Tuesday, 21 August 1984 AUSTRALIA PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Hansard 1984 FIRST SESSION OF THE THIRTY-THIRD PARLIAMENT (FOURTH PERIOD) Pursuant to the Resolution of the House of Representatives passed on 7 June 1984, the House of Representatives met on Tuesday, 21 August 1984, at 2 p.m. Mr SPEAKER (Hon. Harry Jenkins) took the chair at 2 p.m., and read prayers. Mr HAWKE(Wills-Prime Minister) —I move: That this House expresses its deep regret at the death of the Right Honourable Sir Phillip Reginald Lynch, a former Minister and member for the division of Flinders, who passed away on 19 June 1984, places on record its appreciation of his long and meritorious public service and tenders its profound sympathy to his family in their bereavement. I am sure honourable members were saddened to hear during the recess of the death of Sir Phillip Lynch. Sir Phillip was a member of this House for the division of Flinders from 1966 until his retirement on 11 October 1982. His achievements during that relatively short career were notable. He served as a Minister for 11 of those 16 years and was deputy leader of his party for 10 years. In an extensive ministerial career he served in six portfolios. He was appointed Minister for the Army in 1968 and subsequently served as Minister for Immigration and Minister for Labour and National Service in the Gorton and McMahon Ministries. During the period of the Fraser Government he was consecutively Treasurer, Minister for Finance and Minister for Industry and Commerce. I understand, Mr Speaker, that he also acted as Prime Minister for a brief period. Sir Phillip's capacity for handling the hard, unremitting work of ministerial office was well known to all members of this House. He was also known for the strength of character and single-mindedness of purpose through which he sought to achieve his political ambitions. Although many members of this Parliament would have disagreed with him on a number of occasions, they would all, I believe, have respected the views that he expressed and especially the conviction with which he expressed them. I had the opportunity of knowing Sir Phillip over a long period. We were fellow members of the Australian delegation to the 1962 Duke of Edinburgh study conference in Canada. I got to know him well then and that acquaintance continued from that point on. During my period as President of the Australian Council of Trade Unions I knew him when he was the relevant industrial relations Minister. May I say, without going into details of the personal knowledge and friendship I had with Sir Phillip, that in the latter days of his illness on two or three occasions I had the opportunity of speaking to him by telephone. I pay tribute to the remarkable courage which Sir Phillip showed in that great adversity. Sir Phillip Lynch's illness and early death took from the community the services of a man who had a great deal more to contribute to Australian public life. On behalf of this House I extend to his widow and to his family our sincere sympathy. Mr PEACOCK(Kooyong-Leader of the Opposition) —I would like to commence by thanking the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) for the remarks he has passed in relation to Sir Phillip Lynch. All honourable members on this side of the House admired Phillip Lynch. We worked closely with him over many years. In fact, from a personal point of view, from the day I joined the Liberal Party of Australia and before it the Young Liberal Movement, Phillip was a part of it. Until his death, in fact, Phil Lynch and I shared so much of our political careers together. Twenty-eight of my 45 years have been spent in membership of the Liberal Party. When I joined the Liberal Party, Phillip was President of the Young Liberal Movement. We served in the Young Liberals together, we served on the Liberal Party State Executive together, we came into Parliament in the same year, and we served together in the Ministry, in opposition and subsequently in Cabinet. There are few men who have the qualities that Phillip Lynch brought to this Parliament. He was an extraordinarily human person. He had none of the frailties and weaknesses that so many of us have. I fought Phil and opposed him on a number of occasions but I always admired him. The qualities that he had are rarely possessed by one person. He had a tolerance, a patience and a dedication but an unremitting friendliness to anyone even though that person may have argued or contested positions against him. When I learned of the death of Phil, having had communication with him particularly in the latter stages of his illness, I had a feeling of loss that I knew was shared by all members of my Party. We lost not only a great member and a great politician but also a man who throughout his life had shown courage, but none so much as in the last 12 months or so of his life. His work for the Party is well known; his work in the Parliament and in government is well known. I know I speak for all honourable members on this side when I say that we probably knew Phil better for his unremitting loyalty to each of us and the people with whom he worked and the humanity he showed to everyone he met. All