benefits accruing from examples of the advantage of privatisation the privatisation, the study pointed to ‘a over and above competition from any experi- previously near moribund textile company in ence in the world that is measurable? We got Niger,’ ‘a finance company in Swaziland’ and two stunning examples: two electricity com- ‘an agroindustrial enterprise in Mozambique’. panies in Chile in the early to mid-1980s, Just 170 of the 6,800 privatisations occurred when the Pinochet dictatorship, noted for its in OECD countries. human rights abuses, was running Chile. They Other studies relied on by supporters of were the only two examples the finance privatisation included—and this is a classic department, DOCA and Telstra could come list—the Polish cement and lime sector, the up with to justify some advantage to privatis- Odessa meat company, the Swarzedz Furni- ation in improving efficiency. In one of the ture Company in Poland, the Trinidad and cases, the improvement appeared to be no Tobago Methanol Company, textiles in Tunis- more than 1½ per cent improvement in ia and—the one that tops the whole list— productivity. In another case, they said one of privatisation in Haiti. the things that privatisation brought about was I have to say that for a report to rely on the a reduction in the theft rate in one of those privatisation in Haiti as an example of why companies in Chile. I must say I have never you should privatise Telstra really is one of seen any evidence that theft in Telstra from the most extraordinary arguments I have its own employees is a major problem that heard. We know that for about a century or has had to be addressed. I have not seen any more Haiti has relied on voodoo philosophy. large numbers of Telstra employees being Now we have the minister relying on voodoo dragged off to the courts because they are economics from Haiti to justify the sale of consistently thieving from Telstra. Telstra, a profitable company, in a First These are the absurd examples this govern- World economy, by comparing it with Haiti, ment and its departments have relied upon to a Fourth World economy that has been justify the privatisation of Telstra. Telstra is through more unfortunate experiences than a profitable company. On 13 September, most of us care to recount. Telstra announced a profit after tax, Those reports clearly showed all the time abnormals and minority interests of $2.3 that privatisation occurred where companies billion for the year ended 30 June 1996. On were not profitable. In the Third World, all the day these massive profits were announced, Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4305 business editor Alan Kohler said on the 7.30 Telstra’s return on average equity for 1993- Report that Telstra’s unit costs per line are 94 was 18 per cent; world’s best practice is now below the average of the world’s tele- over 17 per cent. It was 17.9 per cent in communications companies for the first time. 1994-95 and 1995-96. So again that is an Kohler commented: international measure. Telstra’s credit ratings . . . they’re 8 per cent below the average of the are amongst the highest of any major Austral- world and they’re planning now to stay there. ian company; this has enabled Telstra to On the 7.30 Report, Kerry O’Brien asked access low cost borrowings. Alan Kohler: All in all, we have in Telstra a company So would partial privatisation force greater efficien- that on a number of international measures is cy on Telstra? already one of the world’s best. Telstra is His response was: performing at a rate that we should all be very proud of. Its contribution to national Well, that’s already happening, that’s the point. revenues is significant. In fact, I think last A comment from a commentator such as year Telstra’s profit was bigger than the Kohler is far more persuasive than the very revenue we gained from the capital gains tax, dodgy examples that the World Bank study and the way the profit is anticipated to grow produced. will mean that within a few years it may well Mr Ian Martin from BZW, a company equal the revenue we get from the fringe strongly in favour of privatisation, gave benefits tax. So Telstra is making a major evidence accordingly before the Senate contribution to revenue whilst providing a committee. He said: better and better service to the Australian people. On a range of benchmarks, Telstra stacks up very well against overseas companies. We also want to point out that privatising Telstra’s pretax return on capital for 1993-94 monopolies is not without risk. Whatever was 22 per cent; world’s best practice is over people may say about a public monopoly, at 20 per cent. In 1994-95, return on investment least it is in public hands. For the future, even was 21.8 per cent and in 1995-96 it increased under the changes that will be made from July to 22.9 per cent. Telstra’s interest cover for next year when we have a more deregulated 1993-94 was 5.3 times; world’s best practice market, Telstra will still be the dominant is over 5.5 times. In 1994-95, Telstra’s inter- player in providing telecommunications est cover increased to 8.3 times and, in 1995- services to anywhere between 85 and 90 per 96, it was 8.6 times. This indicates that cent of the Australian public. Telstra is continually improving its capacity Even those people who came before the to service its debt. Telstra’s debt ratio was Senate committee arguing for privatisation 35.5 per cent in 1993-94 and world’s best said that, for the foreseeable future, Telstra practice is 35 per cent. The debt ratio im- will be the dominant provider of telecom- proved from 35 per cent in June 1995 to 30 munications in this country. Yet, if it is the per cent in June 1996—a significant improve- dominant player, is it not much better to keep ment. that dominant player in public ownership and We have heard some advocates of privatis- responsible through the minister and estimates ation saying that the problem with Telstra is hearings to the Australian Parliament in that its debt is too low. This comes from a regard to the services it is providing? Once it government which is saying that our national becomes privatised, those oversight arrange- debt is too high, yet they are saying that ments come to an end. Telstra is not performing well enough because Telstra will be the biggest dominant player its debt is too low. That is an extraordinary in our economy. We believe that is a major contradiction. We ought to congratulate reason why such a dominant player should be Telstra for having a debt well below the maintained in public ownership for the benefit average debt of similar telecommunications of ordinary Australians. Then, should they companies. have a query about the way it is being run or 4306 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 about its performance, or should there be in public ownership so that not only will its issues of concern, questions can be asked of revenues pay a profit to the federal govern- the minister in this parliament. ment but also so that capital works can be Madam Acting Deputy President, I also directed for the benefit of all Australians. want to deal with the sort of telecommunica- The next matter I wish to raise is the issue tions system this country will have in the of industry policy. Telstra is a major purchas- future. There is no doubt that early in the next er of equipment in Australia. It has had that century access to broadband services will be policy for decades. As a result, we have many a major issue for the social and economic manufacturing companies in Australia which equity of this country. New definitions, such not only have supplied top quality equipment as information poor and information rich, to the Telstra system in Australia, but also are which have already come to light, will be now being able to compete in the world commonly used. If you have access to broad- market. I think that, last financial year, ex- band services you will have advantages in the ports from Australia of such equipment way you conduct yourself and in the way you totalled $600 million or $700 million—a will have economic opportunities within our threefold increase over the previous five society. If you do not have the ability to years. They are getting into that market connect with these new broadband services, because Telstra gives critical mass to purchas- you will be economically disadvantaged. ing in Australia. That creates lots of high With Telstra in public ownership we can quality, effective jobs. ensure that all Australians will have access to Once you let private sector enterprise into a reasonable telecommunications system Telstra—foreign interests, in particular over- because, when parliament and the minister seas telcos—many of them will not want direct Telstra, it will be carried out. Once the Telstra, which they are part owners of, com- power of direction, the power of effective peting with them in the new markets of Asia. oversight, by the parliament is given up, we It will be against their interests. As share- will no longer be able to guarantee that all holders, and with directors on the board— Australians will get the new range of services. even in a minority position—they will be able The Telstra committee of inquiry recom- to influence an outcome. Because the mended, for example, that universal service minister’s power of direction and influence is obligations should be amended to guarantee, reduced under this bill, there will be no way instead of it being a local phone connection to overcome it and say, ‘We want Telstra to on a copper pair, that it should be a band- be one of the major leading companies ex- width of 64 kilobits per second. That is the porting services to the world and creating start for everybody to be on the information good quality jobs for Australians.’ That is superhighway. another area in which this bill is extremely People in regional Australia will not get this deficient. It is silent about what will happen level of connection. When you ask Telstra when Telstra is in private ownership. and Optus—who are rolling out cable for Though we will get some argument that we broadband services in the major cities of are only privatising a third, we all know that Australia—they will tell you they have no the Minister for Communications and the plan to do this in Tasmania or in regional Arts, Senator Alston, spilt the beans on all Australia. As a result, we will end up with a this about a month ago in a television inter- two-tiered system. If you are fortunate enough view, which he obviously came to regret. He to live in a socio-economically rich suburb in said, ‘It is not only desirable, but it is inevi- Sydney or Melbourne you will probably get table that all of Telstra will be privatised.’ it; if you are unfortunate enough to live in a The Prime Minister (Mr Howard) publicly country town or in Hobart, Tasmania, you admonished him for those remarks. He public- will be waiting a long time, whistling in the ly said that he had rung the minister twice to wind, to get that connection. To get that point out that that was not the policy of the connection and service Telstra should be left government. The Prime Minister was getting Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4307 worried at the minister’s inability to convince tered workshop. Telstra is one of the most the Senate to support the privatisation and successful companies this country has ever that this may upset some independent senators seen, and it is in public ownership. It is in this place. delivering the goods for the Australian people. It is quite clear that is on the agenda. Mr That is why this opposition will, in this bill, Costello made similar remarks overseas. He fight tooth and nail to oppose the privatisation made it quite clear that if he could not get of Telstra. We will fight it all the way away with privatising it by legislative means, through in this place, and we hope that he might look it by non-legislative means. enough senators see the commonsense view Again, this government is about full of maintaining Telstra in public ownership for privatisation—privatisation that will lead to the benefit of all Australians. (Time expired) substantial job losses. The minister has an- Debate interrupted. nounced at the estimates committee that he is quite happy that Telstra will get rid of 22,000 FIRST SPEECH jobs over the next three years. That is a one- The PRESIDENT—Order! Pursuant to third downsizing of Telstra. Telstra itself said sessional order, we will now proceed to that this will improve the profit bottom line Senator Coonan’s speech. Before I call her, I by $600 million a year within 12 months— remind honourable senators that this is her $600 million profit! first speech, and I ask that the usual courte- If we have to have this downsizing under sies be extended to her. this government over the next three years, Senator COONAN (New South Wales) why don’t we keep Telstra in public owner- (4.58 p.m.)—Thank you, Madam President. I ship so that that extra profit—which comes at rise this afternoon, as the last new senator of the loss of 22,000 jobs—at least stays with the class of 1 July 1996, to make my first the public; it at least goes into consolidated speech. In so doing I am conscious that our revenue and can be used, maybe, for educa- terms as senators will expire in year 2002, tion, health or, in particular, labour market and that we will have had the privilege and reform programs for the 22,000 who have lost enormous responsibility, with others, of their jobs. Some of those 22,000 will over- defining and shaping Australia’s direction whelmingly be in the rural areas of this across the dawn of the new millennium. I country. The ones who will hit the fence are have listened with interest and admiration to the service operators, the directory assistance the speeches of my colleagues and have been personnel—all of which are operating very impressed by the diversity of perspective, successfully in country regional centres. They talent and unique life experience which each are the ones who will get chopped by Telstra. one brings to this place. That is what project Mercury said, even I have no immediate predecessor to ac- though it has now been denied. knowledge. In the 1996 election my seat was Telstra is an outstanding public asset of the the only numerical change in the composition Australian people. We on our side accept that of the Senate, being a gain for the coalition. there always will be some faults in Telstra, Until 1990 my seat was held by a distin- that there will always be need for improve- guished former senator Chris Puplick, current- ment. There always should be. We should ly President of the New South Wales Anti- always look at ways to improve its perform- Discrimination Board and Chairman of the ance, to improve its service to its customers, Privacy Committee. In these capacities he to improve the quality of its jobs for its continues to make a significant contribution employees and, above all, to improve its to public life. profit to the Australian people. I am immensely proud to represent the Telstra should not be bagged, as it has people of New South Wales—the premier been, by the minister and this government, state. In May 1788 in Sydney, New South who describe it as a 600-pound gorilla. They Wales, Governor Arthur Phillip laid the bag it as inefficient, saying that it is a shel- foundation stone for the first Government 4308 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

House, the seat of colonial power in the Let us start with education. Are our policies Pacific. This profoundly significant act has well designed to ensure that the students of different meanings to different Australians. To today are getting an education that will best some it marked the birthplace of a nation; to enable them to obtain employment in areas others it meant invasion. For many, it means where jobs will be available? In order to a turning point in history and untold oppor- ensure that we train students appropriately, it tunities to build the nation together. It is an is necessary to determine the likely employ- opportunity given to me by the people of ment picture of the future. The future of work New South Wales and I will not waste it. and how we deal with unemployment and the I have no doubt that as the present custodi- unemployed are critical to our vision of the ans each of us wish to leave our community future—about the place we want Australia to a better place than we found it. As I see it, be. Unemployment, lack of security, declining the most compelling challenge facing us as a living standards and pressure on resources nation today is how to reconcile the need for profoundly affect the balance of equity and fiscal responsibility with the provision of a efficiency. In addition, the social cost of meaningful and adequate safety net for the unemployment on families and relationships genuinely needy in an era of rapid technologi- is often overlooked or hidden. It affects not cal and social change. To borrow the words only individuals but all too often third parties of US economist, Arthur M. Okun from his who are the victims of crime and drug abuse essay ‘Equality and Efficiency: The Big born out of hopelessness and despair. Trade-off’, the dilemma is how ‘to put some rationality into equality and some humanity Profound shifts in employment patterns and into efficiency’. in traditional modes of work not only impact on labour market policy but pose many Perhaps at no time in Australia’s history has questions for any forward looking job strat- the need to balance these competing notions egy. What will work mean at the close of the been so important or so compelling. To century? What sort of jobs will be available respond to this, we need to step back from the in the year 2020? Who will do the available siren calls coming from simplistic feelings of work? What hours will they do it in? Will fear, prejudice and misunderstanding. What there be a physical workplace to go to? What Australians demand of us as legislators and happens to those who do not have any work? what the community is entitled to have is an On these answers depend future strategies for examination of the concept of what the com- appropriate education, training, employment, munity aims to be and wants to pass on to our urban planning, infrastructure and industry children. In a fair society, those aims find policy. expression in access to minimum standards of education, employment, health, housing and Not only does Australia currently have a decent standard of living for its citizens. close to one million people unsuccessfully The problems that face Australia today and seeking paid employment but, as well, unpub- over the next decade are intertwined. We need lished ABS figures show that almost a quarter to take a holistic picture of the Australian of those in employment work in casual jobs. community of the future. What education do One in four casual employees would under- citizens need? What level of education can we take more work if it were available. At the afford? What jobs will be available? What other end of the spectrum, those with full- will be the requirements of a physically and time jobs are working longer hours than ever socially healthy community? Inappropriate before and those having two jobs to make solutions for education now will necessarily ends meet have significantly increased. In his aggravate the problems of lack of employment recent series in the Australian Financial opportunities and lack of employment impacts Review, ‘Revolution in the Workplace’, on community health. It is only by devising Stephen Long describes the great divide in the appropriate solutions to all these problems Australian workplace as ‘between the over- that we can achieve a fair society. worked and the out of work; between the well Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4309 paid and the poorly paid; between career jobs tied to productivity outcomes, job pools and and fringe jobs’. programs to directly assist matching of skills The composition of the work force has also to available jobs for the unemployed. changed dramatically. Staying in one job for Concerns that deregulation of the labour the whole of one’s working life is no longer market might result in increased productivity a reality. In its final report in May 1996 the but lower wages can be met by encouraging Commission for the Future of Work identified growth of those businesses capable of creating the increase of women in the work force from a large volume of high wage and high satis- 51 per cent to 62 per cent in the last 15 years faction jobs. The 1996 OECD report ‘Tech- as providing the most significant change in nology, Productivity and Job Creation’ identi- work force participation. The increase, how- fies