Thursday, 21 April 1983 THE PARLIAMENT DISSOLVED THIRTY-SECOND PARLIAMENT PROCLAMATION Commonwealth of Australia N. M. STEPHEN Governor-General By His Excellency the Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia WHEREAS by section 57 of the Constitution it is provided that if the House of Representatives passes any proposed law, and the Senate rejects or fails to pass it, or passes it with amendments to which the House of Representatives will not agree, and if after an interval of three months the House of Representatives, in the same or the next session, again passes the proposed law with or without any amendments which have been made, suggested, or agreed to by the Senate and the Senate rejects or fails to pass it, or passes it with amendments to which the House of Representatives will not agree, the Governor-General may dissolve the Senate and the House of Representatives simultaneously: AND WHEREAS the conditions upon which the Governor-General is empowered by that section of the Constitution to dissolve the Senate and the House of Representatives simultaneously have been fulfilled in respect of the several proposed laws intituled- Sales Tax Amendment Bill (No. 1A) 1981 Sales Tax Amendment Bill (No. 2A) 1981 Sales Tax Amendment Bill (No. 3A) 1981 Sales Tax Amendment Bill (No. 4A) 1981 Sales Tax Amendment Bill (No. 5A) 1981 Sales Tax Amendment Bill (No. 6A) 1981 Sales Tax Amendment Bill (No. 7A) 1981 Sales Tax Amendment Bill (No. 8A) 1981 Sales Tax Amendment Bill (No. 9A) 1981 Canberra College of Advanced Education Amendment Bill 1981 States Grants (Tertiary Education Assistance) Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1981 Australian National University Amendment Bill (No. 3) 1981 Social Services Amendment Bill (No. 3) 1981. NOW THEREFORE I, SIR NINIAN MARTIN STEPHEN, the Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia, do by this my Proclamation dissolve the Senate and the House of Representatives. (L.S.) GIVEN under my Hand and the Great Seal of Australia on 4 February 1983. By His Excellency's Command, MALCOLM FRASER Prime Minister GOD SAVE THE QUEEN! THE PARLIAMENT CONVENED THIRTY-THIRD PARLIAMENT PROCLAMATION Commonwealth of Australia N. M. STEPHEN Governor-General By His Excellency the Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia WHEREAS by section 5 of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia it is provided, amongst other things, that the Governor-General may appoint such times for holding the sessions of the Parliament as he thinks fit: NOW THEREFORE I, Sir Ninian Martin Stephen, Governor-General of the Commonwealth of Australia, by this Proclamation appoint Thursday, 21 April 1983 as the day for the Parliament of the Commonwealth to assemble for the despatch of business: And all Senators and Members of the House of Representatives are hereby required to give their attendance accordingly at Parliament House, Canberra, in the Australian Capital Territory, at 10.30 o'clock in the morning on Thursday, 21 April 1983. (L.S.) GIVEN under my Hand and the Great Seal of Australia on 7th April 1983. By His Excellency's Command, BOB HAWKE Prime Minister GOD SAVE THE QUEEN! AUSTRALIA PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Hansard 1983 FIRST SESSION OF THE THIRTY-THIRD PARLIAMENT (FIRST PERIOD) The Thirty-second Parliament was, by proclamation, dissolved on 4 February 1983 . The Thirty-third Parliament was convened for the dispatch of business on 21 April 1983, and the First Session commenced on that day. The House met at 10.30 a.m., pursuant to the proclamation of His Excellency the Governor-General. The Clerk read the proclamation. The Usher of the Black Rod, being announced, was admitted, and delivered the message that the Deputy of the Governor-General for the Opening of the Parliament requested the attendance of honourable members in the Senate chamber forthwith. Honourable members attended accordingly, and having returned- The Deputy authorised by the Governor-General to administer the oath or affirmation entered the chamber. The Clerk read the commission authorising the Right Honourable Sir Anthony Frank Mason, K.B.E., a Justice of the High Court of Australia, to administer the oath or affirmation of allegiance to the Queen required by the Constitution to be taken or made by members of the House of Representatives. The Clerk laid on the table returns to the 125 writs for the election of members of the House of Representatives held on 5 March 1983. Resignation of Member and Issue of Writ The Clerk informed the House of the resignation of the right honourable member for Wannon (Mr Malcolm Fraser) and announced that the Governor-General had issued a writ for the consequential by-election. The following honourable members made and subscribed the oath or affirmation of allegiance: Adermann, Albert Evan, Fisher, Queensland Andrew, John Neil, Wakefield, South Australia Anthony, John Douglas, Richmond, New South Wales Baldwin, Peter Jeremy, Sydney, New South Wales Beazley, Kim Christian, Swan, Western Australia Beddall, David Peter, Fadden, Queensland Bilney, Gordon Neil, Kingston, South Australia Blanchard, Cecil Allen, Moore, Western Australia Blewett, Neal, Bonython, South Australia Bowen, Lionel Frost, Kingsford-Smith, New South Wales Braithwaite, Raymond Allen, Dawson, Queensland Brown, John Joseph, Parramatta, New South Wales Brown, Robert James, Hunter, New South Wales Brumby, John Mansfield, Bendigo, Victoria Burr, Maxwell Arthur, Wilmot, Tasmania Cadman, Alan Glyndwr, Mitchell, New South Wales Cameron, Ewen Colin, Indi, Victoria Cameron, Ian Milne Dixon, Maranoa, Queensland Carlton, James Joseph, Mackellar, New South Wales Charles, David Ernest, Isaacs, Victoria Charlesworth, Richard Ian, Perth, Western Australia Child, Joan, Henty, Victoria Chynoweth, Robert Leslie, Flinders, Victoria Cohen, Barry, Robertson, New South Wales Coleman, William Peter, Wentworth, New South Wales Connolly, David Miles, Bradfield, New South Wales Cowan, David Bruce, Lyne, New South Wales Cross, Manfred Douglas, Brisbane, Queensland Cunningham, Barry Thomas, McMillan, Victoria Darling, Elaine Elizabeth, Lilley, Queensland Dawkins, John Sydney, Fremantle, Western Australia Dobie, James Donald Mathieson, Cook, New South Wales Drummond, Peter Hertford, Forrest, Western Australia Duffy, Michael John, Holt, Victoria Edwards, Harold Raymond, Berowra, New South Wales Edwards, Ronald Frederick, Stirling, Western Australia Everingham, Douglas Nixon, Capricornia, Queensland Fatin, Wendy Frances, Canning, Western Australia Fife, Wallace Clyde, Farrer, New South Wales Fisher, Peter Stanley, Mallee, Victoria Free, Ross Vincent, Macquarie, New South Wales Fry, Kenneth Lionel, Fraser, Australian Capital Territory Gayler, John, Leichhardt, Queensland Gear, George, Tangney, Western Australia Goodluck, Bruce John, Franklin, Tasmania Gorman, Russell Neville Joseph, Chifley, New South Wales Griffiths, Alan Gordon, Maribyrnong, Victoria Groom, Raymond John, Braddon, Tasmania Hall, Raymond Steele, Boothby, South Australia Hand, Gerard Leslie, Melbourne, Victoria Hawke, Robert James Lee, Wills, Victoria Hayden, William George, Oxley, Queensland Hicks, Noel Jeffrey, Riverina, New South Wales Hodgman, William Michael, Denison, Tasmania Holding, Allan Clyde, Melbourne Ports, Victoria Hollis, Colin, Macarthur, New South Wales Howard, John Winston, Bennelong, New South Wales Howe, Brian Leslie, Batman, Victoria Humphreys, Benjamin Charles, Griffith, Queensland Hunt, Ralph James Dunnet, Gwydir, New South Wales Jacobi, Ralph, Hawker, South Australia Jenkins, Henry Alfred, Scullin, Victoria Johnson, Leslie Royston, Hughes, New South Wales Jones, Barry Owen, Lalor, Victoria Katter, Robert Cummin, Kennedy, Queensland Keating, Paul John, Blaxland, New South Wales Kelly, Roslyn Joan, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory Kent, Lewis, Hotham, Victoria Keogh, Leonard Joseph, Bowman, Queensland Kerin, John Charles, Werriwa, New South Wales Killen, Denis James, Moreton, Queensland Klugman, Richard Emanuel, Prospect, New South Wales Lindsay, Eamon John, Herbert, Queensland Lloyd, Bruce, Murray, Victoria Lusher, Stephen Augustus, Hume, New South Wales McGauran, Peter John, Gippsland, Victoria McHugh, Jeannette, Phillip, New South Wales MacKellar, Michael John Randal, Warringah, New South Wales McLeay, Leo Boyce, Grayndler, New South Wales McVeigh, Daniel Thomas, Darling Downs, Queensland Macphee, Ian Malcolm, Balaclava, Victoria Maher, Michael John, Lowe, New South Wales Mayer, Helen, Chisholm, Victoria Mildren, John Barry, Ballarat, Victoria Millar, Percival Clarence, Wide Bay, Queensland Milton, Peter, La Trobe, Victoria Moore, John Colinton, Ryan, Queensland Morris, Allan Agapitos, Newcastle, New South Wales Morris, Peter Frederick, Shortland, New South Wales Morrison, William Lawrence, St George, New South Wales Mountford, John Graham, Banks, New South Wales Newman, Kevin Eugene, Bass, Tasmania O'Keefe, Frank Lionel, Paterson, New South Wales O'Neil, Lloyd Reginald Terrence, Grey, South Australia Peacock, Andrew Sharp, Kooyong, Victoria Porter, James Robert, Barker, South Australia Punch, Gary Francis, Barton, New South Wales Reeves, John Edward, Northern Territory Robinson, Ian Louis, Cowper, New South Wales Rocher, Allan Charles, Curtin, Western Australia Ruddock, Philip Maxwell, Dundas, New South Wales Saunderson, John, Deakin, Victoria Scholes, Gordon Glen Denton, Corio, Victoria Scott, John Lyden, Hindmarsh, South Australia Shipton, Roger Francis, Higgins, Victoria Simmons, David William, Calare, New South Wales Sinclair, Ian McCahon, New England, New South Wales Snedden, Billy Mackie, Bruce, Victoria Snow, James Henry, Eden-Monaro, New South Wales Spender, John Michael, North Sydney, New South Wales Staples, Peter Richard, Diamond Valley, Victoria Steedman, Alan Peter, Casey, Victoria Theophanous, Andrew Charles, Burke, Victoria Tuckey, Charles Wilson, O'Connor, Western Australia Uren, Thomas, Reid, New South Wales Wells, Deane McMillan, Petrie, Queensland West, Stewart John, Cunningham, New South Wales White, Peter Nicholson Duckett, McPherson, Queensland Willis, Ralph, Gellibrand, Victoria Wilson, Ian Bonython Cameron, Sturt, South Australia Young, Michael Jerome, Port Adelaide, South Australia Election The Clerk-Honourable members, the next business is the election of a Speaker. Dr THEOPHANOUS(Burke) —It is my privilege to propose to the House for its Speaker in the Thirty-third Parliament the honourable member for Scullin, Dr Harry Jenkins. I therefore move: That the honourable member for Scullin do take the chair of this House as Speaker. Mrs Darling —I take pleasure in seconding the nomination. Dr Jenkins —I accept the nomination. The Clerk-Is there any further proposal? If there is no further proposal, the time for proposals has expired. I declare that the honourable member for Scullin (Dr Jenkins) has been elected as Speaker. Mr SPEAKER(Hon. Harry Jenkins) —I wish to express my grateful thanks for the high honour the House has been pleased to confer upon me. Mr Speaker having seated himself in the chair- Sir BILLY SNEDDEN(Bruce) —Mr Speaker, I wish to congratulate you on your nomination from the majority party for the office of Speaker. Likewise, I was very pleased that there was no contesting nomination and we were spared the scarring of past parliaments when there was acrimonious debate on the matter. You, Mr Speaker, are a man of great integrity and your friendship I have enjoyed for many years, especially during my own term in the office of Speaker. You have great experience in the chair and your skill in the conduct of the House has earned respect from all sides. Apart from the duties seen in the House, a Speaker must give leadership in the interests of all members. He must speak for all members. He must put the protection of members and the discharge of their duties above all party considerations. Each member of this House has a duty to speak the truth and to demand the truth, and the Speaker is guardian of the right of each member to do so. The Speaker must be above party politics in this House. Significant advances in the role of parliament in the national government in the last few years have brought opportunity for members to contribute better their abilities and their energies. Of all reforms achieved the most significant is that this Parliament has gained control over its own budget, with the passage last year of the Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill. If Parliament is to discharge its constitutional role it must be served by highly competent staff. Parliamentary staff are now independent of the Public Service, with the Presiding Officers assuming complete autonomy in respect of parliamentary staffing arrangements. Functions previously carried out by the Executive concerning members of the Parliament have been transferred to the control of the Parliament and further functions are being progressively transferred. However, many reforms remain to be achieved. I was elected last month by the electorate of Bruce hoping-indeed, expecting-that I would be Speaker and could pursue these reforms. That is not to be and it will now be for you, Mr Speaker, to carry the reforming thrust. I know that you fully understand the need and I am confident that you will do so. I have constantly argued both here and in the public forum for the adoption by this House of the Westminster convention in relation to the Speaker. Under that convention, a Speaker upon being elected to that high office resigns from his political party, does not engage in partisan controversy inside or outside the chamber, is re-elected unopposed as Speaker, is not opposed at general elections by the major parties, casts his vote on a casting basis so as to avoid any judgment on the merits of a question and resigns from the House upon resigning from the Speakership. Under that convention the Speaker is not only impartial but also is seen to be impartial. I believe it to be an essential ingredient for the best parliamentary democracy. Here the convention has not yet been adopted. Nevertheless, general knowledge and consideration of the convention have expanded and I believe the status of the Speaker has thereby been enhanced, together with an increase in the public perception of the status of parliament. That the Westminster convention will eventually be adopted in this House is inevitable if the standing of the Parliament is to be further raised. During my term of office I endeavoured to apply such of the features of the convention as were consistent with reality. I rarely attended party meetings and confined my attendance to occasions when major issues of principle were to be discussed. I took no part in the development of day to day policies or in the examination of legislation. I knew nothing of the political tactics to be adopted in the House. I endeavoured always to act independently and fairly and I will do nothing which may subtract from the status of the Chair. I believe it is essential that the incoming Speaker should not be handicapped in carrying out his onerous tasks. There should be no focal point in the House which may be seen as a potential challenge to the Speaker and certainly there must not be any capacity to politicise his conduct or his rulings. The presence in this chamber of a former Speaker would increase enormously the load that the new Speaker would have to bear. I do not want to see that happen and I will not see it happen. My presence can only subtract from your role, Mr Speaker. Inevitably, if I were to stay I would be called upon for advice in any questioning of your rulings. This could only undermine the Chair and must not be allowed to happen. I am very conscious that, under the Westminster convention, when the Speaker leaves the chair he leaves the House. I think this is right. This Westminster practice has been firmly in place all this century and considerations of which I have spoken have led to its acceptance. I have weighed this principle against other considerations, both political and personal. I have concluded that the Westminster practice is correct and, pursuant to it, I intend to leave the Parliament and will resign forthwith. I have given 27 years of service in various capacities in this House. The first eight years were spent alongside my old and honourable friend Jim Killen. In our early days we were both called ' oncers'. Now we are the joint fathers of the House. As from the next sitting father of the House will be his undisputed and honourable role. This occasion is traumatic to me and fills me with great sadness. I look at the magnificent chair that I had the honour to occupy for seven years. The chair is itself a replica of that which stood in the House of Commons at Westminster. It was presented to the Australian House of Representatives by the Empire Parliamentary Association to mark the opening of this House in Canberra on 9 May 1927. The arms and the canopy are carved in oak from the timbers of Westminster Hall, which date from 1399, and the hinged arm rests are taken from the oak of the Victory, Nelson's flagship at Trafalgar in 1805. A replica of that chair, a gift from this Parliament, has now been installed in Westminster to replace the original, which was destroyed in the bombing of London. To all new members, I wish you success. I trust that you will acquire a deep commitment to the House and that you will be true parliamentarians. Mr Speaker, as the new occupant of the chair, you have a tremendous responsibility and duties to perform. I know that you will do the job well, and I wish you well. Mr HAWKE(Wills-Prime Minister) —Mr Speaker, may I address my remarks to you and about you. One of my most favourable impressions in the two years that I have been in this House has been the effective, impartial and genial way in which you have chaired the Caucus proceedings of the Australian Labor Party. I am totally confident that if you can discharge that awesome responsibility you will discharge your new and most important role in an impeccably acceptable manner by bringing to it those same characteristics. You bring to this new role, Mr Speaker, not only those characteristics but also great experience-experience which, I remind honourable members, has been derived from service not only in this House but also as a member of the Victorian Parliament from 1961 to 1969. Of course, Mr Speaker, you have been a member of this House since 1969. You have been Deputy Chairman of Committees since 1976. In the latter months of the last Labor Government you were Deputy Speaker, you served in the position of Chairman of Committees and you were Chairman of the Joint Committee on the Parliamentary Committee System. You have been involved in many international forums studying parliamentary procedure. Mr Speaker, in the final observations I wish to make in congratulating you, I want to say that the quality of the proceedings of this Parliament is an important element in seeking to maintain respect for the democratic procedures and principles in our community. You now have a central and vital role in helping us to lift that quality. Mr Speaker, because of those personal characteristics to which I have referred, and because of your experience, you have demonstrably the respect of all members on both sides of the House. We wish you well in your new role. Mr PEACOCK(Kooyong-Leader of the Opposition) —Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Opposition, I should like to extend our sincere congratulations. As a demonstration of our faith in you and your integrity, we did not contest the election today. Government members interjecting- Mr PEACOCK —It has been the practice of others on this side of the Parliament so to do, though the numbers may have been different. Mr Speaker, we believe that on your performance as a member of this House since 1969, during which time you have held many responsible positions-in addition, the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) referred to the fact that you were a member of the Victorian Parliament for eight years before entering this House-there would be few who could equal your more than 20 years of parliamentary experience. We know you to be a man of integrity and honour, and we feel sure that you will carry out the duties of your high office with diligence and with dignity. You are, of course, Mr Speaker, following a man, in Sir Billy Snedden, who brought a new sense of dedication and purpose to the office of Speaker. I think it is commonly accepted that Sir Billy was one of the finest Speakers that this Parliament has enjoyed. I can assure you, Mr Speaker, of the desire on the Opposition side of the House to observe your rulings, although, should we be forced to disagree, the Standing Orders provide the appropriate forms for so doing. I also hope that the present Government accords you and your office more deference than it did to one of your predecessors when your party was last in office. We support you, we congratulate you, and we wish you well in the endless adventure that awaits you. Dr THEOPHANOUS(Burke) —It is with great pleasure, Mr Speaker, that I add to the congratulations of the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) and the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock). I had intended to say a few words about your excellent parliamentary record, but that matter has already been covered. It has been a privilege for me to nominate you for two other reasons. First, the electorate of Scullin borders my electorate of Burke, and we share the same kinds of problems and we have often pooled ideas as to how we can assist people at the grass roots level. I have seen you in action, and I believe that you have performed your duties excellently. Secondly, as one of the few ethnic Australians in the House of Representatives, I have often marvelled at your capacity to work with migrant Australians. Over a third of your constituents are overseas born, and you have an excellent rapport with them. I believe that your commitment to the equality of all Australians, men and women, whether born here or migrants to this country, will help to establish a valuable foundation on which this Parliament will be built-that is, equality and fairness. It is because of your commitment to these values, Mr Speaker, and your accumulation of parliamentary experience that you have become greatly respected on both sides of the House for your impartiality, consistency and sense of national duty. Indeed, these qualities will be extremely important in ensuring that this Parliament performs its duty to the nation in a constructive and positive way, for I am sure that most honourable members will agree that the challenges we face in the Thirty-third Parliament are the greatest that any parliament has faced since the war, especially in view of the deepening economic crisis. To overcome these problems we shall need to ensure that all members of parliament from both sides make the maximum contribution. I am sure that you will be a sympathetic guide to ensure that these important goals are achieved. Mr ANTHONY(Richmond-Leader of the National Party of Australia) —Mr Speaker, on behalf of the members of the National Party of Australia, I should like to congratulate you on being elected Speaker, the most senior position in this chamber. It is a pleasure to know that you have been elected unopposed. It is a pleasure because it shows the mark of respect that we on this side of the House have for you as a person. We have seen the way in which you have acted for the Speaker on many occasions during the past seven years. You have done that with great capacity, with great competence and in an unbiased manner. Your job is onerous and very important: It is to ensure that there is free and frank debate in the Parliament. You, along with the President of the Senate, have the responsibility of attending to the needs and requirements of members of parliament within this building. I am sure that you will do your very best to act independently to ensure that every member of parliament is looked after. It is not with any great pleasure that I recall former Labor Speakers. On many occasions during the period that I was in Opposition I saw what would be questionable judgments of the Speaker. That provoked a reaction. What we need is complete impartiality at all times. I can assure you that, if there is any doubt , there will be some reaction from this side of the chamber. I believe the example set by the former Speaker, Sir Billy Snedden, is excellent. He did the job with enormous competence and skill and with the respect of everybody. He acted independently, as he should have, and will always be remembered as one of the outstanding Speakers of the Parliament. It is with a great deal of sadness that I hear of his resignation and departure from this building. We have been friends for many years. We were both made Ministers on the same day in 1963-a long time ago. Mr Speaker, I have to say that I have some doubts whether you will not have pressures applied upon you, and I hope that you will resist such pressures. I have always felt that Labor Speakers at least have been able to have the protection of Caucus, but we see the protection of Caucus being greatly eroded. We find that Caucus has now decided that it ought to have a Cabinet and already within Cabinet there is a kitchen cabinet-a group of people who are guiding and directing the whole of the Labor Party. We find that this kitchen cabinet has undermined the integrity-- Government members interjecting- Mr SPEAKER —Order! I suggest that the Leader of the National Party is straying a bit into other matters. Mr ANTHONY —Not altogether, Mr Speaker, with full respect; I am pointing out that there is a new ball game around the place, particularly within the Labor Party. When we see that Ministers cannot be trusted, that their staffs have to be vetted and that they cannot put out Press statements unless they go through others, it is quite obvious that pressures will be applied in all directions. Mr Speaker, I hope that you will resist those pressures and that you will show impeccable impartiality at all times. In that way we can have true and frank debate in this House. If that is the way of things, I can assure you that you will have full co-operation and support from this side of the Parliament. We wish you well in the high and noble job that you have. Mrs DARLING(Lilley) —Mr Speaker, I am delighted to be able to take this opportunity to attest to your personal attributes and to those professional qualifications which fit you so well for this position. I found it a little disappointing that the previous speaker, the Leader of the National Party of Australia (Mr Anthony), brought in that smear of politics on the opening day of a parliament which I hope will be a parliament of vision and of consensus. Certainly, Mr Speaker-- Opposition members interjecting- Mr SPEAKER —Order! I make it quite clear that as the occupant of this chair I will ensure the right of every honourable member to be heard. Persistent interjection does not allow that. If honourable members wish to pay me respect, the best respect they can pay the Chair is by observing that rule. Mrs DARLING —Mr Speaker, I wish briefly to pay tribute to your professional qualifications. The fact is that you come to this position as a man of letters, being a Master of Science, a Bachelor of Surgery and a Bachelor of Medicine. You have been in private medical practice and also were involved in much research work. These elements give you a very good background. You show your initiative further, I understand, in that you are now broadening your horizons by pursuing a Bachelor of Arts degree. So, you will be adding to those letters. Also, I mention your experience as a family man. You have had to keep in control four young people who at times, perhaps, have been unruly. That experience should stand you in good stead in your new position. I compliment you on the fact, for I feel it is important, that you have that warmth which is shown in your pursuits in your electorate. You have broadened your involvement in community areas. I understand that you work in the Lions organisation and with the Community Youth Support Scheme. Also I believe that you have called together the welfare groups in your electorate and organised them to try to meet those needs where responsibilities overlap. We all know that those problem areas exist in welfare. I congratulate you on that work. Personally, I am delighted that we have in the chair a man who is part of a government which recognises the contribution of Australian women in the home, the work place, the boardroom and now in government. I understand in fact that your wife is active in the local council and that you have encouraged that activity. I can quite believe that because, as your colleague over the past couple of years, I acknowledge that you have encouraged the women in this Parliament to seek further responsibility. I thank you for that encouragement. I point out that, in the ninth decade after Federation, to have at the moment six women out of 124 members in the House of Representatives is hardly a proud record but I am proud that those six women members are all part of this Labor Government. Government members-Hear, hear! Mrs DARLING —The three women members of the House of Representatives in the last Parliament were also members of the Australian Labor Party. I look forward to the number of women members of this Parliament increasing under the encouragement of this Government. Mr Speaker, you are a man of integrity, intellect and wit. I know that you will make your mark on this Parliament of consensus and vision. I join my colleagues in wishing you well. Congratulations, Harry. Sir JAMES KILLEN(Moreton) —Mr Speaker-- Mr Keogh —When are you going, Jim? Sir JAMES KILLEN —I shall go to heaven, where you are unlikely to be in attendance. I trespass on the time of the House for but a few minutes. I congratulate you most warmly, Mr Speaker, on your election. It is a pleasure for you, I know, to occupy the position of Speaker in this Parliament. I know that that pleasure is shared by all of your friends and supporters. I trust it would be a tolerable display of presumption if I were to describe myself as one of your friends. I hope, sir, that it is no breach of our personal relationship if I inform the House that, for many years of a morning, as we exchanged greetings, you asked me how I was and my reply invariably was: 'I have a heavy preference for your opinion'. You invariably gave that opinion with commendable brevity and encouragement. I was further stimulated when you said to me that the prospect of becoming the Speaker of this Parliament would not mean that you would find yourself unable to give me a daily opinion as to how my health was. Sir, I would hope that no person, either in this House or outside it, would regard it as some suffusion of political activity that your election to the office of Speaker was not opposed. This world is not consumed entirely by cynicism. You are there because you command the respect of all those who have sat in parliament with you. I vividly recall, towards the close of the last Parliament, when you, as Mr Deputy Speaker, presided over the Parliament and there was not a quorum. It would have been at your disposal and within your proper power to have adjourned the House until the next day. You did not do so. You adjourned the House for five minutes to give the Whips the opportunity of ensuring that there was a proper attendance in the House. Sir, that was very proper and a very fine parliamentary gesture. As the former Leader of the House, I recall with immense gratitude that you took it. Sir, you carry with you the good wishes of us all and our willingness to assist you in every possible respect. For my part, I have not the slightest doubt that you walk in the splendid tradition of Speaker Lenthall of centuries ago, who declared to this effect: 'I have neither eyes to see nor tongue to speak otherwise than as directed by this House'. Finally may I say that it was a sad moment when I heard this morning the final decision of my right honourable and learned friend the member for Bruce (Sir Billy Snedden) to leave us. He has held, and held genuinely, to the view that the position of Speaker should be elevated from the dust of conflict. This has been the case in the United Kingdom. The present Speaker of the House of Commons , Speaker Thomas, has indicated that, when the Conservative Government goes to the election, he, Speaker Thomas, as one who formerly held an affinity with the British Labour Party, will step down. Before that, Speaker Selwyn Lloyd took that view. Now the right honourable member for Bruce has declared to the Parliament and to the country his position. To have sat with a person in this chamber for all that period and now to arrive at a stage when the parliamentary break is made is not an experience that one can pass through unmoved and with equanimity. I say to my right honourable friend that the years we have spent together in times of sadness, in times of tragedy, in times of cheerfulness and in times of tension have been a wonderful human experience to have shared. I am sure that I speak on behalf of all who have had the pleasure of knowing him when I say that he goes from this Parliament commanding our respect, our admiration and, beyond that, our good wishes for the years ahead. Mr SCHOLES(Corio-Minister for Defence) —I will delay the House for only a few moments. Mr Speaker, I wish to congratulate you on assuming the office of Speaker. You have the experience which is required to carry it out in a manner which is appropriate to this Parliament. You will, I am sure, do this Parliament and yourself proud. I do not accept that past Speakers of any party have shown a degree of bias different to that which could be expected in a House where the Speaker has been a member of the government parties. I regret that the right honourable member for Bruce (Sir Billy Snedden) finds it necessary to resign from this Parliament. That is his decision. It is a decision which, I think, every member of this House will respect. I do not believe it was appropriate for this Parliament to start with suggestions that Australian Labor Party Speakers are biased. Labor Speakers quite often face more difficult tasks than those of their conservative colleagues and are more rarely in office. The right honourable member for Richmond (Mr Anthony) and I had one disagreement during my period in the chair which resulted in his being suspended from the chamber. I assure him that that was not an act of bias; it was a proper and responsible act by the Chair. I congratulate you, Mr Speaker, on assuming the office of Speaker. I am certain that you will not be subjected to any criticism by this House. Mr SPEAKER —I wish to convey my thanks to the honourable members who have spoken and for the way in which they addressed their remarks. They commented that I have demonstrated an ability to be impartial in the chair in trying to promote that robust and worthwhile debate for which Parliament exists. By not opposing my candidature they have sought to place the responsibility on me of carrying out my duty in an impartial manner. But I remind them that by that very act they have placed the responsibility upon themselves to accept that there is a judgment of what is fair and reasonable in robust debate and that someone must make the decision as to when the limits which should restrict the privileges that members enjoy are reached. I hope they will accept that responsibility. Certainly, as Speaker, I have started in an unorthodox manner. It is traditional for the call to go to the Government side first and then to the Opposition. On this occasion I called the right honourable member for Bruce (Sir Billy Snedden). I think, as he spoke, it became obvious to the House why he had risen so quickly and why I had given him the call. There is no doubt that the right honorable member, as Speaker, has given considerable thought to reform in the Parliament and has stimulated discussion. I am sure he is disappointed at the slow progress that has been made. I wonder at times whether we are talking about parliamentary evolution rather than reform. I am sure that is what he has been talking about, too. I know that when my friend the Minister for Defence (Mr Scholes) was the Speaker he thought the committee system should be investigated. No doubt many of our committee reforms arose from Speaker Scholes. I regret that former Speaker Snedden will not be with us in this Parliament. I think he still has much to add in the development of parliamentary procedures. I assure