of the tasks that Phillip Lynch took on were difficult tasks and never did he place the dedication with which he brought to those tasks ahead of the association with his own members. I know that the friendships that were formed with Phil Lynch crossed political boundaries. I know that members of the Government also felt a deep sadness when Phil died. He was one of those rare people who inspire that degree of friendship amongst people no matter what their partisan views. I have spoken to Leah and the boys and I know that they will be grateful for the remarks of the Prime Minister. Equally we ought to be grateful for what Phillip Lynch gave us. He was a Liberal, a great Australian, a great contributor and a great family man who will be deeply missed by us all. Mr SINCLAIR(New England-Leader of the National Party of Australia) —On behalf of the National Party of Australia I would like to support the condolence motion moved by the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) and supported by my colleague the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock). Phil Lynch had a range of characteristics. As a politician he was certainly a remarkable man. He earned the respect of us all. He was a powerful debater and a great contributor within the Cabinet system. His record speaks for itself. Yet over that period, as the Leader of the Opposition remarked a moment ago, his contribution was more often than not one of always taking the harder tasks. It was his lot, for example, to preside over the Committee of Review of Government Expenditure-the Lynch Committee. It was a task which did not receive the united support either of those who worked with him in the Cabinet or, indeed, of the Public Service. But it was a task to which he applied himself with his customary persistence, dedication and sincerity. As a political leader, I found him particularly co-operative in trying to resolve those often difficult tasks of trying to reconcile the divided views that frequently there are between organisations and between organisations and parliamentarians. I know that Peter Nixon, who worked with him so often in matters affecting Victorian conservative politics, found it was Phil Lynch perhaps more than anybody else who helped to weld together that team which for so long was so dominant in that State. Perhaps more notable than even his contributions in the political field, Phil Lynch was a man who was very fond of his family; he had a great affection for his wife and three sons. Any of us who worked with him cannot help but recall the pride that he had in one of his sons' success as a windsurfer. He certainly enjoyed sailing with them. He was a family man who was well supported by his wonderful wife, Leah, who not only in days of good health but also in those saddening final days of ill health was by his side constantly. I am sure she gave courage and support to him. He was a man who I and all my colleagues admired in every sense, and to Leah and his family I extend our deepest personal sympathy. Mr CHYNOWETH(Flinders) —It was with much regret that I heard of the death of Phillip Lynch at Frankston Community Hospital on 19 June 1984. From humble beginnings Phillip Lynch rose to considerable heights within the Liberal Party of Australia and, indeed, the Australian Parliament. He entered Parliament in 1966 after gaining Liberal preselection for Flinders and within 14 months left the anonymity of the back bench for the Army portfolio in the Gorton Government. Phillip Lynch served the Australian Parliament for 16 years and during that time held a variety of appointments. After being Minister for the Army he became the Minister for Immigration and Minister Assisting the Treasurer from the end of the sixties until early 1971. From 1971, for approximately 18 months, Phillip Lynch was the Minister for Labour and National Service. He then reached the pinnacle of his parliamentary career by attaining the position of Treasurer, which he held from 1975 to 1977. From 1977 until his resignation in 1982 Phillip Lynch served as Minister for Industry and Commerce. It is obvious, having achieved such a rapid rise through a parliamentary party, that Phillip Lynch was a tireless and dedicated worker for the Liberal Party. Although our philosophies would differ in many areas, we shared the same concern for the people of Flinders, for the constituents we represented. Since representing Flinders I have come to realise the amount of time that a Federal member must spend away from home, his family and his friends. Phillip Lynch, a Minister for most of his parliamentary life, had even less opportunity than I do to enjoy family life. In this regard, too little is mentioned of the tremendous responsibility that falls onto the spouse of a member of parliament to be the mainstay of a family, to perform the role of both parents at once and to be the consoler and confidante of the children as well as being sufficiently firm to guide their moral development. An example of the precious moments of life that one misses in this profession is the time when one of my sons started an early morning paper round. This was a major turning point in his life. I was not able to share in that experience. I