knowledge, especially technological ever, is predominantly in part-time or casual knowledge, in industries such as telecom- work, which no doubt reflects the relentless munications, pharmaceuticals, new materials, need of most women to juggle work and environmental technologies, computers, family responsibilities as much as it reveals education and software as the main source of the type of available work. economic growth and job creation in member The real brunt of unemployment, however, countries. falls unequally on the young. Figures pub- lished by the commission show that almost If finding better ways to do things is the half of unemployed people are under 30 and source of future jobs and higher living stand- young people aged between 20 and 24 years ards, what sort of education and training will of age comprise the largest group of long- best equip the work force of the future to term unemployed. Of most concern in sharing understand and use knowledge? One thing is the burden of unemployment equitably is the certain, and that is that the better educated long-term rise in Australian families that will have an advantage in accessing the new simply have no ‘breadwinner’ at all. world of electronic commerce. This may lead A recent National Institute of Labour to widening inequalities between the skilled Studies report has predicted that the best and unskilled, unless ways are found to train official unemployment figure to expect by the workers in the new technologies and to year 2000 is 7.2 per cent. Downsizing, re- remove barriers to entry to new jobs. How- structuring and outsourcing have eliminated ever, there are new and exciting possibilities thousands of jobs. If these trends continue, here to provide, for example, electronic access there are profound implications not only for to teachers, trainers, libraries and programs to wage policy, taxation, superannuation and meet needs of those in rural and remote welfare, but for health, education and our locations or for those who would otherwise ability to deliver equity goals. Even if it have no access to such training. were possible to achieve a more equitable Creating new demand for new products distribution of jobs by making greater effi- inevitably creates the need for more highly ciencies, that will only affect the pool of work skilled and better paid workers. One only has currently available. To be able to provide to consider, for example, the effect of new appropriate education, employment and health products such as mobile phones. The Standard care for future Australians and help for the and Poor’s Industry Profile predicts that the genuinely disadvantaged, it is essential that telecommunications industry, worth $19.3 we identify and provide opportunities for billion in 1994, will reach $30 billion by the growth and the creation of new jobs. year 2004, with the mobile phone sector It is right, in my view, to emphasise the growing in excess of 50 per cent per annum. importance of labour market flexibility and Mobile phones, which barely existed 20 years productivity related reforms. There is also ago, now in Australia alone constitute a $1 much to be said for ways of organising the billion industry with some 2.5 million sub- workplace, including multiskilling, job shar- scribers. If this is the way forward in Austral- ing, perhaps self-managing units, work units ia for job creation, the policy implications go 4310 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 beyond making the labour and product mar- more scope for government to intervene to improve kets more flexible. the resource base or provide the enabling conditions likely to attract and/or advantage globally competi- As Dr David Clark of the School of Eco- tive industries within its own territory. nomics, University of New South Wales, points out, job creation also depends on A clear example is the need to provide a addressing those factors which inhibit busi- regulatory environment in telecommunications ness investment. The role for government is and the multi-media which allows competition not only to foster conditions for emerging to deliver the very best results, while protect- markets, it is also to develop and implement ing community safeguards and ensuring that strategies coordinating initiatives across a the fruits of such competition are widespread wide range of relevant policy areas including throughout the community. business, taxation, industry, training and To achieve an education system that pre- employment. pares a motivated work force for the type and As a means of job creation, Australia’s range of available work and to enlarge the trading relationship with east Asia, the fastest pool of available work will enable an appro- growing region in the world, is of critical priate response to the problems of those who, importance. In his recent speech to the 25th by reason of health, age or disadvantage, Annual Conference of Economists, ANU require a social safety net. Professor Peter Drysdale suggested that, on an Few community needs can be as compelling international comparison, Australia is becom- or deserving of our national attention than the ing less relevant in the booming Asian mar- need for access to health care at an affordable kets, having lost export opportunities worth cost. We have an ageing population. Not only $12 billion between 1985 and 1993. This that, but we are living longer than our fore- cannot be allowed to continue. bears and the ratio of those working to those The need for increased competitiveness in retired will be 40 per cent in a short 35 years. existing and new import markets, especially Australia spends 8.6 per cent of its GDP on in value added so-called ‘elaborately health services. This is expected to rise to 10 transformed’ manufactures and services, per cent by the year 2000. Unless the health should not only arrest the decline but generate system undergoes fundamental reform it will more high wage export manufacturing jobs. not survive in its present form. More particu- larly, unless the private health insurance Despite Australia’s welcome commitment system, which currently meets about 12 per together with APEC trading partners to cent of health care costs and takes some reduction of tariff protection for local indus- pressure of the public health system, is over- try, care will be needed to ensure our own hauled, it will disintegrate. The inquiry by the industries are not wiped out in the process. Productivity Commission is timely. The Whilst the distorting effect of subsidies questions seem to be how much of this cost through tariffs, rebates or tax breaks are well can be shifted equitably to those who can understood, when and how to cut business afford to pay and how the costs can be con- welfare and by how much is a difficult balan- tained. cing act. The community as a whole is affect- ed, simply because business responds by Although no measure in isolation is suffi- increasing prices or by reducing investment. cient, the principle of community rating, with The role for government in identifying and everyone paying the same premium irrespec- encouraging new growth opportunities is, in tive of age or state of health, results in the my view, to promote those policies which young and the healthy simply opting out of boost productivity and to provide the settings health insurance, leaving only high risk users, for long-term efficiency and equity. In Re- the old and the chronically ill, as a customer making Australia, Professor Hugh Emy base. Inevitably, premiums increase to cover described the process thus: the increase in claims. Infrastructure, research, knowledge production— We need to be much more imaginative in these are the realms of government, so there is how private health insurance is structured and Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4311 underwritten. Funds must be permitted to Socioeconomic indicators measuring the offer innovative products, such as lifetime health, education, income and housing status community rating with lower premiums for of indigenous Australians paint a clear picture those who join young and perhaps no-claim of systemic disadvantage. According to the bonuses or 100 per cent cover to eliminate the 1994 survey of indigenous Australians, infant gap between benefit paid and cost to the mortality rates are four times the rate of the patient. Additionally, the place of risk rated total population whilst the life expectancy of health insurance for trauma, sickness, hospital males is 18 years less than the national figure and medical gap and income cover needs to and 20 years less for females. be explored rather than shut out of calcula- Overall average income in 1994 was 30 per tion. cent less than the $20,000 average of the total Ultimately, the most effective measure to population. At the last national census, 40 per contain health costs is to maintain a healthy cent of indigenous Australians aged 15 and population. It requires a fundamental shift in over earned less than $8,000 a year. Long- attitude to devise strategies to keep people term unemployment of Aboriginal and Torres well, especially as they age and become Strait Islander people ranges between 60 per consumers of health services. Maintaining cent and 70 per cent compared with 46 per good health for the ageing should be as much cent of all Australians unemployed. as an investment for the future as education To continue to be proud to be Australians is for the young. in the year 2000, we must confront the prob- There is a sense of genuine bewilderment lems of delivery of assistance. Reconciliation amongst a lot of Australians that, in spite of will follow, in my view, as a matter of an expenditure in the vicinity of $10.329 course. It may be unrealistic to expect, at least billion in the last decade, there has been no in the short term, that indigenous Australians substantial improvement in the health, hous- will be able to create a sustainable wealth ing, education and general living conditions base from running cattle stations or other of Aboriginal people. This has led many to commercial or community business ventures. conclude that the cause is hopeless, and Certainly, there are outstanding examples of further expenditure at such scale is unjustified Aboriginal people’s involvement in successful and, at a time of economic stringency, unwar- commercial ventures. ranted. It will be important to long-term relations Instead, Australians should conclude that between indigenous and non-indigenous the way we have been doing it is wrong. Australians that incentives are given to Abo- Australia was right in concluding that the riginal and Torres Strait Islander people to conditions of indigenous Australians were make self-determination work so that they shameful and that if we were to hold up our may better help themselves. Far more import- heads and face ourselves in the mirror of our ant than attributing blame is the need to consciences we had to eradicate these condi- reassess our priorities. We all have a stake in tions of shame. Obviously, that needed mon- the outcome, and in the end we are all ac- ey. Obviously, not all the money was well countable as Australians, whatever our race or spent. Why? How can we do it better? origin. Instead of giving way to strident calls of The call against immigration is another prejudice and misunderstanding, it behoves us manifestation of our loss of national purpose. to rectify our system for delivery of what Contrast the conditions today with the eco- most fair-minded Australians believe all nomic and social conditions which obtained members of the community are entitled to. Is at times of strong migrant inflow. Historically, eradication of treatable disease, provision of Australia has been a great migrant nation running water and adequate housing really too greatly advantaged by the intake of skill, much to ask? labour and social diversity. That indigenous Australians are less well One could go back to the days of the gold off than other Australians is incontrovertible. rushes or Queensland canegrowing, but, 4312 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 rather, look at the more recent past. In the munity support. Getting the balance right 1950s, migration gave us the mighty Snowy must be a national priority. Mountains scheme. There was a great need in I enter political life laterally, so to speak, those days for hundreds of thousands of against the background of a professional unskilled workers, and a great number of such career in law spanning over 20 years. Practice people were anxious to come to this country. of many facets of law in Australia and in the The large number of new arrivals in the 1960s United States has given me some insight into and 1970s were seen as meeting an important the human condition. It has heightened my economic need. awareness of the need to guard against injust- Conditions have changed and our migrant ice. It has strengthened my resolve to be a intake needs to reflect this. At a time when voice for the oppressed. The law can be a there is already serious unemployment in powerful instrument for social and political Australia, bringing in more unskilled workers change. It is the machinery which maintains can cause resentment. Even in skilled areas— and regulates legal relationships and social for example, doctors—there are arguments activity in a free and democratic society. against unconditional migration. We must first It remains an abiding concern that many look after our own. Yet doctors are an exam- Australians cannot afford access to justice. ple of an unfulfilled need. There is still a The Attorney-General (Mr Williams) has great need for doctors in rural areas which referred to the Australian Law Reform Com- Australian graduates to date seem reluctant or mission the question of changes to the adver- unable to meet. sarial system of litigation and alternative dispute resolution. The problems of delay, Instead of erecting a mindless Fortress technicality and expense are well known and Australia against newcomers, we should look clear. The need to find a solution to provide to a pattern of migration which, as it did in the Australian community with an affordable the past, advances properly thought out and efficient dispute resolution system is yet national goals. Opposition to immigration is another manifestation of a fair and just soci- in part a reflection of the deep malaise and ety. anxiety felt by many Australians. Until more I am grateful to those in the Liberal Party wealth is created and there are more jobs on of New South Wales who saw in me a candi- offer, tightening family reunion requirements date worth fostering—one who would con- and expanding skilled business migration tinue the great traditions of Liberal senators makes sense. It is difficult to see how newly from New South Wales. I mention my friend arrived migrants can be expected to share the Peter Collins, Leader of the Opposition in values, goals and aspirations of Australians if New South Wales, who for many years in coming here they remain dispossessed, encouraged my interest; Rosemary Foot, poor and on the margins of society. Little former Deputy Leader of the Opposition and wonder there has been a decline in public the first woman in New South Wales to hold confidence about immigration and the value that office, who started me on my journey; of multiculturalism. and Jessie Bartos, who helped along the way. The question, however, remains as to what I also acknowledge Chris McDiven, President level of immigration is in the national interest. of the Liberal Women’s Council, who has Our population is unlikely to grow sufficient- excelled at identifying and encouraging ly without immigration to take advantage of women political candidates from all walks of the opportunities made possible by our prox- life. imity to the south-east Asian region, nor will I am grateful to have the love and support it be conducive to maintaining our national of my family and friends, some of whom integrity. Fortress Australia is a mentality we have travelled to be here. I especially ac- cannot let prevail for long. There is a pattern knowledge my father, Bill Lloyd, now in his of non-discriminatory migration which will 85th year, here with me today; my late moth- serve the national interest and receive com- er, Mary Lloyd, who would have loved to be Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4313 here; my husband, mentor and friend, Andrew The Senate is debating the Telstra (Dilution Rogers, who has so generously encouraged of Public Ownership) Bill 1996 which pro- my personal aspirations; and my son, Adam, vides for up to one-third reduction of who is my inspiration. Commonwealth equity in the Telstra corpora- tion. The bill is a manifestation of the major I am immensely proud to be one of the 26 coalition promise to the Australian people coalition women in the federal parliament and when it was so overwhelmingly elected in to be part of the march to government on 2 March of this year. March 1996, which gave expression to the Liberal Party’s commitment to the advance- The National and Liberal parties were ment of women into parliament. I am also elected to do something about government proud to take my place alongside the women debt. We were elected to do something about representatives from other parties. Together the environment. The partial sale of Telstra we now constitute 20 per cent of the national does both by providing an estimated $7 parliament—an historic first. Never before has billion to reduce public debt and interest, and the national parliament been as representative over $1 billion to fund a natural heritage trust of the people it serves. program for the environment and sustainable If that is the sort of society we want Aus- agriculture. tralia to be, we need to confront the choices This Telstra bill has been carefully designed which will deliver equality and efficiency. to restrict ownership and to entrench com- This is not an improbable mix of the practical munity service obligations. It facilitates direct and the visionary. It is about democratic ownership by Australian citizens in the values, opportunity, progress and the relent- country’s third largest company in turnover. less search of the human spirit to do better. It fosters a competitive presence in the inter- Oscar Wilde described it thus: national telecommunications market as the A map of the world that does not include Utopia world embraces the information age. is not worth even glancing at, for it leaves out the one country at which Humanity is always landing. Telstra is the only one of the world’s top 20 And when Humanity lands there, it looks out and, telecommunication companies yet to proceed seeing a better country, sets sail. Progress is the with privatisation. The UK, New Zealand, realisation of the Utopias. Canada, Japan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Argenti- Putting rationality into equality and some na, Germany and France—the communica- humanity into efficiency is within our grasp. tions minister even adds Albania—have all And I look forward to taking part in its privatised their carriers in whole or in part or realisation. are scheduled to do so. Honourable senators—Hear, hear! The opposition’s approach to the issue of the part-privatisation of Telstra has been one TELSTRA (DILUTION OF PUBLIC of ‘do what I say but not what I do’. The OWNERSHIP) BILL 1996 Commonwealth Bank, the Federal Airports Corporation and Qantas are all examples of Second Reading Labor’s privatisation program. The electorate Debate resumed. knows that the tears being cried by Labor over part-privatisation of Telstra are nothing Senator BOSWELL (Queensland—Leader but crocodile tears and a sham. During the of the National Party of Australia in the debate on the Commonwealth Bank Sale Bill Senate) (5.26 p.m.)—Mr Acting Deputy last year, former Senator Wheelwright stated: President, can I be the first publicly to con- gratulate Senator Coonan on her first speech I think what the government is doing in selling the in the parliament. It was a speech that showed Commonwealth Bank now is redeploying in a responsible way Commonwealth funds—some $4.5 a lot of depth and a lot of commitment. I am billion, if current share price values hold up—to sure that she will make a great contribution in reduce its borrowings and to maintain a sound this place. fiscal policy. 4314 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