him that his presence would not have embarrassed me. This process of evolution is illustrated, I think, when one considers the remarks of my nominator and seconder. We face a changing Parliament. Today we have members who neither are Australian-born nor come from the British Isles, as was once traditional. They represent a great section of our community. There are cultural differences. Parliament must adjust to those different views. The honourable member for Lilley (Mrs Darling) mentioned the small increase in the female membership of the Parliament. The increase has been a great breakthrough and this Parliament will see more female members. It has now been demonstrated that the electorate does not have an aversion, as myth would have us believe, to members of the female sex being elected to Parliament, where they have shown their worth. In our evolution I think the televising of parliamentary proceedings will be inevitable in the short term. We must adjust and work out how that will be best applied in our new and permanent Parliament House. We have to look also at our other procedures, particularly Question Time. It is about time that questions were really information-seeking and were made short and sharp by members. Likewise, the answers by Ministers should not be totally irrelevant to the questions or be ministerial statements. Ministerial statements should be made at the proper time. I hope that supplementary questions may be possible and that the parties can agree on that. I hope that we can continue with committee experimentation. We saw a debate in this chamber last week between the leaders of Australia about the economy of Australia. If we look at our own record in parliament, where honourable members are restricted by the bounds of the Budget debate or a matter of public importance, I think we see that there is a lesson to be learnt about parliament's ability to look at committee reports and to have general debates. I do not think I need say much more than that. I am most grateful for the support I have received from my own party and for the remarks from the Opposition parties. The honourable member for Moreton (Sir James Killen) did not complete the story about my inquiries of his health in the mornings. So often I would feel his pulse and I would say: 'Jim, do you mind if we pause for a few moments of silent prayer'. I wish the right honourable member for Bruce well. I have enjoyed working with him as a Deputy Speaker. We had a close relationship. I think the Parliament will be poorer for his leaving. I trust that over the term of this Parliament honourable members will be satisfied with my firmness of ruling and my efforts to see that they all have the opportunity to have their say but, please, do not expect me to extend the limits beyond reasonable ones. I thank the House. Mr HAWKE(Wills-Prime Minister) —I have ascertained that it will be His Excellency the Governor-General's pleasure to receive the Speaker in the Library of the Parliament this day at 2.15 p.m. Mr SPEAKER —Prior to my presentation to His Excellency this afternoon, the bells will ring for three minutes so that honourable members may attend in the chamber and accompany me to the Library, when they may, if they so wish, be introduced to His Excellency. Sitting suspended from 12.2 to 2.13 p.m. Mr Speaker with honourable members proceeded to the Library and, having returned- Mr SPEAKER —I have to report that, accompanied by honourable members, I this day proceeded to the Library of the Parliament and presented myself to His Excellency the Governor-General as the choice of the House as its Speaker, and that His Excellency was kind enough to congratulate me. Mr SPEAKER —His Excellency also presented to me his commission authorising me to administer to members the oath or affirmation of allegiance. I now lay the commission on the table. The Usher of the Black Rod, being announced, was admitted, and delivered a message that His Excellency the Governor-General desired the attendance of honourable members in the Senate chamber forthwith. Mr Speaker and honourable members attended accordingly and, having returned- Mr HAWKE(Wills-Prime Minister) —Mr Speaker, I have the honour to inform the House that, following the elections held on 5 March, the Governor-General commissioned me to form a government. The Ministry was sworn in on 11 March. I seek leave to incorporate details of the Ministry in Hansard. Leave granted. The list read as follows- COMMONWEALTH GOVERNMENT Hawke Ministry Representation in other Chamber *Prime Minister The Hon. R. J. L. Hawke, A.C., M.P. Senator Button *Deputy Prime Minister, Minister for Trade and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Commonwealth-State Relations The Hon. Lionel Bowen, M.P. Senator Walsh *Leader of the Government in the Senate, Minister for Industry and Commerce and Minister Assisting the Minister for Communications Senator the Hon. John Button Mr Brown *Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate and Minister for Social Security Senator the Hon. Don Grimes Dr Blewett *Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Public Service Matters The Hon. Ralph Willis, M.P. Senator Button *Treasurer The Hon. P. J. Keating, M.P. Senator Walsh *Special Minister of State, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the House The Hon. Michael J. Young, M.P. Senator Evans *Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs The Hon. Stewart West, M.P. Senator Grimes *Minister for Resources and Energy Senator the Hon. Peter Walsh Mr Jones *Minister for Foreign Affairs The Hon. Bill Hayden, M.P. Senator Evans *Minister for Education and Youth Affairs and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Status of Women Senator the Hon. Susan Ryan Mr Cohen *Attorney-General Senator the Hon. Gareth Evans Mr Bowen *Minister for Defence The Hon. Gordon Scholes, M.P. Senator Evans Minister for Transport The Hon. Peter Morris, M.P. Senator Gietzelt Minister for Primary Industry The Hon. John Kerin, M.P. Senator Walsh Minister for Aviation and Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence The Hon. Kim Beazley, M.P. Senator Gietzelt Minister for Housing and Construction The Hon. Chris Hurford Senator Grimes Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism, Minister for Administrative Services and Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry and Commerce The Hon. John Brown, M.P. ** ** Senator Ryan Senator Gietzelt Minister for Finance The Hon. J. S. Dawkins, M.P. Senator Walsh Minister for Health The Hon. Neal Blewett, M.P. Senator Grimes Minister for Science and Technology The Hon. Barry O. Jones Senator Ryan Minister for Communications The Hon. Michael Duffy, M.P. Senator Button Minister for Home Affairs and Environment The Hon. Barry Cohen, M.P. Senator Ryan Minister for Aboriginal Affairs The Hon. A. C. Holding, M.P. Senator Ryan Minister for Veterans' Affairs Senator the Hon. A. T. Gietzelt Mr Holding Minister for Territories and Local Government and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Community Development and Regional Affairs The Hon. Tom Uren, M.P. Senator Gietzelt Minister for Defence Support The Hon. Brian Howe, M.P. Senator Evans * Minister in the Cabinet. ** Senator Ryan to represent the Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism and Senator Gietzelt to represent the Minister for Administrative Services. Mr HAWKE —Mr Humphreys has been elected Government Whip and Mr Cunningham has been elected Deputy Government Whip. Mr PEACOCK(Kooyong) —Mr Speaker, I have the honour to inform the House that the Parliamentary Liberal Party has elected me as its Leader and the honourable member for Bennelong, Mr Howard, as its Deputy Leader. The honourable member for Cook, Mr Dobie, has been appointed Opposition Whip and the honourable member for Indi, Mr Ewen Cameron, Deputy Opposition Whip. Mr ANTHONY(Richmond) —Mr Speaker, I wish to inform the House that the National Party has elected me as its Leader, the right honourable member for New England (Mr Sinclair) as its Deputy Leader and the honourable member for Riverina (Mr Hicks) as its Whip. Bill presented by Mr Hawke, and read a first time. Ordered that the second reading of the Bill be made an order of the day for the next day of sitting. Mr SPEAKER —I have to report that the House this day attended His Excellency the Governor-General in the Senate chamber, when His Excellency was pleased to make a Speech to both Houses of the Parliament. The speech will be included in Hansard for record purposes. The Speech read as follows- Honourable Members of the Parliament of Australia here assembled: At the elections for both Houses of Parliament on 5 March 1983, the people of Australia declared firmly for a change of government and for a change of national direction. You have been called together to consider a wide-ranging program of legislation designed to give effect to the mandate of the people. The new Government has assumed office at a time of Australia's gravest economic crisis since the Great Depression fifty years ago. In the twelve months from March 1982, unemployment grew from 6.6 per cent to 10 .4 per cent of the workforce. Unemployment among fifteen to nineteen year olds in the workforce rose above 29 per cent. It is estimated some two million of our fellow Australians are now living in poverty. Accordingly, my new advisers will give the highest priority to the task of restoring sustained growth to the Australian economy, now in deep recession. The Government, however, is deeply committed to the need for social, economic, legal and Parliamentary reform. The work of reform, to create a more equal and a more just society, must continue side by side with the urgent task of removing the acute injustice and deprivation caused by Australia's present massive unemployment. The Economy In fulfilment of an important undertaking given during the recent elections, my Government invited representatives of the governments, business and industrial unions of Australia to assemble in the national capital for a National Economic Summit Conference. My advisers are confident that this historic Conference has achieved wider community understanding of the nature of the economic problems facing Australia and broad agreement upon a national effort to attack those problems. The agreement reached at the Conference contains the basic framework and approach to enable Australia to begin to arrest the serious economic decline and place the economy on a path of sustained, non-inflationary growth. My advisers have assured the participants at the Summit and their representative organisations of the Government's support and assistance in building upon the foundations laid so successfully at the Conference. An essential ingredient to the success of the Conference was the dissemination of information to an extent not previously attempted in Australia. My advisers have undertaken that this process of information-sharing, which they believe essential to the making of sound economic decisions, will continue. Certain matters arising from the Conference will require legislative action which you will be asked to consider during this Session. The Government will establish an Economic Planning Advisory Council, representing governments, business, unions, farmers and community groups, to advise on economic developments and provide a forum for community consultation on national economic and social strategies. The Government will establish a price surveillance mechanism to assess pricing decisions made by the strategic price setters, in both the private and public sectors. The Government will also review the structure and operation of the Petroleum Products Pricing Authority to ensure adequate supervision of petroleum prices. My new Government has inherited a budgetary deficit problem of an unprecedented magnitude. A comprehensive review of budgetary commitments, both in terms of outlays and taxation expenditures, has been set in train. Nevertheless, within the severe budgetary constraints it has inherited, the Government will give the highest priority to measures to create jobs and restore economic growth. My Government will give high priority to combating tax avoidance and evasion. Legislation on this and other taxation matters will be introduced during the present Session. Employment and Industrial Relations A Community Works Program will be established. This Program, including Jobs on Local Roads, will be designed to provide jobs on projects of lasting benefit to the community which would not otherwise have been commenced. A new Private Sector Assistance Program will be introduced to co-ordinate and enhance the value of existing programs. This program will give special emphasis to the needs of the young unemployed. An Australian Labour Office will be established to develop a comprehensive work force strategy. My advisers believe that better industrial relations are essential in the achievement of national economic recovery. To this end the National Labour Consultative Council will be developed as the major forum for consultation on industrial relations matters and a tripartite review of the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act will be conducted. Legislation will be introduced this Session to abolish the Industrial Relations Bureau and to facilitate trade union amalgamation. Measures will be taken to improve the working environment by programs to enhance the standard of occupational health and safety and by encouraging the expansion of industrial democracy. Secondary Industry The development of a strong, competitive manufacturing industry will be of crucial importance to my Government's efforts towards national recovery and reconstruction. The Government will develop a program of industrial regeneration to revitalise existing industries and seek new opportunities for growth in areas of high technology. The Australian Industry Development Corporation will be given an enhanced status and provided with adequate funds to promote industrial reconstruction and develop new industries. The Government intends to preserve a viable and efficient steel industry and is engaged in consultation with a view to formulating a long-term development plan. The technological capability of Australian industry will be improved by incentive measures to stimulate research and development. The role of the Industries Assistance Commission will be reviewed to ensure that its operations are directed towards the development and extension of industry. Temporary assistance and anti-dumping procedures are being reviewed as a matter of urgency. It is my Government's policy not to reduce existing protection programs in current conditions of high unemployment. Legislation will be introduced to give effect to the accelerated depreciation allowance on plant and machinery, together with 2 1/2 per cent depreciation allowance on non-residential income- producing buildings. Parliament will be asked to consider a proposal for a Buy Australian Act. Small Business My Government recognises the vital contribution of the small business sector to the Australian economy. A National Small Business Action Program will be developed, designed to improve access to finance, to ease the tax burden as budgetary circumstances permit and to improve managerial skills. Housing and Construction In its efforts towards national recovery, my Government will give the highest priority to the revitalisation of the Australian housing industry. This priority reflects the social as well as the economic goals of my Government. A range of policies will be implemented to increase access to housing. The Government's objectives are to increase significantly the availability of public housing and other low-cost rental accommodation, provide assistance in bridging the deposit gap, and ensure adequate funds are available for housing. Trade As a major world trading nation, Australia's economic strengths must depend on the strength of our export industries. Multilateral and bilateral trade policies will be pursued to ensure that markets for Australian exports are made secure and develop to their full potential. The supporting services available to Australian companies will be improved. The Export Finance and Insurance Corporation, the Australian Overseas Projects Corporation and the Trade Commissioner Service will be reviewed with a view to improving their effectiveness. Primary Industry The rural sector remains of fundamental importance to Australia's export earning capacity. My Government is committed to progressive long term policies designed to ensure a strong rural sector. Although recent widespread rainfall has reduced the extent of the drought over Eastern Australia, a large area is still classed as rain-deficient. Measures to ensure equitable treatment for farmers during the drought and beyond will continue to be given high priority. The role and function of statutory marketing authorities will be reviewed. A national soil conservation program will be introduced. Legislation of significance to the rural sector will include reform of the administration of the meat and livestock industry, and a new wheat marketing plan to apply from the 1984-85 season. Resources In consultation with the States, my Government will review the Study on the Perspective on Water Resources to the Year 2000 as a basis for determining national water resource priorities. The Government will consider the establishment of an institute of freshwater studies to investigate water quality , and, as a matter of priority, advise on the equitable and effective management of the River Murray system. The Government will promote the pursuit of comprehensive knowledge of the oceans in the 200-mile exclusive economic zone around Australia. The Government is reviewing the operation of the Commonwealth and State legislation covering off-shore petroleum and mining activities. The Australian coal mining industry is experiencing severe problems, largely created by depressed international prices. An Australian Coal Consultative Council has been established so that governments, industry and unions can co- operate in the task of maintaining the strength and stability of the industry. The task of national reconstruction calls for a major national effort to improve the efficiency of the basic economic infrastructure. Transport An Inter-State Commission will be established to develop a balanced national transport framework. There will be a national inquiry into the road freight industry to undertake, in co-operation with the States, a wide-ranging examination of the problems currently facing the industry. The Australian Bicentennial Road Development Program will continue, in addition to other road programs. Measures will be taken in co-operation with the States, within current budgetary restrictions, to improve the efficiency of national rail services and to upgrade designated railway routes of national importance, including port and rail facilities for exports. The Government is considering steps which might be taken to place the Australian Shipping Commission and the Australian National Railways Commission on an improved commercial basis. Legislation will be introduced to provide financial incentives for the expansion of Australia's shipping industry. Australia intends to become a party to the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships 1973 and the Protocol of 1978 which amends that Convention. My Government recognises the importance of the aviation industry to the Australian economy and the Australian quality of life. The national airline, TAA, will remain in full public ownership. Consideration will be given to the capital needs of both TAA and Qantas and steps will be taken to place them on an improved commercial basis. My Government is considering the establishment of an airports authority to plan , develop and operate the major airports. The Government will promote participation by the community, the users and industry employees in decision-making on aviation issues, especially the provision of airports. My Government is mindful of the significance of the general aviation sector and will ensure that it is fully consulted on its regulation and levels of costs attributed to it. Communications You will be asked to consider legislation to establish the Australian Broadcasting Corporation to give the ABC a clear charter, a modern structure and effective, businesslike management. The Broadcasting and Television Act will be amended to remove the ban on political news and comment applying to radio and television stations in the three days before Federal and State elections. To stimulate innovation and expansion in the area of radio- communications and to control interference in the radio frequency spectrum, a radiocommunications bill will be introduced this Session. My Government's efforts in the communications area will form a significant Australian contribution to the World Communications Year of 1983. Science and Technology My Government will use the Industrial Research and Development Incentives Scheme to encourage the development of new high technology industries in Australia, with particular emphasis on biotechnology. Australia will increase the level of its scientific work in Antarctica and provide more effective transport links including landing strips. My Government will work to decrease Australia's technological dependence and raise levels of community understanding in science and technology. Recognising the impact of technological change on educational and employment opportunities, the Government will allocate funds to provide secondary schools, including needy non-government schools, with computers. It is intended eventually to extend this program to primary schools. Education and Youth Affairs In recognition of its pre-eminent concern to meet the needs of our young people , the new Government has established the Ministry of Education and Youth Affairs . The Government is determined to restore the confidence of the community in the nation's public education system while at the same time assisting in the operation of non-government schools. My Government is firmly committed to the principle of genuine equality of educational opportunity and the elimination of disadvantage and discrimination. A major effort will be applied to increasing the numbers of young people who complete their secondary education and to increasing the numbers who continue into tertiary education. The education assistance schemes will be progressively improved as budgetary circumstances permit. In consultation with the States, my Government seeks to expand training opportunities in educational institutions for young people and adults affected by technological change and unemployment. In response to social and economic changes affecting work patterns and the availability of work, the Government will encourage developments designed to equip young people to engage in innovative enterprises. While current unemployment falls with particular severity on young people, the problem of the demand for jobs concerns the whole community. At the Economic Summit Conference, my advisers undertook to examine co-operatively the possibility of providing fulfilment in life for some of our people alongside the conventional production system. Social Security The deep economic recession has exposed serious inequalities in Australian society. My Government is deeply committed to the elimination of poverty and gross inequality and a wide range of policies will be progressively implemented towards that goal. My advisers note with deep satisfaction the centrality given to the need for reform in the welfare area during the recent Economic Summit Conference and in its communique. The highest priority has been given to assistance to the unemployed and legislation will be introduced immediately to increase the single adult rate of unemployment benefit. Further initiatives will be taken in the areas of child care, lone parents, the aged, widowed, invalid and the disabled and the sick. Health My Government will proceed to fulfil its undertaking with regard to the proposed Medicare arrangements, to ensure that the costs of health care in Australia are fairly shared and that proper health care is available to all. My Government will end the existing fragmentation of policies and funding for the aged through the creation of an Office of Aged Care. The Government proposes to modify the present over-emphasis on nursing home care for the aged and improve the availability of hostels and community care services. Veterans' Affairs A Royal Commission will be established to inquire into the effects of herbicides and pesticides on veterans of the Vietnam war. The Government will proceed to modernise the Repatriation Act, including the Appeals system, to remove existing anomalies. Sport, Recreation and Tourism The great cost to this nation of avoidable ill-health was a significant factor in my Government's decision to establish a Ministry of Sport, Recreation and Tourism. My Government will move to increase the availability of sport, physical fitness and recreation facilities throughout the Australian community. My Government fully recognises the importance of tourism to the Australian economy. The role of the Australian Tourist Commission will be strengthened. Emphasis will be given to the promotion overseas of Australia's tourist potential and to measures to encourage domestic tourism. The Arts My Government places great importance on the role of the arts in the development of the national character and identity. Support for the arts will be aimed at widening the access to, and participation in, the arts by all sections of the community. The development of the Australian film industry will be encouraged by amendment to the legislation providing taxation incentives for the production of Australian films. The Environment My new Government has been elected with a very clear mandate from the people of Australia to protect the Australian environment. My Government is convinced that it would be a gross dereliction of its Constitutional responsibility were it to fail to carry out the clear wishes of the overwhelming majority of the Australian people. The national Government is obliged to protect Australia's natural and cultural heritage, including the South-West Tasmanian wilderness. Legislation will be introduced this day to protect areas identified as being of World Heritage status. My Government is also committed to investigating possibilities for alternative hydro electricity schemes and employment-generating activities in Tasmania. The Government will move to include the whole of the Great Barrier Reef in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. My Government will improve the measures to protect Australia's fauna and flora, including the introduction of a national kangaroo monitoring group. Aboriginals My Government is deeply committed to the discharge of its Constitutional responsibility towards the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island people. My Government seeks a national approach to the rights, status and living standards of these most disadvantaged of our fellow Australians. Discussion will be undertaken with the States and Territories to establish a consistent national approach to Aboriginal land rights. At all stages, there will be full consultation with the Aboriginal people. Parliamentary, Legal and Constitutional Reform A wide range of proposals and legislation designed to enhance the quality of government in Australia and to strengthen the foundations of Parliamentary democracy will be submitted for your consideration. My advisers deeply believe that public confidence in the effectiveness and integrity of our parliamentary institution must be strengthened. Legislation will be introduced to ensure that the principle of one vote-one value is clearly established. My Government will introduce public funding of election campaigns and measures to reduce the incidence of informal voting through simpler voting procedures. The Parliamentary Committee system of the national Parliament will be strengthened to give Members of Parliament a more effective role and participation in the great affairs of this nation. My Government proposes to amend the Parliamentary contributory superannuation scheme in line with the general agreement that restraint should be shared by all sections of the community. My Government proposes to place before you a Bill for a referendum on Fixed Term Parliaments, involving the setting of a fixed date for general elections to provide greater stability in the Australian political system. My Government will be supporting a systematic review of the Constitution with a view to developing a consensus on modernisation of the Australian Constitution by the Bicentennial year of 1988. It is also proposed to develop, in consultation with the States and the Judiciary, a Constitutional amendment to provide for a single national courts system. My Government is committed to bringing self-government to the Australian Capital Territory. As a first step, a broad range of local government powers will be transferred to the House of Assembly. For the first time in the nation's history, a Commonwealth Department has been created with specific responsibility for local government. The Freedom of Information Act 1982 will be amended to broaden and make more effective its operation. Complementary legislation will be introduced to provide a legislative basis for the management of all government records and archives. The Family Law Amendment Bill will be re-introduced, with further amendments to give effect to recommendations of the Parliamentary Joint Select Committee. My advisers are considering the establishment of a National Maintenance Collection and Enforcement Agency and ways of improving the delivery of legal aid services. Bills will be introduced so as to abolish the residual and anachronistic Constitutional links with the United Kingdom, but not affecting the Constitutional position of Her Majesty the Queen of Australia. The Australian Security Intelligence Organization Act of 1979 will be amended to define more precisely the Organization's jurisdiction and to ensure its private and public accountability. A comprehensive review of company and securities law will be undertaken by the Company and Securities Law Review Committee; and the Trade Practices Act and the operations of the Trade Practices Commission will also be reviewed. The proposal for a National Crimes Commission will be reviewed. My advisers are considering a revised Criminal Investigation Bill. A Directorate of Public Prosecutions for the Commonwealth is under active consideration. My advisers are considering a number of initiatives relating to human rights, especially in regard to the elimination of all forms of discrimination on the grounds of sex or race and the enactment of an Australian Bill of Rights. Status of Women Legislation will be introduced dealing with discrimination on the basis of sex or marital status. My Government will ensure that women are appointed to key government advisory bodies. Mechanisms will be established for consultation with women throughout the community. Australia will ratify the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women. Through the Office of the Status of Women, within the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, my Government is determined to ensure that the concerns of women are made an integral part of all government policies and programs. In co-operation with the States and community groups, my Government will co- ordinate the provision of emergency services for women and children in need of crisis care. My advisers place great significance on the fact that the agreed Communique of the Economic Summit Conference stresses that the basic rights of women should be recognised and protected and that the move towards greater equality and independence for women should be encouraged. Migrants Migrants have contributed significantly to Australia's national interest. My Government will give special consideration to Family Reunion Programs and will continue to recognise United Nations and humanitarian obligations in respect to refugees. The services available to migrants to facilitate their settlement into the Australian community will be co-ordinated and upgraded. The Citizenship Act will be amended to remove anomalies and discrimination. The Migration Act will be amended to remove discrimination between Commonwealth and non-Commonwealth citizens. Australian Public Service My Government recognises that an effective public service is an integral part of an effective democracy. My Government will strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of the Australian Public Service. The Public Service Board will be expected to promote efficiency, with particular attention to the impact of new technology in Government departments. The Board will be asked to establish a special unit to develop more participatory forms of management within the service. My advisers are currently considering the creation of a special division of senior officers appointed by the Governor-General in Council with a view to creating a more open and responsive service, and to making more effective use of talents and skills outside the service. The present staff ceiling system is being reviewed to remove the justifiable dissatisfaction about its operation. The British subject requirement for permanent employment in the Public Service will be replaced with an Australian citizenship requirement. Repressive legislation which unfairly restricts the freedom of Commonwealth employees to exercise their basic industrial rights will be repealed. The Ombudsman Act is being reviewed to develop the Ombudsman role. An Office of Defence Force Ombudsman is to be created and vested in the Commonwealth Ombudsman. A Defence Force pay-fixing tribunal will be established. Defence and Foreign Affairs The defence and security of Australia and the integrity of her territory is the fundamental obligation of the Government of Australia. My Government will continue programs now underway and review the content and priorities of defence forward planning. Despite the economic constraints, my Government will make a significant investment of the nation's resources in defence preparedness, maximising defence procurement in Australia. My Government will seek to develop close working relations with our neighbours in South-East Asia and the South Pacific to contribute to the stability and security of our region. My advisers seek to ensure that relations with the member nations of ASEAN are placed on the firmest possible footing through closer and more frequent consultations at the highest level. The Fourteenth South Pacific Forum bringing together Heads of Government of the region will be held in Australia later this year. My Government will maintain its close and wide-ranging relations with Japan, and continue to broaden relations with the People's Republic of China. Our close relationship with the United States, built up over many decades within the framework of the ANZUS Treaty, will be maintained. My advisers propose to have discussions with the United States administration at the highest level to ensure that the interpretation and application of the provisions of the ANZUS Treaty are mutually consistent. Normal relations are being re-established with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Particular emphasis will be given to support for bilateral and multilateral arms control arrangements. In general, the conduct of Australia's international relations is presently characterised by a high degree of consensus and continuity. In all aspects of our international relationship my Government will be using Australia's influence to try to ensure as far as possible that the conditions for an internationally peaceful world are strengthened. Senators and Members of the House of Representatives: My new Government has pledged itself to the pursuit of national reconciliation, national recovery and national reconstruction. The spirit of co-operation which marked the National Economic Summit Conference last week has, my advisers believe, laid good foundations for a renewed national effort to enable Australia and its people to surmount the present grave crisis and indeed emerge from it a more united, stronger, and better nation. The comprehensive program I have outlined is designed to further the great national goals of reconciliation, recovery and reconstruction. There can be no doubt that the gravity of Australia's present crisis imposes on this Parliament a burden and a responsibility as challenging as that faced by any of its predecessors since