was unable to talk to him until he had returned from his first day at work. These are the simple yet important things I am certain Phillip Lynch missed out on due to his service to this nation. It is most unfortunate to note that the main aim of Phillip Lynch's retirement was to spend more time with his wife Leah and their three sons in order to bridge the gap that inevitably occurs as a result of so much time being spent away from home on parliamentary and government business. On behalf of the people of Flinders, my family and myself, I offer sincere sympathy to Leah, Phillip, Peter and Mark for their loss of husband and father. I extend to them my genuine understanding of the grief that they are now experiencing. I am sure that with time and fortitude they will come to terms with their grief and go on through life as Phillip Lynch would have wished. Mr HOWARD(Bennelong) —I would like to associate myself with the motion moved by the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) and warmly endorse his remarks and those of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock) and the Leader of the National Party of Australia (Mr Sinclair). I first got to know Phillip Lynch really well when the Liberal Party was in opposition before I became a member of parliament. I served with him as a member of a committee asked by the Federal Executive of the Liberal Party to rewrite the Federal platform after our election defeat in 1972. All of us, if we are candid-on occasions such as this perhaps we should be more candid and be enjoined to be more candid than on other occasions-will acknowledge that the early months of opposition for any political movement are difficult. During those early months in opposition Phillip Lynch worked extraordinarily hard in the interests of his Party and in the interests of our side of politics. I became tremendously impressed then with his commitment and his capacity for hard work. He demonstrated that capacity at a parliamentary level in 1975 with his relentless work on behalf of the Opposition concerning the loans affair. Sir Phillip marked himself in my eyes as a person of enormous energy and application to the job. The Prime Minister's cataloguing of the portfolios that he held is very eloquent testimony to that. In addition to stating the admiration I had for Sir Phillip's tremendous hard work, I wish to say just three more things. He placed an enormous store on the quality and the depth of family life. It was very obvious to me when I had the privilege of visiting him at his home in Melbourne just two or three weeks before he died and speaking to him and Leah, as it was obvious to many of his close friends, that he was greatly sustained during the last months of his life by his very deep Catholic faith and also by the closeness of the family environment in which he lived. The experience that I witnessed then was a reminder of the enormous value of a close and supportive family life. Through his life he was sustained by a very strong and deeply affectionate family life. On a number of occasions I found Phillip Lynch to have a very engaging sense of humour. He bequeathed a number of very interesting words to the economic lexicon of Australia. Perhaps the best known of those was that very colourful term which he used-perhaps not intending humour at the time, but over the years it acquired a greater degree of humour-at the National Press Club the day after the delivery of the 1977 Budget Speech when he described some of the estimates as being ' rubbery'. I think that expression has found its way into the economic lexicon of Australia. It has acquired different meanings and interpretations as time has gone by. During Cabinet discussions-on occasions there were arguments, some of which on rare occasions were fairly vigorous-I never found Phillip really to lose his temper. That is saying something, given a group of people who had to spend so much time with each other over a period of seven years. I often complimented him on his marvellously calm exterior and manner. I very deeply regret, as do all other members of the Liberal Party and the Liberal Party organisation, the loss of Sir Phillip Lynch, and the loss to his family. We thank his family for him. On behalf of the broader Liberal community I thank him for the enormous contribution he made as the Deputy Leader of our Party and as a senior Minister over such a long period. Mr COHEN(Robertson-Minister for Home Affairs and Environment) —Like all other members of the House, I was extremely sad to hear of the death of Sir Phillip Lynch. It was not a surprise because we had all heard reports of, had seen and had realised how ill he was. I became a member of this House in 1969. One of the first people to offer me the hand of friendship was Phillip Lynch. He invited me to his home in Frankston. I accepted and spent a delightful day with him, his wife and family. It is perhaps unusual for a member of another party to say this , but I regarded Phil as a friend throughout the period that he was a member of this Parliament. I agree with almost all the sentiments expressed today by the Prime Minister ( Mr Hawke), the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock) and