If he was right then, he is wrong now. As privatisation of Telstra, that any change in Australians have had a chance to share direct- ownership will not affect their access to ly in the ownership of these institutions, why telecommunications services. This bill ensures not also Telstra? These are the holes in the in a number of ways that rural Australians opposition by Labor and the Australian will not be disadvantaged. Firstly, part 2C Democrats to the part-privatisation of reaffirms the universal service obligations that Telstra—so many holes that the opposition already apply to Telstra and other telecom- ship is sinking. munications carriers under the Telecommuni- Many of my constituents in Queensland are cations Act. The universal service obligation concerned about the excess of foreign owner- requires a standard telephone service to be ship in large chunks of Australia’s backyard. offered to all Australians. The untimed local I take this opportunity to tell them of the call obligation already guaranteed will be provisions in this bill which prevent that retained for residential consumers. Price scenario occurring with Telstra and which capping will continue to apply and general make sure that it remains Australian owned price surveillance will apply to other industry and controlled. players. Part 2A sets out restrictions on foreign On top of this, there are three newcomer ownership of equity in Telstra. It will be safeguards. One is the extension to business unacceptable for foreign ownership to exceed of the statutory obligation to provide the 11.6 or 35 per cent of the partial sale. It will option of untimed local calls. This has not be unacceptable for one or more foreign been the law until now. The others are the person to take hold of more than a 1.6 stake customer service guarantee and the extension in Telstra, which relates to five per cent of of Austel’s power to make indicative perform- the equity on offer in the one-third sale. ance standards. In the place of a voluntary A foreign person is defined to mean a connection and repair guarantee, the new foreign citizen not ordinarily resident in customer service guarantee will be a legislated Australia; a company in which any individual and mandatory requirement to apply to all foreign person or company holds more than carriers, backed up by stiffer penalties. a 15 per cent stake; a company in which an Austel will have the power to determine ownership stake of 40 per cent or more is performance standards in relation to the held by two or more foreign persons or period taken to comply with the request for companies; or a trustee of a trust estate in connecting and rectifying faults, and the which foreign persons hold a substantial keeping of appointments to meet customers interest. Telstra’s head office remains Austral- for these purposes. Carriers will have to meet ian; Telstra’s chairperson and a majority of its the standards and the statutory requirements directors must be Australian citizens. or face an Austel determined scale of damag- If an unacceptable foreign ownership es. Austel will report annually on how the situation comes to exist, the Federal Court, on carriers discharge their obligations. application from the minister, may make Austel’s existing power to develop indica- appropriate orders to stop it, including order- tive performance standards will also be ing the disposal of shares. So even with widened to impose requirements on the foreign ownership at the maximum level industry in relation to most other billing available under this legislation, Telstra will matters. These include requirements to com- remain over 88 per cent Australian owned. ply with Austel’s specific billing standards to There are even special incentives for individ- ensure timely, accurate and comprehensive ual Australians and Telstra employees to financial information. There is a requirement invest in their company, to personally share for Austel to set up procedures for the genera- ownership in Australia’s flagship telecom- tion of standard billing reports to be made munications corporation. available to customers on request, enabling Regional Australia will want to know that independent analysis and audit of telecom- their interests are being secured by the part- munication bills. As a minority Senate com- Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4315 mittee report found, the Telstra bill will not We have to ask whether we would put lead in any way affect the legislative and other in the shoes of a runner, but that is exactly protection of directory assistance, timed local what the Labor Party and the Democrats are calls and the provision of public telephones, advocating. The public benefit is not served all of which will remain unaffected by this by restraining full public ownership of bill. Telstra. The public benefit is not served by The customer service guarantee and related ploughing more government funds into provisions actually increase Telstra’s ac- Telstra. The public benefit is not served by countability to and scrutiny by the public rejecting an opportunity to reduce colossal while, at the same time, Telstra will still have debt and restore the environment. Senator to report to parliament. The majority report Meg Lees complains the government is being from Labor and, I might add, the Australian driven by economic fashion. I say to Senator Democrats, was illuminating. They found so Lees: if helping the environment and reducing many faults with the way Telstra is currently debt while, at the same time, legislating for operating, it is a wonder they did not do customer service guarantees is economically something about it when they were in govern- fashionable, then let’s be in it. We want an ment. It is a case of selective amnesia with Australian controlled Telstra out on the Labor senators forgetting the principles which international catwalk parading Australia’s guided their own privatisation effort. competitiveness and winning market share. The Democrats and Labor would hide Telstra I was particularly struck by the way Labor backstage and not allow it to present itself. and Democrat senators used the committee as an exercise to say that, far from selling part Mr Acting Deputy President, like many of of Telstra, we should be giving it more us, you have probably seen the Telstra adver- money. Recommendation 13 of the majority tisement on television where a girl comes out report says that the committee recommends and says, ‘My wish is for an everlasting Telstra’s operation be resourced up to a level packet of Tim Tams.’ That is how the Demo- which allows ongoing improvements in crats want to run this country—wishing for an customer service quality. You have to ask: everlasting supply of money. If someone where is the money going to come from? provides it, the Democrats will be neither the Perhaps the answer is that we should borrow government nor the opposition, yet they will some more. Maybe Senator Kernot and her sit on the crossbenches and tell all of us how merry band of Democrats could allow us to it should be done. take it out of the environmental vote. It is We have to find money for public debt ludicrous when we are trying to restore some reduction and environmental programs. Mon- fiscal balance and alleviate government ey does not grow on trees. We have to do borrowings and interest repayments, as well what we can with what we have. The Telstra as making massive investments in the envi- (Dilution of Public Ownership) Bill presents ronment. Australia with several opportunities for doing The opposition is suggesting that govern- exactly that: $7 billion to reduce the debt ment find more money to resource Telstra. burden of future Australians inflicted by a Then, in a bizarre twist, they also want to reckless past government; $1 billion to put the charge Telstra a levy. It is in recommendation environment and sustainable agriculture on 35. On the one hand, Telstra should be the pedestal it deserves; and the opportunity, resourced up. On the other hand, it should be via private ownership, to give Telstra what it levied down. They propose so many regula- needs to compete in a competitive communi- tions and qualifiers which would straight- cation information age for the benefit of all jacket the enterprising activities needed to Australians. ensure Telstra’s survival. The partial privat- I plead with the Democrats and senators on isation will enable Telstra to increase its the other side to show concern for the envi- flexibility in response to market demands in ronment. They should note that, over the next what is a rapidly changing environment. five years, this bill will fund five capital 4316 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 projects: the national vegetation initiative; the heard evidence that in the United States there Murray-Darling 2001 project; the national is an increasing trend to site such businesses reserve system; the national land and water outside the big cities to take advantage of resources audit; and the coast and clean seas lower costs and a large pool of high quality, initiative—all initiatives that I should have motivated potential employees—and the same thought the Democrats would have been in on is certainly the case in Australia. with their ears back. But they are bogged This government has already insisted on a down on some illogical concern and, although dramatic speed-up of the availability of state- the basis of their party is concern for the of-the-art communication services to the bush. environment, they do not appear the least bit Telstra has recently announced the accelera- interested in it. The only logical response is tion of the national telecommunication ex- to get on with this bill and get it over with. change network to digital standard—the (Quorum formed) ISDN. This will be completed by 1998 and Senator SANDY MACDONALD (New will cover over 97 per cent of the population. South Wales) (5.42 p.m.)—Telstra and its Telstra has said it will be upgrading the future role is important for all Australians, but network at the same rate in both country and especially so for those living away from the metropolitan areas. So city and country metropolitan areas. Communication is the exchanges will be 85 per cent digital by essential equaliser between regional Australia December 1997. and the more populated areas. In Europe and This is a first for country areas because Asia, where population density is higher than regional Australia normally lags behind, here, regional development is facilitated and which is hardly surprising, especially in view encouraged by superior communications that of the communication explosion that we have are at least equal to the larger towns and seen over the last 10 years or so and the fact cities. that the previous government had little under- In the south-west of England there is hardly standing of regional areas. Telstra is to be an empty farm shed that has not been gutted congratulated on providing these facilities and therefore allowed some small business which will allow for educational, cultural and armed with an on-line computer, fax, phone, information services, for much faster faxes, e-mail and Internet to carve out a business fast access to Internet, interactive multi-media where communications is the key and the functions such as video conferencing, faster physical position of the operation is largely and more reliable transmission with modern irrelevant. The situation is essentially the circuits, quicker dial-up times and better same in Australia. Because our country is so signal quality, small screen video confer- geographically enormous there is difficulty in encing, fast EFTPOS links, and much more. providing communication services, the high The government’s decision to expedite this costs of spreading a network, the diversity of modernisation program will mean between our agricultural and regional businesses, the 500,000 and 750,000 people who presently low density of population in some areas and have substandard lines around the bush will the increasing number of companies that are begin to have state-of-the-art communication. in the information and communications The technological breakthrough will mean industry. both business and domestic phone users will As the quality of telecommunications in and have access to the wide range of enhanced to non-metropolitan areas improves, there is services that I have already mentioned. This scope for the creation, not the reduction of is great news for people who live in regional jobs. Tele-industries are increasingly import- Australia. ant employers in businesses like airlines, In a recent report by the Rural Industries hotels, car rental reservation centres, the Research and Development Corporation, the telephone inquiry centres for banks and other significant demand for the delivery of on-line financial institutions, catalogue sale order and services for regional Australia was highlight- service centres and so on. The Senate inquiry ed. The report confirmed that remote commu- Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4317 nities and farm businesses stand to benefit graded to accommodate new technologies significantly from the world’s growing infor- such as fax and data transmissions and mobile mation sector. Dr Buckeridge, the author of phones, along with the cost implications. this report entitled Rural Australia Online, The current definition of the universal identified three main constraints on the service obligation within the Telecommunica- delivery of service. They were: inadequate tions Act 1991 provides for a minimum voice technical capacity of existing telecommunica- grade telephone service to be reasonably tions infrastructure; high telecommunications accessible to all Australians, wherever they prices; and restricted access to education, live or wherever they carry on a business. training and user support services. Dr However, there have been significant advan- Buckeridge says that Telstra will have to play ces in technology since that legislation was a major part in the effective delivery of these passed and the community’s expectations of services as it is by far the dominant owner access and availability have grown as a result. and current builder of the telephone and data This review will clearly amend our under- networks. standing of what amounts to a standard Clearly, Telstra’s investment strategies will telephone service. have to satisfy the needs of remote areas. The The second initiative was the July an- government’s commitment has already been nouncement by the Minister for Transport and shown to a large extent with the ISDN pro- Regional Development, John Sharp, who posed investment, which has been expedited launched the farmwide online services project. by the present Minister for Communications This is a trial project giving 1,000 people and the Arts, Senator Alston. A continued living in rural and remote areas cheap on-line commitment will be necessary from Telstra. services and Internet for $5 per hour and for In June, the National Farmers Federation the cost of a local call. This is a joint project conducted a survey to gauge farmers’ opinion of the NFF, the Department of Transport and on the partial sale of Telstra. The survey had Regional Development, Telstra, Microsoft and 860 respondents, of which 66 per cent sup- IBM. It is another initiative to provide people ported the proposal. In addition, the survey in rural and regional areas with access to shows that a majority of 73 per cent believe information equivalent to that of their city that the partial sale should fund the proposed counterparts. environmental package. The funding of the The third initiative was Senator Alston’s Natural Heritage Trust, in addition to the announcement in which he recently reassured substantial funds allocated in this year’s rural mobile phone users that they will not be budget, will be very beneficial to all Austral- disadvantaged when the network is converted ians, not just farmers. from analog to digital by December 1999. Those who responded to the NFF survey There is no doubt that at the moment the made it clear, however, that they want exist- current analog network is superior to the ing benefits, namely, the universal service digital network. It has a wider reach and it obligation and no timed local calls, main- does not suddenly drop out, as is the case tained. The proposed legislation guarantees with some digital services. Senator Alston has that where services are uneconomic the said the government will ensure that the draft present cross-subsidisation will be maintained. telecommunications bill will have a safety net The new government has already shown for rural mobile phone users after the network itself keen to address regional Australia’s is converted from analog to digital. This will telecommunications needs, quite apart from preserve the mobile phone service of at least the proposed partial sale of Telstra. I would 3,000 mobile phone users who will lack like to mention three initiatives. The first was digital coverage at the time of the phase-out. the July announcement of the review of the Regional Australia has much to benefit standard telephone service. This review will from this government and will continue to do focus on whether the current standard tele- so with the collateral partial sale of Telstra. phone service is adequate or should be up- Appearing before the Senate Telstra inquiry, 4318 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 the National Farmers Federation supported the ly to capital projects to maintain and replenish sale, with the President, Mr McGauchie, Australia’s environmental infrastructure. saying: The five capital projects to be funded from . . . the market in telecommunications is maturing the money invested in the Natural Heritage and further competition and regulatory changes are Trust are: a national vegetation initiative; the needed to keep up the momentum to keep pace with our international and domestic competition . . . Murray-Darling rehabilitation; a national land the partial privatisation of Telstra will better place and water resources system; a comprehensive it to respond to that change. national reserve system; and a coasts and He went on to state: clean seas initiative. All interest earned from the trust will be devoted to recurrent expendi- . . . the farming community have had to bear the cost of, in many respects, inefficiencies in services ture on environmental projects and the further provided in that way in the past. development of sustainable agriculture. Some of these projects include: additional funding He further said: for the Landcare project; a national river care Telstra has identified some of the key benefits of program; a cleaner air program to address air partial privatisation as a faster response to market trends, exposure to the discipline of continuous pollution; and a national weed strategy. At the performance assessment by the financial markets end of the five-year program, over $300 and commercially based access to resources, million will remain in perpetuity in the trust. including capital. All interest earned on the capital held in the I certainly agree with him. Interestingly trust will be devoted to environmental pro- enough, so do a number of people on the jects. other side, including the present Leader of the In establishing the Natural Heritage Trust, Opposition, Mr Kim Beazley. When speaking the government is providing a certainty of at the National Press Club in August 1994, he funding over a long period of time that will is quoted as having said: be free of normal economic and budgetary The primary objective driving the privatisation constraints which all governments inevitably program is to make Australia an efficient, interna- face. The trust will provide a commitment to tionally competitive economy—and that means the environment which is certainly preferable introducing competition into our enterprises and to a recurrent funding approach. We need into our market sectors. look no further than the massive $10 billion Mr Beazley went on to state: debt that the government inherited from the The real measure for whether privatisation should now opposition. The budget has already made occur is whether there will be a net social and inroads into addressing that deficit, but to economic gain from moving a particular enterprise fund the much needed environmental pro- into private ownership. grams from recurrent expenditure would The "net gain" can take many forms: potentially require savings of a further $1 billion over the better services and lower prices for consumers; next five years. This would simply be too stronger enterprises and greater competition for our economy; and, in the broader sense, making difficult for us to absorb at this time. Any government funds available for new policy. alternative approach to the partial sale of I repeat that: making government funds Telstra and the simultaneous establishment of available for new policy. This particular the Natural Heritage Trust would come at an privatisation will provide additional funds for extreme cost to either the environment or our the environment. The environmental benefits national economy. of the sale should be particularly highlighted. To conclude, the partial sale of Telstra will The commitment to transfer $1 billion to the expose it to the scrutiny of the market place, Natural Heritage Trust is the most comprehen- which will contribute to making it a more sive environmental package ever proposed by dynamic company, both domestically and government. It is in addition to existing globally. This will allow Telstra to operate on spending commitments in the budget on the a commercial basis, rather than be forced to environment. The money invested in the fulfil the ever changing political objectives of Natural Heritage Trust will be devoted entire- the government of the day. Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4319