Federation. The people of Australia have placed upon you, as their representatives, a trust and a duty of the highest order. With confidence that you will fulfil to the utmost of your abilities the deep responsibility the Australian people have placed upon you, I leave you to carry out your high and important duties. Motion (by Mr Hawke) agreed to: That a Committee, consisting of Ms Fatin, Mr Lindsay and myself, be appointed to prepare an Address-in-Reply to the Speech delivered by His Excellency the Governor-General to both Houses of the Parliament, and that the Committee do report at the next sitting. Mr SPEAKER —I understand that it will suit the convenience of the House to have the sitting suspended until 4.30 p.m. I will resume the chair at that time. Sitting suspended from 3.25 to 4.30 p.m. Resignation of Member Mr SPEAKER —I inform the House that today I received a letter from the Rt Hon. Sir Billy Mackie Snedden, K.C.M.G., Q.C., resigning his seat as member for the electoral division of Bruce. I will give consideration to the date of the by- election as soon as practicable. Mr HUMPHREYS(Griffith) —Mr Speaker, I crave your indulgence to congratulate you on being elected to your very high office. I offer you my full support. It now gives me very much pleasure to move: That Mr Johnson, the honourable member for Hughes, be appointed Chairman of Committees of this House. Mrs Child —I have much pleasure in seconding the motion. Mr SPEAKER —Is there any further motion? Mr KATTER(Kennedy) —Mr Speaker, I firstly join with all of those who have congratulated you on your appointment as Speaker. I am sure that honourable members on both sides of the House are delighted to see you occupy this office. I am sure that both sides of the House will be equally delighted to support the following motion: That Mr Millar, the honourable member for Wide Bay, be appointed as Chairman of Committees of this House. For the benefit-- Mr SPEAKER —I remind the honourable member for Kennedy that the motion is moved without debate at this stage. Mr Dobie —Mr Speaker, I second the motion. Mr SPEAKER —The time allowed for nominations has expired. I call the honourable member for Griffith. Mr HUMPHREYS(Griffith)(4.32) —Mr Speaker, during my short parliamentary career in this House of only 5 1/2 years, I have on many occasions had the privilege of performing special duties from which I have derived a great deal of personal satisfaction. I say to all honourable members without fear of contradiction that on no other occasion have I had such an overwhelming feeling of pride and honour as I now have in nominating the Honourable Leslie Royston Johnson, the honourable member for Hughes, as Chairman of Committees of this Thirty-third Parliament of our great nation. The very high office of Chairman of Committees and Deputy Speaker is one of tremendous responsibility, as all experienced honourable members will be well aware. I am confident and trust that all honourable members, including all new honourable members, will quickly recognise that fact if they do not already do so. The honourable member who attains this very high office is required to have a very special ability and talent and there is no doubt in my mind-nor, I feel quite sure, in the minds of honourable members on this side of the House-that the honourable member for Hughes has been blessed with all the special qualifications that are required of the Chairman of Committees. The ability and achievements of the honourable member for Hughes since being elected to Federal Parliament in 1955 leave little to be desired. For instance, he has had the honour and privilege of working in this very chamber with great Labor leaders such as Dr Evatt, Arthur Calwell, E. G. Whitlam and the honourable member for Oxley, W. G. Hayden. He is also father of the Federal Parliamentary Labor Party, with 25 years service to the Parliament and to the constituents of Hughes. I do not intend relating all his relevant personal achievements but I suggest that those honourable members who are not aware of them and who would like to know more about his long and distinguished career study the twenty-first edition of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Handbook. As an honourable member interjects, I am sure that if we just asked him he would be happy to assist. During his 25 years of devoted and loyal service to all the Federal parliaments to which he was elected he has gained a knowledge of parliamentary procedures and Standing Orders that will not only assist him to carry out his duties with the highest degree of integrity and impartiality but also, I feel sure, assist you, Mr Speaker, officers of the Parliament, the Opposition Whip and me to ensure that the Thirty-third Parliament of Australia operates efficiently and effectively. The position of Chairman of Committees has a long and distinguished history. It was established by the House of Commons in an effort to resolve conflicts between the King and the parliaments on money matters. In 1853 the Chairman of Committees became the Deputy Speaker. In fact, in 1855 an Act was passed in the House of Commons conferring all the powers of the Speaker on his deputy in the absence of the Speaker. As I previously stated, the position of Chairman of Committees has a long and distinguished history. Is it not fitting that this House should elect to that high office a truly great and devoted Australian parliamentarian who also has a long and distinguished history? Mr KATTER(Kennedy)(4.36) —Mr Speaker, I had great pleasure in seeing you elected today. However, it was followed by regret when I heard of the retirement from Parliament of the right honourable member for Bruce (Sir Billy Snedden). I am sure that all of us very much regret his retirement. I should not have to talk about the qualities of Clarrie Millar, the former Chairman of Committees, except that there have been a few changes in this House. There are a few new honourable members opposite who have not had the experience of serving under his splendid chairmanship. I think one of the points we must consider today is the commendable ambition of the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) to bring about a consensus. Would it not be great if consensus began right here on the floor of the House? I think this nation would throb with admiration if the newspapers were able to carry the story tomorrow that members of the Labor Government, temporary though that Government' s term in office is, had shown themselves to be the gracious people which no doubt one or two of them are and had elected as Chairman of Committees a man who has had tremendous experience. Let us look at his experience. Over the last two parliaments the Chairman of Committees has been subjected to tremendous pressures. The Speaker was not always able to occupy the chair. We all know and we all concede that Clarrie Millar did a splendid job under difficult circumstances. I know something about previous Chairmen of Committees. The former member for Kennedy, Mr Bill Riordan, occupied the chair for many years. Then, of course, we had the Phil Lucock era. He was a great, commendable and much-loved Chairman of Committees. Clarrie Millar took over from him, which was a very difficult thing to do, and did a most commendable job. Let us have a look at his record. He is an ordinary knockabout sort of fellow. A Chairman of Committees has to relate to the various people in this House. My God, what a proposition that is. We do not even know half of the members yet. Clarrie Millar served in the Public Service. He worked for the former Postmaster-General's Department. He fought for his country in the Royal Australian Air Force. He was a farmer. What more noble occupation than that? He has travelled in all States. He has got to know those rather odd people in Victoria and the odd people in South Australia. He has got to know all of their peculiarities. He would even understand all the peculiarities of honourable members opposite. I say that very seriously. It is commendable that he has travelled through the States. We have ac- knowledged your academic status, Mr Speaker. Clarrie Millar was at university as an undergraduate and so he has that to commend him as well. I wish to make a final point to the ladies and gentlemen here. We have to be a lot more polite here from now on with more ladies present. We welcome the ladies , so long as they behave themselves and do not talk too much! It was quite remarkable that when the leader of our party, Mr Anthony, commended Clarrie Millar when we were giving credits where they were due at the end of the last Parliament, on both sides of the House the 'Hear, hears' rang out loud and clear . There was a commendation from both sides of the House. If consensus is what the Prime Minister wants, he should set the example and put this man in as Chairman of Committees. Mrs CHILD(Henty)(4.40) —Mr Speaker, I congratulate you on your election as Speaker of this House and wish you many long and successful years in that position. I take great pleasure in seconding the nomination of my friend and colleague, the honourable member for Hughes (Mr Les Johnson), for the important position of Chairman of Committees. The honourable member has served this House since 1955 with only one break, which was between 1966 and 1969. In that time he has served on numerous committees, represented the Parliament on a number of overseas missions, held ministerial office during the Whitlam Government, and served since 1977 as Opposition Whip. In summary, he has all round parliamentary experience, and experience of parliamentary life which would be hard to match. I am sure that the experience will be of great value to him in facing new responsibilities. Speaking from my own experience, I have always found the honourable member to be someone who can combine an amiable disposition with an efficient approach to his work. I value greatly his friendship and comradeship, and I know that the House respects his ability. The honourable member for Wide Bay (Mr Millar) occupied this office in the last Parliament and justifiably earned the respect of honourable members on both sides of the House. I consider the honourable member for Hughes to be a worthy successor to the honourable member for Wide Bay , and I am sure that he will occupy his new office with great distinction. Mr DOBIE(Cook)(4.42) —Mr Speaker, I support the nomination of Clarrie Millar, the honourable member for Wide Bay, as Chairman of Committees for the ensuing Parliament. This is the second occasion on which I have had the honour of seconding the nomination of Clarrie Millar for this position of great responsibility in this Parliament. Mr Young —Your earlier speeches were much more persuasive. Mr DOBIE —Did the honourable member have something to say, or was he just interrupting? Mr SPEAKER —Order! I invite the honourable member for Cook to address the Chair. Mr DOBIE —Thank you, Mr Speaker. The first time was on 25 November 1980, when I reminded the House that the honourable member for Wide Bay had conducted himself for the previous two and a half years with a rare distinction in this position. Mr Millar went on throughout the Thirty-second Parliament to gain the respect of all honourable members in this chamber by his continuing dignity and impartiality. The position of Chariman of Committees, Mr Speaker, as you well know, is a formidable one and with Mr Millar's prodigious knowledge of the Standing Orders and his proven record of impartiality towards all honourable members of the House, I believe that Mr Millar is an outstanding member to assume this important position. It is with great pleasure that I, as one who served as one of his deputy chairmen in the Thirty-second Parliament, second his nomination and ask all members, including members who have spoken previously to vote for Clarrie Millar, the honourable member for Wide Bay. Mr SPEAKER —In accordance with the Standing Order, the bells will be rung for two minutes and a ballot will be conducted. The bells having been rung- Mr SPEAKER —The ballot papers will now be distributed. Will honourable members please write on the ballot paper the name of the candidate for whom they wish to vote. The candidates are: Mr Johnson and Mr Millar. A ballot having been taken- The ballot having been concluded- Mr SPEAKER —The result of the ballot is: Mr Johnson 71 votes, Mr Millar 45 votes . Mr Johnson is declared elected. Mr HAWKE(Wills-Prime Minister)(4.49) —It gives me very much pleasure to be the first to extend congratulations to the honourable member for Hughes, Mr Johnson. Before I extend those congratulations I know you would understand, Mr Speaker, if I said a very few words about the unsuccessful candidate. I want him to know that we on this side of the House identify ourselves with all the laudatory comments that were made in respect of him by those nominating and supporting him . He is, in the best sense of the word, a real gentleman. He has both our respect and our affection. I must say to the honourable member for Kennedy (Mr Katter) that it is true, as he said, that I have preached consensus; but I remind him that I did not preach coalition. Mr Les Johnson has just been elected to the very important position of Chairman of Committees. He is a member who brings to the position, as has been said, a quarter of a century of service in this place to the people of Australia. During that time he has, I know, like the honourable member for Wide Bay (Mr Millar), earned both the respect and the affection of all people in the House. I have the opportunity of speaking of him only in respect of our two-year acquaintance in the House. I pick up the comments that were made by the honourable member for Henty (Mrs Childs) that he does combine a capacity for geniality with an extraordinary toughness when required. I know because I have been on the receiving end of both of those commodities. They are characteristics which are required in this very important task. We know that the honourable member for Hughes will bring to this important role not only the experience of the quarter of a century that he has served in this House, but also those personal qualities which both endear him to us and gain our respect. We wish him well in the years ahead in this important task. Mr PEACOCK(Kooyong-Leader of the Opposition)(5.2) —I congratulate the honourable member for Hughes (Mr Les Johnson) on being elected to the very important post of Chairman of Committees. I thank the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) for his remarks about the honourable member for Wide Bay (Mr Millar), who served this Parliament extraordinarily well during his time as Chairman of Committees. That was the primary reason we nominated him today. We recognise that the honourable member for Hughes has been a member of the House for a considerable period. Indeed, I think it was mentioned that he has been a member since 1955 with the exception of the years 1966 to 1969. I recognise that he brings to the position a wealth of parliamentary experience. I noted with interest the reference to his service in the Whitlam Administration. I recall it well. We know of the honourable member's interest in the commitment to the forms of the House. We wish him well in his new office. Mr ANTHONY(Richmond-Leader of the National Party of Australia)(5.3) —May I add my congratulations to the honourable member for Hughes, Mr Les Johnson, on being elected to the position of Chairman of Committees. I understand he will also be the Deputy Speaker when you, Mr Speaker, are not present. He has a task in front of him, in emulating the excellent job that was done by the former Chairman of Committees but I believe the wealth of experience that he has had in this Parliament should enable him to carry out that job well. He has been a Minister. He has been the Whip of his party. That should give him a basic understanding. I remember that when he was a much younger member of this Parliament he was considered a pretty aggressive, provocative member. I think that to any Speaker or Chairman of Committes he would have been described as difficult to handle. As years have gone by he has become a little more tolerant. He has become more fair -minded. I think his political bias has become much more moderate. At any rate, in his position as Chairman of Committees I hope that we will be seeing him completely unbiased in dispensing justice as he handles the procedures of this place. I wish him well. Mr MILLAR(Wide Bay)(5.5) —Mr Speaker, let me say immediately that the brevity of my remarks will not reflect on their sincerity. I congratulate the honourable member for Hughes (Mr Les Johnson). He will find the job he has undertaken both challenging and rewarding. I wish him and the House well during his incumbency. Mr SPEAKER —Before calling the honourable member for Hughes (Mr Les Johnson), may I offer him my congratulations. I worked in the same position under Speaker Scholes and I know how necessary co-operation is between the Speaker and the Chairman of Committees. The honourable member for Hughes and I have an association going back long before I entered this Parliament. In line with the words of the Leader of the National Party, I think we were both young and provocative then; so it goes back a fair while. I am sure that he and I will work well together. I could not let the opportunity pass without paying a tribute to the previous Chairman of Committees, with whom I had a close association and who I believe set a wonderful example for future Chairmen of Committees. Honourable members-Hear, hear! Mr LES JOHNSON(Hughes)(5.6) —First I would like to congratulate you, sir, on your election to the high office of Speaker and offer my full co-operation in the discharge of your duties. The House will be glad to know at this stage, I believe, that I accept the position of Chairman of Committees. I would like to convey my appreciation to the House for elevating me to this office. I acknowledge the very kind words that have been said by my nominators, the honourable member for Griffith (Mr Humphreys) and the honourable member for Henty (Mrs Child). I also appreciate the remarks that were made subsequent to my election. There could be some truth in the fact that I was young and provocative , and that you were. As far as the Leader of the National Party (Mr Anthony) is concerned, we are all prepared to concede that he is provocative. It will be my aim to uphold the dignity of the House and the impartiality of the Chair. In that regard I have a fine tradition of predecessors to follow. In particular, I would like to say that I am very glad that my predecessor, the honourable member for Wide Bay (Mr Millar), has not chosen to emulate the example set today by the former Speaker, the right honourable member for Bruce ( Sir Billy Snedden). I know that the honourable member for Wide Bay does not have the same incentive to uphold Westminster tradition. In any event I acknowledge the great respect I have for the honourable member for Wide Bay and I look forward to his co-operation and support and the co-operation and support of all the members of the House in the true spirit of national reconciliation. Mr SPEAKER —Before calling the next business, I inform the House that present in the Gallery is the Deputy Speaker from the national Parliament of Papua New Guinea. We welcome him. Honourable members-Hear, hear! Mr YOUNG(Port Adelaide-Leader of the House)(5.8) —May I, before starting any formal business also, as is custom, offer my congratulations to you on your election to this very high office of Speaker. We look forward to you being just as unbiased and impartial as your predecessor towards the Government. I also congratulate the Chairman of Committees, the honourable member for Hughes (Mr Les Johnson). I take the point made by the Leader of the National Party (Mr Anthony) about objectivity. I draw attention to the fact that we have a couple of classic examples of people who were very objective in their politics. I think the Leader of the Country Party- Mr Anthony —The National Party. Mr YOUNG —National Party-whatever it is called. We have another name for it. The National Party should have followed the objectivity in politics of the two former members sitting in the gallery observing the proceedings today-the Honourable Charlie Jones, the former honourable member for Newcastle, and the Honourable Clyde Cameron, the former honourable member for Hindmarsh. Their objectivity in politics was a lesson to us all. I also say to Clarrie Millar: It is true, we on this side of the House had a great deal of respect for you while you were in the chair. It is nice to be over here. It is a bit unfortunate that you find yourself in the predicament that you do today, but you did hold the respect of the Opposition while you were in the chair. I thought you were a glowing example to some of the senior members of the National Party and they should have followed the lesson you gave. Mr Young-Mr Speaker, I ask leave of the House to move a motion to facilitate the introduction and passage of an Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 1982-83, an Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 1982-83, a Loan Bill 1983, and a Social Security Amendment Bill 1983. Leave not granted. Mr YOUNG(Port Adelaide-Leader of the House)(5.10) —Well, if you have 71 votes you might as well use them. I move: That so much of the Standing Orders be suspended as would prevent- (1) an Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 1982-83, an Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 1982- 83 and a Loan Bill 1983- (a) being presented together at this sitting and read a first time together and one motion being moved without delay and one question being put in regard to, respectively, the second readings, the committee's report stage, and the third readings, of the Bills together, and (b) being considered in one committee of the whole (2) a Social Security Amendment Bill 1983 being presented at this sitting and being passed through all stages without delay. This one day sitting, of which all members of this new Parliament have been aware for some weeks, was not our idea. It was not our idea that the Parliament should sit for one day in the first four months of this year. The responsibility of our finding ourselves in this predicament belongs to the former member for Wannon, the former Prime Minister of this country, and anybody who collaborated with him in making the decision to call the election 10 months early. The responsibility does not lie with this side of the House. We are not unhappy about being here, but it ought to be understood that $21m has been wasted by calling the election prematurely. This means that the procedures of the House as they ought to have been conducted commencing in February of this year have not been attended to. The delay being proposed by the Opposition in regard to these Bills would mean a delay of bushfire and drought payments. The bushfires and the drought, which these Bills encompass, are some of the most horrendous happenings that have occurred in Australia in a long time. It also means a delay in the increase in the benefits that would have been made to adult, single unemployed people. As I say, it was not the responsibility of this Government that we find ourselves in this predicament. Nor is it the responsibility of this Government as it is now constituted that Australia is in the economic mess in which we find ourselves. I can assure the Opposition that there will not be any shortage of time in which this House will debate that predicament. In referring to those who were members of the previous Government-whether on the front bench or elevated to the front bench subsequently-I must say that Harry Edwards, the honourable member for Berowra, is the most unlucky bloke in the world. He is always elevated in Opposition. He never gets any of the goodies on this side of the House. I think he ought to get an undertaking from the leader this time that if he ever gets back over here he will be elected to the Ministry. We find ourselves in the predicament of this one day sitting as a result of the irresponsible handling of the economy and the irresponsible calling of the election 10 months early, which wasted millions of dollars of taxpayers' money. This sitting could not possibly have been called earlier than today. We have given every member not only the opportunity of being advised of the sitting as early as possible but also more information about the state of the Australian economy than any 10 Liberal governments ever gave the Australian public. As the Governor-General said today, that will be par for the course for this Government . I can assure honourable members that they will get plenty of opportunity and plenty of hours to debate some of the national issues which will come before this Parliament, not just in the May sitting but throughout the Budget session. There is absolutely no need for the Opposition to cause any delay to the introduction and passage of these Bills today. Mr PEACOCK(Kooyong-Leader of the Opposition)(5.14) —We oppose this procedural motion to suspend Standing Orders. The reason we oppose it has nothing to do with the merits-there are substantial merits-in the Bills that will come before us in any case. We do not oppose those Bills. We will support the Bills that are listed, but we cannot allow Standing Orders, particularly Standing Order No. 101 , to be swept aside like this. I remind the House that Standing Order 101 covers the procedure of the House, including the giving of notices, questions without notice, discussions of matters of public importance and so on, in other words, the fundamental rights of members of this Parliament. One of the last great vestiges of the grass-roots democratic system that we have here is the requirement that Ministers-the Executive-be present to answer questions without notice on the floor of this Parliament. That is being swept aside by this procedural motion. To call this Parliament together for a single day, not even sitting for 10 hours, and to scuttle the basic procedures is an action which makes a total mockery of the Government's conduct in this institution. Apart from the merits of the Appropriation Bills, the Loan Bill and the Social Security Amendment Bill , the Government is engaging in a parliamentary charade. We are in many ways having a Clayton's Parliament, the parliament you have when you do not have a parliament-no question time, no notices, no discussion of matters of public importance. Not since 1917 have Bills such as these been put forward in this manner. For nearly 70 years governments of all persuasions have not only backed away from crude parliamentary behaviour such as this but also positively taken the opposite course and allowed proper time for consideration of measures. These measures warrant and will get support. They warrant also earnest consideration; but, no, sweep that aside! The first words uttered were: 'We have the numbers and we will use them', or words to that effect. Crush the rights of members to probe, question and analyse Bills. Crush the rights of members on both sides to probe, question and analyse Ministers in this House. Crush the rights of members to present notices on matters of public importance. Why is the House rising today? We are prepared to stay here. We are prepared to sit tomorrow. Why could the chamber be used for four days last week but not even for a period exceeding 24 hours when those actually elected by the people are here to represent them in their forum, the people's forum? It is not as if there is nothing to discuss. I say to the Government: Tell us about the background of the misuse of military aircraft; tell us why you called in this House a conference on the economy dominated by big unions and big business and without significant elected representatives being even invited; tell us why you allowed the conference to be unrepresentative; tell us who spoke for the unemployed; tell us who spoke for the aged; tell us who spoke for the vulnerable in the community; tell us why you cannot even indicate to us today, let alone last week , how long the wages pause will run or how long you want it to run; tell us why you backed off the tough decisions and sent them to the Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission. And while you are about it, why do you not tell us why you cannot fix the steel industry's problems as you promised to do immediately upon being elected to government? While you are about it, tell us why you practised hollow diplomatic protest against Vietnam's aggression yet still discussed the possibility of giving aid to that occupying state. After all, this Government directed its Ambassador to Hanoi to register the strongest protest against Vietnam's military incursions into Thailand and the senseless slaughter of civilians. If the Government were fair dinkum, it would not just protest. Anybody can do that; anybody can move the Ambassador in to protest. It would say bluntly: 'As a consequence of these actions, we will not give you aid; we will not give you assistance.' The reality is that the Government wants to have it both ways-to condemn a country and also assist that country; to have an economic conference and call it community representative, yet ensure that the community is not represented; to have a meeting of the Parliament yet not let the Parliament handle even its routine business. I said during the elections-and how correct it has been-that Labor would put the 'con' into consensus, the 'con' into reconciliation and, regrettably, the 'con' into the economy, and it has. It does not stop with what I have touched on. There sits, behind the Minister for politics, the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke), the man who within days of election to government told the nation he would take personal responsibility, with his wide background for negotiation, for negotiations with the Tasmanian Government over the Franklin Dam. This was to be the test, the chance for the new Government to show its credentials; a chance to show how it could negotiate and reconcile. What transpired? Two letters, a High Court writ and the use of military aircraft. Some negotiation! The Prime Minister should detail the procedures involved in the misuse of the aircraft. He should detail the reasons for his refusal to visit the site. He should give us some detail and not have moved procedural motions like this. We are entitled to ask and we are entitled to receive answers, but the Government seeks to sweep aside our right to pursue these matters in detail by seeking to suspend Standing Orders and preventing the normal routine business of the House proceeding. Members of the Government have said they stand for consensus. Consensus government should mean government for the greatest good of the greatest number. Where is the opportunity for us to pursue that at this brief meeting of the Parliament? This Government should be focusing today on the social tragedy as well as the economic cost of unemployment. Instead, it has now risked increased union pressure-it is evident around us-for higher wages at the expense of Australian jobs. This is not government for the greatest good of the greatest number. Unjustified wage rises and rising unemployment are the last things the community wants. Yet under this Government the wage rise of one man or one woman is now in danger of becoming the job of that same man or woman. The Australian Labor Party, with its election to government, had the chance to show that it really meant what it said in the election campaign. It had the chance to create for Australia a parliament in which the reservoir of goodwill which exists in this nation today could be tapped in a genuine manner, bringing together the diverse interests represented in this Parliament and working for the betterment of Australia and the Australian people. The Opposition was ready to work with the Government, constructively, with common purpose in as many fields as our political differences would allow. Instead, the Government intends day after day when we come back in May to take a different course, I assume. Bear in mind that we will be coming back for the Budget in August and that the Government was elected in March. So the Parliament will have sat for but one month until that time. Here we are for one day and the Government chooses to divide and indeed deride the institution to which we at least on this side of the House are dedicated. In the words of another, there is nothing more difficult to take in hand or more perilous to conduct than the lead in the introduction of a new order of things. The Government has, by its actions today, shown just how true that is. It will not even try to take the lead. It gathers the Parliament, strips it of its functions, dumps its procedures and dismisses it in less than a day; this with the country crying out for all of us to move beyond the obsessive issues of the past and to call forth the aspirations of all Australians. Not only does effective government require the smooth handling of government business but also democracy requires the closest scrutiny of that business by the people's elected representatives. That is why our Standing Orders provide for Question Time and provide for proper and effective debate to ensure effective scrutiny of that government business. Yet, the Government sweeps aside our rights as if attendance here is a mere adjunct to its ambitions. That is why we will not allow this course and why we have protested as we have and as we will. Mr SPEAKER —Order! The honourable member's time has expired. Question put: That the motion (Mr Young's) be agreed to. The House divided. (Mr Speaker-Hon. Harry Jenkins) Ayes . . . . . . . . . . . 71 Noes . . . . . . . . . . . 44 —— Majority . . . . . . . . . 27 —— Baldwin, P. J. Johnson, LesBeazley, K. C. Jones, BarryBeddall, D. P. Keating, P. J.Bilney, G. N. Kelly, R. J.Blanchard, C. A. Kent, L.Blewett, N. Keogh, L. J.Bowen, Lionel Kerin, J. C.Brown, John Klugman, R. E.Brown, Robert Lindsay, E. J.Brumby, J. M. McHugh, J.Charles, D. E. McLeay, LeoCharlesworth, R. I. Maher, M. J.Child, J. Mayer, H.Chynoweth, R. L. Mildren, J. B.Cohen, B Milton, P.Cross, M. D. Morris, AllanCunningham, B. T. (Teller) Morris, PeterDarling, E. E. Morrison, W. L.Dawkins, J. S. Mountford, J. G.Duffy, M. J. O'Neil, L. R. T.Edwards, Ronald Punch, G. F.Everingham, D. N. Reeves, J. E.Fatin, W. F. Saunderson, J.Free, R. V. Scholes, G. G. D.Fry, K. L. Scott, J. L.Gayler, J. Simmons, D. W.Gear, G. Snow, J. H.Gorman, R. N. J. Staples, P. R.Griffiths, A. G. Steedman, A. P.Hand, G. L. Theophanous, A. C.Hawke, R. J. L. Uren, T.Hayden, W. G. Wells, D. McM.Holding, A. C. West, S. J.Hollis, C. Willis, R.Howe, B. L. Young, M. J.Humphreys, B. C. (Teller) Adermann, A. E. Hunt, R. J. D.Andrew, J. N. Katter, R. C.Anthony, J. D. Lloyd, B.Braithwaite, R. A. Lusher, S.A.Burr, M. A. McGauran, P. J.Cadman, A. G. MacKellar, M. J. R.Cameron, Ewen, (Teller) McVeigh, D. T.Cameron, Ian Macphee, I. M.Carlton, J. J. Millar, P. C.Connolly, D. M. Moore, J. C.Cowan, D. B. Newman, K. E.Dobie, J. D. M. O'Keefe, F. L.Drummond, P. H. Peacock, A. S.Edwards, Harry Porter, J. R.Fife, W. C. Robinson, IanFisher, P. S. Rocher, A. C.Goodluck, B. J. Ruddock, P. M.Groom, R. J. Shipton, R. F.Hall, Steele Sinclair, I. McC.Hicks, N. J. (Teller) Spender, J. M.Hodgman, W. M. Tuckey, C. W.Howard, J. W. White, P. N. D. Hurford, C. J. Street, A. A.Jacobi, R. Coleman, W. P. Question so resolved in the affirmative with an absolute majority. Messages from the Governor-General recommending appropriation for proposed expenditures announced. Bills presented by Mr Dawkins, and read a first time. Mr DAWKINS(Fremantle-Minister for Finance)(5.37) —I move: That the Bills be now read a second time. Before proceeding any further, Mr Speaker, I add my congratulations to those which have already been forthcoming from members on both sides of the House. As one who from time to time has seen the rough end of the authority of the Chair, I look forward to a much better association with the Chair in the next few years than perhaps I enjoyed in the past few. APPROPRIATION BILL (No. 3) 1982-83 Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 1982-83, together with Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 1982-83, comprises certain urgent appropriation measures which cannot reasonably await the passage of the Additional Estimates in the main autumn sittings. Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 1982-83 is a Bill for the ordinary annual services of the Government. The need for these measures arises out of abnormally large calls on the contingency provisions-the advances to the Minister for Finance-contained in the Appropriation Acts (Nos 1 and 2) 1982-83. The Government was advised immediately on coming to office that, on the basis of information then available , urgent expenditures not foreseen at the time of the Budget could be expected to exceed the amounts available in the advances by early May, with further substantial calls on them by the end of that month; this initial expectation has been reinforced by subsequent monitoring of the situation. There is an urgent need to seek interim appropriation measures before the passage of the Additional Estimates in the usual way in the main autumn sittings . The additional amounts sought in these interim appropriations total $407.3m- $ 211.3m in Appropriation Bill (No. 3) and $196m in Appropriation Bill (No. 4). The principal factors underlying the abnormally large calls on the contingency provisions include post-Budget initiatives of the previous Government arising, inter alia, out of a fall in economic activity, the costs of the general election, drought and other natural disaster relief and associated costs, and higher than expected cost increases in some areas such as electricity charges. While the additional appropriations sought in this Bill, and those that will be the subject of the normal Additional Estimates in the main sittings, have been partly offset by savings in appropriations made by the Appropriation Acts (Nos 1 and 2) 1982-83, they nevertheless reflect the more general pressures that have led to the substantial blow-out in the Budget deficit. A statement of such savings will, as is usual, be provided to the House at the time of the Additional Estimates. In seeking these interim appropriations, the Government has had uppermost in its mind two important matters of parliamentary principle. They are: Firstly, the right of the Parliament to appropriate public moneys for specific purposes subject to accepted principles relating to the contingency provisions under the advances to the Minister for Finance; and secondly, the need to minimise the effects of not being able to avail ourselves of the normal processes for the scrutiny of estimates of expenditure. The provisions sought in the Bills have therefore been carefully chosen with a view to minimising the amount of supplementation for the contingency advances while avoiding matters which the Parliament might reasonably expect to scrutinise more closely. The major considerations in their selection have been that, with the exception of some bushfire relief payments recently agreed between the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) and the Premiers of Victoria and South Australia-provision for which has been included in Appropriation Bill (No. 4)-they do not involve initiatives of the new Government; they are not contentious; the expenditures are urgent and would normally be appropriate for the issue of funds from the Advance to the Minister for Finance; and the amounts, or significant proportions of them, would but for the specific appropriations involve substantial demands on the advances before the end of May. No specific provisions have been included for departmental salaries notwithstanding that, as a result of post-Budget decisions of the previous Government to increase substantially staff ceilings in the Department of Social Security, the Australian Taxation Office and other areas, there could be significant calls on the Advance contained in Appropriation Act (No. 1) 1982- 83 before the passage of the Additional Estimates. Of the additional $211.3m sought in this Bill, $50m is for supplementation of the Advance to the Minister for Finance contained in Appropriation Act (No. 1) 1982-83, reflecting estimates of urgent funds requirements before the end of May , by which time it is hoped the Additional Estimates will have been passed, together with a margin for further urgent and unforeseen requirements. All the prospective calls on the Advance were, of course, unforeseen at the time the previous Government brought down its Budget. The earlier the passage of the Additional Estimates, the less likely will be the calls on the Advance. However, it is important that the supplementary provison is adequate to meet contingencies. The specific appropriations include amounts for legal aid resulting from increased costs and unforeseen costs associated with the newly operating Victorian Legal Aid Commission; higher costs, especially electricity charges, associated with certain defence operations; higher rates of eligibility and increased average benefits under student assistance programs; additional places made available under the special apprentice training schemes; emergency relief for Lebanon; payments to meet higher operational losses sustained by the Australian National Railways Commission reflecting reduced cash flow as a result of the drought-affected harvest and the economic downturn; and the costs of the general election itself. APPROPRIATION BILL (No. 4) 1982-83 Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 1982-83 seeks appropriations totalling $196m for payments to or for the States and the Northern Territory in respect of natural diaster relief and restoration pursuant to long-standing arrangements, and for payments to the Victorian and South Australian Governments for general purpose assistance in respect of the recent tragic bushfires. As in the case of certain urgent appropriation measures I have just outlined with reference to the Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 1982-83, these provisions are of such urgency that they cannot reasonably await the passage of the Additional Estimates in the main autumn sittings. Payments in respect of the natural disaster relief and restoration item amounting to $34.8m have already been met from moneys available under the Advance to the Minister for Finance. However, as the required total payments substantially exceed the amount provided under the Advance, it is necessary either to seek supplementation of the Advance for this and other prospective contingencies, or to seek specific appropriations for the bushfire and other natural disaster relief payments. Clearly the more desirable course in these circumstances is to seek appropriations for the specific purposes for which they are required. I am sure that it will be agreed that the provisions warrant very wide support. LOAN BILL 1983 This Bill seeks supplementation of the provision made in the Loan Act (No. 2) 1982 for financing 1982-83 expenditures to the extent that such expenditures as appropriated from the Consolidated Revenue Fund are likely to exceed the moneys legally available to that fund. The House will be aware that expenditures from the CRF in any financial year may not exceed the moneys available to it. While there is standing authority to meet certain expenditures from the Loan Fund, such as payments to or for the States for capital assistance and roads grants, successive governments have found it necessary to introduce legislation to authorise borrowings for and expenditure in respect of services for which the Parliament has appropriated moneys from the CRF. The simplest and traditional means of seeking such authority has been a loan Bill for the purpose of funding defence expenditure from Loan Fund. Such legislation does not therefore authorise expenditure in excess of those for which valid appropriations of the CRF already exist-other than expenditures in respect of the costs of the relevant borrowings; it merely provides for the funding of such expenditures from Loan Fund to the extent that moneys of the CRF are insufficient. The Parliament passed the Loan Act (No. 2) 1982 in the Budget sittings authorising the charging of defence expenditure up to $1,500m to the Loan Fund. In introducing the legislation into the House in October last year, the former Treasurer indicated that prospective expenditures looked like exceeding the Budget by some $750m. Since that time revised estimates of receipts and outlays have indicated a prospective deficit of the order of $4 1/2 billion, nearly $3 billion in excess of the budgeted deficit of $1.7 billion and substantially higher than that in prospect in October 1982. These revisions to the Estimates reflect of course on the Government's funding arrangements and it has become necessary to seek supplementation of the authority under the Loan Act (No. 2) 1982 to charge CRF expenditures to Loan Fund. To achieve this purpose the Bill proposes, firstly, that the authority under the Loan Act (No. 2) 1982 to charge defence expenditures to Loan Fund be increased by $1200m; and, secondly, as defence expenditures may not be charged to Loan Fund retrospectively, that authority be provided to reimburse the CRF from Loan Fund in respect of other expenditures up to the limit of the Commonwealth's Loan Council borrowing program. I consider these additional authorisations provide an adequate margin to enable the Government to meet the prospective deficit in the CRF. However, the margin sought is contingent on the urgent passage of the Bill since, as I have previously stated, defence expenditure cannot be charged retrospectively to Loan Fund. I would emphasise that this measure does not of itself authorise additional expenditures over and above what the Parliament has already approved; it merely provides the mechanisms for the financing of such expenditures. As well I want to take the opportunity to indicate that, having regard to the need to pass these measures urgently in this one day sitting and notwithstanding that the items involved are of a straightforward nature, I support the reference of the Acts, when passed, to the Estimates committees in the other place for examination when the Additional Estimates are being considered in the autumn sitting. This will prove an opportunity, albeit retrospectively, for the normal Estimates scrutiny process to proceed. I have circulated to honourable members explanatory notes giving details of the proposed additional appropriations. I seek leave to table those documents. Leave granted. Mr DAWKINS —I add also that, with some substantial difficulty, I was able to establish which of the Opposition front bench regiment was handling this measure in the House. I arranged for him and some of his colleagues to be briefed on the details of these measures. That having been done and the nature of the items being urgent and non-contentious, I commend the Bills to the House and request that their passage be dealt with speedily. Mr MOORE(Ryan)(5.49) —Mr Speaker, firstly, I congratulate you on your appointment. It is a pleasure to see you there. You have served the House well in the past in your previous positions. I join with those who have spoken already in congratulating you. The Opposition will not oppose the Bills. I want to draw attention really to two particular aspects that have come out of the legislation, the fires and the drought. They are the most significant factors which have contributed to the appropriation of this very large amount of money. The drought in Australia this year has been one of the worst on record. It has affected all States. It has had a dramatic effect on the rural sector and all those who are gainfully employed in earning a substantial living in that area. The effect on the rest of the community is yet to be felt. It is a built-up problem which I do not believe the people in the metropolitan areas have a total understanding of. On top of that, particularly in South Australia and Victoria, there have been very substantial and tragic fires which came about, in some parts, through human error and, in other parts, through sheer accident. These fires have caused human tragedy, enormous loss of personal property, the dislocation of lives and a whole altering of the structure of the way of life for very many people. In response to that crisis the previous Government moved quickly. It was the previous Fraser Government which set the programs in train to cater for those people caught up in this massive tragedy. I think we should record our thanks for the thoughtful words and deeds of the previous Government. It was not only the Government which came to the party; very many large charitable organisations assisted through the collection of moneys and the provision of services and materials to those who were affected. They are to be commended for the enormous amount that they did. It is one thing to make grants and raise money but it is another matter to distribute it and see that it is done properly with a sense of equity and justice. Far too often people who contribute money to charitable organisations feel that they have not received value for the amount of money they have contributed. Unfortunately, a lot of money is wasted. We would like to ensure that the moneys that have been distributed have gone to worthy recipients and that true and proper value has been received for them. I believe that two questions ought to be asked. How many people insured their properties against fire and how many did not? In the areas of Victoria and South Australia where tragic losses occurred a substantial number of people did not insure. They are now picking up very generous support of both government and the community. What about those who did insure, at their cost, against the eventuality of fire? Inequities in this respect ought to be considered. It may well be that in national disasters we should consider applying the one-in-all-in principle so that those who do contribute are not penalised in the sense that they receive only the amount for which they are insured while those who made no prudent allocation receive handouts from governments and other institutions. The second question is one of taxation. What is the position regarding the granting of these moneys? Are they taxable in the hands of the recipient? Are the amounts given as income supplementations purely related to the income of the year? Are the amounts granted in relation to fencing, building and the like, which are clearly capital items, to be considered as capital grants, tax free, in the hands of the recipients or are they to be considered in relation to the total amount a person receives? Considerable inequity may arise, because in no small number of cases the person in receipt might well have other interests away from the area of the fire or drought. I think those who are in receipt of such moneys should know what their position is so there is no uncertainty, as I am led to believe there has been in certain parts. I would be remiss if I did not also make a general comment regarding the appropriation for the National Economic Summit Conference. The Summit Conference was held in this place only a few days ago. It was scheduled for five days but actually went for four days. It was held against a background of huge publicity. There were expectations when the big met-big business, big government and big unions. It was not what one might call the most representative group. There were more people outside who were totally unrepresented than those who were here. But it did provide a meeting ground and it did enable the employers and the unions to get together in some sense, not that they should have needed a national forum to do that. Common sense in itself ought to have been the vehicle for that avenue. Nevertheless, at that meeting the unions went along with certain commitments. Those are the commitments-co-operation and getting along with one another-which the business world felt might work. But delivery is the name of the game. It is a testing time now for the leadership of the Australian Council of Trade Unions. I was surprised when I picked up this morning's Australian Financial Review to read the headlines: 'ACTU back away from wages commitment'. The article states: . . . Mr Dolan, yesterday warned that union promises of restraint under the ACTU's prices and incomes accord with the Federal Government would break down if the Arbitration Commission awarded less than full indexation under a new centralised wage system. That is the very thing that the unions wanted-a centralised wage system. The article continued: And, in a second warning, he said that sectional wage increases would be a fact of life under a centralised system, despite the ACTU's commitment in last week's summit communique to suppress sectional claims in a return to such a system. There is today's news on the latest in terms of how the trade unions are going to handle it. We back that up, in this period of consensus and of getting on with one another, with the Australian Workers Union's handling of the shearers' strike. It is a very serious matter for those involved in the rural sector. Only yesterday in Victoria 10 car loads of people with guns turned up at a shearing shed and bashed up a few people, all over the question of wide combs. What is this Government going to do-in terms of sorting out its priorities and coming to some equity and justice within the scheme of things-to stop these thugs intimidating the shearers in Australia? There is not a word from a former AWU Secretary, the honourable member for Port Adelaide (Mr Young). He must know only too well what the problems are. Nevertheless, he has not done a thing. In the whole context of this matter, nothing is done because the problem might be too close to home. Mr Young —Only shear with narrow combs; that was my motto. Mr MOORE —I will have to tell your neighbour about that. I am not too sure about that. Mr Young —Why don't you try it? You will soon find out. Get off that stock exchange floor and into the shearing sheds. Mr SPEAKER —Order! Mr MOORE —I would only hope, Mr Speaker, that those brief comments on the inadequacies of the trade unions at the moment would draw attention to the fact that delivery is the name of the game if the Summit is to be successful. So far we have not seen anything of that from the ACTU. Let us look to the role of the Government, because since its election we have heard an enormous amount about good will, consensus and so forth. Despite the two Appropriation Bills here today we have not seen anything else from the Government. We have not seen the perceived consensus that we hear about from the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke). There is certainly good will at the moment from the public. I have referred to the actions of the trade unions and to their bashing people. I now move on to this new scheme of consensus-the Economic Summit. We get people to believe: 'Yes, we will go along with it'. All of a sudden we find that this becomes the excuse for not carrying out election promises. I used to hear in this House all sorts of things about election promises, but before the new Government even came to the House, before it even met, one of the cardinal promises was: 'We will cut taxation'. In the same newspaper to which I referred earlier it is stated that taxes will go up. The Government has no mandate to increase taxation. It promised tax cuts and it is now proposing to put up taxes under the heading of 'consensus' from the wonderful Economic Summit meeting. On top of these matters we have to look at the question of the 500,000 new jobs the Government is going to create. Since it has come to power we have seen further retrenchments in the iron and steel industry. Likewise, we have seen other industries going backwards. I forecast that that will probably continue in the short term. As a consequence, the economic tide will take some considerable understanding before it will turn. For the Government to say that it will reverse its election promises because it cannot deliver and because the National Economic Summit Conference said it could do so because it has consensus is a load of codswallop, and Government members know it as well as I do. For the Government to think it can hoodwink the nation of Australia on the basis of these figures is absolute nonsense. I hope that the electors and the nation will see that a promise of a tax cut does not mean a tax increase, that a promise of half a million new jobs does not mean tens of thousands more out of work and that a promise of consensus does mean that the Australian Labor Party will go out and do something to restore some peace within the industrial movement and that it will not go along and revel in the delights of Australian Workers Union bashings and the like within the trade union movement. The Opposition supports the Bills. Mr ROBERT BROWN(Hunter)(6.1) —In the first instance, Mr Speaker, I would like to endorse the complimentary and very apt remarks that have been made in relation to you and your elevation today to this important, high and historic position as Speaker of the House of Representatives. I extend my personal congratulations to you as well. We are giving consideration to Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 1982-83, Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 1982-83, and the Loan Bill 1983 . As the Minister for Finance (Mr Dawkins) indicated, the purpose of the Loan Bill 1983 is to provide not for expenditures additional to those the Parliament has already approved but simply for the mechanisms for the financing of such expenditures. Appropriation Bill (No. 3) and Appropriation Bill (No. 4) are designed to deal with contingency situations of expenditure normally incurred by the Parliament and expenditure which, in part at least, has been provided for before. In addition, these Bills also provide for contingency expenditure and expenditure which has been essentially related to the disastrous bushfires and the drought. I appreciate the fact that the honourable member for Ryan (Mr Moore), who has just spoken, is a man who has more perception than he gave evidence of in the contribution he made. Some of the comments that he made will be matters of continuing debate, exposure and concern within not only this Parliament but also the general community. I find it incredible and disappointing that, despite the fact that the Leader of the House (Mr Young) sought leave from the Opposition to suspend Standing Orders in order to deal with these Bills, the Opposition chose not to provide that leave. In fact, in the process of refusing to provide leave, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock) referred to the fundamental rights of members of this Parliament. I think it is extremely important that the Opposition, right from the start, realise that while there certainly are legitimate and fundamental rights of members of parliament, this Government in the first instance and continually into the future will be giving fundamental concern to the rights of the people in the Australian community. Mr Porter —Have you seen the legislation? Mr ROBERT BROWN —It is all right for the honourable member for Barker (Mr Porter ) to make references of this kind, but for seven years too little concern was shown by the previous Government for the fundamental rights of the Australian people. The record of that previous Government is very clear. Increasingly, the Australian people became aware not only of the direction in which they had been taken as a result of the falsifications and frauds, distortions, lies and deceit of the previous Government, but also of the direction in which they were going. For that reason, despite the extreme cynicism surrounding the reasons why that most recent election was called, the Australian people on 5 March overwhelmingly showed that they had taken sufficient. Their number include those who had experienced the extreme damage, the extreme losses, associated with bushfire and drought, people who had been burnt out of their homes, who had suffered the extreme, continuing and serious hardships associated with the drought. Yet we had members of the National Party-it is no longer termed the Country Party- showing no concern, in refusing leave to introduce and deal with these measures, for rural Australia. The fact that they have distanced and divorced themselves from the interests of rural Australia has been more than adequately indicated by the attitude that they have adopted. The first significant decision to which the remnants of the discredited former Government, now in opposition, contributed in this place was that to refuse leave to the new Government, which is prepared to show concern and compassion for those who are suffering massive and continuing hardship in Australia at the present time, to introduce legislation to provide the funding necessary to aid those very seriously disadvantaged groups in the community, including people in urban Victoria who suffered the effects of the bushfires. Not only those in rural areas have been affected. For example, I was amazed to note that the honourable member for Riverina (Mr Hicks) should have been a party to such a decision. I expected better from at least some members of the National Party. The honourable member for Riverina is a person for whom I have a high personal regard. I expected that he at least would have crossed the floor and said: 'We are not going to impede the purposes and objectives of this Government in regard to providing relief for people who have suffered these serious natural disasters'. Because of the increasing awareness of the Australian people of the direction in which Australia was being taken by the previous Government, Labor on 5 March was elected to government. That was an election that we had no part in calling but, of course, we did not retreat or resile from it. We welcomed the opportunity, finally, for the Australian people to act, even though it was ten months in advance of the time when the election should have been held. It was the most cynical election in the history of this Commonwealth. We applauded the opportunity to go before the people because we knew that they would reject, discard, abandon the impossible, incompetent, shameful Government which occupied these benches before that date. Abandon that Government they did; they did it with a vengeance. Labor was able to convert a deficiency of 21 seats in this Parliament to a majority of 25. That more than clearly indicated the extent to which the Australian people were no longer prepared to tolerate the incompetent rabble who today occupy the Opposition benches. What a shameful record of economic incompetence they produced when in government. In regard to the need for additional appropriations, the honourable member for Ryan could well have referred to the fact that, although the former Government budgeted for a deficit of $1.6 billion in the current year, at about Christmas time or towards the end of the first half of the financial year, its supporters suggested that the deficit would blow out to about $4 billion. Since then we have found that not even $4 billion is sufficient to accommodate the deficit- that it will now be $4.3 billion. Well may the honourable member and some of his colleagues refer to newspaper speculation about the possibility of taxes being increased. One thing that came out of the Summit Conference was that all of the representatives of peak councils and important groups and interests in the Australian community had become aware that the economic, budgetary and fiscal situation which this Government had inherited was the worst that any government had inherited at any time since Federation. I deliberately include the period of the Great Depression. The task of resuscitating the economy, of bringing about recovery, has now fallen to a government which has not only the will but also the competence to deal with those issues. Deal with those issues this Government will. Certainly there will be an initial period in which the situation will continue to deteriorate. It will not deteriorate for seven long, horrible years. That is the experience we had under the previous Government. There will be recovery and there will be resuscitation, and that recovery and resuscitation will be brought about as a result of the policies that this Government will put into place. As the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) has said, there is no way in the world that this Government would, could or will tolerate a Budget deficit for next year of over $11 billion. That position was not of our making. In fact, it was deliberately camouflaged from the present Government, then the Opposition. It was deliberately concealed as a result of directives from the office of the former Prime Minister during the last week of the campaign. The evidence of that concealment and the documentation of the shameful form of election campaigning which was conducted by senior spokesmen who are now in opposition, one of whom has been relegated back to Nareen-although there are other guilty men as well who concealed, fabricated, falsified and engaged in lying and deceit-- Mr SPEAKER —Order! I suggest that the honourable member for Hunter realises the restrictions on the use of those terms and withdraws. Mr ROBERT BROWN —The terms may be a little colourful, Mr Speaker. Mr SPEAKER —I just ask you to withdraw them. Mr ROBERT BROWN —Deceit? Mr SPEAKER —And lying. Mr ROBERT BROWN —I will, Mr Speaker, in deference to you and because of the great respect-- Mr SPEAKER —Unqualifiedly. Mr ROBERT BROWN —I unqualifiedly withdraw the word 'lying'. In conclusion, the deliberate falsifications which were employed during the election campaign by leading personalities, leading personnel, on the present Opposition side have been well documented and increasingly the evidence of those serious falsifications will be brought before this Parliament and before the Australian people. Mr HOWARD(Bennelong) —Mr Speaker, I seek your indulgence as I claim to have been misrepresented. Mr SPEAKER —I call the honourable member. Mr HOWARD —I listened to the remarks of the honourable member for Hunter (Mr Robert Brown), a member on the Government side for whom I have always had considerable regard because of both his intelligent contributions and his vigorous debate. He made reference to remarks during the election campaign regarding the size of the deficit for 1982-83 and also possible references to a likely deficit size for 1983-84. I want through this personal explanation to say to the honourable member for Hunter that there is not one skerrick of evidence of deliberate falsification by any member of the former Government of this country in relation to either of those two items. I also through this personal explanation serve notice on the honourable member for Hunter and any other member of the Government that, if they want to debate the credit of the different sides of this House on responsible approaches to deficit financing, I will be happy to do it with them on any occasion while the Parliament sits. Mr SPEAKER —Order! The honourable member is going beyond the personal explanation. Mr ROBERT BROWN(Hunter) —Mr Speaker, I indicate that I believe I have been misrepresented and at the first opportunity I would like to respond to what has been said. Mr Porter —To apologise? Mr ROBERT BROWN —The apology is due from your side, not from ours. Mr STEELE HALL(Boothby)(6.14) —Mr Speaker, I tender my congratulations to you on the well-merited position you now hold and for which you were so ably supported by all honourable members. I would like firstly to refer to remarks made by the Special Minister of State (Mr Young) when he initiated the movement of these Bills into the House. He often hides his wisdom under many of the political ploys in which he continually engages but on this occasion he made one thing quite clear. It will be of great interest to all members of the House and to the public generally to know that the Government will run its full three-year term. He has without qualification, adopted a stance which derides early elections. His criticism of the previous Government for going to the people 10 months early was made in such a determined fashion that one can only deduce quite clearly that the speculation which is already rife in the community about an election late next year is simply speculation and is false. Mr Young —I will let you know. Mr STEELE HALL —The Special Minister of State has let us know his attitute quite clearly today. He has adopted a stance. We did not ask him a question. In fact, as the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock) has said, we have not been able to ask any questions today. We did not ask the Special Minister of State for that jewel of wisdom. In an unqualified fashion he gave us his views on early elections. Of course, if he is to run with the new code of conduct about which he and his Government have spoken so frequently, he will maintain that position. I find that of very great interest. We will be looking for future indications of the maintenance of that attitude. I would like to refer to the natural disaster which overtook so much of Australia recently. Certainly the people of Victoria and South Australia were the victims of a disaster on a State and national scale-a scale that was undreamed of by the people who lived in the areas affected. It was a disaster that touched the districts of many honourable members. I know that the district of the honourable member for Barker (Mr Porter) was decimated by the fires in the south-east of South Australia. My own district was extremely devastated by the fires. The consequences of losses on two fronts will be felt for many years to come. We had property and stock damage but that was nothing compared with the loss of life and the injuries which were sustained in that disaster. It was a very sobering experience to travel through fire devastated areas the next day and to find the smouldering ruins of homes and vehicles and to see the victims. It was horrifying. As my colleague the honourable member for Ryan (Mr Moore) has said, Australia responded in a magnificent way. Before mentioning the previous Government's attitude and action in this matter one must, of course, congratulate all the people of Australia upon responding so quickly to the appeals that were conducted in areas far distant from the scene of the fires. It is a magnificent commentary on the Australian community that it could respond in this way and assist those who were so gravely injured. Of course, the previous Government did respond magnificently too. Its was a response that possibly cost it some political support in the sense that the election campaign which had been mounted was interrupted. But there was no thought of that campaign and politics in Australia stopped for several days. That too, I suppose, is a tribute to politicians of all colours. The previous Government deserves the highest commendation for meeting the request of States and individuals so promptly and for providing relief which in no way can compensate people anywhere near fully for the damage they have sustained personally or in the business sense. It was a move supported Australia-wide and one for which, as I said, the previous Government deserves the highest commendation. A number of factors are still arising and will arise for some time from the assistance that is being given. For instance I am told, again by my colleague the honourable member for Barker, that there is still an unresolved taxation question. It is assumed that money allocated from the funds collected will not be taxed. I understand that an answer has yet to be given in this matter. If the Minister for Finance (Mr Dawkins), who is at the table, could give that answer today it would allay quite a few fears which exist in the community. I do not want to make a lot of it because I do not want in any way to trade politics in that area; but it is an issue and I run into it in my district. There is also another factor, about which I contacted the Minister for Social Security (Senator Grimes) and to which he promised to give immediate attention. That was a problem that arose from the fact that a number of people have had insurance pay-outs for lost property, have still no means of livelihood and have been placed on a special benefit, and the possession of their home or business, but principally their home, in cash temporarily as an insurance pay-out before they purchase another, prejudices their ability to receive special or unemployment benefits. I raise that matter simply as an illustration of the problem which can arise unexpectedly. It is a problem that I have placed before the Minister in another place. I hope and trust that he is giving attention to it. It was something that worried several of my constituents, and I know that it must apply in many dozens of cases because of the enormity of the disaster. The question of the need for future research also arises. Obviously, in these disaster areas there ought not to be simply an assumption that it will not happen again in a generation, or that