others, but there are a couple of points I would like to make that have not been brought out. I think one of Phillip Lynch's greatest qualities was that he was always willing to listen to the Opposition. He did not believe that all wisdom came from one side of politics. He listened to debates in which he was involved; if he thought that a member had something to contribute he would invite the member to his office to discuss the matter, and he often acted upon it. In my early years in Parliament I took a considerable interest in immigration and questioned a lot of things. As a result of a number of discussions we had in his office about the matter, he set up the Borrie National Population Inquiry. He was excellent in his capacity as Minister responsible for tourism. The Prime Minister of the day set up the Select Committee on Tourism, and that Committee did a lot of work. When the report came out Phillip Lynch did not shelve it, as so often happens. He implemented a number of the recommendations in that report, many of which have had a profound impact upon the tourist industry in this country. As the honourable member for Bennelong (Mr Howard) mentioned, he was always courteous. I never saw him lose his temper. I never saw him make personal attacks on anyone. He would attack one's ideas but he would never attack one personally. I would like to say how sorry and saddened my wife Rae and I are that Phil is not with us and to wish Leah and the three boys all the very best and a long life. Mr MACPHEE(Balaclava) —I join in the sentiments expressed by other speakers. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock) summed up the qualities of Phillip Lynch and others have added to that. I believe his prodigious capacity for work and his very competent administration of his departments were his other characteristics. Certainly he was a steadying influence in Cabinet discussions. Even in close, private moments I never saw him show any acrimony or ill will towards anyone with whom he had lost an argument, no matter how strongly he felt about it. I recall him first at the discussions the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) mentioned, when the Conciliation and Arbitration Act was being reviewed once again. I was in the employers' delegation. The present Prime Minister had fairly recently taken the chair at the Australian Council of Trade Unions and Phillip had been appointed fairly recently to one of the most sensitive portfolios. They were two young men, each seeking to make his mark in his chosen area. It was fascinating to watch the contests between them, when each gave as good as he received, and they developed the very healthy respect for each other which was evident in the Prime Minister's remarks. I finally came to serve with Phillip when, as Minister for Productivity, I assisted him in his capacity as Minister for Industry and Commerce. I saw again the dedication of the man, the patience and thoroughness with which he examined all the major issues, even those in which it seemed impossible to satisfy the various interest groups. In areas such as the automotive industry, he still applied himself prodigiously and tried to steer the Cabinet patiently in what he thought was the right direction. He was a man with a lot of patience, and that was obviously exhibited many times in his life. I think it was his role as Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party which may have been his most important contribution. It was a difficult time; Malcolm Fraser successfully deposed the then Leader of the Party when we were last in Opposition. Phillip remained the Deputy Leader throughout that period and was a most important figure in stabilising the Liberal Party at a volatile time. He was a person in whom everyone felt they could confide and know that it would be kept confidential. I think he was an enormously valuable figure, sometimes better than was generally understood by the Liberal Party and very often better than it deserved. I extend, with all other speakers, my condolences to Leah and the boys and again express my deep personal gratitude for the friendship of Phillip Lynch. Mr CHARLES(Isaacs) —I would like to join other speakers in supporting this motion moved by the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke). I came to know Phillip Lynch fairly well after entering the Parliament, not only because of my work here but also because of the fact that our electorates of Isaacs and Flinders join at the major town of Frankston. We met on a number of occasions to discuss issues and the important events of that time. I, like the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock), had many a battle with Phil Lynch but through all that time my respect for him grew. He was a man of integrity and a great family person. I knew his family commitment. His boys went to school in the middle of my electorate, not far from where I live. As I said, my respect for him, even though we disagreed politically on a number of occasions, grew as each day went by. He crossed various political borders by giving me advice from time to time about what I should do. When I entered this Parliament I think I was about the same age