I reaffirm the safeguards that have been you hate blackfellas?’ My recollection is that written into the legislation: to ensure that I used the words ‘black people’. In the ab- Telstra abides by its customer service obliga- sence of any tape recording of the full range tions to provide rural and regional Australia of interjections, I do not seek to change the with a fair and equitable service; that untimed Hansard at all but I do indicate, as I did in local telephone calls are provided to both question time, that I withdraw the words residential and business customers; that ‘Why do you hate blackfellas’, which were existing price caps will remain to ensure directed at Senator Herron, and I apologise lower telephone prices; that the minimum for any hurt that they may have caused. service standards are maintained through a customer services guarantee; and that the TELSTRA (DILUTION OF PUBLIC maximum allowable level of foreign owner- OWNERSHIP) BILL 1996 ship will be less than 12 per cent. Further, the Second Reading chairman will be an Australian, the board will Debate resumed. be comprised of a majority of Australians, and Telstra’s corporate headquarters will Senator FAULKNER (New South Wales— remain in Australia. Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (6.00 p.m.)—Let me commence my contribution to It is clear that the partial sale will deliver the debate on the second reading of the significant economic, service and environ- Telstra (Dilution of Public Ownership) Bill mental benefits to Australians. These same 1996 by indicating that this bill gives effect Australians expect the government to imple- to the government’s blackmail policy of ment the policies announced prior to our flogging off our national communications election. The people of Australia overwhelm- carrier, Telstra, to pay for environment fund- ingly supported the coalition’s policy package ing through the Natural Heritage Trust of at the last election, a package which included Australia, as announced by the coalition responsible management of the nation’s during the election campaign this year. The finances and the strongest possible commit- Labor Party, for its part, is committed to a ment to the environment in our history. Let us 100 per cent government owned national get on with the job with this sale. communications carrier. We took that com- Debate (on motion by Senator Panizza) mitment to the last election. That has been a adjourned. longstanding platform commitment of the PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS Australian Labor Party. Senator BOLKUS (South Australia) (5.58 We really made our position on this crystal p.m.)—I seek leave to make a personal clear during the last election campaign when explanation. the former Prime Minister, Mr Keating, said on 23 January this year: ‘Telstra is simply not Leave granted. for sale.’ Unlike the government, this rabble Senator BOLKUS—During question time over here with their core and non-core prom- I was one of a number of people who inter- ises and commitments, we are going to stick jected on Senator Herron. In quick succession, resolutely by that commitment that our leader amongst other things, I said: ‘Why do you run made during the election campaign. a hate campaign against black people?’ and As we all know, this legislation is not just ‘Why do you hate black people?’ or ‘Why do about selling Telstra; it is also about holding you hate blackfellas?’ I repeated the first environment funding in this country hostage statement on the point of order at the time. to the sale of Telstra. We on this side of the I have checked the Hansard tape and find chamber have always opposed and stand that the tape is inaudible in respect of the opposed to that sort of political thuggery. I relevant comments. There were many interjec- believe that selling part or all of our national tions at the time. I have also checked the communications carrier—Telstra—worth some Hansard transcript, which only includes the $24 billion, would be an act of gross irre- second comment, which is noted as: ‘Why do sponsibility in itself. For the government to 4320 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 claim that it will be a more competitive cover up and repair the damage that was company after privatisation is just arrant non- caused by Senator Alston’s unfortunate and sense. untimely gaffe—his revelation. This is some- Telstra has been corporatised, and it is thing, I suppose, that the Prime Minister has already competing very successfully on the become pretty expert in, given the number of international market. It is fair to say that gaffes that he has had to cover up for with his Telstra is a very strong, very vibrant company front bench. This was John Howard’s pathetic which achieved record profits of $3 billion in defence on this issue: 1994-95. It is aggressively seeking and claim- . . . the government has not taken any decision to ing new markets in Asia. Its value has in- sell off the whole of Telstra. The only decision that creased from $18 billion when John Hewson the Government has taken is the policy that we took to the last election. . . . The only policy wanted to sell it—remember him?—to around commitment we have is a commitment to sell one- $24 billion now. It has employed an extra third and I said during the election campaign and 11,000 people since 1993. We believe that, I repeat it, and nothing has changed, I want to inevitably, a partial sale of Telstra would lead make this very clear, that if there were any inten- to its complete privatisation under a coalition tion to go any further that would be the subject of government. an explicit policy at a subsequent election. The Prime Minister (Mr Howard) has found They were Mr Howard’s own words. He can it very hard to hide his intentions on this try and sleaze out of this with weasel words particular matter, while the Minister for any way he likes, but he can never hide or Communications and the Arts, Senator Alston, cover up the ideological obsession that this has not even bothered to try; neither did the government has with privatisation for Treasurer, Mr Costello, on his gaffe riddled privatisation’s sake. trip to the United States of America. During This government cannot be trusted on this the election campaign, Mr Howard promised issue. They are trying to con this Senate and that a third of the company would be sold in the Australian people into selling off part of this term of government. That was his prom- one national asset to save another. No-one ise. But he never denied, nor did he at any should for one minute believe these weasel stage rule out, that all the $24 billion resource words about not selling more than one-third would be flogged off in the longer term, of Telstra during this term of government. including to non-Australian interests. They will not settle for one-third of Telstra. The coalition’s true agenda has been more I might say that they have failed to provide recently accidentally revealed by Senator any good reason for the partial privatisation Alston. When questioned on Channel 10’s of Telstra. Their only defence has been one Meet the Press program on Sunday, 1 Sep- that the opposition finds thoroughly objection- tember, whether the eventual total sale of able. The government’s approach of making Telstra was inevitable and preferable, he environment policy in this country some kind responded in this way: of bait or trade-off for the Senate agreeing to Indeed it is, Michelle. It is not only inevitable but the sale of Telstra is an insult to all of us. it is highly desirable. Senator Parer—You just can’t borrow the He was asked further whether he anticipated money. going to the next election with a platform which says, ‘We will sell the rest of Telstra,’ Senator FAULKNER—It even ought to be to which he responded: an insult to you, Senator Parer. It is nothing more or less than a straight out political bribe That’s quite a possibility. It depends on whether we that has been exposed as such during the get this Bill through, how it beds down, what we judge the community reaction to be. But if you election campaign and since. were asking me in principle, do I have any objec- Mr Fischer, the Deputy Prime Minister, tion to going further, the answer is clearly no. who has been subject to a lot of interesting After Senator Alston let the cat out of the parliamentary questioning just today about bag, the Prime Minister was left to try to another issue, said on radio station 2CS on 2 Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4321

February 1996—let me quote the eloquent Senator FAULKNER—It is pathetic, and articulate words of Mr Fischer—that the Senator Carr. Instead of care and consider- link was merely a ‘ploy to captivate a Senate ation being given to the implementation of vote’. That really says it all. He was being environment policy, we have from this mob very honest on that occasion. We may not the opposite. I recently mentioned to the have heard the whole truth about the BHP Senate the absolutely pathetic record of the shares and conflict of interest, but I am sure Howard government’s environment policy, a he was being very frank when he said that the government whose environment credentials Telstra-environment link was a ploy to capti- are already in tatters after just seven months. vate a Senate vote. We have an environment minister in office The reality is that the coalition’s Telstra who shows no interest in the environment, no environment policy was a sham. It was willingness to take up the cudgels to protect always a sham to con and blackmail the the environment. His record speaks for itself. Senate into being part of the coalition’s He has been involved in a massive increase privatisation agenda. If the coalition were in the amount of woodchips to be exported really serious about the environment, they from Australia. He did not stand up to you, would fund the environment off the budget, Senator Parer, when he attempted to abolish as we did in government and as we always export control powers for minerals. He has will when we are returned to government. been perfectly happy to give state govern- ments veto powers over listing of World I do not believe that the coalition’s Natural Heritage, and more than happy to support Heritage Trust is an unworthy objective. I you, Senator Parer, in expanding uranium think it is a worthy enough objective. But it mining in Australia. He has done nothing— has to be funded without resorting to political along with you, Senator Parer—in progressing blackmail and Thatcherite funding mecha- the government’s response to the greenhouse nisms. effect. He has been absolutely negligent in his I remind the Senate that the initiatives and responsibilities in giving the green light to the policies that are to be funded by the trust— Port Hinchinbrook development in North the land and water degradation programs, the Queensland and he has presided over a cut in rehabilitation of the Murray-Darling Basin, the environment department’s budget. national river care, the coasts and clean seas What a miserable, pathetic, disgusting initiative and the national reserves cooperative record for a minister after only seven months program—are all essentially Labor’s policies. in office. After just seven months in office he They were stolen by the coalition for electoral has basically abrogated all responsibility on reasons. The policies were ours, but the lack the environment and handed it willy-nilly to of commitment to those policies was uniquely Senator Parer, the resources minister. The yours. It was unique to the coalition. When it Telstra-environment link is a shabby link that comes to the hard question of economic has been concocted by this government to interest versus environmental protection, the capture the support of the minor parties in this coalition’s true colours always shine through. place. As I have indicated before, the dry They do not believe, and never have, in the agenda far outweighs the wet. I think the protection of the environment. If they did, we coalition failed in this shabby trick. It failed would have had an environmental policy in the election campaign to convince the implemented well before now. John Howard majority of Australians that this was a reason- showed his true colours in April 1992 when able proposal. I have said before in this place he said that Australia’s economic progress that, without doubt, this was the biggest was being held up by excessive concern for single negative that the coalition had in its the environment and that this position was election campaign. exacerbated by skewed media coverage of ecological issues. The government hoodwinked the people. You were exposed during the election cam- Senator Carr—Isn’t that pathetic. paign because Australians were able to see 4322 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 that clearly a majority of the Senate did not nothing more or less than a capacity to break support the partial privatisation of Telstra. the election promises and commitments that Your commitment to the environment stood it has made. I urge the Senate to oppose this exposed as nothing more than mere rhetoric. bill. (Time expired) We in the Labor Party made our level of Senator CARR (Victoria) (6.20 p.m.)—I commitment to the environment very clear. remind the Senate that Oscar Wilde remarked We have always believed the environment in 100 years ago that the cynic knew the price this country should be supported with ad- of everything but the value of nothing. This equate funding and no strings attached. is a government driven by economic We actually happen to believe that the rationalists who are the ultimate cynics when environment and its protection is a vital issue it comes to social policy and national devel- in its own right. We had a tremendous record opment. While even these cynics might have in government. Without strings or blackmail some difficulty agreeing on the price of we were able to achieve an enormous amount Telstra, Oscar Wilde’s observation as to its in terms of the protection of the environment value is remarkably apt. As far as Labor is in this country. The Labor government had concerned, Telstra is far too valuable to ever those achievements in environmental policy sell. without any strings attached. We never resort- The government has sought to bribe and ed to the sort of blackmail that we have seen blackmail the Australian conservation move- from the coalition. There was never any ment and others concerned about Australia’s blackmail to flog one national asset to save environment by suggesting that we should another. accept ill-defined and illusionary short-term Labor does not accept that the government financial benefits from the sale of Telstra has an unfettered mandate to sell Telstra. which themselves are overshadowed by the During the election campaign we made our massive disadvantages to the Australian position on this issue clear. As the former people and national development at large. It environment minister I well remember the day is important to ask: what is it that builds a the coalition announced its policy on the nation? Nearly 100 years ago our federation environment in the Dandenong Ranges. The came into being. It was just at the time Oscar policy was clear—it was the part-privatisation Wilde was making his comments. Federation of Telstra with a link to the environment. One meant that all Australian citizens could be hour after that policy became public I tagged represented in one place and at one time. it, quite rightly, the ‘Telstra environment It is in the last few years that the mainland policy’. We indicated that we would not vote states of this nation were linked by a common for the partial sale of Telstra in this place railway. The previous railway system was a regardless of the outcome of the election. blight on our landscape and was a historical We said that from the time the government monument to our isolation and separatism. announced its policy. We have not wavered. One of the first and most significant means of We will not waver on this issue. We gave a bringing this country and its citizens together commitment to the Australian people, who was our telephone and postal services. The voted for Labor in the House of Representa- telephone network became the lifeline and the tives and the Senate, that we would do every- means by which Australians right across the thing in our power to maintain Telstra in country could keep in touch, could develop public ownership. We will honour that com- business links and could run public adminis- mitment. I assure those who voted for us that tration properly. we will keep that commitment. The telecommunications industry that was This is a very important piece of legislation. built around the telephonic network has I do not think that the Australian community brought economic growth and thousands of has any confidence in or derives any reassur- jobs across this country. Labor’s opposition ance from any commitment from this govern- to the sale of Telstra is based upon our ment, which has indicated that it stands for recognition of the fundamental place that this Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4323 service provider and employer has in our same time, as well as being one of the history and reflects the recent and substantial country’s largest employers, it has provided community disquiet about the government’s job opportunities throughout Australia. privatisation plan. It fundamentally recognises Its recent record $2.3 billion profit is sure the critical importance of Telstra to our to grow in future years. The industry is economy. growing at 15 per cent per annum. New It is based on a firm conviction that the investment is set to grow at 22 per cent per government’s claims about the benefits of the annum, sales by 20 per cent per annum and sale offered to the nation are illusory. Many exports at 38 per cent per annum. That, to will argue that the short-term budgetary me, indicates the value of Telstra to the implications for this sale would be of huge Australian economy and it should not be political benefit to the government. As far as diverted from the 100 per cent Australian I am concerned, the budgetary gains will be ownership that it currently has. One hundred overshadowed by the long-term disadvantages per cent of Australians currently own Telstra that must attend the loss of such a profitable and currently enjoy the benefit of that public and strategically significant public asset. I say ownership. the ‘loss’ of the asset because Senator Alston, The government’s main rationale for the I think, has made his point very clearly, and sale—supposed private sector efficiency no-one in this chamber should be under any gains—clearly fail the test of public scrutiny, illusion about the real issues that we face and that was clearly demonstrated by the today. Senate committee. Of the 650 submissions Should this Senate endorse the process of received and 135 witnesses examined, the the sale of one-third of Telstra, we will see only real supporters of the sale were govern- ultimately the full privatisation of Telstra. As ment departments acting on the instructions of far as Labor is concerned, this country should their political masters; the senior management not embark upon that course. Our resolve has of Telstra, who stand to gain substantial only been strengthened by the evidence remuneration increases under a privatised against privatisation presented to this parlia- regime; and, of course, government agencies ment via its committee, that is, the inquiry who are under direct political control. into Telstra. The main argument presented in evidence We have seen that the case for privatisation to the committee was based on a World Bank is based essentially on rhetorical and ideologi- study which looked at some 6,800 cases. But cal arguments rather than on any empirical there were no comparisons with telecommuni- evidence. Telstra is a highly successful com- cations