it happens only in a generation, and that we can withstand such things or provide the same support systems in a similar disaster in the future. Future disasters should be planned out of the system as much as possible. A great deal can be done following the work carried out after the Darwin disaster which produced, in regard to cyclones, very real improvements in buildings and planning means by which the effects of future disasters could be ameliorated. Much could be done, too, in relation to fire in forested and occupied areas. There needs to be some determined effort to see that life can be saved on the properties which are hit by fire. There needs to be some life-saving aspect in relation to shelter while the fire is passing. There needs to be some determined attention to the design and construction of buildings, and there is need, perhaps beyond anything else, to give great attention to planning and incentives , or perhaps compulsions, in relation to fire prevention activities by residents on their own properties. Beyond that too, possibly, will be a need to codify further the means by which natural diasters are met by State and Federal governments. Soon after the fire disaster in South Australia, we had a flood disaster, in which millions of dollars were lost and property damage was incurred, and the same conditions as pertain to fire do not, of course, apply to flood. So there seems to be a need for the Government to codify and clarify the type of assistance which is automatically provided under the existing system in relation to State governments. I turn to the question of the Summit. My colleague the honourable member for Ryan dealt with the matter at some length and made some pertinent comments about it. It was marked by a number of factors. One of them was mentioned by the honourable member for Hunter (Mr Robert Brown) when he said: 'The Government will make decisions'. It would seem that the last thing the Government wanted to do was to make decisions on its own initiative when it constructed the Summit in this place the other week. In any event, we all know that there was great eagerness by most of the people who attended that Summit, if not all of them, to achieve something. They did not come here to propagandise. The debates here to which one could listen or which one could read about proved that point. However, the public's vision of the Summit, that it was a consensus and that from it will come great economic progress, or at least that there will come programs which will assist the community in its many present problems, is quickly eroding. It is interesting to compare parts of the printed communique. One of them, paragraph 20, appears on the front page of the Australian today. It states: It is recognised that if a centralised system is to work effectively as the only way in which wage increases are generated, a suppression of sectional claims is essential except in special or extraordinary circumstances proved before the centralised wage-fixing authority. One therefore takes the view that there will be a great deal of constraint. All delegates who attended the Summit went away with the view that there must be a suppression of sectional interest and the forgoing, at least for a significant period, of wage rises, dividend increases and the like, which otherwise would have taken place. But one now finds that Mr Dolan of the Australian Council of Trade Unions is already making statements which substantially and significantly erode the consensus which was supposed to have been arrived at last week. Dr Theophanous —That's not true. Mr STEELE HALL —I will read to the hon- ourable member for Burke (Dr Theophanous ) a statement made by Mr Dolan. This is a quote from, not simply a description of, an off-the-cuff or on-the-kerb interview he gave last night. He said: The whole accord breaks down if the commission goes back to some discounting system or some 80 per cent arrangement . . . then that busts the accord . . . Of course, the accord was not featured to that extent at the Summit. Mr Dolan was giving his first allegiance to the accord. The accord needs to be quoted in parallel with the remarks made last night by Mr Dolan, because it is the agreement which the ACTU has with the Government. It does not relate to the results of the Summit. In relation to wages and working conditions, a most significant paragraph of the accord states: To protect the purchasing power of wages and salaries the adoption of a system of full cost of living adjustments will be strongly supported in tripartite consultations and before industrial tribunals. Mr Dolan, therefore, in supporting the accord with the Government which he did unstintingly last night, supports the provisions of the accord which are contrary to the results and meaning of the Summit. If that is not a significant erosion within one week, what can be called an erosion? The Summit took place. It was mentioned four or five times in a speech made in the other place today as the base for Government action. Already it is becoming meaningless, because we have a determination to support the accord at the expense of the Summit. They are not the same things. The public will be very disillusioned if those who represented business and commerce give their unqualified support to the Summit while another key figure representing unions runs away and supports something else. Indeed, we will not have an erosion of the Summit; we will have a collapse . In making that statement I make no attack on Mr Dolan's character. He is simply a prisoner of his own militants, who, while the Summit was meeting, were on strike at the site of the new Parliament House in the very city in which the Summit was being held. We are supposed to have a Summit and a consensus. I hope that we can achieve a consensus. All I can say is that if the consensus breaks down, those who break it will be known. We know who they are and what they represent. The vision at the moment is not a happy one. In closing, I state my protest at the misuse of the defence forces in spying on Government works in Tasmania. I do so because one of the Bills now before us contains a vote specifically to pay for fuel for the defence forces. I suppose that by this vote we are paying for the fuel of the plane that flew at about 300 feet over the dam works in Tasmania. So we are supporting this spying activity by voting for this Bill. I suppose we could keep it at that level. We could call it a spying activity. We could say that it is simply a result of instability in the Attorney-General (Senator Gareth Evans). We could say that he has some visions of grandeur. He plays strategy with real planes instead of buttons on a board. As has been said, he has been called Biggles. In fact, when I heard today in the Governor-General's Speech that we were to have a kangaroo monitoring system I had no doubt who would monitor the kangaroos of Australia; it would be the Attorney-General. He will make a low level and a high level pass every day over their watering holes. But I see some conflict. I see that the Minister for Defence (Mr Scholes) is selling all the Navy's planes and I would not be at all surprised if he receives a reprimand from the Attorney-General. The Attorney- General will not want to give up his air force as easily as that. But on a more serious note I refer to the description that the Government gave today when it made some serious remarks about the need to defend Australia. It used those remarks in a determined and serious manner. The remarks in that speech have not been matched by the Government's action so far in the scandalous misuse of Defence personnel and equipment. I use the word 'personnel'. It is not a pleasant thing to think that Australians who may have been recruited from any part of this continent are sent spying against one of the States in this Federation. I lodge my protest at this early stage and I support my leader wholeheartedly in his spirited attack on the Government today for the cavalier way in which it introduced these Bills. For the content of these Bills, for the support they give to the previous Government's program, I support them. Mr SPEAKER —When I was calling the honourable member for Boothby (Mr Steele Hall ), the honourable member for Hunter (Mr Robert Brown) was indicating that he had been misrepresented. I take it that he wishes to correct any misrepresentation. Mr ROBERT BROWN(Hunter) —Yes, Mr Speaker, very briefly. By implication, the comments of the honourable member for Bennelong (Mr Howard) in his personal explanation cast doubts on the credibility of the position that I adopted during the debate. I just say that the claims that I made during the debate are more than adequately documented. Dr THEOPHANOUS(Burke)(6.33) —I was very disappointed to hear the previous speaker, the honourable member for Boothby (Mr Steele Hall), attack the President of the Australian Council of Trade Unions when that gentleman was not present and had not been consulted. What the honourable member said was a total misrepresentation of what Mr Dolan was talking about. It is about time that the Opposition-I am very glad to see that it is the Opposition-got its act together and its facts straight. What Mr Dolan was talking about was the content of the accord. He was not talking about the agreement and the statement that he made that the wages situation would be achieved over time. He has not gone back on that statement. I notice that the honourable member for Bennelong (Mr Howard) is about to leave the chamber. I advise him not to do so because I have some comments to make about his behaviour. I notice that he objected to the remarks of the honourable member for Hunter (Mr Robert Brown), claiming that in fact he was not responsible for this outrageous difference in the Budget deficit and in the Budget figures. If he was not responsible, who was? If the Treasurer of this country, as he then was, was not responsible, then who was responsible for misleading the nation on this matter? This is not the first occasion that it has happened; there have been many other occasions. For example, last year we were told that the Budget deficit would be $1.7 billion for this year; it has turned out to be $4.3 billion. It is because of such things that we now have to introduce legislation for more money and more loans in order to cover the deficit created by the actions of the previous Government. Mr Braithwaite —Don't you want to help those in the drought areas? Dr THEOPHANOUS —I will come to the positive aspects. There are other positive aspects in the Bill relating to drought and bushfire relief. I agree with the comments of the honourable member for Boothby about the excellent performance of the Australian nation in disaster situations. The northern part of my electorate -the Macedon area-was almost totally burned down. I went out there and I experienced at first hand the suffering of the people there. It was an extraordinary situation. It was as if there had been a war. Certainly every member of this House wholeheartedly supports these measures. That is why I was surprised to find the Opposition attempting to delay them even further. These measures must be implemented as soon as possible so that these people can receive their relief. I hope that this relief will be distributed in a proper and equitable fashion so that all concerned receive their true share on the basis of need. I return to the point I was making earlier concerning other aspects of this Bill. I start with the economic situation. Until the election of this Government we had seen the worst economic indicators for 50 years in this country. In the 12 months from March last year unemployment went from 6.6 per cent to 10.4 per cent. We can see how the figures developed month after month. I ask leave of the House to incorporate in Hansard a table which illustrates this matter. Leave granted. The table read as follows- COMMONWEALTH PARLIAMENTARY LIBRARY STATISTICS GROUP 1.2 UNEMPLOYMENT-ORIGINAL SERIES Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Number-'000 1979 446.2 453.9 425.0 416.8 396.6 389.3 382.5 373.8 396.5 387.8 360.6 426.9 1980 437.8 444.5 412.4 404.5 413.6 406.0 385.4 392.3 405.5 375.7 357.0 432.0 1981 430.4 424.1 409.9 376.0 375.5 350.2 374.8 377.1 391.1 370.4 371.9 433.3 1982 439.6 484.4 459.7 436.2 449.9 447.8 450.3 458.5 505.9 536.8 552.0 674.0 1983 691.7 747.3 731.6 Unemployment Rate (a)-% 1979 7.0 7.0 6.6 6.4 6.2 6.0 5.9 5.8 6.1 6.0 5.5 6.4 1980 6.7 6.7 6.2 6.1 6. 2 6.1 5.8 5.9 6.0 5.6 5.4 6.3 1981 6.5 6.3 6.0 5.6 5.6 5.2 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.5 5.5 6.3 1982 6.5 7.0 6.6 6.4 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.7 7.3 7.7 8.0 9.6 1983 10.1 10.7 10.4 (a) Number unemployed as a percentage of the labour force. Update: Early May Source: The Labour Force, ABS (6202.0, 6203.0). Dr THEOPHANOUS —Unemployment is not the only problem. Poverty has increased to the point where over two million Australians are living below the poverty line. Interest rates went up dramatically under the previous Government, but promise after promise had been made that they would be controlled. All this was based on a theory which has been discredited throughout the world-the monetarist, Friedmanite policy of the honourable member for Bennelong and his supporter, the former Prime Minister. That theory was that by creating unemployment-that is what they set out to do and that is what they deliberately did-they would bring inflation under control. What did they do? They achieved one of the worst inflation rates in the world and one of the worst unemployment rates as well. That is the legacy of that Government, and the Australian people know that. The Australian people will not forgive honourable members opposite unless they abandon totally these discredited policies. Has there been any indication from members of the Opposition that they have learned a lesson from the election, from the complete and utter rejection of their policies by the people of this country? There was certainly no indication of that in the speeches we heard today, especially the speech from the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock). He talked about how he too would like to see national unity and reconciliation, but he did not state one positive policy that he would support to achieve that great goal. He did not state that the Liberal and National parties had learned any lessons from the election and were prepared to abandon their disastrous monetarist policies and to support a new neo- Keynesian approach, an approach based on expansion of the economy and on redistribution. During the last seven years, under the previous Government, there was a redistribution from the poor and low income people to the rich and the wealthy, the people whom the Liberal Party has traditionally represented. It refused to implement taxes on the wealthy. It refused to close loopholes for many years until forced to do so by our policies. Now honourable members opposite are not even prepared to give an unqualified commitment to the redistributive, neo-Keynesian approach adopted by the Summit. Let us make it clear that the Opposition's traditional supporters have now abandoned it. The forces of the business sector realise that it is only through growth in the economy that all sectors of the economy can prosper. That growth can be achieved only by abandoning the ridiculous monetarist approach-the screwing down of the economy for seven years-and adopting the completely different approach which this Government represents. During that period we also had a lot of talk about the taxation system. We were promised reforms. We were promised action to plug the loopholes. Time and again this was not achieved. This Government, contrary to what the honourable member for Ryan (Mr Moore) was saying earlier, will be concerned with plugging those loopholes and, when it is in a position to reduce taxes on the poor and on low income families, it will do so. But let no one think that it will allow to continue the kinds of tax rip-offs that occurred under the previous Government. Let me say this: The Economic Summit was an historic occasion in which all sectors of the Australian economy- Mr Shipton —Did you go to it? Dr THEOPHANOUS —Yes, I did as a matter of fact. I did attend and I did not see you there. Mr Shipton —I was not invited. Dr THEOPHANOUS —You could have come as an observer. Leaving that aside, the people at the Economic Summit adopted the principle of an equitable sharing of burdens during the period when we are trying to stimulate growth and get the economy moving. That is the principle that was adopted. Contrary to the snide comments by the honourable member for Boothby (Mr Steele Hall), the union movement led in offering sacrifices and in offering a situation in which we can start to get the economy moving again. That was an historic achievement on the part of the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) and everyone concerned with the Summit. The Opposition today offers nothing positive. It offers no support, no change in policy and no change in direction. The people who have brought about the virtual economic destruction of this nation offer nothing new. When will we hear something new from the Liberal and National Parties? Or are they destined to go into the dustbin of history with no ideas and no positive outlook? The passage of these Appropriation Bills is needed immediately. There will be other Bills coming forward to implement our economic policy. The most important of these Bills will be those concerned with the creation of a large number of jobs so that we can put Australia back to work. Those Bills when introduced, we hope, will attract bipartisan support. We hope, with the support of the Opposition, that those Bills will not be debated in the shabby manner that we have heard from the Opposition today. We want co-operation in a policy of growth. But co- operation entails that the Opposition must do a bit of self-criticism and look at its own destructive approach which has brought about its own downfall. It must look at the possibility that it was wrong in its monetarist policies. It must try to adapt to a new theoretical model as to how we can get the economy moving. It must support the adoption of a new approach which will create jobs to get the economy of this country growing and prospering again. Mr LLOYD(Murray)(6.44) —Mr Speaker, first of all, may I add my congratulations to those already tendered to you on your elevation to the Speakership. Because of a certain interest that you and your family have in the electorate of Murray, I think that your election to your high office is the closest that my electorate will come for some time to providing the Speaker of this chamber. The previous speaker, the honourable member for Burke (Dr Theophanous), seemed to be rather confused. I would suggest that, before he embarks on another 10 or 15 minutes of bombast such as we have just heard, he should sort himself out a little. On the one hand, he has been critical of the previous Government because the deficit for the current financial year will be about $4 billion compared with the Budget night estimate-and I emphasise the word 'estimate'-of about $1.7 billion. But, if I remember correctly all of the proceedings leading up to the introduction of the Budget last year, whenever some guesstimate came from the then Government of what the estimated deficit might be, from the Labor side of the House would immediately come the comment: 'That is not enough'. Quite a lot of leapfrogging went on. Labor was always at the top in regard to what it considered to be the correct level of the deficit. When in Opposition, the Australian Labor Party said that the deficit should be at least $4 billion. It cannot have it both ways. It cannot on the one hand say that the deficit was wrong, that somehow or other it has been handed something bad because the deficit has reached somewhere near what the Labor Party at one time considered was the correct figure. Also, the Labor Party cannot have it both ways in respect of its confused line of thinking. On the one hand it criticised this side of the House for the so-called monetarist or Friedmanite policies which were followed and on the other hand praises the neo-Keynesian approach to government which surely would have meant a deficit at least that high or higher. So I suggest that the honourable member sort out his thinking a little bit more and remember what he said when he was on the other side of the chamber before he makes any further speeches in this place. The legislation before us provides for, among other things, advances to meet the requirements of the natural disasters relief fund and the procedures and arrangements that follow from that. In a way I agree with the honourable member for Boothby (Mr Steele Hall), a previous speaker from this side of the House, that the advances that are required now from the legislation are a tribute to the previous Government. Faced with the two greatest natural disasters in our history-the greatest drought and the greatest bushfires-the previous Government responded generously, promptly and comprehensively to a degree beyond what any previous government has ever done. I believe that the part of this legislation relating to the advance is a tribute to the previous Government. First of all I want to refer to the great natural disaster that took place on Ash Wednesday, the great bushfires that swept through southern Australia. The toll from those bushfires, of course, is still rising because there have been a further two deaths in the last week or 10 days. The last holocaust took place on Black Friday in 1939. However, the intensity, the extent and the severity of Ash Wednesday and the days following was even greater than the fire on Black Friday. Certain things became obvious immediately the fires burst out in southern Victoria and the south east of South Australia. The first was the bravery of the volunteer fire fighters who fought the fires in South Australia and Victoria. This bravery led to the loss of a number of lives. Some volunteer fire fighters who gave their time voluntarily and knew the dangers paid the supreme sacrifice. On behalf of those on this side of the House I want to pay a tribute to all volunteer fire fighters. I am not just talking about the job they did on Ash Wednesday. I also have in mind the time they give every week to training and the opportunities for advancing their careers which they would perhaps miss. Fire fighters are basically regional and country people. Once again this shows the dedication of people who live outside the metropolitan areas of this country. My area was not affected at all by these fires. However, a large number of volunteers from my area and from other areas of Victoria and South Australia which were not affected by the fires gave their time and risked their lives to go down and fight alongside other volunteers. The second thing that immediately becomes obvious is the great generosity of Australians. Other members have referred to this and I support what they have said. I think that about $20m has been donated. One can always be proud of being an Australian when one sees and is aware of the great natural generosity of Australians in times of real crisis. The third obvious point is the response of the then Prime Minister, the right honourable member for Wannon, the Rt. Hon. Malcolm Fraser. To his great credit and to the great credit of the then Government he did two things. First of all he arranged for an immediate advance of $16m to the two States ahead of the ordinary payment requirements under the natural disaster relief arrangements. Secondly, he declared a moratorium on campaigning in a critical period and this was his loss rather than the then Opposition's loss. However, the point I want to make is that the then Prime Minister declared and led a moratorium. I think that is to his credit and to the credit of all others who were in that situation at that time. What about the period since the fires-the aftermath, the post-mortems? This is always a far more difficult matter. I think one of the things that have become obvious concerns the inability of the Government of Victoria. I am not having a crack at the present State Government. This would probably be true of any State government faced with the magnitude of this situation. But it is obvious that the State Government was not ready to implement what was necessary for relief and reconstruction afterwards. There was no structure or no arrangements which would automatically follow. I support a previous speaker from this side of the House who indicated that there is a need, at least at the State level, for legislation to be already implemented so that everybody in that State knows that whenever the next disaster of that magnitude strikes certain things will follow and certain procedures will be adopted. For example, donations should not be paid into the consolidated revenue of the State Government. I think that is an insult to the generosity of the individuals who make the donation. Legislation for special trust funds should be already in place. There should also be ready the criteria for the distribution of those funds and for other relief so that everybody knows quite clearly in advance that if they take certain actions certain assistance will follow. For example, the ratio of assistance between people who lose private dwellings and people whose businesses as well as homes have been burnt should be considered. I believe at this stage sufficient generosity is not given to those whose livelihood, whose future income as well as their private homes are lost as a result of fire or whatever the natural disaster may be. It has come up time and time again in Victoria-it may have arisen also in South Australia-that business people have not been treated as well as those who have just had their houses burnt down. One can use the example of the need in the farming area around Warrnambool for certain basic capital expenditures on fencing to hold livestock for the future before any income can be gained. It is almost impossible for the business sector to gain any form of meaningful government welfare assistance. There should also be a criterion for the degree of generosity between a person whose principal home is burnt and somebody whose holiday or second home is burnt . This problem has been experienced because quite a number of holiday homes were burnt out in southern Victoria on this occasion. The third criterion which is needed-this has been mentioned by previous speakers from this side-would provide an incentive for people to insure their houses. It would be wrong for a person who neglected to adopt a personal responsiblity to receive greater generosity than somebody who had taken some care in this matter. I come now to the Federal Government and its responsibilities and problems in the aftermath of these disasters. The first point I want to put to the Minister for Finance (Mr Dawkins) is that one of the forms of tremendous generosity that were provided during the fires was donations in kind by other farmers in areas already drought stricken. One of those forms of donation was the provision of fodder. Fodder was needed more than money to keep livestock alive in southern Victoria in the days immediately following the fires. Because of the greatest drought in our history there was already a shortage of fodder. However, those donations were not tax deductible. I appeal to the Minister to consider that situation because that was a donation far more generous than money. Money would have been useless in the circumstances. I understand there is still the problem of what happens to the advances made to people as fire relief and whether that is tax deductible. However, the main point I want to concentrate the Government' s attention on is whether it is possible to do something about donations in kind , particularly when they are given with such generosity. Secondly, I want to draw the Government's attention to the future of water bombing as a fire fighting technique. In the 1981-82 fire season the previous Government implemented a series of research and development measures to improve our ability to fight fires, particularly of this kind, in the future. I ask for this Government's continued support. Mr Dawkins —Is this a bit of encouragement for the Attorney-General? Mr LLOYD —I mean the right sorts of fires, not his particular form of fire over Tasmania. Hercules aircraft have been used in this form of fire fighting. The Royal Australian Air Force has been involved, to my knowledge, in water bombing techniques. Other techniques in ground fire fighting are also being developed with this research grant. I understand that we are at the stage at which tenders could be called for water-bombing equipment so that we are better equipped to fight these sorts of fires in the future. I ask that the present Government continue to honour that commitment in order to get somewhere with these developments. The other point I want to make relates to the future. First of all, the single most important point relating to Victoria is that the Country Fire Authority must be retained as a separate volunteer organisation and certain people in the Victorian Government should not proceed with their attempt to create just a paid force in Victoria and to amalgamate the two relevant organisations. The result would be disastrous, as we can see if we compare the ability of the volunteers to respond to the recent crisis with that of the other fire fighting organisation. The second thing is that the Victorian Government, or any other State government for that matter, has to look again at the level of insurance and income maintenance for the families of volunteers who paid the supreme sacrifice in those fires. Those measures have also proved to be inadequate. The next point-it has already been made-is that there is a need for sensible conservation measures to reduce the risk of that sort of fire or holocaust occurring again. By sensible conservation I do not mean exclusion. Some people are tending to use the term in that way. In some areas of Melbourne people have now been burned out twice-in 1939 and again this year-and no lessons seem to have been learned. The necessity for precautionary strategic burning is so obvious from this situation. It should be done both in forest commission areas and in some of the hilly and treed suburbs of Melbourne. There are certain elementary preventive measures that people should take to reduce the risk to themselves and to others in the future, and the influence of those who would exclude sensible prevention measures has to be overcome. I support the point that has also been made on this side that if necessary the CFA should have some sort of power to lay down agreed criteria to see that certain prevention is undertaken in some of the more fire prone areas. The next matter I want to talk about is the drought. We have had the worst drought in our history, the driest year on record. Once again, the drought advances by the previous Federal Government, resulting particularly from the work of Peter Nixon, have been the most generous, prompt and comprehensive ever. I refer not only to Federal-State arrangements-we successfully applied pressure to State governments to increase the range of those measures and the level of support-but also to the Federal-only arrangements through the fodder and interest rate subsidies. During debates about the drought and the need for a national drought or fodder reserve people have tended to overlook the fact that there is a national drought reserve in existence in Australia. I refer to the wheat stocks held and paid for by the wheat growers throughout this country. I think credit and congratulations are due to the wheat growers of this country for the way they paid for the maintenance of wheat stocks in this country which then became so invaluable for fodder during this drought. I want to make the point to the Government that it is tremendously important for it to continue with these drought measures and not to stop them just because there has been some rain. There are cash flow problems which in many situations, particularly for wheat growers, will not become obvious for six to nine months. Whatever the Government does, if it is genuine in its assistance for people in the aftermath of the drought, there must be a continuation of the drought measures for some months because the cash flow problems will become obvious only at a later stage. The final point is that it would be completely foolish if the Government, in its cost cutting measures, were to interfere in any way with the taxation incentives which have been of tremendous value in encouraging farmers to improve the water and fodder conservation measures which were brought in by the previous Government to encourage self-sufficiency and self-reliance in these difficult times. I support the legislation, particularly those aspects relating to the advances for the natural disaster relief fund. Mr DAWKINS(Fremantle-Minister for Finance)(7.0) —in reply-I thank honourable members who participated in this debate. The honourable member for Boothby (Mr Steele Hall) and the honourable member for Murray (Mr Lloyd) raised questions about the taxation of certain contributions, in either cash or kind, to fire and flood victims. I will have those matters examined and write to them as soon as I can. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bills read a second time. Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced. Leave granted for third readings to be moved forthwith. Bills (on motion by Mr Dawkins) read a third time. Bill presented by Dr Blewett, and read a first time. Dr BLEWETT(Bonython-Minister for Health)(7.3) —I move: That the Bill be now read a second time. The Social Security Amendment Bill will increase the weekly rate of unemployment benefit for persons aged 18 or more who have no dependants. From 1 May 1983, the benefit will rise from $64.40 to $68.65 a week, so that those persons will be paid the additional amount of the automatic consumer price index increase which eligible pensioners and married beneficiaries will receive. Our intention to pass this measure on the first day of the Thirty-third Parliament reflects this Government's determination to give the highest emphasis to relief for the chief victims of the recession. This urgency is symbolic, but also practical because unless action is taken today the adjustment will not be possible on 1 May when all pensioners and the unemployed with dependants will receive automatic increases. It is the view of the Government that there has been an unwarranted cut in the living standards of the single adult unemployed since 1978. Between 1973 and 1978, the single adult unemployment benefit rate was the same as the rate for single pensioners and sickness beneficiaries. In 1978, the previous Government froze this rate of benefit while continuing to index pension and sickness benefit rates. Since then, the pension has had eight automatic CPI adjustments while the single adult unemployment benefit has had only three minor ad hoc increases. The rate is now around 17 per cent below the standard rate of pension and sickness benefit and, without the May increase, would fall to some 22 per cent below the standard pension rate. It would also be less than half the rate payable to a married unemployed couple. It cannot be in dispute that the unemployed are the major victims of the economic downturn of the past few years. The demoralisation of the unemployed due to their jobless state has been compounded in the discrimination evident in the lower payments made to them by the previous Government. During the election campaign the Government committed itself to return to the pre-1978 position by progressively increasing the single adult unemployment benefit rate to the single pension rate. This Bill represents the first step towards achieving that goal. The cost of adjusting the unemployment benefit by this initiative is estimated at $15m for the remainder of this financial year and a total of $106m in the year 1983-84. The passage of this Bill will assist an estimated average of some 400,000 single adult beneficiaries this financial year and an estimated average of 480,000 in 1983-84. These totals include special beneficiaries and sickness beneficiaries whose benefit rate is limited to the single rate of unemployment benefit. Finally, I note that despite the heavy economic burdens this Government has inherited this Bill reflects the Government's unwavering commitment to eliminate discrimination against the victims of economic recession. I commend the Bill to the House. Mr CARLTON(Mackellar)(7.7) —Mr Speaker, I join with other members in congratulating you on your election as Speaker. I think you will know that there is a very genuine feeling on this side of the House that this was a fine election. We will do our best, within the constraints placed on us by the difficulties of opposition, to play the game. The Social Security Amendment Bill, which is before the House, seeks to set the unemployment benefit for single persons aged 18 years or more at $68.65, compared with the existing rate of $64.40. The Opposition supports the Bill, not only because it is sensible but also because it embraces a commitment made by Mr Malcolm Fraser in his policy speech on 15 February this year. I imagine that there will be a necessity for this Australian Labor Party Government to take the many further steps foreshadowed by the Minister for Health (Dr Blewett) to provide additional financial support for the unemployed, as this Government has so clearly identified itself as a government that accepts a continuing high rate of unemployment as a matter of policy. Today in this House we are in the quite extraordinary position of standing, as elected representatives of all the people, in second place to those who were chosen representatives of entrenched and powerful interest groups. I am an elected representative, not a chosen representative. I represent all the people, not the organised groups. I speak on behalf of those excluded from the National Economic Summit Conference. Today, in my remarks on this Bill, in particular, I speak on behalf of the unemployed. Again, as I do not represent an existing interest group dependent on government protection or largesse and am not fearful of a cessation of benefits, I do not feel obliged to congratulate the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) on his capacity to assemble and charm the group of people most likely to provide willing or conscripted endorsement of the disgraceful deal cooked up between the ALP and the Australian Council of Trade Unions before the election. This so- called accord-this deal-was and is a recipe for the continuing exclusion of 10 per cent or more of the work force from the opportunity to earn gainful reward for employment. Mr Scott —What was it before? For seven years you did not care about them. Mr CARLTON —I remind the honourable member for Hindmarsh that the good thing about the Summit meeting was the information that was made available to the Australian people about the forward options for the economy. In a spirit of consensus, I certainly support that action to that degree. The interesting thing about these options with regard to unemployment is that they are all high unemployment options. Option A, which allowed for no wage catch-up for consumer price index increases prior to the current pause but involved a wage increase of 3 per cent in the latter half of 1983 and a return to full quarterly indexation and annual productivity cases subsequently, would allow for an unemployment rate of 9.7 per cent in 1985-86. That is a total unemployment level, three years down the line, of 710,000. That was the option which the Treasurer (Mr Keating) seemed to favour. Option B, which gave full catch-up and full quarterly indexation and productivity increases, would increase unemployment from 10.6 per cent in 1983- 84, to 11.7 per cent in 1984-85 and 12.2 per cent-or 880,000 people-by 1985-86. Of course, that is a pretty horrific scenario. Option C-under which the pause would be extended to April 1984, with half yearly partial indexation following that and productivity increases from 1 April 1985-would allow for a small fall in unemployment over the three years from 9.7 per cent in 1983-84 to 8.7 per cent three years down the line but still at the very high level of 640,000 unemployed. The difference between options A and C, if we take the apparently favoured option of the Government-option C is the slightly harder option-would be about 70,000 jobs in 1985-86. I draw attention to the comparatively small difference even there between a hard option, as some would see it, and a slightly softer option apparently favoured by the Government. But both of them, I remind the House, are looking at unemployment levels of the order of 700,000 people. The late Sir Keith Campbell-for whom I had a very high regard-pointed out that the three scenarios were just not good enough if one was really concerned about the unemployed. He put forward the idea of an option D. Unfortunately the idea of the Summit was to do as much as it could for the unemployed without disturbing existing privileges and practices. This is quite clear from the communique that was issued, because part of it-item 5-states in part: To arrest and reverse that decline demands the generation of high growth rates for long periods. Item 6 states: To ensure that such generated growth is equitably and efficiently distributed requires a community prepared to place a priority on employment and a restraint on self-interest. However, the basic tenets to which all Australians aspire remain fundamentally unaltered. I will repeat that, Mr Speaker, because it is very important and central to the whole communique: . . . the basic tenets to which all Australians aspire remain fundamentally unaltered. In other words, all these powerful interest groups represented at the Summit remained unaltered in their views about their legitimate requirements. The communique goes on in item 8 to state: It is a legitimate expectation that income of the employed shall be increased in real terms through time in line with productivity. In good times, and if nearly 10 per cent of the population were not unemployed, I think one would applaud that objective. But unfortunately in the communique that objective overshadows the interests of the unemployed. The end result of this communique is an acceptance of virtually no change in unemployment levels over three years, even assuming that the parties to the Summit exercised the restraint which they said they would exercise-and there is some doubt about that . Mr Ivan Hodgson, the Federal Secretary of the Transport Workers Union and a member of the Executive of the ACTU, which is a party to the accord, said this on the program PM on 19 April 1983: I don't recall agreeing to wage restraint at the Summit. The actions of the building unions at the very same time the Summit was under way and since cast grave doubts on the capacity of the ACTU to deliver. Mr Dolan 's actions over the last 48 hours seem to indicate that there will be a dressing up of the building union demands in a different way to make them appear more reasonable and more apparently in accordance with the Summit spirit. Of course, they will not be that. They will still be unrealistic and outrageous demands. Really if there is not any exercise of restraint coming out of the Summit this could lead, in effect, to the following of option B or worse. I suggest that there is a very real danger of option B, or worse, being followed if the Gallaghers, Hodgsons and Dolans, who are doing their best in trying to cover up these breaks in the dyke, have their way. I remind the House that Option B means an unemployment rate of 12.2 per cent or an extra 200,000 unemployed by 1985-86. There are very many questions to be asked on behalf of the unemployed who were unrepresented at the Summit Conference. What real steps can be taken to share out whatever work is available? If there is a genuine belief in the community that people who are unemployed must be looked after and that something more drastic has to be done about it-if, as the late Sir Keith Campbell said, it is unacceptable to have scenarios which all point to unemployment of 700,000 odd in three years time-what are the questions which must be raised? What structure within the community must be questioned if something is to be done for those people? The first question one has to ask is the general one about the level of wages. The industrialists at the meeting said that even a 3 per cent wage increase later this year will definitely cost jobs. Speaker after speaker said this and yet a group of people looked at the first scenario, which provides for a 3 per cent wage increase, and allowed it to go virtually unquestioned in the minds of Government Ministers. How does one agree to further wage increases if one knows that they will put people out of jobs? It may be that the industrial realities will not allow one to do anything about it. At page 33 of the Summit projections document, projection C, the so-called hard option, states: It should be noted that these assumed wage-setting arrangements would not appear to be fully consistent with the prices and incomes accord as it now stands and might well be judged unrealistic on industrial relations grounds. In other words, even the hardest of the three projections-that in itself, I remind honourable members, will still lead to unemployment levels of 640,000 in three years time-is not acceptable to the ACTU in its accord with the Labor Party. In other words the ACTU has vetoed an option which would have some minor effect in reducing unemployment; it would be industrially unrealistic. It is not acceptable for any government of either persuasion to sit back and say that there are realities, apparently beyond our control, which prevent us from drawing attention to this continuing outrage. I believe that whichever government is in power it will have to face up to these quite fundamental questions. There is the real question of the level of wages. If the pause has to be maintained until well into next year in order to bring about a real effective cut in wages to allow people at least to hold their jobs, that should be said and we should not allow the Dolans, the Hodgsons and the Gallaghers of this world to try to bully us into thinking otherwise. We also have to be concerned about the wage rules that prevent employment. There are very many things which are difficult to talk about within the high priesthood of the conciliation and arbitration system. The very interests that were represented in this chamber at the Summit are the ones which meet with great ceremony before this body year after year and which carve up the economy between the strongly entrenched groups to the disadvantage of the unemployed. That continues year in and year out. Unfortunately, those proceedings have a mesmeric effect on people who might otherwise ask sensible questions. For example, there are real questions about minimum wages which are set at a level which prevents the unskilled, the inexperienced or the disabled from being employed. Governments of our persuasion and also the incoming Government, in effect, recognise this to a degree by providing employment subsidies to employers in order to try to employ these unskilled, inexperienced or disabled people. But those are only ways and means of overcoming a distorted market situation which should be looked at to see whether the structure of minimum wages in Australia is one which automatically forces those people out of jobs. The next area is the working rules of various kinds, such as penalty rates which affect small business and the growth areas of the economy, such as the knowledge and leisure industries, where people might want to employ others to service the needs of the vast majority of the population who are looking for things in their leisure hours. Also, there is the possibility of sharing jobs in labour intensive industries which could be brought about by changes in these penalty rates or other rules of work. Those privileges were earned over a period or secured by action before the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission. There is, of course, necessarily a determination on the part of those who enjoy those privileges to retain them. I think members of the general community have a slightly different view. I think that if it were put to them that these privileges were keeping people out of jobs they would realise that we ought to be having a fundamental look at the structure of employment. Another area is fixed trading hours-- Mr Young —What has this to do with the Bill? It is a Summit speech. Mr CARLTON —It is about unemployment; perhaps the honourable member for Port Adelaide (Mr Young) wants to talk about something other than unemployment. We are committing the taxpayers'-- Mr Scott —You didn't talk about it before. You have had seven years and done nothing. Mr CARLTON —I have talked about it many times. I am trying to make a serious contribution. I am sure the predecessor in the Parliament of the honourable member for Hindmarsh (Mr Scott) would have allowed me the privilege of making a serious contribution. I am speaking here on behalf of the unemployed. Fixed trading hours are another practice which prevents the employment of people to meet the legitimate wants of others at times which are not currently available. I cannot understand why trading hours have to be fixed in the way they are when most of the working habits of people have changed over the last 20 or 30 years so that the single income family is much less the norm. Many two income families work during most of the times that shops are now open. When these people come out of work most of the shops are closed. That has an effect on the incapacity to share work out over longer hours. This would at least give people part time work which would be better than nothing. I think that fixed trading hours are one of the things we might examine. There are restrictions on job sharing within the Public Service and the private work force brought about by restrictive practices within awards. I think they need to be looked at. The final matter I will mention is the so-called employment protection Acts which are being brought into the States and which have the avowed purpose, as did the British Employment Protection Act, of protecting people in employment who are likely to be retrenched and increasing the payments that are available to those people. The problem with that, of course, if one examines it logically, is that employers are required to add enormous potential burdens and take a risk employing somebody when there is always the possibility that that person might be put off. It becomes so costly in prospect to employ and then to have to put that person off that the employer does not even begin to employ the person in the first place. Employment protection Acts of this kind are in fact disemployment Acts. The Act brought in by the British Government, I think, under Prime Minister Callaghan, had disastrous effects in this regard. These are undiscussed issues. When some of these points were raised by some of the speakers at the Summit they were pushed under the carpet because they could not be looked at under the terms of the accord which had been signed before the meeting was even held. But they must be discussed if we are to examine the structural problems in Australia which lead to these three scenarios giving us horrendous unemployment levels after three years. The provision of additional information to the Australian public by the Summit indicated that the kinds of difficulties that were faced in reducing unemployment were ones that would be faced by a government of either persuasion. There is no doubt about that. The Government committed itself to taking totally new directions. In his policy speech, the Prime Minister said: There are tremendous issues involved in this historic election on 5 March-first and foremost, the right of all Australians to a job. He went on to say: For the sake of the 1 million and more Australians who face unemployment unless there is a change, those policies must be changed, and will be changed-by the Australian Labor government after 5 March. I followed the proceedings of the National Economic Summit Conference very carefully. I have read the communique. I had previously read the accord. I do not see coming out of that Summit, the accord or the speeches of the Prime Minister, the Treasurer or the other Ministers, any fundamental reappraisal of the structures in Australian society which would lead to a genuine decrease in unemployment. I repeat, I do not see it. On behalf of the unemployed, I must draw that to the attention of this elected House and ask the elected members to look over the work of the chosen representatives who came into this chamber a week or two ago, to question, in all honesty and sincerity, these basic structures in society which are preventing people from being employed and not to accept any of the three scenarios which leave unemployment at 10 per cent or more in three years time. I would hope that our new Prime Minister would have the modesty not to go to the International Labour Organisation in Geneva in June to lecture the world on how to tackle the problems of unemployment before he has seriously questioned these practices and structures in the Australian community, the ones we are not allowed to talk about under the accord. I would hope that he would examine those before going to such a meeting to speak on our behalf. I hope that he and the Government will learn that declarations are not actions; that intentions are not results. We will be looking for results and there is no indication that the fundamental issues are being addressed. Certainly, with this human tragedy continuing, it would be the intention of the Opposition to support a Bill such as this which provides some small relief to the victims of these structural difficulties. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced. Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith. Dr BLEWETT(Bonython-Minister for Health)(7.27) —I move: That the Bill be now read a third time. In moving the third reading of the Bill, I belatedly congratulate you, Mr Speaker, on your unopposed elevation to the high office which you occupy. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a third time. Mr Cohen-I ask leave of the House to present a Bill relating to the protection and conservation of certain property and for related purposes. Leave not granted. Mr COHEN(Robertson-Minister for Home Affairs and Environment)(7.29) —I move: That so much of the Standing Orders be suspended as would prevent a World Heritage Properties Conservation Bill being presented at this sitting and a motion being moved for the second reading of the Bill. The Government is putting into practice its election promise to ensure parliamentary time is more productively spent from the point of view of both Government and Opposition. This Bill is being introduced today to enable the Opposition to peruse it for two weeks. I believe that is a very generous amount of time. Because of the urgency of this Bill, we could have introduced it tonight and put it through, but we want the Opposition to have the opportunity to look at this very important measure for the next two weeks. I do not think anybody in this House would disagree with the view that this is an important matter. This is a matter which the Government put to the people, which has been widely debated throughout our community over the last three or four months in particular-perhaps the last three or four years-and on which the Government has a solid mandate. Mr Groom —What about the Tasmanian vote? Come on; be honest. Mr COHEN —Can the honourable member not count? The Government has 75 members and the Opposition has 50 members. The people of Australia voted for this Government and for this Bill. I will quote a letter that I received tonight from a senator for New South Wales, Senator Colin Mason. It states: I urge your Government to extend the sitting of the House . . . so that the . . . Bill . . . can be passed . . . (today). My concern has been increased following a conversation with Mr Peter Waterman, formerly the Head of the South West Tasmania Resources Survey . . . who has just returned from the World Heritage area on the Franklin River, evidenced large amounts of grading equipment being brought into the World Heritage area to speed up road and associated construction. Of greater concern than even this physical damage is the biological damage which is resulting from this movement of unwashed equipment. Mr Waterman says that a plant disease known as Phytophthora cinnamomi has been introduced to the area and is already wreaking savage effect on the plant life. I will not take up any more of the time of the House because there is quite a lot of work to do on this Bill this evening. I understand that the honourable member for Denison (Mr Hodgman) wants to say a few words. Mr HODGMAN(Denison)(7.32) —Mr Speaker, I preface my remarks by adding my personal congratulations to you on your election to the very high office of Speaker. Completely contrary to what the Minister for Home Affairs and Environment (Mr Cohen) has just said, we are witnessing tonight a panic-stricken , last-minute move by a Government frightened to death by the reality of the fact that its own legal advisers are now gravely concerned that the Hawke Government will lose the High Court case it has commenced against the State of Tasmania on the question of the constitutional validity of the regulations made under the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1975. The Government is in a mess; the Government is panicking. Both on principle and on the specifics of this case the Opposition strongly opposes the suspension of Standing Orders. The motion introduced by the Minister for Home Affairs and Environment represents yet another shameful chapter in the scandalous chain of events which have been vigorously pursued by the Hawke Government since it came to power. Far from adopting an approach of national reconciliation on this very controversial issue, the Hawke Government stands condemned for pursuing a course of confrontation, and it continues it tonight. Never before in the history of Federation has a government, elected on the slogan 'Bringing Australia Together' , tended more to promote disunity, discord and divisiveness within our Federation. To that extent, I want to quote to the Government at this time the very significant words from Pettifer's House of Representatives Practice. He points out to this Government and to the Parliament that: The Parliament is composed of 3 distinct elements, the Queen, the Senate and the House of Representatives. These 3 elements together characterise the nation as being a constitutional monarchy, a parliamentary democracy and a federation. The election of 5 March has changed nothing of that. Ignoring the fact that there is such a thing as a Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia, casting aside the fact that the Constitution positively guarantees that there shall be one indissoluble Federal Commonwealth, trampling upon the rule of law in a parliamentary democracy, this newly elected Government has lurched from crisis to crisis on this issue since it was sworn in on 11 March, just 42 days ago. Government members interjecting- Mr HODGMAN —Honourable members opposite should not laugh too soon because, in another place, they have made the mistake of their lives. They have tabled all the documents on the Royal Australian Air Force spy flights conspiracy scandal. If that does not bring down one or two of their ministerial colleagues, I will be very surprised. I speak not of the contents of this most important constitutional Bill, for I cannot, the reason being that the Government, in its panic-stricken frame of mind, on the very eve of the most important constitutional case in the history of Australia and just 24 hours after the first appearance in the High Court of Australia before the Chief Justice by counsel on behalf of the Commonwealth and counsel on behalf of the State of Tasmania and others, has rushed this Bill into this House with indecent haste. Is this the new Parliament of consensus and vision of which the honourable member for Lilley (Mrs Darling) spoke so passionately in this place this morning? Is this the way the Government intends to treat this Parliament, its members and the people of Australia? Were this the first instance of insult and dishonour in this incredible saga on the question of federalism the Opposition may not have decided to oppose the motion to suspend Standing Orders that has been moved by the Minister for Home Affairs and Environment. We have done so because it is an affront to this Parliament that a Bill of this importance should be brought down in this manner. The history of the matter is indeed a sad and sorry one. Within days of its election to office, the Hawke Government determined that it would institute legislative action which would effectively pre-empt any further attempt at negotiation and reconciliation with the sovereign State of Tasmania. It chose to bring in regulations to test what is without doubt the most important constitutional question ever raised concerning the balance of powers within the federal system which comprises the Commonwealth of Australia. By using this sneaky device, the Hawke Government inflamed the situation. It had hoped that the regulations that it was making under the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 1975 could not be challenged, let alone debated, because the Parliament was not sitting. It chose to pre-empt the issue by using executive power behind closed doors at a time when no parliamentary debate whatsoever would be possible. It had conceived the strategy that the Parliament would not meet until 21 April and then for only one day. That is a shameful and demeaning course of conduct in testing the most important constitutional question in this country-to do so by means of regulation. What an affront to the High Court of Australia to say, 'We will have one shot by way of regulations and if we are unsuccessful in that attempt will have a second shot by way of trying an Act of the Parliament.' The urgency of the matter has to be admitted by the Government because, under Standing Order 399, as you would know and rule Mr Speaker, a motion to suspend Standing Orders may not be put in this chamber except in cases of necessity. What is the necessity here? It is that the Government knows that it is going to lose-I mean no contempt of the court-in relation to reliance on regulations. The Government is backing away from seeking a decision in the High Court based on regulations because it realises that it would go down the drain, defeated by the smallest State in the Commonwealth. What sort of Government do we have, when it takes the opportunity-- Mr Young —A good one. Mr HODGMAN —Members of the Government are on the crest of a wave at the moment but I suggest that when, last time, they tried to govern without constitutional authority it was a vice-regal personage who showed them the door. It will be the High Court that will show them the door this time. Governments are not above and beyond the law. We do have a constitution and a parliamentary democracy. Mr Young —How did you get two votes? Mr HODGMAN —According to the Bulletin I have a better public opinion rating than does the Minister. Involved here is a fundamental principle which is bigger than all of the issues. I refer to the rule of law. It is now patently clear that the Government realises that it is in serious legal trouble on this matter in regard to its regulations, because they are beyond the power of section 69 of the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act. The Government's own advisers have said to it: 'You are not going to win on the regulations; try to get that Bill through quickly.' The Government acted in a clandestine and deceitful manner, by bringing in regulations at a time when the Parliament was not sitting, at a time when no honourable member could speak in this place on this important issue, no member could move to disallow them. The Government sought to cheat and has now been caught out. In regard to the Government's indecent haste and impropriety in introducing this proposed legislation on the very opening day of a new Parliament, many outside this place will find it difficult to accept that such action has been taken by a Government led by a man who is a legal practitioner and an officer of the court. There are two other matters that I suggest should be dealt with before this Bill proceeds further. Mr SPEAKER —Order! I remind the honourable member that we are not debating a Bill; we are debating the suspension of Standing Orders. He has done very well so far. Mr HODGMAN —Thank you, Mr Speaker. Dare I say that before this debate proceeds further the Government should stand up in this Parliament and tell the people of Australia, particularly the people of Tasmania, the whole truth about the Royal Australian Air Force spy flight scandal-without doubt the most outrageous misuse of the defence forces of this nation in the history of this Commonwealth. I draw to the attention of the Government the fact that, far from succeeding in covering up, we have at best a situation where two Ministers have acted grossly irresponsibly. We have at worst-- Mr SPEAKER —Order! I think the honourable member realises that he is getting away from the motion for the suspension of Standing Orders. Mr HODGMAN —Mr Speaker, it is the seriousness of the matter. It is a matter which-- Mr SPEAKER —I am not required to consider the seriousness of the matter but the nature of the motion before the House. The motion before the House deals with Standing Orders. Mr HODGMAN —Mr Speaker, I accept your ruling. I am saying that the Government is being hypocritical and deceitful on this issue because the real reason why it is seeking to rush this Bill through this Parliament-- Mr Young —We are not rushing it through. We are giving you a fortnight. Mr HODGMAN —The Government wants to get it into the Parliament so that it can then argue in the High Court of Australia for a decision on the Act and not on the regulations. That is the deceit; that is the real dishonesty of a government which has started off a course of action under a banner of national reconciliation by bringing about the commencement of the greatest constitutional brawl in the history of the Commonwealth. In conclusion, there is more to this issue than just the question of the dam and the environment. There is the question of the Federation, the question of the Constitution, the question of the rule of law and the question of parliamentary democracy. The Government, by its action tonight, has shown that it is prepared to trample on the Constitution. It is prepared to destroy the system of federalism and it is prepared to treat the High Court of Australia with contempt by going on two separate bases. It is in trouble. It knows that it is in trouble. History will show that it has acted disgracefully. Mr SPEAKER —Order! The honourable member's time has expired. Mr GROOM(Braddon)(7.42) —Mr Speaker-- Motion (by Mr Young) put: That the question be now put. The House divided. (Mr Speaker-Hon. Harry Jenkins) Ayes . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Noes . . . . . . . . . . . 42 —— Majority . . . . . . . . . 25 —— Baldwin, P. J. Johnson, LesBeazley, K. C. Jones, BarryBeddall, D. P. Keating, P. J.Bilney, G. N. Kelly, R. J.Blanchard, C. A. Kent, L.Blewett, N. Keogh, L. J.Bowen, Lionel Kerin, J. C.Brown, John Klugman, R. E.Brown, Robert McHugh, J.Brumby, J. M. McLeay, LeoCharles, D. E. Maher, M. J.Charlesworth, R. I. Mayer, H.Child, J. Mildren, J. B.Chynoweth, R. L. Milton, P.Cohen, B. Morris, AllanCross, M. D. Morris, PeterCunningham, B. T. (Teller) Morrison, W. L.Darling, E. E. Mountford, J. G.Dawkins, J. S. O'Neil, L. R. T.Duffy, M. J. Punch, G. F.Edwards, Ronald Reeves, J. E.Everingham, D. M. Saunderson, J.Fatin, W. F. Scott, J. L.Free, R. V. Simmonds, D. W.Fry, K. L. Snow, J. H.Gayler, J. Staples, P. R.Gear, G. Steedman, A. P.Gorman, R. N. J. Theophanous, A. C.Griffiths, A. G. Uren, T.Hand, G. L. Wells, D. McM.Holding, A. C. West, S. J.Hollis, C. Willis, R.Howe, B. L. Young, M. J.Humphreys, B. C. (Teller) Adermann, A. E. Hunt, R. J. D.Andrew, J. N. Katter, R. C.Anthony, J. D. Lloyd, B.Braithwaite, R. A. Lusher, S. A.Burr, M. A. McGauran, P. J.Cadman, A. G. MacKellar, M. J. R.Cameron, Ewen (Teller) McVeigh, D. T.Cameron, Ian Macphee, I. M.Carlton, J. J. Millar, P. C.Connolly, D. M. Moore, J. C.Cowan, D. B. Newman, K. E.Dobie, J. D. M. O'Keefe, F. L.Drummond, P. H. Porter, J. R.Edwards, Harry Robinson, IanFisher, P. S. Rocher, A. C.Goodluck, B. J. Ruddock, P. M.Groom, R. J. Shipton, R. F.Hall, Steele Sinclair, I. McC.Hicks, N. J. (Teller) Spender, J. M.Hodgman, W. M. Tuckey, C. W.Howard, J. W. White, P. N. D. Hurford, C. J. Street, A. A.Jacobi, R. Coleman, W. P. In division- Mr Goodluck-Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. This is an abuse of the parliamentary system. We, the Tasmanians, do not have a chance. Mr SPEAKER-Order! The honourable member should come to his point of order. Mr Goodluck-I accuse the Prime Minister of this country of telling lies on this subject. We do not have a chance. Mr SPEAKER-Order! I warn the honourable member for Franklin. Mr Goodluck-We came here to represent those people in Tasmania, not to be bootwhipped by this crowd. Mr SPEAKER-Order! Question so resolved in the affirmative. Original question put: That the motion (Mr Cohen's) be agreed to. The House divided. (Mr Speaker-Hon. Harry Jenkins) Ayes . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Noes . . . . . . . . . . . 42 —— Majority . . . . . . . . . 25 —— Baldwin, P. J. Johnson, LesBeazley, K. C. Jones, BarryBeddall, D. P. Keating, P. J.Bilney, G. N. Kelly, R. J.Blanchard, C. A. Kent, L.Blewett, N. Keogh, L. J.Bowen, Lionel Kerin, J. C.Brown, John Klugman, R. E.Brown, Robert McHugh, J.Brumby, J. M. McLeay, LeoCharles, D. E. Maher, M. J.Charlesworth, R. I. Mayer, H.Child, J. Mildren, J. B.Chynoweth, R. L. Milton, P.Cohen, B. Morris, AllanCross, M. D. Morris, PeterCunningham, B. T. (Teller) Morrison, W. L.Darling, E. E. Mountford, J. G.Dawkins, J. S. O'Neil, L. R. T.Duffy, M. J. Punch, G. F.Edwards, Ronald Reeves, J. E.Everingham, D. N. Saunderson, J.Fatin, W. F. Scott, J. L.Free, R. V. Simmons, D. W.Fry, K. L. Snow, J. H.Gayler, J. Staples, P. R.Gear, G. Steedman, A. P.Gorman, R. N. J. Theophanous, A. C.Griffiths, A. G. Uren, T.Hand, G. L. Wells, D. McM.Holding, A. C. West, S. J.Hollis, C. Willis, R.Howe, B. L. Young, M. J.Humphreys, B. C. (Teller) Adermann, A. E. Hunt, R. J. D.Andrew, J. N. Katter, R. C.Anthony, J. D. Lloyd, B.Braithwaite, R. A. Lusher, S. A.Burr, M. A. McGauran, P. J.Cadman, A. G. MacKellar, M. J. R.Cameron, Ewen (Teller) McVeigh, D. T.Cameron, Ian Macphee, I. M.Carlton, J. J. Millar, P. C.Connolly, D. M. Moore, J. C.Cowan, D. B. Newman, K. E.Dobie, J. D. M. O'Keefe, F. L.Drummond, P. H. Porter, J. R.Edwards, Harry Robinson, IanFisher, P. S. Rocher, A. C.Goodluck, B. J. Ruddock, P. M.Groom, R. J. Shipton, R. F.Hall, Steele Sinclair, I. McC.Hicks, N. J. (Teller) Spender, J. M.Hodgman, W. M. Tuckey, C. W.Howard, J. W. White, P. N. D. Hurford, C. J. Street, A. A.Jacobi, R. Coleman, W. P. Question so resolved in the affirmative with an absolute majority. Bill presented by Mr Cohen, and read a first time. Second Reading Mr COHEN(Robertson-Minister for Home Affairs and Environment)(7.59) —I move: That the Bill be now read a second time. First, Mr Speaker, perhaps I may take this opportunity of congratulating you on your elevation to the position of Speaker. The World Heritage Properties Conservation Bill makes provision for the protection and conservation of those places in Australia or under Australian control that are of such outstanding universal value that they are recognised as part of the cultural or natural heritage of the world. The Bill therefore shares the objective of the World Heritage Properties Protection Bill 1982 that was introduced in the Senate last year by the Australian Democrats. As I shall explain, the purpose of the Bill is not to exclude or replace other laws that are effective to protect such property . It is designed to provide protection only where property of universal value is being or is likely to be damaged or destroyed. I shall deal first with the general background to this legislation; then I shall explain the approach taken in the Bill; and, finally, I shall refer to the present prospect of damage to the South West Tasmania World Heritage area. For many years, and particularly since the end of the Second World War, there has been growing international awareness of heritage values and a sense of concern and shared responsibility for the protection of the cultural and natural heritage. Many specific examples could be given of this sense of concern, and of Australia's own involvement in it. Australia has expressed its own commitment to heritage values, and to the need to conserve heritage in Australia, under successive governments. One of the most important international instruments in this field is the treaty known as the World Heritage Convention, which is the Schedule to the Bill and which I shall refer to here as 'the Convention'. Its full title is the Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage. The Convention entered into force in 1975, and Australia was one of the first parties to it. It is important to bear in mind that the Convention is not a solitary example of international concern and co-operation in the heritage conservation area. There are many other such examples, including instances of international co- operation directed to the saving of particular sites, such as the temples of Borobudur in Indonesia and the city of Venice. The preamble to the Convention notes that the deterioration or disappearance of any item of the cultural or natural heritage constitutes a harmful impoverishment of the heritage of all the nations of the world. It refers to the importance, for all the peoples of the world, of safeguarding cultural and natural property, notwithstanding that it may belong to a particular people. In addition to the obligations that the Convention places on individual parties, it provides a system for identifying the world's natural and cultural heritage, and a system of collective protection for items of that heritage that may be in danger. The Convention recognises that it is primarily the duty of the country where heritage property is situated to ensure its identification, protection, conservation, presentation and transmission to future generations. The World Heritage Committee established by the Convention consists of representatives of 21 parties. It is responsible for the administration of the system of international assistance and co-operation set up by the Convention. The Convention provides for the nomination or submission by a party to the Convention of property in its territory that is suitable for inclusion in the World Heritage List. The World Heritage List is not to contain all heritage property within a country, but only heritage property that has outstanding universal value in terms of criteria established by the World Heritage Committee . The World Heritage List is, therefore- Mr Tuckey —And wins the Labor Party some votes. You have sold out to the greenies. Mr COHEN —The honourable member for O'Connor should go back to bashing Aborigines. That is what you are good at. The World Heritage List is, therefore- - Mr Tuckey —Mr Deputy Speaker, I take a point of order. I ask for that remark to be withdrawn. It is quite out of order. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER(Hon. Les Johnson) —Order! The honourable member will resume his seat. I ask the Minister to withdraw that remark. Mr COHEN —Mr Deputy Speaker, I withdraw. The World Heritage List is, therefore, a short list of heritage property of special value. A further list-the list of World Heritage-- Mr Tuckey —Mr Deputy Speaker, I take a point of order. I did not hear him withdraw. Mr COHEN —No wonder. You are not only stupid, you are deaf, too. Mr Tuckey —I have also been called stupid now. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER —Order! The honourable member will resume his seat. The Minister has withdrawn the remark. I call the Minister. Mr COHEN —The World Heritage List is, therefore, a short list-- Mr Newman —Mr Deputy Speaker, I take a point of order. The minister may have withdrawn, but he was making remarks under his breath. This is a most important matter and a matter that concerns Tasmania. We have been blocked from having any debate on the matter. The Minister has started to laugh about it. He should go to Tasmania and do something about it. This Government is a disgrace. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER —Order! There is no point of order. The honourable member will resume his seat. I call the Minister. Mr COHEN —Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I will start again. The World Heritage List is, therefore, a short list of heritage property of special value. A further list-the List of World Heritage in Danger-may contain property appearing in the World Heritage List for the conservation of which major operations are necessary and for which assistance has been requested under the Convention. The system of assistance established by the Convention is available in respect of property that the World Heritage Committee has decided to enter in the World Heritage List. I now mention some practical details. Seventy-two countries have become parties to the Convention, including the United States and most countries of Western Europe. Many developing countries have also ratified the Convention. Only one hundred and thirty-six properties are on the World Heritage List. These include both cultural heritage, such as temples and other buildings, and natural heritage such as wilderness areas or other natural features. Among the world famous and significant natural areas on the List are the Yellowstone National Park and the Grand Canyon in the United States of America, Serengeti National Park in Tanzania, Sagamartha National Park-which contains Mount Everest-in Nepal and Australia's own Great Barrier Reef. In all, five Australian sites have been nominated by Australia and found to satisfy the tests for inclusion in the World Heritage List. I will detail them. The Great Barrier Reef is the world's largest and most complex expanse of living coral reefs, encompassing a great variety of marine life. There are over 1,500 species of fish and about 400 species of coral. Its great diversity of life forms makes it an area of enormous scientific importance. Kakadu National Park in the Northern Territory is an area of over 6,000 square kilometres containing an unusual variety of vegetation, while most of its fauna is rare elsewhere in Australia. Quite apart from its natural heritage value, the Park is of great importance, internationally and to Australia, because of the antiquity and quality of its archaeology and Aboriginal cultural and art sites. The Willandra Lakes region is a system of dried-up lakes in far western New South Wales. Their outstanding universal value lies in the evidence they provide of human occupation dating back more than 30,000 years. Mr Goodluck —Where is the man who is going to bring us together-the conciliator? Mr COHEN —The honourable member should crawl back into an apple, for God's sake. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER(Hon. Les Johnson) —Order! The House will come to order. Mr COHEN —Skeletal remains found there are among the oldest evidence of homo sapiens anywhere in the world and establish the great antiquity of Aboriginal man in Australia. The Willandra Lakes evidence is also important because it enables a reconstruction of the economic life of early modern man, showing a remarkable adaptation to local resources and the interaction between culture and the changing environment. The Lord Howe Island group has not only exceptional beauty but also an enormous diversity of landscapes. Because of the high proportion of endemic animals and plants, Lord Howe Island provides an outstanding example of independent evolutionary processes and is of great scientific and conservation interest. The islands include the most southerly coral reef in the world and provide, on the peaks of the main island, the habitat of one of the world's rarest birds, the Lord Howe Island Woodhen. The Western Tasmanian wilderness national parks of some 769,000 hectares together cover a large part of one of the last remaining temperate wilderness areas in the world, and have many features of unique significance, to which I shall refer later. Mr Newman —What would you know about it? Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER —Order! Honourable members will restrain themselves. Mr Goodluck —This is disgraceful. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER —The House will come to order. Mr Goodluck —Point of order. Mr Leo McLeay —Sit down, you twerp. Mr Goodluck —Yes, you can call me a twerp. You hate Tasmania, the lot of you. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER —Order! I call the Minister. Mr COHEN —Although the identifications of heritage property by Australia are made within the Convention framework to discharge obligations under the Convention-- Mr Newman —I raise a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Members opposite were having a go at my colleague from Franklin and they should apologise. This is a serious matter. You fellows have never even been down there. This is one of the most important constitutional matters ever before this House. The Leader of the House-- Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER —Order! The honourable member will resume his seat. Mr Newman —The Leader of the House promised that he would bring into this House the regulation. Where is it? Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER —Order! The honourable member will resume his seat. Mr Newman —You are a liar, you don't even keep your promises. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER —Order! There is no point of order. I remind honourable members that it is out of order to take such frivolous action. Mr Newman —That's not the case. Here is the telegram that he promised. I will read it. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER —I ask the honourable member to resume his seat. Mr Newman —This is a most important issue. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER —I ask the honourable member to resume his seat. I will not tolerate defiance. Mr Groom —Mr Deputy Speaker, we demand the right to debate this issue tonight. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER —Order! There is no point of order. I call the Minister. Mr COHEN —This is an obvious attempt to get their names in the paper tomorrow. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER —Order! I ask the Minister to resume the debate. Mr COHEN —Although the identifications of heritage property by Australia are made within the Convention framework-to discharge obligations under the Convention and to enjoy its benefits-this action has several aspects. It focusses awareness on the unique values of the properties concerned and thereby helps to foster concern for their conservation. It draws the attention of the world to the important natural and cultural heritage in Australia, the richness of which can rival that of other regions. This enhances the attraction of these sites to tourists and other visitors from overseas. The prestige of World Heritage Listing is also a source of pride for Australians. Indeed, these are properties which belong to all Australians, who bear a responsibility to the rest of the world for the safeguarding of them. In world heritage matters, Australia has so far played a responsible and even prominent role. It has freely acknowledged its responsibilities in this area. In 1981 the former Prime Minister opened the Fifth Meeting of the World Heritage Committee in Sydney. He gave an address entitled 'Australia's Heritage' in which he referred to the Convention as 'an important milestone in the modern history of man's concern not only for his environment, but also for his cultural roots and origins'. He said that 'the concept of world heritage, which includes both the cultural and natural heritage of mankind, and which means that individual nations will hold sites and properties of universal value in trust not just for their own peoples, but for the whole of mankind, is surely a profound expression of co-operation between people and a willingness to share'. The speech went on to describe in glowing terms the ways in which Australia had shown 'its awareness of the need for initiative and action on matters of conservation and the environment'. It concluded by referring to the Committee's task 'in co- operation with the countries of the world . . . of trying to make sure that universally valuable sites and properties from all countries, not just the wealthy and well-provided countries, can find a secure place on the World Heritage List'. I do not quote those words in a critical way. Indeed, I applaud them. They are the words of the former Prime Minister. They are directly relevant to the purpose of this Bill. In the past, Australia has clearly articulated its national responsibilities for protecting the heritage. It is a responsibility that cannot now be avoided, and which this Bill seeks to discharge. I now turn to describe the approach to heritage protection taken in the Bill. I do not contend that in all circumstances, and in relation to all kinds of heritage property, the only way, or the most appropriate way, to achieve the protection of heritage property is by Commonwealth legislation. A property might never be under threat, or a threat might not be capable of being countered by legislation. Another possibility is that the property might be on Commonwealth land or otherwise adequately controlled. A further possibility is that State law or State measures will be adequate. I want to stress at this point the importance we attach to State and Territory co-operation in this area. Nominations by Australia to the-- Mr Hodgman —Sending in RAAF-that is the way you treat it. Mr COHEN —You will not upset me; I have been here and listened to bigger thugs than you. So I can take it. If you want to be here all night, it is all right with me. Mr SPEAKER —Order! I hope that the House will come to order. It is obvious that we have before the House a matter that is a subject of some passion. The procedures of the House have been followed, as it is the duty of the Chair to see that they are followed. I ask honourable members who feel passionately about it to observe proper behaviour in the House. I ask the Minister not to provoke them. Mr COHEN —Mr Speaker, I am not the one who is interjecting. Mr SPEAKER —Order! The Minister-- Mr Hodgman —He called me a thug, and if that is not provocative I do not know what is. Mr SPEAKER —Order! The honourable member will resume his seat. Mr Goodluck —I take a point of order, Mr Speaker. With the greatest of respect to you, sir-and I have respect for you-you have asked us to withdraw and keep quiet and not show emotion and passion. Unfortunately we have to show emotion and passion tonight, and as a consequence we will offend you. We do not wish to offend you but we will, because we feel strongly about this issue. Mr SPEAKER —Order! There is no point of order. I did not ask honourable members not to show emotion and passion. I asked them to keep within reasonable bounds. I also ask the Minister, if that term was used, to withdraw it. Mr COHEN —I withdraw. I should also like honourable members to stop interjecting so that I may get on with my speech. Mr SPEAKER —I have already asked honourable members to do that. Mr COHEN —I will repeat what I said. I want to stress at this point the importance we attach to State and Territory co-operation in this area. Nominations by Australia to the World Heritage List have been made in a spirit of co-operation with State authorities. State laws relating to national parks, conservation and heritage protection might well afford a suitable means of meeting any threat to property that might exist. Opposition members interjecting- Mr SPEAKER —Order! I think I have given honourable members a reasonable chance. I suspect that they may want me to take certain action. I certainly will not resile from taking action if this sort of behaviour persists. Mr COHEN —Given a commitment by a State Government to heritage protection and an awareness by the State of the international importance of such protection, the Commonwealth Government would foresee no need to exercise its own powers. This Bill is to provide a means of protection of last resort. Its provisions are to be invoked when it appears that other means are not available or are inadequate or unsuitable to meet a threat of damage or destruction to heritage property. It is the Government's intention that the procedures under the Bill would not be resorted to if effective action can and will be taken under State or Territory law. It follows that there would normally be consultation with the State or Territory. Mr Newman —Why not in this case? Mr COHEN —We did consult with the States, as the honourable member would know if he had been following what has been happening in the last three or four weeks. The scheme of the Bill is as follows: The Bill applies to property satisfying two tests. It must answer the description of cultural heritage or natural heritage within the meaning of the Convention-I draw honourable members' attention to Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention-and Australia must have identified it as such, either by its nomination for the World Heritage List or by the making of regulations which so identify it. Provision has been made for the regulations to do this as Australia could have obligations under the Convention in respect of items that have not been nominated. Before the protective provisions in clauses 9, 10 or 11 apply to any 'identified property', a proclamation must be made under clauses 6, 7 or 8. Before such a proclamation can be made, the Governor-General in Council must be satisfied that the property is being, or is likely to be, damaged or destroyed. In the Bill, a reference to damage to or destruction of property includes a reference to damage to or destruction of a particular part of a feature of the property. The Bill is drafted to draw on all heads of Commonwealth legislative powers that may appropriately be used. The way in which this has been done is briefly outlined in the explanatory memorandum. I draw particular attention to the use of the 'race' power in clauses 8 and 11 of the Bill. This is an appropriate exercise of the power since much of Australia's distinctive heritage of universal value consists of relics of Aboriginal culture. Three of the sites that Australia has already nominated to the World Heritage List are of great importance in this regard. Kakadu National Park consists mainly of Aboriginal land. The significance of Kakadu to Aborigines today is intense, and is evidenced in the offer of their land to the nation so that it could become a truly national park. This significance is also evidenced in the concern shown by traditional Aboriginal owners about the art, archaeological and sacred sites in the Park, and their instructions to the Parks Service for the protective management of their spiritual and cultural heritage. Willandra Lakes Region provides evidence of the great antiquity of Australian Aborigines, and the discoveries have established the richness of Aboriginal culture and have caused a significant reassessment of Aboriginal prehistory and its place in the history of modern man. It has not been possible in the drafting of the Bill to specify, in clauses 9, 10 and 11, a complete list of acts that might need to be prohibited to protect properties in danger. Each of these clauses, therefore, also prohibits acts that are prescribed by regulations for the purpose in relation to the particular property to which each clause relates. At the same time, the acts prohibited by the Bill are not made offences. Should the legislation raise contentious issues needing to be considered by a court, including constitutional issues, these may more conveniently be dealt with under the procedure provided by clause 14-that is, on an application for an injunction restraining a person from doing an act made unlawful by the Bill. I draw the attention of the House to clause 15 of the Bill which provides for the tabling in each House of Parliament of any proclamation made under clauses 6 , 7 or 8 of the Bill. A proclamation is subject to disapproval by either House of Parliament. This is a similar procedure to that applying to regulations made under an Act, but here the period for tabling has been shortened from 15 to five sitting days. Clause 16 of the Bill makes provision for compensation in the event that the operation of the Bill, or the operation of the World Heritage (Western Tasmania Wilderness) Regulations, results in an 'acquisition of property' from any person within the meaning of section 51 (xxxi) of the Constitution. It is not unusual practice for provision to meet the requirements of section 51 (xxxi) to be included in a Bill that could result in an 'acquisition of property' in the constitutional sense. Clause 16 is unusual in that it provides a detailed procedure for the investigation of what compensation, if any, might be payable in the event of a very large claim-$5m or more. The reason for this provision is that, because there is unlikely to be a direct acquisition of property of a readily ascertainable market value, an investigatory procedure before a special commission is likely to be more appropriate than proceedings before a court. However, there is provision for recourse to a court in the event that a claimant is unsatisfied at the end of the investigatory procedure or where a claim is for less than $5m. Mr Speaker, I now turn to the specific issue of the proposed construction of the Gordon below Franklin dam in South West Tasmania. There is no question that this project, if allowed to be completed, would destroy a significant part of the heritage value of the Western Tasmania Wilderness National Parks, a property that was nominated by Australia for inclusion in the World Heritage List and accepted for inclusion in that list. While this Bill is not aimed solely at the protection of that particular property, it is the inability of the Commonwealth Government to prevent the substantial destruction of the property by any other means that has led to the introduction of this Bill as one of the first parliamentary acts of the Government. In doing this, the Government is fulfilling a commitment given to the people of Australia and is supported by the overwhelming majority of the Australian people. The legal situation that has arisen in relation to the dam illustrates, in a striking way, the need for this legislation and what is at stake in the whole debate over natural and cultural values. The nomination of the Western Tasmania Wilderness National Parks was submitted by the Australian Government to the World Heritage Committee, at the request of the Government of Tasmania, in November 1981. The nomination that was prepared by Tasmania is an impressive document that draws attention to the unique features of the property. Under the heading 'Justification for Inclusion in the World Heritage List', the nomination refers to Fraser Cave-now Kutikina Cave-as one of the six archaeologically richest limestone caves sites in the Western Pacific. The unique value of this and other caves in the area has been acclaimed by eminent experts from other countries. Important sites continue to be discovered in South West Tasmania and, indeed, as I announced only two days ago, a significant new archaeological site has been discovered recently in the Franklin River Valley. The site has been named Deena Reena and is just as important as, if not more important than, the abundantly rich Kutikina Cave. The nomination also referred to the area as comprising 'most of the last great temperate wilderness remaining in Australia and one of the last remaining in the world'. The nomination claimed that the region satisfied all four criteria required for the nomination to the World Heritage List. It claimed that it has many geological sites of local, State, national and international significance and unique, rare and superb natural features and areas of exceptional natural beauty. It asserted that 'virtually all other areas in the temperate zone have been so substantially modified by man that their pristine wilderness characteristics have been destroyed'. The nomination gave a list of rare and endangered endemic plants which occur there and stated that the area was one of great importance for the conservation of Australian fauna. The nomination came before the World Heritage Committee last December. Representatives of the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, IUCN, and the International Council on Monuments and Sites, ICOMOS, expressed their views that the nominated areas satisfied all relevant criteria and were suitable for inclusion in the World Heritage List. These are the two expert bodies which advise the World Heritage Committee on nominations. The ICOMOS representative made particular reference to the prehistoric cave sites which, he said, had been reported as making the area as significant as the great cave sites of southern France. He referred also to a report that an expedition to South West Tasmania in 1981 had collected some 4,000 specimens of invertebrates of which 25 per cent were new to science. The World Heritage Committee had before it reports at the proposals for dam construction in the area. Members of the Committee expressed strong concern at the probable loss of the heritage value of the nominated area if the dam were built. Mr Newman —I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Mr COHEN —In the result the Commitee decided to include the Western Tasmania Wilderness National Parks- Mr Newman —Mr Speaker, this speech by this Minister is full of the most devastating lies I have ever heard a Minister give in this place. Mr SPEAKER —Order! The honourable member for Bass should withdraw those terms. Mr Newman —Mr Speaker, this document is full of lies. He is producing those lies . Mr SPEAKER —Order! The honourable member for Bass will withdraw those terms. Mr Newman —I will not. Mr Goodluck —I support what my colleague has said. Mr SPEAKER —Order! In the circumstances of the day I asked the honourable member for Bass to withdraw the terms which he used which he knows are unparliamentary. I ask him to withdraw. Mr Newman —They may be unparliamentary, Mr Speaker, but they happen to be true. Mr SPEAKER —I ask him to withdraw. Mr Newman —I will not. Mr SPEAKER —I have no alternative then but to meet the honourable member's wishes and name him. Mr Young —Mr Speaker, it is not my desire to move the necessary motion. This is the first day of this Parliament. Mr McVeigh —Why didn't you let us ask questions then? Mr Young —Because the honourable member has not asked questions for the 20 years he was running the Parliament. I know that honourable members from Tasmania have strong feelings on this issue but I think it would be a disgrace to the Parliament if I were forced to move the motion which would put the Speaker elected on the first day in a very difficult position. He has to keep decorum in the House. I ask the honourable member to give second thoughts to the request made of him by the Speaker. Perhaps if he wants to interject he could use strong terms but not terms which force the Speaker and me into a position which would turn the first day of Parliament into a fiasco. I ask the honourable member to give second thoughts to that request put to him by the Speaker. Mr Newman —Mr Speaker, may I respond to that? The position is that honourable members from Tasmania went to the Prime Minister and asked for an assurance that the regulation, which is instrumental in stopping the dam, would be tabled. Then , we could move a motion to disallow that regulation which would result in a debate and scrutiny of what the Government is doing. The Leader of the Government-I do not know whether he meant it or not-sent a telegram to us. It gave an assurance that the Clerk would table this regulation. That has not happened. The Government misled us. That is the reason why we are so upset tonight. It was something that we expected to happen. Mr Young —I assure the honourable member that there will be no shortage of debate on this matter in the House. We are having a one-day sitting. When the House resumes honourable members will have plenty of time to debate this matter. Nothing will happen between now and 3 May in relation to this Bill. The Bill will sit there. All I am doing is asking the honourable member not to place the Speaker in the predicament in which he is now placed by virtue of the honourable member's use of unparliamentary language. I think the Parliament would be better off if he accepted the offer I made to him. Mr Newman —Mr Speaker, the problem is- Mr SPEAKER —Order! Mr Newman —I seek leave to explain. Mr SPEAKER —I have some problems beause the Minister's time is expiring. I think he needs to complete it. Mr Young —I do not think there is a need to- Motion (by Mr Sinclair) proposed: That the Minister be granted an extension of time. Mr SPEAKER —It has been moved that the Minister be granted an extension of time. Mr Young —The honourable member is placing the House in a very silly position on the first day. The honourable member has been here long enough to know that. There may be some publicity in- Mr Goodluck —We are not looking for publicity. Mr Young —I am not talking about individual publicity. I am talking about publicity for this Parliament because the only thing that will be recorded out of this incident- Mr SPEAKER —Order! I think the Leader of the House has made his point. In the circumstances and in view of what he has said I will not proceed with the naming of the honourable member. I will accept the motion for an extension of time for the Minister because I have allowed some indulgence. Extension of time granted. Mr COHEN —Members of the Committee expressed strong concern at the possible loss of the heritage value of the nominated area if the dam were built. In the result , the Committee decided to include the Western Tasmania Wilderness National Parks in the World Heritage List. However, in so doing it adopted a statement expressing its concern at the likely effect of dam construction on those natural and cultural characteristics which made the property of outstanding universal value. The Committee recommended that the Australian authorities take all possible measures to protect the integrity of the property. The House will be well aware of the attitude of the present Government in Tasmania to the construction of the dam. That Government has adopted an attitude which sets at nothing the irreplaceable heritage value of the area and which ignores Australia's international responsibilities in the matter. That Government had, of course, sought the withdrawal of the nomination of the property after Australia had already put forward the nomination at Tasmania's request and so identified it to the world as having the oustanding universal values that makes it part of the world cultural and natural heritage. Even if a withdrawal of the nomination could have removed or reduced Australia's responsibilities in the matter, such a withdrawal would have amounted to a blatant denial of the principles enshrined in the World Heritage Convention. It is to the credit of the previous Government that it did not take the course suggested by Tasmania and adopted an attitude consistent with Australia's responsible guardianship of the area. On 30 March 1983 the Commonwealth Government made the World Heritage (Western Tasmania Wilderness) Regulations as an exercise of the legal powers then available to it to prevent construction of the dam. As the House will be aware, measures to enforce those regulations and the question of the validity of the regulations are matters that are now before the High Court. Mr Speaker, it would be hard to imagine a stronger cause for the enactment of Commonwealth legislation in this internationally important area of heritage protection than has now arisen in relation to South West Tasmania. Australia has sought international recognition of the value of the area and the prestige and publicity which flow from World Heritage listing. It has taken steps to make the property eligible for international assistance. At the same time, a State government, following the request by the State itself for nomination of the property now seeks to destroy some of its most important features. The intransigence of the Tasmanian Government in persisting with its plans for the dam has flown in the face of great concern, even outrage, both here and overseas at the impact of the dam on the area. Not only international organisations and world-renowned scientists and scholars, such as Sir Peter Scott, have protested but also public personalities such as Yehudi Menuhin, David Bellamy, who is also an eminent botanist, and a certain Mr Spike Milligan, the son of a constituent of mine, have combined with one voice to condemn this action by the Tasmanian Government. There is no prospect of saving the property by appealing to the Tasmanian Government or by further consultation. Commonwealth legislation, as a matter of last resort, is the only responsible course. When the Bill is passed it is the intention of the Government to seek to have made proclamations under its provisions for the purpose of protecting and conserving the Western Tasmania Wilderness National Parks, if, after the entry into force of the Act, the circumstances make that course necessary. Debate (on motion by Mr Connolly) adjourned. Mr SPEAKER —I call the honourable member for Braddon. Mr GROOM(Braddon) —On the authority of the High Court decision in Dignan's case- - Mr SPEAKER —Order! Mr GROOM —As reported in (1931) 45 Commonwealth Law Reports at page 188 and the precedents-- Mr SPEAKER —Order! The honourable member will resume his seat. The honourable member was given the call. He has not indicated what he required the call for. He is reading a statement. If an honourable member wishes to make some sort of personal explanation it is usual for that honourable member to approach the chair. I call the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade. Mr LIONEL BOWEN(Kingsford-Smith-Minister for Trade)(8.35) —Mr Speaker, firstly I extend my congratulations to you on your elevation. I seek leave to move a motion relating to the continuing participation by the Commonwealth Parliament in the Australian Constitutional Convention. Leave granted. Mr LIONEL BOWEN —I thank the House. I move: That the House of Representatives, recognising the desirability of a thorough review of the Australian Constitution in the light of experience since its establishment and of modern day requirements, agrees that the Commonwealth Parliament continue its participation in the Australian Constitutional Convention established to review the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution and accordingly resolves: (1) That, for the purposes of the Convention- (a) a delegation from the Commonwealth Parliament take part in the deliberations of the Convention, and comprise sixteen members of the Parliament of whom six shall be members of the Senate and ten shall be members of the House of Representatives; (b) the ten members of the House of Representatives comprise five members of the Australian Labor Party, three members of the Liberal Party of Australia and two members of the National Party of Australia. (2) That- (a) the Prime Minister and four other members of the House of Representatives, being members of the Australian Labor Party, nominated by him; (b) the Leader of the Opposition and two other members of the House, being members of the Liberal Party of Australia, nominated by him; and (c) two members of the House, being members of the National Party of Australia, nominated by the Leader of that Party, be members of the Delegation. (3) That the Prime Minister be the Leader of the Delegation, and the Leader of the Opposition be the Deputy Leader. (4) That a member of the Delegation cease to be such a member if- (a) he ceases to be a member of the Commonwealth Parliament; (b) the House of the Parliament of which he is a member terminates his appointment; or (c) he resigns as a member of the Delegation by writing addressed to the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives, as the case requires. (5) That where, because of illness or any other cause, a member of the Delegation is not available to attend a meeting, or part of a meeting, of the Convention, the Leader or senior available member of the Party in the House from which the member was drawn may nominate an alternate member (being a member of the House of which the first-mentioned member is a member) and the member so nominated shall be a member of the Delegation for that meeting, or that part of that meeting. (6) That, in the event of a member of the Delegation ceasing to be such a member , the Leader of the Party in the House from which the member was drawn may nominate another member (being a member of the House of which the first- mentioned member is or was a member) to replace the first-mentioned member. (7) That the Leader of the