as Phil was when he entered Federal Parliament in 1966. Subsequently a few tips from Phil Lynch were very much appreciated. I was very saddened to learn of his death. I knew of the struggles that he had had over a long time. During some of those I was able to convey my concern to him. Now, Mr Speaker, I would like to convey condolences both from myself and from everyone living in the bayside region of Melbourne where Phil Lynch made his home. I express my deepest sympathy to his family and I wish them all the very best for the future. Mr FISHER(Mallee) —I wish to place on public record, on behalf of past and present members of the Australian Jaycees, the outstanding contribution made to this international organisation by the late Sir Phillip Lynch. Sir Phillip Lynch joined the Melbourne Jaycees-then the Junior Chamber of Commerce-in 1959. From that year he held leadership positions every year until he became President of the Melbourne Chapter in 1963. He was National Vice President of the Victorian Zone in 1964 and subsequently, in 1966, he served as National President of Australian Jaycees. In the same year he was pre-selected for Flinders against 21 strong contenders. During his lifetime Sir Phillip Lynch epitomised the charter and function of the Jaycees movement-self-development and leadership. He particularly recognised the need for young people to contribute to the field of public leadership and during his period of membership his efforts were aimed at tapping the potential of young Australians. He was, to my knowledge, the first person in Australia to campaign actively for the appointment of a public grievance investigator-an ombudsman-because of his very strong belief in the protection of the rights of the individual. Australian Jaycees extend their sympathy to his wife Leah and her three sons at the loss of a husband, father and a great Australian. I conclude by quoting from a speech the late Sir Phillip made in 1966 as National President of the Jaycees movement. He said: If we are to lead, we must first become leaders through self-development and deepening awareness of our responsibility to the community we serve. This objective will be fulfilled only by providing a greater number of young men with effective opportunities to develop their emergent human resources through the training, education, fellowship and project participation which Junior Chamber must offer. The late Sir Phillip Lynch, in a life that was sadly so short, made an enormous contribution to the Australian community through practical adherence to these ideals and a capacity to work and organise his own talents and the talents of others with whom he worked. We grieve his passing. Mr BARRY JONES(Lalor-Minister for Science and Technology) —I want to add a few words. I knew Phillip Lynch for about 30 years. We used to debate together at the Melbourne University. In 1955 he stood as a candidate in what was then the hopeless old seat of Scullin, as I recall. He went down in flames, as many of us did in 1955. Mr Howard —As you did in Bruce. Mr BARRY JONES —No, in 1963 I went down in flames in Bruce. In 1955 I went down in flames in the old seat of Isaacs, which was not the safe Labor seat that it is now. I want to comment about Sir Phillip Lynch. I hope that what I say will not be misunderstood. I do not think that those of us who are paying tribute to Sir Phillip Lynch would mark him out as a man of extraordinary intellectual brilliance. He was not. But he was a man who developed the capacities he had within him by sheer unremitting work. He never gave up. He had that quality that the Germans call Sitzfleisch. He could outsit anybody else. He was very valuable in committee work. When people were fainting in coils, Sir Phillip Lynch was writing the minutes. Stalin said on one occasion: 'He who keeps the minutes writes the history'. Mr Howard —Joe Chamberlain said that as well. Mr BARRY JONES —Joe Chamberlain probably did also. Sir Phillip Lynch was not a great orator; nevertheless he applied himself with extraordinary assiduity to everything that he did. He came from a working class background. Although some reference has been made to his family and his sons, and of course I express sympathy with them, no reference has been made so far to his parents. His parents and his sister were at the funeral at St Patrick's Cathedral and I want to pay some sort of tribute, and I am sure the House would want to express its sympathy, to his parents and sister, to whom it caused great grief to see their son and brother laid to rest. Sir Phillip had a particular set of values. I do not say that those values were necessarily my own but there is no doubt that he put everything he had into them -his church, his family, his economic philosophy and also his extraordinary relationship with various community bodies. I think it was said at the service that he had been a patron of or actively involved in 53 community bodies of various kinds. Having heard what other people had said, and noticing some of the things that had not been said, I wanted to add a few words of my own. Mr ALDRED(Bruce) —I wish to pay my respects to the Rt Hon. Sir Phillip Lynch, KCMG, both as a former parliamentary colleague