companies of equal value or equal pany and its record $2.3 billion profit for this profitability to Telstra, no companies that year clearly indicates that. Its financial per- compare with Australia’s regulatory frame- formance is equal to that of its international work and no country—even on an internation- peers. At the same time, it provides a unique al basis—that compares with Australia’s service. Despite the difficulties presented by demography or geography. After failing to Australia’s geography and its demography, justify the validity of the international studies Australian society has one of the highest that had been so heavily cited by the govern- levels of telephone access in the world. ment, the only argument that those supporting Telstra has played an important role in privatisation can muster is a mystical and nation building through the provision of unsupported belief in the power of the market affordable communications services on a itself. universal basis. It has pioneered research and The undermining of consumer interests— development of international importance and especially in rural communities—that this has been a leader in the introduction of market power will cause has been ignored by technologies such as ISDN and fibre optics. this government in its unrestrained drive to It has played a critical part in the growth of reach the magical world best practice bench- the Australian electronics industry. At the mark. The debate about the power of the 4324 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 marker appears to unleash the cowboys of the service delivery of Telstra. We see that no corporate and political worlds who would more clearly than in the subsidised service follow the unrestrained doctrine of the far that Telstra currently provides. Right. In simplistic terms, public ownership, This is the international experience of according to this view, is bad and private privatisation. Job losses are the most signifi- wealth is good. The private sector is good. cant common theme of all the international This is an ideological belief that has to do privatisations of telecommunications com- more with the political assumptions of this panies. In the case of Telecom New Zealand, government than with any sound basis in fact. staffing levels declined from 24,500 in 1987, The ramifications of the sale are very clear. at the time of corporatisation, to 16,000 in Mr Costello, Mr Howard and Senator Alston 1990, at the time of the privatisation. Now have clearly indicated that this government is they are down to a mere 8,568. Telstra has committed to pursuing the full privatisation of already announced job cuts of 9,000 this Telstra. We have a situation where, despite financial year. Well over fifty per cent of the fact that legislation has just come in those are coming from the consumer and before the parliament, privatisation is already commercial divisions, which are responsible the driving force within the operations of for network maintenance and installation. The Telstra itself. This is particularly the case project Mercury process has been followed when one looks at the areas of the current through to the board level to the stage now round of redundancies being pursued by the where the removal of some 23,000 jobs has Telstra management. been announced—almost one-third of the Despite Telstra’s desire to reveal only company’s work force. It is clear to me that minimal details before the Senate committee, the first casualties of privatisation are to be the Senate inquiry was able to clearly identify the workers themselves. that project Mercury was operating in such a The majority report was particularly critical way as to remove one-third of the company— of Telstra’s privatisation plans. It identified to remove one-third of the work force within that, in addition to job losses associated with Telstra—and that it was an internal program outsourcing, Telstra hoped to reduce staff initiated by the Telstra management in April through internal rationalisations. Redundancies 1996 to prepare Telstra for privatisation. caused by this process were to be ‘manage- Its objective was to identify areas where ment initiated’. I note that the Telstra man- cost savings could be achieved, largely agement is seeking to change the current through staff reductions. The project Mercury redundancy arrangements to see that that documents clearly reveal that this was where happens. I am sure that, if the industrial the massive job losses would occur as a result relations bill currently before the parliament of the sale or outsourcing of so-called non- is passed in its present form, that objective value added or non-core businesses within the will be much easier to achieve. These are not company. You do not have to be particularly necessarily to be voluntary redundancies. smart to understand that the aim of project They will inflict great harm and suffering on Mercury was to prepare Telstra for privatis- workers right across this country. ation itself. Project Mercury has clearly been identified Under this plan, Telstra is to be gutted for as a means to reduce the work force within the marketplace. It is to be trimmed of its Telstra, to reduce labour costs by employing capacity to support Australian technological contractors at lower rates of pay than those of industry, cured of any sense of community Telstra’s current award workers, to take service obligation and packaged for potential labour costs off the balance sheets through investors. The restructuring of Telstra for mechanisms such as joint ventures, to dispose privatisation comes at considerable costs to of assets in areas considered to be non-core consumers, to Telstra workers and to regional and to release millions of dollars of invest- communities that benefit substantially from ment funds. This process would fundamen- the current industrial practices and the current tally change the character of Telstra in such Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4325 a way as to see it move towards a much more have a profound effect on those regions and profit oriented, market driven supplier. It on those individuals. It is unlikely that they would have dramatic impacts in terms of will be able to find work within the telecom- external suppliers and it would undermine munications industry. The historical evidence fundamentally Telstra’s capacity to produce does not support contrary conclusions. a high quality service to Australian consum- The international experience is clear. It has ers. to be understood in the context of so-called All of this is in line with the program and efficiencies and market discipline, which is the policies of this government to pursue the the so-called driving force behind these privatisation of Telstra. A lot of this is irra- reductions. It is interesting to look at the tional. It is identifying outsourcing of particu- contribution that the overseas telcos being lar agencies which are currently profitable and promoted by the government have made to are not necessarily a drain upon the company their nations in practice. If we look at but which will, when removed from the Ameritech or US West, two of the US Bell company, reduce the overall employment operating companies, we see a similar pattern levels within the company and therefore emerge. We see companies that are being reduce the company’s bottom line for the compared to Telstra as their international prospectus. Before the estimates committee benchmark that have an absolutely appalling Telstra management identified that the net record in terms of their treatment of workers impact to the bottom line profit of the com- and consumers. This is a good example of the pany will be some $600 million per annum. so-called power of the market. But I do not We can only explain the irrationality of believe it is necessarily an example we should these redundancies by understanding that they try to emulate. are the result of external pressures being In the case of US West, waiting times for placed upon Telstra to meet the head count customers attempting to reach a representative benchmarks, no matter how crude and inap- have increased in recent times. US West’s propriate they may be. It is all part of the numbers of employees declined by some process in the run-up to privatisation. These 13,500 from 1989 to 1995. We see that a drop pressures may be coming from the views of in employment leads to a drop in consumer the market analysts who have been reported service delivery. There have been increased in the media. Such pressures are being trans- waiting times for new installations, especially mitted by the CS First Boston Group, which in rural areas. We see an increased number of conducted the privatisation scoping study on missed appointments for repairs for both behalf of the government. In the work of business and residential customers. We see senior Telstra management, senior officials of cuts in the construction of basic telephone the Department of Finance and members of plant. We see that there has been a 460 per the scoping study there has been very close cent increase in the number of customer cooperation. This is part of the process of complaints to the Oregon Public Utility preparing a prospectus which will ultimately Commission. The service standards of these identify the value of Telstra. great models that this government holds up so The committee was presented with no highly are so bad that in April of this year the evidence to establish that particular employees commission reimposed rate of return regula- retrenched from Telstra would have the tions on US West. appropriate skills to find work in other sec- A similar pattern emerges with Bell Atlan- tions of industry. The historical pattern is that, tic. I suggest to the Senate that these are whilst this industry is growing at a great rate, fundamental issues that affect the long-term that does not necessarily translate into growth ability of this parliament to have real influ- in employment levels. It is a capital intensive ence over telecommunications policy in this industry. The removal of unskilled or semi- country. This policy of privatisation is being skilled workers, particularly those over 50 pursued at breakneck speed. It is being intro- years of age and those in regional areas, will duced at a time when the regulatory frame- 4326 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 work to operate in the post-1997 environment It is quite clear that those that are con- is yet to be determined. It is being introduced cerned about sustaining a natural environment, in such a way as to leave huge doubts about a world-class and affordable telewcommunic- the issues of equity and affordability in the ations service, will look to this parliament to provision of key services. reject this bill and to protect the Australian interest, to protect this nation from what is We see that few in the community believe quite clearly a wrong policy, a socially de- that social justice policy objectives will structive policy, which is founded upon the survive the privatisation process. We have assumption of political bribery and blackmail. seen that the recently reconstituted board has It is is ill considered, ideologically driven, been carefully chosen to facilitate a profit based on rhetoric rather than on empirical driven culture within Telstra in the prepara- evidence, and it does not deserve the support tion for privatisation. We see that there is a of this chamber. (Time expired) pattern emerging within this government in terms of not providing adequate protection for Senator TIERNEY (New South Wales) parliamentary scrutiny and the commitment (6.40 p.m.)—I rise with pleasure in this that they are prepared to go outside the debate to support the Telstra (Dilution of parliamentary process if necessary so as to Public Ownership) Bill 1996. It is rather have their way, no matter what this parlia- strange that Senator Carr and I actually sat ment suggests. That, to me, is something we throught the same set of hearings and read the should all be resisting with all our political same evidence. I sat there listening to what he abilities. had to say and was absolutely amazed that he came to some of the conclusions that he did. It seems to me that this is a time frame that He must have been listening to the evidence suggests that the government needs to rush out of his left ear, I fear. this privatisation process because it will not Let us return to what this bill was about stand up to public scrutiny, it will not stand and the importance of it for Australia. What up to rigorous scrutiny in terms of the post- it will do is bring Telstra up to world-class 1997 telecommunications environment. It is standard. The opponents of this bill like to quite clear that over the last eight weeks three play on public fear of the unknown by sug- major packages of legislation have been gesting that this is a giant leap in the dark. In introduced into this parliament that are yet to fact, it is quite the opposite. have significant community debate. The Australia is probably the last cab off the consumer groups have had little time to rank in terms of advanced countries in the analyse these complex legislative packages. in world and even some of those that are not so fact, it would need a team of lawyers working advanced. Telstra is the only one of about 20 around the clock to make sense of the direc- major telcos around the world that has not tions that are being followed by this govern- been partly privatised or privatised, and this ment and to meet the timetable imposed by bill is proposing the sale of only one-third of this government in the establishment of this Telstra. When you get Fidel Castro part- new environment. privatising his telco and selling off a fair bit Of course, is it little wonder therefore that of it over to the people in Mexico you know in these circumstances there is still no indus- you are in a rather strange situation in Aus- try consensus regarding the draft telecom- tralia where we have all the opposition parties munications bills and the shape of the post- off to the left of Fidel Castro and Cuba and 1997 operating environment? This is quite indeed the former regime in Albania. clearly a measure that this government needs Let us examine the opposition’s hypocrisy to reconsider very carefully—and I trust that on this part-privatisation of Telstra. In 1994, this parliament forces it to reconsider very the then Prime Minister, Paul Keating, was carefully—and that this is a bill that ought to asked on the ABC program Lateline about the be rejected by this parliament on its second privatisation of Telstra. Reporter Kerry reading. O’Brien asked whether it really mattered if Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4327

Telstra was privately or publicly owned. The was about a reference. And of course they answer from Mr Keating was both accurate had control, they had the majority. and succinct: ‘Ah, not of its essence, no.’ That was his response, and that was consistent The real game was exposed in this place by at the time with Labor’s other privatisation Senator Faulkner, who belled the cat by decisions with the Commonwealth Bank and announcing before we had the inquiry that the Qantas float. Labor was going to oppose it. Why waste all that money having an inquiry if they were It is very difficult to understand why you already opposed to it before we went to an can support the privatisation of Qantas and inquiry? They compromised the terms of the Commonwealth Bank and not support the reference of this inquiry by throwing in a privatisation of Telstra. I fail to see the whole range of issues unrelated to the terms ideolgocal basis of one set of decisions and of reference. not of the other. The reason you cannot sort of work out the ideology of it is that it is just Sixty per cent of the submissions dealt with purely a matter of expediency. It is expedient overhead cabling. Senator Carr trumpeted the and it is tragic, particularly when such a sale number of submissions, but over two-thirds of is in the best interests of Australia. those submissions were only one page in length. A lot of the information before the The Australian Democrats’ position is inquiry—even by the people who turned up— probably even more curious. They have was ill-informed, particularly as we could not shown some sensible approaches here today find any opponents to the bill who had even on IR, and I would urge them to do a similar read the bill. How on earth can you come out thing with the Telstra bill. They claim, curi- in a public hearing opposed to it if you have ously, that they have some sort of mandate to not even had a look at it? A substantial oppose Telstra. They have got a very funny number of the submissions did express sup- idea of what a mandate is. I thought in that port for the part-privatisation of Telstra. last election that the coalition parties in 1996 won 50 per cent of the Senate seats. I thought After all those hearings, all that time and all we won a 45-seat majority in the lower those witnesses, we ended up with what was house—an outstanding majority in the lower a pretty poor report. The majority report of house—and, in the upper house, 50 per cent the opposition simply ignored the majority of the seats. I would have thought that 50 per and weight of the evidence favouring a one- cent was a pass, and that is exactly what third sale of Telstra. It was intellectually should happen with the Telstra legislation. dishonest and it produced a report with a very predetermined position. The majority report Senator Forshaw—How do you get 50 per quotes evidence from the National Farmers cent? Federation and Australian Women in Agricul- Senator TIERNEY—Just look at the maths ture, yet fails to acknowledge their pro- there, Senator. If you get out a pen and paper privatisation stance. There is no comparable and work through it slowly, you might actual- body of evidence to demonstrate the benefits ly work out that 50 per cent is a pass. of keeping the business in public ownership. Let us turn to the Telstra inquiry, that We had a seminar in this parliament with a famous delaying tactic where the government speaker in favour of keeping Telstra in full had totally made up its mind. The opposition public ownership. He looked for examples sent it off to a reference committee, which around the world to see where it would work was terribly dishonest, because it is a bill. It better. He could come up with only one— is called the Telstra bill and, as a matter of Iceland. Iceland is the only place where full fact, at each site for our inquiry they had a public ownership works better. I suppose the sign up that said ‘Teltsra Bill this way’. So telephone system in Reykjavik goes about two why did it not go to a legislative committee? kilometres out of town, and that is about it. In It did not because they added in a few other that sort of area, you could probably run a bits and pieces to try and make out that this fairly efficient system. 4328 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