Delegation from time to time make a report for presentation to each House of the Parliament on matters arising out of the Convention, and that the Deputy Leader of the Delegation may make an accompanying report. (8) That a message be sent to the Senate acquainting it of the resolution agreed to by the House of Representatives. I wish to make some brief comments. The motion of which honourable members have already received notice provides for a delegation of 16 members from the Commonwealth Parliament. The delegation will comprise 10 members of the House of Representatives and six members of the Senate. It is proposed that the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) be the leader of the delegation and the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock) be the deputy leader of the delegation. It is further proposed that both the leader and the deputy leader will report to Parliament in due course. The Government and, I think, the Parliament are committed to ongoing constitutional reform in the spirit of widespread consensus which is clearly emerging in Australia. Whilst we have a basic Constitution there is a continual need for renovation. The next plenary session of the Australian Constitutional Convention is scheduled to be held in Adelaide over the four-day period from 26 to 29 April this year. It will be the fifth plenary meeting of the Convention. Since the last Convention in Perth, a number of proposals have been developed by what is called the Convention Standing Committee. These proposals include an integrated system of courts, advisory opinions jurisdiction for the High Court of Australia and a fixed term of Parliament. Based upon the ground work set by previous sessions there is confidence that at this and in future sessions we will be able to work towards a systematic review of the Constitution for 1988, the bicentennial year. When the Convention was established in 1973 it was generally recognised that the object of participation should be to see whether consensus could be achieved . The motion I have moved is very similar to the 1978 resolution. Consistent with the spirit of consensus, it provides for representation of all parties on the basis of an equal number of Government and non-Government representatives. The Government's representatives will be the Prime Minister; the Leader of the Government in the Senate and Minister for Industry and Commerce, Senator Button; the Attorney-General, Senator Gareth Evans; the Minister for Territories and Local Government, Mr Uren; Senator Tate; the honourable member for Hunter, Mr Robert Brown; and the honourable member for Burke, Dr Theophanous. The Leader of the Opposition has informed us-I expect he will report to the House-of the names of the Opposition's representatives in the delegation. I also will be part of the delegation. The plenary sessions of the Convention provide an opportunity for delegates from the legislatures of the Commonwealth and the States and the Northern Territory, together with representatives of the Legislative Assembly of the Australian Capital Territory and local government, to meet to exchange views. For the first time this session will be conducted in the presence of a number of officially accredited observers representing a wide range of interests. The Convention provides a unique forum for discussion of fundamental constitutional issues. I commend to the House the motion, which seeks to ratify the continued participation of this Parliament in the endeavours of the Australian Constitutional Convention. Mr PEACOCK(Kooyong-Leader of the Opposition)(8.38) —I support the motion and advise that I will lead the Opposition's delegation to the Australian Constitutional Convention. Other delegates from the Opposition will be, from the House of Representatives, the right honourable member for New England (Mr Sinclair), the honourable member for North Sydney (Mr Spender), the honourable member for Hume (Mr Lusher) and the honourable member for Sturt (Mr Wilson). From the Senate, the delegates will be the Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, Senator Durack, and Senator Peter Rae. There will, of course, be alternates. In supporting the motion the Opposition welcomes and supports the ongoing work of the Constitutional Convention. While our Constitution is the foundation-stone of Australia's political and legal system, to continue to be effective it must be modern and relevant. That means, of course, updating practices and conventions and, in some cases, the Constitution itself to suit contemporary Australia. An outstanding example was the 1967 constitutional amendment by referendum which recognised the rights of Aborigines to full citizenship along with other Australians. Another example of desirable change is a proposal which is before next week's Constitutional Convention for an integrated system of superior courts which, if agreed and approved by referendum, would greatly improve the rational administration of the law throughout Australia. Of a more political flavour is the proposal to extend the parliamentary term from three years to four years, which the Opposition supports. Let me state plainly that there can be nothing but support for the continuing examination of the Constitution within the Convention and indeed for amending the Constitution where it reflects the wishes of the Australian people; that is, where it is achieved by referendum. As stated, we support the motion. Question resolved in the affirmative. Mr SPEAKER —I have received a message from the Senate acquainting the House that it agrees with the Commonwealth Parliament's continuing participation in the Australian Constitutional Convention. Mr KEATING(Blaxland-Treasurer) —For the information of honourable members I present the Government documents submitted to the National Economic Summit Conference. These are information papers on the economy plus two addendums; Department of Finance report on the forward estimates of Budget outlays for 1983 -84 and 1985-86; projections of the Australian economy to 1985-86; the structure and role of the Economic Planning Advisory Council; price surveillance; and special analysis of unemployed persons registered with the Commonwealth Employment Service for full time employment as at 17 March 1983. Copies of the papers have already been made available to members and senators. Mr Speaker, with your indulgence, I wish to make a brief explanation concerning the papers. The Government has also decided to publish a three-volume record of Conference documents and proceedings. The first volume consolidates all Government documents prepared for the Conference, volume 2 is the complete proceedings of the Conference and volume 3 is a reproduction of all submissions to the Conference by participants and observers. I now table volume 2 of that official record. Volumes 1 and 3 will be distributed to members and senators as soon as they are available and tabled early in the May sittings, when the Government will also be making a comprehensive statement on the National Economic Summit Conference. Motion (by Mr Young) proposed: That the House take note of the papers. Debate (on motion by Mr Sinclair) adjourned. Mr Groom-Mr Speaker-- Mr SPEAKER —Does the honourable member for Braddon wish to raise a point of order? Mr Groom-No, Mr Speaker; I seek leave. Might I explain my point. I seek leave of the House to give notice of a motion I intend to move at the next sitting of the House. Mr Young-No. Mr SPEAKER —Leave has been refused. Notice can be given in writing to the Clerk. Mr Groom-It relates to regulations-- Mr SPEAKER —Order! The honourable member seeks leave. Is leave granted? Mr Young-No. Mr SPEAKER —Leave is refused. Mr Groom-With all due respect, Mr Speaker-- Mr SPEAKER —Leave is refused. Mr Groom-But I have not explained the subject matter so that the House can make a judgment on it. Mr SPEAKER —Order! The honourable member sought leave and leave has been refused . I have no alternative but to ask the honourable member to resume his seat. Mr SPEAKER —Pursuant to Standing Order 18, I lay on the table my warrant nominating the honourable members for Henty (Mrs Child), Lilley (Mrs Darling), Forrest (Mr Drummond), Ballarat (Mr Mildren), Wide Bay (Mr Millar), Banks (Mr Mountford) and Curtin (Mr Rocher) to act as Deputy Chairman of Committees when requested so to do by the Chairman of Committees. Mr SPEAKER —Order! I have been advised of the following nomination of members to be members of the Commonwealth Parliament's delegation to the Constitutional Convention: The honourable member for Wills (Mr Hawke), the honourable member for Kingsford-Smith (Mr Lionel Bowen), the honourable member for Reid (Mr Uren), the honourable member for Hunter (Mr Robert Brown) and the honourable member for Burke (Dr Theophanous) have been nominated by the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke). The honourable member for Kooyong (Mr Peacock), the right honourable member for New England (Mr Sinclair), the honourable member for Sturt (Mr Wilson), the honourable member for North Sydney (Mr Spender) and the honourable member for Hume (Mr Lusher) have been nominated by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock ). Motion (by Mr Young) proposed: That the House, at its rising, adjourn until Tuesday, 3 May, unless Mr Speaker fixes an alternative day or hour of meeting. Mr SINCLAIR(New England)(8.44) —I move as an amendment: Omit the words 'Tuesday, 3 May' and substitute the words 'Friday, 22 April'. Mr SPEAKER —Is the amendment in writing and seconded? Mr Steele Hall —Yes, Mr Speaker. I second the amendment. Mr SINCLAIR —I do this because quite obviously today there has been too little opportunity for the members of this place to canvass issues which are of considerable importance. I ask all members to take particular note of the telegram to which the honourable member for Bass (Mr Newman) referred, a telegram which led him to believe that in this House on this day there would be an opportunity to debate the regulation under which the Commonwealth Government seeks to challenge construction work in Tasmania. In those circumstances I believe it quite important that there be an opportunity for all the members of this place to go through the normal procedures and practices that are part of the ordinary parliamentary proceedings. The Leader of the House, the honourable member for Port Adelaide (Mr Young), advised this place that for particular reasons he wanted the legislation passed in this place today to be concluded by tonight. We accepted that. We supported that legislation. However, Mr Speaker, that does not avoid the necessity for this Parliament to sit in its due and proper form. The only way in which it can do that is for the House to resume tomorrow. If the Government has no business we would be very happy to generate a whole array of motions, of notices, of matters that we believe need consideration. Only a few moments ago very important documents were tabled in respect of the National Economic Summit Conference and there has been no opportunity for any member on this side of the House to discuss those matters. There has been no opportunity for the elected members of the Parliament to discuss those matters. My leader, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock), earlier today, in discussing the suspension of Standing Orders to allow Bills to be debated, canvassed an array of matters, all of which are important to the people of Australia and all of which should be considered by the elected members of this place. Today we have been sworn in. The Parliament has sat for one day and we are about to adjourn for a fortnight. Mr Speaker, that is not good enough. There is every reason for this Parliament to resume tomorrow. We would be quite happy to meet whatever time schedule the Leader of the House (Mr Young) might suggest. We believe it is an appropriate way by which the elected members can exercise that function for which they were sworn in in this chamber today. Mr Speaker, I too congratulate you on the election to your office. I only hope that you can serve in that office again tomorrow so you can deliberate properly and effectively on the matters we would love to canvass. Question put: That the words proposed to be omitted (Mr Sinclair's amendment) stand part of the question. The House divided. (Mr Speaker-Hon. Harry Jenkins) Ayes . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Noes . . . . . . . . . . . 42 —— Majority . . . . . . . . . 24 —— Baldwin P. J. Humphreys, B. C. (Teller)Beazley, K. C. Johnson, LesBeddall, D. P. Keating, P. J.Bilney, G. N. Kelly, R. J.Blanchard, C. A. Kent, L.Blewett, N. Keogh, L. J.Bowen, Lionel Kerin, J. C.Brown, John Klugman, R. E.Brown, Robert Lindsay, E. J.Brumby, J. M. McHugh, J.Charles, D. E. McLeay, LeoCharlesworth, R. I. Maher, M. J.Child, J. Mayer, H.Chynoweth, R. L. Mildren, J. B.Cohen, B. Milton, P.Cross, M. D. Morris, AllanCunningham, B. T. (Teller) Morris, PeterDarling, E. E. Morrison, W. L.Dawkins, J. S. Mountford, J. G.Duffy, M. J. O'Neil, L. R. T.Edwards, Ronald Punch, G. F.Everingham, D. N. Reeves, J. E.Fatin, W. F. Saunderson, J.Free, R. V. Scott, J. L.Fry, K. L. Simmons, D. W.Gayler, J. Snow, J. H.Gear, G. Staples, P. R.Gorman, R. N. J. Steedman, A. P.Griffiths, A. G. Theophanous, A. C.Hand, G. L. Uren, T.Holding, A. C. Wells, D. McM.Hollis, C. West, S. J.Howe, B. L. Young, M. J. Adermann, A. E. Hunt, R. J. D.Andrew, J. N. Katter, R. C.Anthony, J. D. Lloyd, B.Braithwaite, R. A. Lusher, S. A.Burr, M. A. McGauran, P. J.Cadman, A. G. MacKellar, M. J. R.Cameron, Ewen (Teller) McVeigh, D. T.Cameron, Ian Macphee, I. M.Carlton, J. J. Millar, P. C.Connolly, D. M. Moore, J. C.Cowan, D. B. Newman, K. E.Dobie, J. D. M. O'Keefe, F. L.Drummond, P. H. Porter, J. R.Edwards, Harry Robinson, IanFisher, P. S. Rocher, A. C.Goodluck, B. J. Ruddock, P. M.Groom, R. J. Shipton, R. F.Hall, Steele Sinclair, I. McC.Hicks, N. J. (Teller) Spender, J. M.Hodgman, W. M. Tuckey, C. W.Howard, J. W. White, P. N. D. Hurford, C. J. Street, A. A.Jacobi, R. Coleman, W. P. Question so resolved in the affirmative Original question resolved in the affirmative. The House adjourned at 8.58 p.m. until Tuesday, 3 May 1983, at 2.15 p.m., in accordance with the resolution agreed to this day. The following papers were deemed to have been presented on 21 April 1983, pursuant to statute: Australian Bureau of Statistics Act-Australian Bureau of Statistics-Proposal for collection of information-1983-No. 1-New topics to be included in the monthly population survey, May 1983. Australian Capital Territory Supreme Court Act-Rules of Court-Statutory Rules- 1982-Nos 359, 365. 1983-Nos 26, 27. Australian Federal Police Act-Regulation-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 367. Australian National Railways Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 398. Australian National University Act-Statutes- No. 163-Staff Superannuation Amendment No. 11. No. 164-Faculties (The Faculties) Amendment No. 17. Bounty (Agricultural Tractors) Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules- 1982-No. 400. 1983-No. 29. Bounty (Berry Fruits) Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 377. Canberra College of Advanced Education Act-Statute-No. 48-Courses and Awards Amendment (No. 2) 1982. Commonwealth Employees (Redeployment and Retirement) Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules- 1982-No. 391. 1983-No. 11. Commonwealth Serum Laboratories Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1983, No. 23. Commonwealth Teaching Service Act- Determinations- 1982-No. 6. 1983-Nos 1, 2, 3 . Continental Shelf (Living Natural Resources) Act-Regulation-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 389. Cotton Research Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1983, No. 25. Customs Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules- 1982, No. 404. 1983, No. 38. Dairy Products (Export Inspection Charge) Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 378. Dairy Products (Export Inspection Charge) Collection Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 379. Defence Act- Determinations- 1982- No. 49-Cadet Forces Allowances. No. 50-Flying Allowance. No. 51-Special Action Forces Allowance. No. 52-Indonesia Living Allowance. No. 53-Recreation Leave. No. 54-Flight Duties Allowance. No. 55-Expense Allowance Payable on Purchase or Sale of a Dwelling. No. 56-Dwelling Purchase on Sale Expenses Allowance. No. 57-District Allowance. No. 58-Higher Duties Allowance. No. 59-Insurance on Removal of Urgently Required Household Items. No. 60-Locum Tenens Allowance. Regulations-Statutory Rules 1983, No. 21. Defence Act, Naval Defence Act and Air Force Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 368. Defence Amendment Act-Interim Determinations-Statutory Rules- 1982-Nos 352, 356 , 357, 358, 360, 361, 362, 407. 1983-Nos 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20. Domicile Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 401. Dried Fruit (Export Inspection Charge) Collection Act- Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 384. Edible Oils (Export Inspection Charge) Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No . 380. Edible Oils (Export Inspection Charge) Collection Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 381. Eggs (Export Inspection Charge) Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 382. Eggs (Export Inspection Charge) Collection Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982 , No. 383. Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1983, No. 8. Epidemiological Studies (Confidentiality) Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 371. Export Control Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, Nos 354, 355. Federal Court of Australia Act-Rules of Court-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 408. Fish (Export Inspection Charge) Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 387. Fish (Export Inspection Charge) Collection Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982 , No. 388. Fisheries Act-Regulation-Statutory Rules 1983, No. 10. Health Insurance Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 370. Historic Shipwrecks Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1983, No. 24. International Organizations (Privileges and Immunities) Act- Regulations- Statutory Rules 1983, Nos 7, 22, 32. Lands Acquisition Act- Land acquired for- Postal services-Turrella, N.S.W. Defence purposes-Mulwala, N.S.W. Statements (18) of lands acquired by agreement authorised under sub-section 7 ( 1). Live-stock Export Charge Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 363. Live-stock Slaughter (Export Inspection Charge) Act- Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 385. Live-stock Slaughter (Export Inspection Charge) Collection Act- Regulations- Statutory Rules 1982, No. 386. Live-stock Slaughter Levy Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 364. Migration Act-Regulation-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 375. National Companies and Securities Commission Act-Regulation-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 366. National Health Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules- 1982-No. 372 1983-No. 28 National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1983, No. 31. Naval Defence Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1983, No. 1. Navigation Act- Navigation (Dangerous Goods) Regulations-Determination, dated 15 December 1982. Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, Nos 396, 397, 399. Overseas Students Charge Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 373. Overseas Students Charge Collection Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 374. Overseas Telecommunications Act-Regulation-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 353. Passports Act-Regulation-Statutory Rules 1983, No. 37. Postal Services Act-Australian Postal Commission-By-Laws-Postal (Staff)-1982- Amendment No. 1. Public Service Act- Appointment-Department of Health-R. Hackett. Determinations- 1982-Nos 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22. 1983-Nos 1, 2, 3. Regulations-Statutory Rules- 1982-Nos 390, 392, 393, 394, 395, 405, 406. 1983-Nos 4, 5, 9, 30, 35, 36. Public Service Arbitration Act-Public Service Arbitrator-Determinations accompanied by statements regarding possible inconsistency with the law- 1982- No. 442-Royal Australian Nursing Federation.* No. 461-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others.* No. 556-Federated Clerks Union of Australia. No. 557-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others.* Nos. 558 and 559-Federated Storemen and Packers Union of Australia.* No. 560-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others. Nos. 561 and 562-Royal Australian Nursing Federation. No. 563-Australian Public Service Artisans' Association. No. 564-Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners of Australia and others.* No. 565-Federated Clerks Union of Australia. No. 566-Meat Inspectors' Association, Commonwealth Public Service.* No. 567-Federated Miscellaneous Workers Union. Nos. 568 to 582-Administrative and Clerical Officers' Association, Commonwealth Public Service and others. Nos. 583 and 584-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others. No. 585-Federated Miscellaneous Workers Union. No. 586-Federated Liquor and Allied Industries Employees Union of Australia. No. 587-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). Nos. 588 and 589-Australian Public Service Artisans' Association. No. 590-Hospital Employees Federation of Australia. No. 591-Federated Miscellaneous Workers Union of Australia. No. 592-Australian Government Lawyers Association. No. 593-Commonwealth Works Supervisors Association. No. 594-Electrical Trades Union of Australia. No. 595-Vehicle Builders Employees Federation of Australia. Nos. 596 and 597-Federated Storemen and Packers Union of Australia. Nos. 598 and 599-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees and others. No. 600-Association of Professional Engineers, Australia and others. No. 601-Professional Officers Association, Australian Public Service. No. 602-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees and others. No. 603-Professional Radio and Electronics Institute of Australasia. No. 604-Australian Theatrical and Amusement Employees Association. No. 605-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others. Nos. 606 and 607-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees . No. 608-Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners of Australia and others. No. 609-Federated Engine Drivers' and Firemen's Association of Australasia.* No. 610-Transport Workers' Union of Australia. No. 611-Australian Workers' Union. No. 612-Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners of Australia. No. 613-Electrical Trades Union of Australia. No. 614-Professional Officers Association, Australian Public Service. No. 615-Administrative and Clerical Officers' Association, Commonwealth Public Service and others. No. 616-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others.* No. 617-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees. No. 618-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others.* No. 619-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 620-Australian Institute of Marine and Power Engineers. Nos 621 and 622-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees. No. 623-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees and others. No. 624-Association of Professional Engineers, Australia. Nos 625 and 626-Administrative and Clerical Officers' Association, Commonwealth Public Service and others. No. 627-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others. No. 628-Administrative and Clerical Officers' Association, Commonwealth Public Service.* No. 629-Federated Miscellaneous Workers Union of Australia.* Nos 630 and 631-Royal Australian Nursing Federation. No. 632-Administrative and Clerical Officers' Association, Australian Government Employment and another.* No. 633-Printing and Kindred Industries Union. No. 634-Transport Workers' Union of Australia.* No. 635-Federal Firefighters' Union. No. 636-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 637-Administrative and Clerical Officers' Association, Australian Government Employment.* No. 638-Australian Government Lawyers Association. No. 639-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 640-Transport Workers' Union of Australia.* No. 641-Administrative and Clerical Officers' Association, Commonwealth Public Service.* No. 642-Commonwealth Foremen's Association of Australia (Australian Public Service). Nos 643 to 649-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others. No. 650-Australian Broadcasting Commission Staff Association. Nos 651 to 672-Professional Officers Association, Australian Public Service and others. No. 673-Administrative and Clerical Officers' Association, Australian Government Employment.* No. 674-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others. No. 675-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 676-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees. No. 677-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others. No. 678-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers).* No. 679-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others. No. 680-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees. No. 681-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). Nos 682 to 686-Australian Public Service Artisans' Association. No. 687-Meat Inspectors' Association, Commonwealth Public Service. No. 688-Professional Radio and Electronics Institute of Australasia. Nos 689 to 692-C.S.I.R.O. Officers Association and others. No. 693-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others. No. 694-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees. No. 695-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 696-Australian Journalists Association. No. 697-Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization Technical Association. Nos 698 and 699-Hospital Employees Federation of Australia. No. 700-Professional Officers Association, Australian Public Service. No. 701-Australian Journalists Association. No. 702-Federated Miscellaneous Workers Union of Australia. No. 703-Professional Radio and Electronics Institute of Australasia. No. 704-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers).* Nos 705 to 708-Royal Australian Nursing Federation. Nos 709 to 712-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others. No. 713-Professional Officers Association, Australian Public Service and another.* No. 714-Professional Officers Association, Australian Public Service and others . No. 715-Australian Journalists Association. Nos 716 to 718-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers) . No. 719-A.C.T. Medical Officers' Association. No. 720-Professional Radio and Electronics Institute of Australasia. No. 721-Repatriation Department Medical Officers Association. No. 722-Commonwealth Medical Officers Association. No. 723-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others. Nos 724 and 725-Australian Broadcasting Commission Senior Officers' Association and others. No. 726-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees. No. 727-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers).* No. 728-Customs Officers' Association of Australia, Fourth Division. No. 729-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 730-Australian Public Service Artisans' Association. No. 731-Customs Officers' Association of Australia, Fourth Division. No. 732-Transport Workers' Union of Australia.* No. 733-Australian Workers' Union.* Nos 734 and 735-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers ).* No. 736-Professional Officers Association, Australian Public Service and others . No. 737-Australian Broadcasting Commission Staff Association. Nos 738 and 739-Professional Officers Association, Australian Public Service. No. 740-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others. No. 741-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 742-Federated Miscellaneous Workers Union of Australia. No. 743-Administrative and Clerical Officers' Association, Australian Government Employment and another. No. 744-Hospital Employees Federation of Australia. No. 745-Australian Broadcasting Commission Staff Association. No. 746-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees. No. 747-Australian Institute of Marine and Power Engineers. Nos 748 and 749-Hospital Employees Federation of Australia. Nos. 750 to 752-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees and another. No. 753-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 754-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees. No. 755-Federated Liquor and Allied Industries Employees Union of Australia. Nos 756 to 762-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers) . No. 763-Federated Clerks Union of Australia. Nos 764 to 768-Australian Broadcasting Commission Staff Association. No. 769-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others. No. 770-Commonwealth Foremen's Association of Australia, Commonwealth Public Service. No. 771-Administrative and Clerical Officers' Association, Australian Government Employment.* No. 772-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees and others. No. 773-Australian Journalists Association. No. 774-Australian Broadcasting Commission Staff Association. No. 775-Hospital Employees Federation of Australia.* No. 776-Commonwealth Foremen's Association of Australia (Australian Public Service). No. 777-Meat Inspectors' Association, Commonwealth Public Service. No. 778-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees. No. 779-Australian Broadcasting Commission Staff Association. Nos 780 to 784-Australian Workers' Union and others.* Nos 785 to 787-Australian Workers' Union and others. No. 788-Australian Workers' Union and others.* No. 789-Federated Miscellaneous Workers Union of Australia. No. 790-Administrative and Clerical Officers' Association, Australian Government Employment and others. 1983- No. 1-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 2-Musicians' Union of Australia. No. 3-Australian Broadcasting Commission Senior Officers' Association and another. No. 4-Royal Australian Nursing Federation. No. 5-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 6-Australian Journalists Association. No. 7-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 8-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees. No. 9-Professional Para-Medical Officers' Association, Commonwealth Public Service. No. 10-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees. No. 11-Federated Clerks Union of Australia. No. 12-Hospital Employees' Federation of Australia. No. 13-Federated Miscellaneous Workers Union of Australia. Nos 14 and 15-Commonwealth Medical Officers' Association. Nos 16 and 17-Repatriation Department Medical Officers Association. No. 18-Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association. No. 19 to 24-Hospital Employees Federation of Australia. No. 25-Federated Miscellaneous Workers Union of Australia. No. 26-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees. Nos 27 and 28-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). Nos 29 and 30-Federated Liquor and Allied Industries Employees Union of Australia. No. 31-Australian Journalists Association. No. 32-Australian Theatrical and Amusement Employees Association. Nos 33 and 34-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 35-Transport Workers' Union of Australia. Nos 36 to 41-Australian Broadcasting Commission Staff Association. No. 42-Australian Theatrical and Amusement Employees Association. No. 43-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers).* Nos 44 to 48-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 49-Australian Journalists Association. Nos 50 and 51-Meat Inspectors' Association, Commonwealth Public Service. Nos 52 to 54-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 55-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees. No. 56-Administrative and Clerical Officers' Association, Commonwealth Public Service and others. No. 57-Royal Australian Nursing Federation. No. 58-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 59-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others. Nos 60 and 61-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 62-Federated Miscellaneous Workers Union of Australia. No. 63-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others. No. 64-Commonwealth Works Supervisors Association. Nos 65 and 66-Federated Miscellaneous Workers Union of Australia. No. 67-Association of Draughting, Supervisory and Technical Employees. No. 68-Printing and Kindred Industries Union. Nos 69 and 70-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 71-Federated Miscellaneous Workers Union of Australia. No. 72-Professional Para-Medical Officers' Association, Commonwealth Public Service. Nos 73 and 74-Commonwealth Police Officers' Association. No. 75-Australian Public Service Association (Fourth Division Officers). No. 76-Electrical Trades Union of Australia. Nos 77 to 80-Customs Officers' Association of Australia, Fourth Division. No. 81-Commonwealth Foremen's Association of Australia (Australian Public Service). No. 82-Transport Workers' Union of Australia.* No. 83-Australian Workers' Union.* No. 84-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others.* No. 85-Federated Ship Painters and Dockers Union of Australia.* No. 86-Federated Furnishing Trade Society of Australia.* No. 87-Federated Engine Drivers' and Firemen's Association of Australasia.* No. 88-Transport Workers' Union of Australia.* No. 89-Australian Workers' Union.* No. 90-Electrical Trades Union of Australia.* Nos 91 and 92-Amalgamated Metal Workers' and Shipwrights Union and others.* No. 93-Australian Building Construction Employees' and Builders Labourers' Federation.* Nos 94 and 95-Australian Broadcasting Commission Staff Association. No. 96-Actors' and Announcers Equity Association of Australia. Nos 97 to 101-Australian Broadcasting Commission Staff Association. (* Not accompanied by statement). Royal Commissions Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1983, No. 6. Seat of Government (Administration) Act- Ordinances- 1982- No. 93-Ordinances Revision (Companies Amendments) (No. 2). No. 94-Motor Traffic (Alcohol and Drugs) (Amendment). No. 95-Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Amendment). No. 96-Motor Traffic (Amendment) (No. 5). No. 97-Sewerage Rates (Amendment) (No. 3). No. 98-Water Rates (Amendment) (No. 4). No. 99-Gaming and Betting (Amendment). No. 100-Consumer Affairs (Amendment). No. 101-Pool Betting (Amendment) (No. 2). No. 102-Real Property (Amendment) (No. 2). No. 103-Workmen's Compensation (Amendment). No. 104-Workmen's Compensation (Amendment) (No. 2). No. 105-Public Assemblies (Amendment). No. 106-Land Valuation (Amendment). No. 107-Leases (Amendment). No. 108-Commonwealth Dwellings (Rent) (Amendment). 1983- No. 1-Remuneration (Amendment). No. 2-Unit Titles (Amendment). No. 3-Canberra Theatre Trust (Amendment). No. 4-Seat of Government (Administration) (Amendment). No. 5-Interpretation (Amendment). No. 6-Juries (Amendment) No. 7-Public Assemblies (Repeal) Regulations-1982- Nos 52 and 53 (Co-operative Societies Ordinance). Spirits Act-Regulation-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 376. States Grants (Petroleum Products) Act-Amendment of the Schedules to the subsidy schemes in relation to the States of- New South Wales, dated 8 December 1982. New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia and Western Australia, dated 30 March 1983. Western Australia, dated 21 December 1982. States Grants (Schools Assistance) Act 1982-Statement of particulars of direction given by Minister under sub-section 16 (2). Stevedoring Industry Levy Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1983, No. 2. Superannuation Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1983, Nos 33, 34. Supply and Development Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, No. 369. Telecommunications Act-Australian Telecommunications Commission- By-laws 1982- Telecommunications (Charging Zones and Charging Districts)- Amendment Nos 29, 30 , 31, 32. Telecommunications (Community Calls)-Amendments Nos 23, 24, 25. Telecommunications (General)-Amendments Nos 34, 35, 36. Telecommunications (Staff)-Amendments Nos 38, 39, 40. Trade Commissioners Act-Regulation-Statutory Rules 1983, No. 3. Wireless Telegraphy Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1982, Nos 402, 403.