and as a personal friend. To Lady Lynch and the Lynch family I also offer my deepest sympathy. It has been rightly pointed out that Sir Phillip Lynch had a most extraordinary political career. During his 16 years as the Federal member for Flinders, he held six different ministerial portfolios, including the exacting posts of Treasurer and Minister for Industry and Commerce. Furthermore for a decade he displayed considerable skill in carrying out the complex role of Deputy Leader of the Parliamentary Liberal Party. Outside politics, Phillip Lynch had many other distinguished achievements, most especially in the business arena. A respected management consultant before entering this House in 1966, he again actively involved himself in business after retiring from Parliament in late 1982. He became a chairman, a director or a consultant of 16 significant business organisations, some of which are located in my electorate of Bruce. However, it is on a personal level that I always best remember Phillip Lynch. As Deputy Leader of my Party he was readily available to talk to back benchers such as myself, and obviously enjoyed doing it. He was consistently a sympathetic source of advice and encouragement and a receptive listener to any ideas or suggestions that one wished to put forward. We shared a common interest in the development of Australian industry-most particularly small business. I very much recall our close partnership during my years as chairman of the coalition's small business committee when we jointly achieved several major policy initiatives for small business. Above all, I relished Phillip Lynch's warm and slightly irreverent sense of humour-a vital quality for survival in this hardest of professions. My wife and I vividly remember his brilliantly funny speech in toasting the bride and groom at our wedding almost four years ago to this day. There is one superb example of Phil Lynch's humour that I would like to leave with the House. It was 16 November 1979 and Phil Lynch was presenting the first national small business awards at the Lakeside Hotel in Canberra. In his opening address he described what he believed to be some of the least believable lines in the English language. One was: 'Your cheque is in the mail'. Another was: 'This is definitely my last drink'. The final one was: 'I am from the Government and I want to help you'. That was vintage Phil Lynch and I think that is how he would like to be remembered. Dr HARRY EDWARDS(Berowra) —I am grateful for this opportunity to join in the expression of appreciation of and sympathy for the family of our former colleague and my personal friend Sir Phillip Lynch-Phil Lynch. From 1976 I worked closely with him as chairman, first of the government parties treasury committee and, secondly, of the industry and commerce committee. In that role, I shared in a background way many of the tussles that took place over that period. At this time I will mention only that in 1979-80 Phillip Lynch championed the export facilitation proposal for the motor industry, which led to the development of the world-scale General Motors-Holden's Ltd engine plant at Fishermans Bend. That in turn meant that engines built in Australia powered motor cars in England and on the Continent. Phillip Lynch achieved much. As has been said by previous speakers, he was always cheerful despite the great pressures, and always ready to lend a helping hand to anyone who asked it of him. He laboured hard and long for the Parliament and for Australia. I mention also the large number of community organisations to which he lent his support. Above all, he was always loyal to his colleagues, to the Party and to his duty as he saw it. As the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr Howard) mentioned, he was a man of firm Christian conviction in the Catholic faith. I am grateful that only a few weeks before his death I had a long conversation with him. I must say that he was in very good shape, courageous and ready for the end, and with the certainty of the life to come. Again, I express my deepest sympathy to Leah and the boys on the loss at such an early age of a beloved husband and father. Mr HODGMAN(Denison) —Mr Speaker, I wish to be associated with the motion of condolence. I am sure that Leah and the boys would have been particularly moved by the eloquence and the warmth of the remarks of the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke), the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock) and the other honourable members who spoke to this motion. I also believe that the Prime Minister is to be commended for something he said earlier this year. I know, because I was with Phil and Leah only two weeks before his death, how much the Prime Minister's remarks meant to him. Honourable members have spoken about the dedication with which Phillip Lynch carried out his ministerial duties. There was one area of his ministerial work to which he was particularly dedicated, and to which the industry involved responded. I refer to the housing industry. The Housing Industry Association would never have gained the strength and achieved the position it has today had it not been for the support it received from Phillip