The inquiry basically was a waste of time. There have been some advances in the There was no tidal wave of community efficiency of Telstra in recent years, but there support for what the opposition was trying to is considerable room for improvement. The do here on the core issues of the bill. The part-privatisation of one-third of Telstra can number of hearing dates was cut by 50 per deliver efficiencies and these can be passed cent. We could not find much interest out in on to consumers. Benefits in the form of rural and regional Australia. As a matter of improved services— fact, the evidence that we did gain supported Debate interrupted. the bill. DOCUMENTS It is somewhat hypocritical for the Labor Party, on the basis of that lack of evidence Department of Social Security and on the basis of their former government’s Annual Report position—former Prime Minister Keating Senator COONEY (Victoria) (6.51 p.m.)— wanting to sell the lot of it a few years ago— I move: to want to go ahead with that. What people have to remember is that it was the Labor That the Senate take note of the document. Party that actually started this whole process I want to make some remarks on the annual by giving away half of Telstra’s monopoly to report of the Department of Social Security. Optus and then planning for it to expand The Department of Social Security is one of further. the most important departments of govern- ment. That is brought out by the departmental What we are proposing is a logical exten- charter, which is set out on page 3 of the sion of that process. In every country where report, which states: government owned monopolies have been changed—exposed to competition—part-priv- The Departmental charter is: atisation or privatisation has actually fol- to achieve social security policies that meet the needs of the Australian community and to lowed. This government has placed telecom- deliver entitlements and services with fairness, munications reform very high on its list of courtesy and efficiency. priorities for its first term. That is why we are debating it here so early in the time of the You will note that its ends are not limited to new government. The reasons for this are simply those who are most vulnerable in quite obvious. society; it also sets out to meet the needs of the Australian community. That is a good way Australia’s telecommunications sector must of putting it because in meeting the needs of maintain the momentum of change to ensure the most vulnerable in society we are meeting that we have a world-class communications the needs of society as a whole. infrastructure. The Australian telecommunica- A core test of a good society is the way it tions market has doubled in size over the last treats its most vulnerable. You are either a few years. It is a highly contested domestic good society or not depending upon the way and international environment and it cannot you—I use the word generically—treat those afford to have a bloated and inefficient Telstra who are, in the traditional biblical sense, halt that will not be able to compete in the new and lame. markets in the post-1997 environment. Amongst those most vulnerable in society We must be prepared for new growth. We are those who are not adequately housed. To must have a dynamic flexible company which use the word that Senator Woodley suggested will take on new demands like the Internet to me, it is ‘fundamental’ to any good society and other telephone based services. Telstra is that it properly houses everybody in society. also facing the reality that its operating The importance of that has been stressed to expenses are increasing faster than its revenue me today by some people who have given up growth. That also brings in the need for time to come to this parliament to talk on market discipline to get Telstra working as a behalf of those people who are not adequately more efficient operation. housed now and those who might not be Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4329 adequately housed in the future. I was very I seek leave to continue my remarks later. impressed with what they had to say. They Leave granted; debate adjourned. come from my state but the sorts of things that they are saying are universal throughout National Health and Medical Research Australia. Council Grants 1996 I will mention their names. There was Senator WOODLEY (Queensland)—I Catherine Upcher from the Ovens and Murray move: district; Gay Hosking, a public tenant from That the Senate take note of the document. Dandenong; Jude Harvey from the Western- port area; and Chris Couzens from the Bar- I seek leave to continue my remarks later. won area down through Geelong. Then there Leave granted; debate adjourned. were two other people who have done an amazing amount of work in this area: Stephen Australian Competition and Consumer Nash, the Executive Officer of the Inner Commission Urban Regional Housing Council; and And- Annual Report rew Mahar, who has now gone on to other things but for years has done great work in Senator NEAL (New South Wales)—I this area. In total, they have over half a move: century’s experience in public housing. On That the Senate take note of the document. page 374 of the report it says: I seek leave to continue my remarks later. Housing is an essential element of Australian’s Leave granted; debate adjourned. quality of life. The CSHA— the Commonwealth-state housing agreement— Australian Tobacco Marketing Advisory has played an important role in housing assistance Committee policies since its inception in 1945, providing Annual Report Australians with greater choice in their housing and responding to the diverse needs of the population. Senator WOODLEY (Queensland)—I The people I have named have told me that move: the Commonwealth-state housing agreement That the Senate take note of the document. has been an outstanding success but that they I seek leave to continue my remarks later. are fearful that capital expenditure on public housing under the act is likely to go to be Leave granted; debate adjourned. replaced by rent assistance. This change might Export Finance and Insurance be for the best of motives but there people are Corporation Australia saying that— Annual Report Senator Woodley—A terrible result. Senator COOK (Western Australia)—I Senator COONEY—Yes, to adopt Senator move: Woodley’s words, it would be a terrible result. Time is short and I know that other That the Senate take note of the document. people want to speak on this document at a I seek leave to continue my remarks later. later time. I seek leave to continue my re- Leave granted; debate adjourned. marks later. Leave granted; debate adjourned. Australian Institute of Marine Science National Health and Medical Research Annual Report Council Senator COOK (Western Australia)—I Annual Report move: Senator NEAL (New South Wales)—I That the Senate take note of the document. move: I seek leave to continue my remarks later. That the Senate take note of the document. Leave granted; debate adjourned. 4330 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

National Science and Technology Centre With respect to this institution, not only do they manage to run their programs with Report of Activities proportionately less funding than every other Senator LUNDY (Australian Capital major institution, but they manage to do it in Territory) (6.58 p.m.)—I move: a way where they actually take the issues to That the Senate take note of the document. the people. They set some great examples about how national institutions can run in an The National Science and Technology Centre inclusive and participatory way, in a way that represents a very important national institution really brings together and involves just about in a number of respects. I have to point out every aspect of our community. that I speak not just as a representative of the If you have not visited Questacon during people of the ACT, given that the centre’s your visits to the ACT, may I suggest you main building is housed here in the national take the time, as it is a very innovative place, capital in the parliamentary triangle, but also full of interest. Everyone who attends there on the basis that the work of this institution really reaps significant benefit from having a extends far beyond the borders of the ACT. look and participating in the hands-on science It takes science and technology right around and technology exhibits that are a feature of the country but I would like to note specifi- the institution. cally the work of this institution in rural and Senator COOK (Western Australia) (7.02 regional areas of Australia. Its travelling p.m.)—I would also like to speak on the programs have become a feature of this 1995-96 annual report of the National Science organisation. They have in place a program and Technology Centre. For most of the time which takes science and technology issues covered by this report I have to confess that and quite successfully attempts to popularise I had the privilege of being the minister for them with schoolchildren in country areas. science. Therefore, the balance of this report Science and technology is an area in which covers my period of office. I would like to, Australia has great strengths. Nothing high- first, pay a tribute to the people at the Nation- lights this more than the context of the debate al Science and Technology Centre. They are we are having at the moment about the partial a fine example of Australian scientists taking privatisation of Telstra. The very issue on the scientific message to the community and which we are at a turning point in Australia, encouraging a greater awareness of science in technology and industry development in the the broad Australian community. whole telecommunications area, really high- In science circles there is a bit of a fear of lights, I believe, the base from which we are the image science has. The belief is that working in our society when it comes to science is not seen as an attractive area for science and the base level of knowledge and Australian students to seek degrees in, or for participation in areas such as this. graduates to do postgraduate or doctoral The point I make this evening is that it is research in. The belief broadly is that science okay to have policies that put in place pro- has a threatening, almost science fiction type grams to advance industry research and image, in which scientists are seen as the bad development but if we have not got a solid guys rather than the good guys helping base of knowledge or infrastructure on the society overcome problems and finding ground in Australia that really promotes answers to complex issues. So the National knowledge amongst children and communities Science and Technology Centre does, as right around the country, it makes it very hard Senator Lundy has so capably described, take for us to establish that base. There has been the message of science to the community and quite a significant amount of research done to provides a series of exhibits and other facili- show the relationship between that base ties for people to become used to dealing with knowledge in the community and participation issues of science at the centre. with technology, and the ability of a country The situation for Australia is roughly this: to expand in a particular field. we create every year between one per cent Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4331 and three per cent of all the new knowledge its end purpose is not seen or valued. There discovered in science in the world. That is a problem that science enrolments at uni- means that our ability to create new know- versity are falling—that is a global trend. ledge is well ahead of our population as a There is a problem as well with the drop-out percentage of the global population and well rate of those enrolled. That is also a global ahead of our GDP as a percentage of global trend. GDP. We now have nine Nobel Prize winners The National Science and Technology in Australia which also means that per head Centre, by sparking the imagination of young of population, or as a percentage of our GDP, Australians about the potential of science, is measures by which you would assess Austra- aimed at arresting and turning around that lia’s standing in the world, we are well ahead trend. They do a very good job of it. I com- of most other countries in the world. We are mend them. I wish there was more of it and essentially a very creative country. The I hope the now government continues to fund trouble for us in this country is that as we sell this centre and the budget for science aware- our commodities like wheat, wool, iron ore ness in Australia, to support things like the and coal in the most unimproved form in the ANZAAS conference and to encourage the world—we sell them as base commodities at young Helix club of the CSIRO to bring the lowest price and, therefore, get the least young students into the science realm, and to return—so too does Australia sell its intellec- do all those things to promote science under- tual property. standing in Australia. (Time expired) Our scientists create this knowledge but Question resolved in the affirmative. other economies take their creations and turn them into developed products which they sell Australian Institute of Marine Science back to us. We have seen a syndrome in Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queensland) Australia of our creative community in the (7.08 p.m.)—I seek leave of the Senate to science sector coming up with new ideas and speak on a document that has already been trying to commercialise those ideas only to dealt with. I apologise for doing this. I rushed find there is a lack of interest in the financial into the chamber as soon as I heard that sector or hurdles put in the way of commer- documents were being discussed but I did not cialisation that make it impossible or very get here in time. difficult within this country. Leave granted. Someone else comes along and buys that intellectual property, turns that intellectual Senator IAN MACDONALD—The Aus- property into a commodity, a good or a tralian Institute of Marine Science is located service, and we then participate in the world at Cape Ferguson on a 207 hectare site just 50 market buying it back. The issue for the miles south of Townsville where I have my previous government was how you build on electorate office, and also in the Dampier- and strengthen the creative base of Australian Karratha region of north west Australia. science so that we continue to be a site for Marine industries are worth some $35 creativity and intellectual property creation, billion annually to Australia and these have and then put in place the various steps neces- been growing at eight per cent per year. The sary to take that intellectual property to the need for ensuring the natural system is pro- market by commercialising it. That was the tected and managed for sustainable develop- fundamental core of the innovation statement ment is quite evident. I was interested to hear brought down by the Keating government in Senator Cook’s speech on the previous report December last year. It put a series of steps and I concur with a lot of what he said about down so we could value add to the intellec- Australia’s pre-eminence in science. tual property we create. The Australian Institute of Marine Sci- Until we start doing that more effectively ence—AIMS—has established itself in stra- there will always be a situation where science tegic basic marine science and is supported by is not understood in the community because both public and private sector interests. The 4332 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 institute recently restructured its three science somehow joined with CSIRO and loses its programs into 12 projects of national signifi- independence and its independent function. cance, removed a layer of management by There is no factual basis for that at this time, abolishing program level management and but there is that feeling around scientific, introduced a formal system of project evalu- academic and business circles in Townsville ation. that this might happen. From the comments As well, the institute has conducted a that have been made to me by the people at voluntary redundancy scheme to enable AIMS—and I do not profess to be in any way efficiency gains through restructure of support an expert in this area—I share this concern sections, shifted the budget towards increased about a move which may be detrimental to support for capital and maintenance and the whole system of science agencies in upgraded its computer systems to allow a Australia. modern management information system to be I know the member for Herbert, Mr Peter introduced during 1996 and 1997. Lindsay, has also been approached. Whilst it The institute has built very strong links with would be improper for me to say he shares Australian industries, particularly in the my concerns, because that is for him to say, petroleum, pharmaceutical and computer I know that he is following this matter as technology industries and the wider Asia- well. Obviously, as well we have spoken to Pacific region. It has established a long-term the relevant ministers and no decision has environmental monitoring program and it has been made; it is part of a long-term process. built skills, knowledge and resource assess- I thought this was an appropriate time, ment, especially in tropical mangrove and while discussing this report, to place on coral reef systems. record the great work that AIMS does as an AIMS is a recognised leader in setting independent scientific organisation. Until I environmental assessment standards. The can be convinced that some other form of effectiveness of the improved links with structure would be beneficial, I remain a very industry, which I mentioned previously, were strong and firm supporter of AIMS as an reflected in the level of the institute’s external independent scientific organisation. earnings. In the term of this report, the exter- Senator COOK (Western Australia) (7.13 nal earnings of the institute were some $4½ p.m.)—I sought leave to continue my remarks million. I am personally aware of a number of on AIMS earlier. But now that it has been the people who work at AIMS and of the addressed, I seek leave to speak to that paper. tremendous work they do and the income they earn for Australia in their science works and Leave granted. in their collaboration with private drug com- Senator COOK—I too regard AIMS as one panies in particular, and this is good. of the premier science research establishments I do, however, note with just a fraction of in Australia and their annual report now concern the National Commission of Audit before the chamber covers the period in which which reported in June of this year recom- I too was mostly the minister; but I acknow- mending a range of reviews by the govern- ledge that, of course, it is the prerogative of ment of its objectives and justification for all the current government to sign off the report. programs and services. In particular, the I relate to many of the things the previous commission noted that a plethora of Common- speaker said. We are well served by AIMS; wealth government science and technology it is in many senses a classic science research programs were inefficient, unaccountable and institute which delivers a high quality product complicated. The report concluded that there for Australia and is overshadowed, to some was considerable scope for rationalisation, im- extent, by its bigger brother, the CSIRO. proved efficiency and achievement of more Nonetheless, nothing can detract from its targeted outcomes. work. It is well known in the fields of re- In the Townsville community there is a search associated with the Great Barrier Reef, concern that this may mean that AIMS is fisheries, offshore management of the marine Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4333 environment and whole areas of other re- that is, the living organisms in the water search that it conducts which is globally column as well as seabed resources and recognised as being of world quality. It is surface rights—if they exploit them to a seen as an agency to which other agencies in sustainable level. In order to know what a the world turn for particular information, sustainable level is, baseline studies need to particularly tropical marine environments as be conducted to work out what the current well other marine environments. level is and what sustainability looks like. If The agency is chaired by a board of which we do not exploit those resources to sustain- Professor Peter Andrews is the chairman, ability, some other nation can do so under the joined by Dr Meryl Williams, Mr Malcolm terms of this treaty. Kinnaird, Dr Ray George and Mr Geoff Hill. What is in Australia’s national interest is to It is a board with a blend of scientific exper- employ the expertise of an agency like AIMS, tise and commercial understanding. AIMS has which would be the leading agency in scien- come up with a number of scientific break- tific research in this field in Australia, to throughs which, if taken to commerciality, work with the states and the Commonwealth, will benefit Australian science and give a and other scientific agencies such as the return to this nation. Getting the right balance Oceanography Division of the CSIRO, to between research and discovery and getting commence a series of baseline studies so that the commercial advantages out of that for this we can be clear as to what the sustainability nation is something that AIMS is very serious of Australia’s marine environment might be. about. Its external earnings reflect its success That means if we are challenged about our in that regard. This board is balanced to rights to exploit resources, living and mineral, achieve that result. I think all of them should hydrocarbon or whatever, we are able to be commended. In particular, I would like to produce the definitive argument as to what commend the Director of AIMS, Dr Russell sustainability is. Reichelt. He is indeed a fine example of one I think AIMS can do that job. It is the of Australia’s leading scientists. agency that should lead in that job. I know The challenge for AIMS is not only to the government is moving towards setting up maintain and continue its fine reputation, that inquiry. I commend AIMS as being the something I am sure it will do, but to look to body that can carry it through. the future and see what the challenges are for Question resolved in the affirmative. an institute like this. In September 1994, as a consequence of a decision of the United National Industrial Chemicals Nations, the territory of Australia was en- Notification and Assessment Scheme larged by 150 per cent—that is, the exclusive Senator LUNDY (Australian Capital economic zone for Australia meant that our Territory) (7.19 p.m.)—I move: seabed boundary was extended from the three- That the Senate take note of the document. mile limit to 200 nautical miles from the low I would like to make a few comments on this tide mark or the edge of the continental shelf, annual report of the national industrial chemi- whichever is the farthest. cals notification and assessment scheme. I do For a continent like Australia, which so on the basis that the issue of occupational stretches across many latitudes and, when you health and safety, which was certainly a consider our island territories as well, covers primary motivator in the establishment of this climatic conditions ranging from tropical to scheme, is something that really needs to be Antarctic and all sea conditions and sub-sea highlighted and drawn to the attention of this surfaces that could be imagined, this is a chamber, given the seriousness of the implica- massive challenge. Australia now ranks as the tions and effects of occupational injury and second largest country in the world in terms illness in Australia. of its offshore marine responsibilities. Last year alone, 500 people died because of Under the law of the sea, the requirement workplace accidents and another 2,200 died is that nations have access to the resources— from acquired diseases. According to the 4334 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 annual report of NICNAS, there were 1,314 per cent women and five per cent men. That recorded incidences of chemical related would be appropriate, because it would be fair injuries and diseases in the last year. to say that in these sorts of disputes the Debate interrupted. majority of people who do not have the funding to pursue such claims are women. ADJOURNMENT However, to couch the guidelines in such a The DEPUTY PRESIDENT—Order! It sexist way was inappropriate. I am glad that being 7.20 pm, the time for consideration of I have been fortified in that view by the government documents has concluded. I Attorney-General’s Department which, as a propose the question: result, will be writing to the Legal Aid Com- mission in Tasmania about that. That the Senate do now adjourn. What this issue highlights is that the former Legal Aid government, in trying to be so politically Senator ABETZ (Tasmania) (7.21 p.m.)— correct, unfortunately created injustice and The matter that I wish to raise this evening in alienated people within the community by the adjournment debate is the question of having such guidelines. The chances are that certain legal aid guidelines that applied in they were well intentioned, but it was political Tasmania in relation to the capacity of certain correctness gone mad which had an impact of people to get aid in certain circumstances. As creating this injustice. a result of the former government’s so-called I would not have raised this matter this access to justice program, a guideline was evening but for some of the gratuitous com- developed whereby women would be provid- ments made by the director of legal aid ed with assistance to institute property settle- concerning me. In making these comments, I ment proceedings where the principal asset of did not in any way refer to anybody in par- the marriage was equity in the former matri- ticular or seek to identify or embarrass any- monial home of between $30,000 and body in particular. Unfortunately, the director $60,000. Another guideline provided for of legal aid in Tasmania made some gratui- assistance to women to obtain the return of tous comments, such as, ‘We have heard furniture and chattels. nothing from Senator Abetz about legal aid I have no objection to those guidelines as funding in Tasmania.’ such, other than that they were framed in a For the record, let me say that Mr Colin blatantly sexist way. Under those guidelines Brown has been in my office. We have a husband and wife could be in exactly the discussed the very issue of legal aid funding same financial position, seeking legal aid to in Tasmania. Further, as chair of the govern- fight or argue over property, and the Legal ment members committee on Attorney- Aid Commission could say to the wife, General and justice matters, I was involved in ‘You’re a woman, we will fund you’, but to an extensive campaign to assist the communi- the man, ‘Because you’re a male, we won’t ty legal centres to ensure that they were fund you.’ I thought that was grossly unjust quarantined as much as possible from the and grossly inappropriate. Indeed, I would government cutbacks that were necessary suggest that that is political correctness gone because of the previous mismanagement of mad. our economy by Labor. I have received many As a result, I raised it at Senate estimates letters of thanks from those community legal committee with the Attorney-General’s De- centres right around Australia for my involve- partment. They then considered the guideline ment. So it is somewhat incongruous for the and provided me with an answer just a day or director of legal aid to have made those sorts so ago, indicating that they thought the of comments. guideline was in breach of anti-discrimination Let me also say that the director of legal legislation. It would be fair to say that, if it aid gave me what I believe to be a very were couched in non-sexist terms, this par- fruitful avenue of inquiry to try to save ticular guideline would undoubtedly favour 95 money in the Attorney-General’s Department Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4335 and thus free up extra money for legal aid. In 3 of the constitution—that is, the judicial arm fact, anybody who is interested can have a of government. look at the Hansard of the Senate estimates The problem is not so much a previous committee where I followed up a number of government’s adherence to political correct- questions and suggestions put to me by the ness but the fact that proper funding has not director of legal aid in Tasmania as to how been put into this area. Fortunately, Senator moneys might be saved. I find it somewhat McKiernan has decided to have an inquiry, unfortunate that Mr Brown has found it and the Senate Legal and Constitutional necessary to make those comments in the References Committee is presently preparing media, which I think most people would see to hold public hearings into this. Senator as a cheap, political shot, when he was unable Abetz is on that committee and no doubt he to deal with the substance of the complaint. will make his usual great contribution to it. It Having said that, I look forward to ongoing, would be a good thing if we waited until that meaningful discussions with Mr Colin Brown, inquiry was held before we came to conclu- the director of legal aid in Tasmania. I look sions about whether guidelines are correct or forward to him providing me with further where the problems lie. suggestions as to how savings can be made in Last Thursday the Senate voted against a the Attorney General’s Department. He can be motion of disallowance which referred to the assured that I will continue to follow them up increase in fees in the Commonwealth courts. at estimates or with the minister or directly This is a related issue because it deals with with the Attorney-General. the question of how we are going to finance I wanted to place on record a response to our judicial system, our legal system. Unfortu- those comments by the director of legal aid nately, much of the debate centred around the and also remind those who are administering question of whether or not it ought to be user schemes such as legal aid that they have to be pays. In the end, the Senate came down very careful no matter how well intentioned they largely on the side that the users should pay may be to try to couch the guidelines so that in this area. they are fair to everybody and not alienate It seems to me extraordinary that one of the what could be potentially a large section of core functions of government should be the community. approached on the basis that the people who are going to have access to that core function Legal Aid have to pay for it. The other core functions Judicial System are the government itself, the administration of the Commonwealth, and the legislature. It Senator COONEY (Victoria) (7.27 p.m.)— seems to me to be extraordinary that at least I would like to say a few words about the one arm of that is looked at in terms of value remarks that Senator Abetz has made. He has for money. In that context, there is an article raised the issue of how legal aid is expended in the New Statesman & Society magazine of and the guidelines by which they are expend- 8 December 1995 which has a bit to say ed. He mentioned Tasmania, the state from about the attitudes and the way in which we which he comes. run society. It states: Senator Abetz—A great state. The arguments about values are disingenuous; Senator COONEY—A very great state, calculated to conceal what has become obvious to all over the past 20 years—that monetary values because that was where I was born. He has have superseded all others, and that the sublimest said that the former government created expression of idealism, hope and high moral injustice and that their adherence to political purpose in the world now is "value for money": if correctness was one of the means by which money has become the supreme measure of value, they did that. I think Senator Abetz raises a why should those who have been so happy to very big issue, and that is the issue of how underwrite this development complain? we run our legal system, how we run that arm That perhaps sums up the sorts of presump- of government which is dealt with in chapter tions and suppositions that too many people 4336 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 are making about the legal system. Instead of on the development of cancer in humans. facing the need to make the system fair, just These are not my words; they come from the and available, we look for excuses for not so International Commission on Non-Ionising making it. The excuses include the following Radiation Protection. The commission stated: propositions: that injustice is brought about because the former government adhered to Most of the established biological effects of exposure to RF fields are consistent with responses what is said was political correctness; that the to induced heating—thermal effects—resulting in guidelines in Tasmania are the problem; and rises in tissue or body temperature of greater than that everything is the problem, except the fact one degree Celsius. Most studies examined that there ought to be adequate resources endpoints other than cancer, many examined devoted to this arm of government so that it physiological and thermoregulatory responses, can work properly. effects on behaviour and on the induction of lense opacities (cataracts) and adverse reproductive May I say in passing that it is not only the outcomes following acute exposure to relatively judicial arm that is being starved of resources high levels of radiofrequency fields. but also this very legislature. The facilities made available to people both in this place The minister failed to point out yesterday that and in the other place are also being cut the current research is primarily about heat down. Having listened to the contribution effects of radiation. The minister’s words also made by Senator Abetz, it is proper that the deny the fact that a growing body of work true picture is raised; that is, a lot of work has does show adverse health effects. These to be done to make sure that everybody in the denials are just like the denials which we community, no matter how poor or how rich, heard and still hear from the tobacco industry, has equal access to the law. Equal access to and which were once heard from the propo- the law means not simply being represented nents of the asbestos industry. The govern- by somebody but being represented by a ment is using the defensive words of the person who is competent, who has time and telecommunications industry and yet accuses who has the resources available to give to not those of us who want to know what is really only the richest but also the poorest and all going on of having closed minds. those in between. That, unfortunately, is not The government and industry are saying, happening now. I doubt very much whether ‘You have not yet proved that some children anybody in this chamber at the moment could are getting leukaemia as a result of living afford to run a case that went for any length close to a TV transmitter tower. You have not of time, and that is a tragedy. It is a tragedy yet proved that brain tumours are the result of brought about—in part at least—by the using mobile phones and you have not yet corruptions of the values by which we live, proved that the damage electromagnetic which have occurred in recent times. radiation has been shown to cause human Electromagnetic Radiation cells has ramifications for human health.’ If the telecommunications carriers and others Senator ALLISON (Victoria) (7.35 p.m.)— were pharmaceutical manufacturers, they The Minister for Communications and the would be required to prove that their products Arts, Senator Alston, said yesterday in this were not harmful to human health. They place: would not expect the research to be done after . . . the weight of national and international scien- millions of people had already used their tific opinion is that there is no substantive evidence product. of adverse health and safety effects from radiofre- quency emissions at typical levels. The telecommunications industry says we What needs to be understood however is that should be reassured because the technology very few studies in the so-called weight of meets Australian standards. A CSIRO report national and international scientific opinion, entitled ‘Radiofrequency radiation exposure which is the sort that is to be re-examined by standards in Australia and New Zealand: the World Health Organisation, are relevant biological effects, part 1’ raises concerns to the evaluation of radiofrequency exposure about potential adverse health effects of long- Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4337 term, low-level, chronic exposure to radiofre- The same researcher invited responses from quency radiation. mobile phone users who experienced effects from their use of mobile phones. More than It says some of the effects which have 50 complained about a range of consistent emerged include: promotion of cancer growth, symptoms, including headaches, numbness, including leukaemia, breast cancer and brain aching jaw and hot spots in the head. For tumours; degenerative changes in the retina, very many these symptoms disappeared when cornea and iris of the eye; changes in brain they stopped using their mobiles. chemistry and drug effectiveness; impaired learning and memory function. It also says These studies do not prove that brain extremely low levels of radiofrequency radi- tumours are caused by mobile phones or ation—that is, thousands of times less than mobile phone towers—very far from it. They the safety limits given in the US and Austral- merely alert us to the fact that we do not ian standards—have promoted cancer and know. They say we must be cautious, we birth defects in animal experiments. must adopt the precautionary principle and we must do more research—research which is Studies have been done and are currently independent, not research which merely under way by independent researchers who do confirms what the industry would hope to not have to adopt a defensive stand—studies find. which have been criticised by an industry which has a great deal to lose if the prelimi- I finish by noting the remarks of Senator nary findings are any indication of what we Boswell this afternoon in the Telstra debate. might find. He said, ‘I think that the Democrats are fools to have promoted recommendation No. 35 of Dr Peter French, head of immunology at St the report of the inquiry, which proposes that Vincents Hospital in Sydney, has commenced a levy be raised from contributors responsible laboratory testing of human cell culture and for electromagnetic radiation to finance found that electromagnetic radiation causes independent research into public health issues changes to genetic make-up. Gene transcrip- concerning EMR.’ Quite obviously, he has tion—the way in which genes are activated to not caught up with Senator Alston’s an- form different cell types—is affected by nouncement yesterday that $4.5 million would exposure. Some DNA expression is turned on pay for such research over the next four years and some is turned off by exposure to electro- and that it would be funded by increases on magnetic radiation. He has also found that industry licences. I will see that Senator proteinaceous water in the body in places Boswell gets a copy of the press release such as the eyeballs and surrounding the brain shortly. is affected by electromagnetic radiation. Dr French says it is possible that headaches Sir George Pearce associated with mobile phones are likely to be Senator BROWNHILL (New South caused by the exposure of blood vessels. He Wales—Parliamentary Secretary to the regards this as fundamental and important Minister for Trade and Parliamentary Secre- work, but I remind the Senate that there is tary to the Minister for Primary Industries and presently no funding to continue his research. Energy) (7.43 p.m.)—In common with other Dr Bruce Hocking undertook an epidemio- senators in this place, I have the opportunity logical study last year and found that, within to have artworks from the Parliament House four kilometres of a television transmitter collection in my office. Some we choose; tower in a residential area of Sydney, rates of some we get because no-one else wants them. childhood leukaemia were 60 per cent higher One painting that attracted my eye and my than in another area away from the tower, and curiosity now hangs in my office. It is a mortality rates from the illness were 100 per painting of the right honourable Sir George cent higher. More work needs to be done to Pearce by Dargie in original oil. I chose it expand the study and look, for instance, at originally because it was a pleasant painting, impacts on adults as well as children. but on inquiring as to the background of this 4338 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 man, I was impressed to learn he had served In my opinion speaking about Cabinet, I have never in the Senate for 37 years. I thought he was sat in with an abler man than George Pearce. He an appropriate role model. I also learnt that he was a man of extraordinary experience and he had great wisdom. had held a number of positions, including chairman of committees. As I asked about Sir Robert Menzies went on to say: him so often, my staff even put a short ‘biog’ I look back on my good fortune to have sat in a against the portrait. cabinet with him for three years as one of the highs in my life. Some weeks ago, my office received a phone call from the guide desk, advising that This praise from a Liberal Prime Minister a granddaughter of Sir George Pearce was about a man who started his political career keen to view the portrait of her grandfather. with the ALP—and then saw the light obvi- Regrettably I was not here, but my staff met ously—and left school at 12 years of age says with Mr and Mrs Janet and Alan Righetti something. from Queensland and they learnt so much The Parliamentary Handbook lists his more about this famous Australian that I political affiliations as being firstly a member thought I would like to share it with other of the Labor Party, then a member of the senators. National Party from 1917 and finally a mem- While it is true that Sir George Pearce did ber of the United Australia Party from 1931. serve for 37 years and was a chairman of Obviously, he was a great political survivor. committees, he was so much more than that. I have always admired the portrait of the Rt I was particularly interested in the fact that he Hon. Sir George Pearce. Now that I know was a member of three political parties. more of his background I am even more pleased to have it in my office. I am also Sir George was one of 10 in a poor family, pleased that his granddaughter knows her his father being a blacksmith in South Aus- grandfather has not been forgotten and that tralia. His formal education finished at 12 his portrait is not languishing in some base- years of age and he walked beside his horse ment. with pick and shovel to Kalgoorlie from Perth to try his luck at the goldfields—obviously Howard Government none too successfully, because he returned to Senator FORSHAW (New South Wales) Perth and started a 57-hour a week job as an (7.47 p.m.)—I pay tribute to Senator apprentice carpenter. Brownhill for those comments even though I He rose through the trade union movement may not agree with everything he said. I note and was elected as a senator for Western that the honourable past senator had been a Australia in the first federal government in trade union member. It is actually pleasing to 1901. He became defence minister in 1910 hear someone on the other side recognise the and, among other credits, founded the Royal worth and value of trade union members who Australian Navy. He was also defence end up in the Senate. They obviously make minister during the First World War. He had great contributions. a long interest in aviation being the first I would like to return to some of the issues politician in Australia to use air travel to I raised today in the Senate during the debate cover his vast electorate. on matters of public interest which go to the Before the First World War he set up a question of political leadership and political flying school at Point Cook in Victoria and in integrity. Unfortunately, I was unable to finish 1921 he brought the RAAF into existence. my remarks due to the constant interruption Other portfolios that Sir George held at the of senators on the government side who were same time as his defence portfolio were obviously most embarrassed about the revela- external affairs and home territories. He was tions that I was bringing to the attention of appointed a privy counsellor in 1921 and the Senate relating to the infiltration of knighted in 1927. He retired from the Senate Liberal Party branches in southern Sydney by in 1938 and died in 1952, aged 82. In 1964, extreme right-wing elements. In particular, I Sir Robert Menzies said about Sir George: referred to newspaper reports emanating from Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4339 more moderate members of the Liberal Party I also want to draw to the attention of the in New South Wales, including Liberal Senate what has been happening since that members of the state parliament. Those article was written. There was a further article reports referred to the grave concerns they in the Daily Telegraph on 31 August this year have about what was happening in their own which revealed that branches of the Young branches. Liberals in this region had put onto the Internet what could only be described as I want to go back to refer to an article that fascist or Nazi party propaganda. The Daily was published in the Sydney Morning Herald Telegraph article states: on Saturday, 27 July which dealt with this very serious issue. The Liberal Party hier- The NSW Liberal Party has demanded its youth archy in New South Wales, at the pinnacle of wing remove an Internet site that invites young computer users to read the views of extreme right- which is none other than the Prime Minister, wing groups, including Nazis. Mr Howard, has really failed to do anything The party has been embarrassed by the web site to curb this issue. The article states: of the Young Liberals’ Hughes-Sutherland branch, The man regarded as the leader of the young which includes "Frequently Asked Questions" about right-wingers is a Sydney lawyer, John White, who the Nazi movement. was one of the unsuccessful candidates for presel- The site, set up by a small number of members ection at Hughes. in the southern Sydney branch, describes the Mr White had been involved in the stacking Holocaust as an "unfortunate but understandable" of the Menai branch where there was, and one event that result from "allied inflicted acts of war". could describe it as, a right-wing almost neo- Up until 11.30am yesterday, visitors to the "links fascist takeover. One of Mr White’s col- page" of the Sutherland-Hughes Young Liberals web site would have found the Nazi site—along leagues was a chap by the name of Wade with "other interesting pages", such as the Prime McInerney. The McInerney family are mem- Minister’s Home Page. bers of the Liberal Party. Wade’s brother, By early afternoon, following inquiries by The Dallas McInerney, is rather notorious. Daily Telegraph, the Nazi "link" had been removed Dallas McInerney, as I am sure honourable on the orders of Riley St headquarters. senators will recall—and certainly members That is the headquarters of the New South of the Liberal Party will recall—gained some Wales Liberal Party. The article goes on: notoriety during the last state election in New Despite this intervention, intrepid Internet users South Wales. Mr Dallas McInerney was on could still gain access to the Nazi site late yester- the staff of Chris Downy the Liberal member day by clicking onto Queensland University of for Sutherland. He used the telephone in the Technology Liberal Club (also listed on the member’s office to make threatening phone Hughes-Sutherland Young Liberals page). calls to the owner of a pizza shop who, The Queensland site contains a link to the same according to Mr McInerney, had made a propaganda as well as a pointer to the extreme terrible mistake of actually leasing premises right-wing League of Rights. to a then Labor candidate for the seat. The Nazi site, compiled in the US, celebrates the "outstanding leadership" of Adolf Hitler and claims Senator Hogg—It wasn’t for making bad "no genocide" took place during World War II. pizzas? What we have here are some very extreme, Senator FORSHAW—It was not for dangerous young Liberals infiltrating the making bad pizzas. This gentleman happened branches in the Sutherland shire and surround- to lease a shop to the Labor candidate so Mr ing areas—only a stone’s throw from the St McInerney took it upon himself to make George area where the Prime Minister lived threatening phone calls. He was arrested, for many years—and touting this type of charged and convicted of offences relevant to absolute garbage, this revisionist history his action. That is an indication of the sorts promulgated by the likes of David Irving and of people who have been active in the Suther- others. We have never really experienced the land shire and southern Sydney branches of provision of this sort of information by major the Liberal Party. political parties before. This type of political 4340 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996 propaganda has not been a feature of Austral- Pearce, which my colleague Senator ian politics in the past, except in very limited Brownhill has just completed. I thought I circumstances. Now we have seen examples might just add a couple of comments to Sena- of where, unfortunately in the Liberal Party, tor Brownhill’s speech because of some there are people who want to push this bar- coincidences. row. Sir George Pearce has, I think, a grand- I have to say that action was taken by the daughter in Brisbane—she may be a grand- New South Wales branch officials to stop niece; I am not quite sure—who is well that. I think that is to be commended. It is known to me. Her name is Mrs Jane Prentice. unfortunate, particularly given the current Mrs Prentice is very much involved with the climate of some of the political debate taking Liberal Party in Queensland. She is married place in this country, such as the extremist to Mr Ian Prentice, who was for several years views of the member for Oxley (Ms Hanson), a Liberal member of the Queensland state that some people are allowed to put this type parliament. In fact, he was one of the group of propaganda over the Internet and through which—those of you who know anything other official party organs of the Liberal about Queensland history will remember Party. I believe it is the duty of the Prime this—prior to 1983 was referred to as the Minister to stamp out this sort of thing, to do ‘ginger group’ of the Liberal Party in Queens- it at the outset—not to flounder around land. He was one of those members of parlia- talking about the right to free expression and ment who, over a principle, ended up depart- freedom of speech. ing from our then coalition colleagues in Today I heard ministers stand up and attack Queensland. What happened after that is, of the Labor Party—the Minister for Communi- course, all history. cations and the Arts, Senator Alston, did so Coincidentally, Mr Prentice, who is the in response to a question from Senator Queensland Liberals’ solicitor, just last week Boswell—because we happen to have a in the Supreme Court had a major victory reasonable percentage of our members of over the Labor Party involving my northern parliament with trade union backgrounds. city of Townsville. They condemn individuals for the simple fact I was at the Prentices’ house a year or so they happen to be trade union members. ago and I noticed a book in their library. I Trade unions around the world have been at think the title of it was From Carpenter to the forefront of standing up for freedom and Cabinet. Mrs Prentice indicated to me that it democracy. There are trade unions leaders was about her grandfather or uncle or great- even today putting their lives on the line in grandfather, so I borrowed the book to read. other countries for the right of workers to I must confess that it is still sitting in my have democratic and collective representation. library. Fortunately, that has never had to happen in this country. I think it is about time the Prime I just thought that the interesting aspect of Minister, leading ministers of the government history Senator Brownhill raised had that and other members of the government stopped further coincidental element in that the Pren- these sorts of disgraceful and disparaging tices are people who have been very much attacks upon individuals and started to clean involved in politics in many aspects over a up the mess that certainly exists in some of long period of time in Queensland. So the the Liberal Party branches in New South fascinating political elements of the life of Sir Wales. George Pearce continue on in his descendants. Certainly, Senator Brownhill’s speech about Sir George Pearce a person who was obviously quite significant Senator IAN MACDONALD (Queensland) in Australia’s political history made interest- (7.56 p.m.)—It is Wednesday night, but I did ing listening. I am sure my friends the Pren- just want to take a few minutes of the tices will be interested to read Senator Senate’s time to make a comment on the Brownhill’s speech when I forward it on to speech about a famous Australian, Sir George them, as I surely will. Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4341

Senate adjourned at 7.59 p.m. Collection) Act, the Training Guarantee (Admin- istration) Act and the Superannuation Guarantee DOCUMENTS (Administration) Act. Industrial Chemicals (Notification and Assess- Tabling ment) Act—National Industrial Chemicals Notification and Assessment Scheme—Report for The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister 1995-96 on the operation of the Act. for the Environment (Senator Campbell) National Health and Medical Research Council tabled the following government documents: Act—National Health and Medical Research Audit Act—Australian National Training Auth- Council— ority—Australia’s vocational education and Grants for 1996. training system—Report for 1995—Volumes 1, 2 and 3. Report for 1995. Audit Act—Reports for 1995-96— National Science and Technology Centre (Questacon)—Report for 1995-96. Australian Institute of Marine Science. Royal Australian Mint—Report for 1995-96. Australian National Maritime Museum. Social Security Act and Public Service Act— Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Department of Social Security—Report for 1995- Organisation. 96. Australian Tourist Commission. Tobacco Marketing Act—Australian Tobacco Export Finance and Insurance Corporation. Marketing Advisory Committee—Report for 1995 on the operation of the Act (Final report). Audit Act and Primary Industries and Energy Trade Practices Act—Australian Competition and Research and Development Act—Forest and Consumer Commission—Report for 1995-96, Wood Products Research and Development including activities of the Trade Practices Com- Corporation and Forest and Wood Products mission and Prices Surveillance Authority for Research and Development Corporation Selection period 1 July to 6 November 1995. Committee—Reports for 1995-96. The following document was tabled by the Income Tax Assessment Act and Taxation Administration Act—Commissioner of Tax- Clerk: ation—Report for 1995-96, including reports Remuneration Tribunal Act—Determination No. pursuant to the Child Support (Registration and 12 of 1996. 4342 SENATE Wednesday, 16 October 1996

QUESTIONS ON NOTICE

The following answers to questions were circulated:

Labour Market: Training Programs be eligible for the same range of labour market assistance as other disadvantaged job seekers who (Question No. 163) are in receipt of Social Security income support. Senator Bolkus asked the Minister for Ministerial Staff Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs, upon notice, on 26 July 1996: (Question No. 193) (1) Will an assurance be given that new migrants Senator Faulkner asked the minister who are unemployed and seeking work, but who representing the Minister for Administrative are otherwise ineligible for monetary benefits, will Services, upon notice, on 10 September 1996: not be denied access to labour market training programmes during their first 2 years in Australia. (1) Are the 294 government ministerial staff positions referred to by the Minister in a question (2) To which labour market programmes will without notice on 9 May 1996 (House of Represen- those new migrants be able to have access. tatives Hansard, p751) all Members of Parliament Senator Vanstone—The answer to the (Staff) Act positions; if not, how many are Mem- honourable senator’s question is as follows: bers of Parliament (Staff) (MOPS(S)) Act positions and what other positions make up this number. (1) and (2) Recent migrants who are not eligible for Social Security income support within their first (2) What is the breakdown of the different two years of residence in Australia will continue classifications in the 294 ministerial staffing until 1 December 1997 to be eligible for the positions; for example, senior adviser, adviser and following labour market programme assistance: assistant adviser. English language training element of the new (3) Are all government MOP(S) Act positions Job Seeker Preparation and Support Programme; located in ministerial offices; if not, where else within the government or bureaucracy are people Advanced English for Migrants Programme employed under MOP(S). (AEMP); National Office of Overseas Skills Recognition (4) How many Departmental Liaison Officers (NOOSR) Bridging Courses for Overseas Trained (DLOs) are working in ministerial offices (includ- Professionals; and ing those of parliamentary secretaries): (a) on a temporary basis; and (b) on a permanent basis. financial assistance under the Job Seeker Preparation and Support Programme for travel (5) How many departmental staff other than and other expenses incurred when starting DLOs are working in ministerial offices (including English language training, AEMP or NOOSR those of parliamentary secretaries): (a) on a tempo- Bridging Courses for Overseas Trained Profes- rary basis; and (b) on a permanent basis. sionals. (6) How many consultants are employed in With the introduction of the Government’s ministerial offices (including those of parliamentary reformed employment assistance arrangements on secretaries): on a short-time (contract under 6 1 December 1997 these migrants will be treated the months) basis; and (b) on a longer term (contract same as other job seekers who are not eligible for over 6 months) basis. Social Security income support. Recent migrants (7) Are there any staff working in ministerial who wish to have higher level English language offices who are not employed under the MOP(S) training after completing the 510 hours of English Act or by a government department; if so, how language training provided by the Department of many are there and who is paying them. Immigration and Multicultural Affairs will retain (8) How many government ministerial staff eligibility for AEMP. Professional migrants will (including those of parliamentary secretaries) are retain eligibility for NOOSR Bridging Courses for based in Canberra. Overseas Trained Professionals. Migrants most in need of assistance including Senator Kemp—The Minister for Adminis- refugees and humanitarian migrants will remain trative Services has provided the following eligible for Social Security income support and will answer to the honourable senator’s question: Wednesday, 16 October 1996 SENATE 4343

(1)&(2) Yes. (6) Is the Minister aware of the recently released Classification Number of positions ‘Inner Peel Regional Structure Plan’, produced by the Western Australia Ministry for Planning, under Consultant 1 which only about one-third of the Creery wetlands Principal Adviser 5 would be protected. Senior Adviser 40 Media Adviser 32 (7) Will a submission be made to this plan now Adviser 80 that it has been released for public comment. Assistant Adviser 50 (8) What action is the Minister currently engaged Clerk to Whip 7 in, or considering, to further the Commonwealth’s Personal Secretary 79 role in protecting this important wetland area. (3) No. Staff are also employed in the offices of Senator Hill—The answer to the honour- Parliamentary Secretaries, Whips, Leader of the able senator’s question is as follows: National Party in the Senate, the Government Members’ Secretariat and the Cabinet Policy Unit. (1) The privately owned property known as (4)(5)(7) These are questions which would need Creery wetland, lies adjacent to Creery Island in to be put to individual Ministers. In my case my the Peel Inlet, which is part of an area listed as a Department has provided one DLO. Under the Wetland of International Importance under the established arrangements, which also applied under Ramsar Convention. None of the Creery property the previous Government, when a personal staff itself is included in the currently listed area. The member is absent on approved leave for periods of Peel Inlet area is of major significance as habitat less than 12 weeks a Minister’s home department for migratory shorebirds listed for protection under is responsible for providing any relief required. Australia’s bilateral migratory bird agreements with There are no staff working in my office who are the Governments of Japan and China. The property paid from other sources. is not on the Register of the National Estate. (6) None (the consultant position has never been (2)-(3) With my agreement, the Australian Nature filled). Conservation Agency has been involved in the (8) As at 30 September 1996—177. drafting of a memorandum of understanding for the cooperative future management of the Creery site, Creery Wetlands in recognition of its high conservation values. This document provides for the permanent conservation (Question No. 196) of the most significant wetland portion of the site, Senator Murray asked the Minister for the and is being developed through discussions with the Environment, upon notice, on 16 September property owner, Cedar Woods Properties Limited, 1996. the Western Australian Government, and Mandurah City Council. (1) What forms of Commonwealth or internation- al recognition, such as National Estate listing and (4) The Commonwealth has provided comments RAMSAR Convention listing, currently apply to the on the draft memorandum of understanding, which Creery wetlands area near Mandurah in Western is now with Cedar Woods Properties Limited for Australia. consideration. (2) What forms of Commonwealth or internation- (5) The Commonwealth does not propose to al recognition are being proposed or considered for acquire the Creery wetlands site, and has been the Creery wetlands area. advised that the property is not currently for sale. (3) What is the current involvement of the Australian Nature Conservation Agency (ANCA) (6) Yes. in the Creery wetlands. (7) Yes, a submission is being prepared by my (4) What is the current status of the draft memo- portfolio. randum of understanding involving ANCA, the (8) I am satisfied that an acceptable outcome for developer Cedar Woods Properties Limited, and the the protection of this important wetland can be Western Australia Government. achieved through the proposed cooperative manage- (5) Is funding to be provided to assist in the ment arrangement being finalised through the acquisition of the Creery wetlands area; if not, why memorandum of understanding under discussion at not. present.