Lynch. That industry association unanimously resolved that it would create an award in his honour and , appropriately, it was known as the Sir Phillip Lynch Award for Excellence. Phillip Lynch was to have attended the presentation of that award this year and was unable to do so. The Prime Minister made the presentation. At the annual conference of the Housing Industry Association he spoke with great warmth and feeling of his sadness at the news of Sir Phillip's illness. That meant a tremendous amount to Phil Lynch. I served under him as Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry and Commerce from 1980 until 1982. I was with him in good times and in bad. As honourable members have said, he was dedicated and hard working, but if I were asked to say what his greatest capacity was I would say it was loyalty. He always gave loyalty; he did not always get loyalty back. In 1977 I saw him in great pain in a hospital bed in Frankston. I saw him the night he collapsed in Parliament in the Budget session of 1981. I saw him only two weeks before his death at The Moorings at Frankston. Despite the offer of surgery and other treatment which he declined to accept, he in fact determined that he would see the thing through. He attended a meeting of the Reserve Bank as a member of the Board of that bank three weeks prior to his death. I believe I delivered to this Parliament the very last letter he wrote to it. It was a letter of tribute which was read out at the dinner in honour of the retirement of the former Deputy Prime Minister, the Rt Hon. Doug Anthony. There is perhaps an epitaph above all which springs to mind as appropriate in the case of Sir Phillip Lynch. It was first uttered upon the death of Edmund Barton by A. E. Piddington. I think it summed up Barton; it certainly sums up Phillip Reginald Lynch. It is: 'Oh, never proud in life-lie down in pride!' Mr WILSON(Sturt) —I join in paying tribute to a great Australian. I entered this Parliament on the same day as Phillip Lynch. Throughout the following years I came to know him and regarded him as a friend. He was a great parliamentarian and played a very significant role in the leadership of this country. I join with the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock) and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr Howard) in the remarks they have made. I wish simply to highlight the fact that I believe that history will record that one of Sir Phillip Lynch's greatest contributions was the one that he made through good times and difficult times as Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party. Historians, when distanced from the difficulties that he confronted as Deputy Leader, will come to record the influence of Phillip Lynch as being far more significant than many of his contemporaries have recognised. As has been said, he was a hard worker and a loyal friend and colleague. His contribution had its peak in the way in which he fulfilled the role of Deputy Leader of the Party. That is not to underestimate the great role that he played in fulfilling his ministerial responsibilities and providing leadership to the Australian nation. I also draw attention, as have other speakers, to his qualities as a family man and endorse the remarks made by others. His sense of family extended not only to his own family, although that was significant; it went also to the families of his colleagues and friends. I am sure that many members of this House will recall that Sir Phillip Lynch when greeting or farewelling them asked after their wives or husbands and children. That was true in my case. He often inquired of my wife and sons. I do not believe it was simply because his three sons were of an age very similar to the age of three of our four sons. His great courage came from his deep faith, his deep sense of belief in and adherence to the Catholic Church. I conclude by saying how moved were my wife and I at his requiem mass. It was one of the most moving funeral services I have attended. At that service, as also today, tribute was paid to a man who contributed his all to the advancement of the Australian people. I extend to Leah, his three sons and other members of his family my heartfelt sympathy. Mr ADERMANN(Fisher) —Mr Speaker, Shakespeare wrote these words: This above all: to thine own self be true, And it must follow, as the night the day, Thou canst not then be false to any man. He might well have been writing of Phillip Lynch. I briefly endorse and agree with all the sentiments that have been expressed here today, but they can only inadequately tell of his loyalty and his ability. I remember his compassion. I knew him as a fine Christian gentleman, true to his friends, of whom I was proud to be one, and to his beliefs and his very high principles. I express my sympathy to his loved ones, who must miss him terribly. Mr SHIPTON(Higgins) —Mr Speaker, in joining this condolence motion on the death of Sir Phillip Lynch, I should like to quote in part a tribute in Travelweek magazine: The death of Sir Phillip Lynch in Melbourne last week prematurely removed from Australian public life a man who made a major contribution to the enhanced esteem in which the Australian tourism industry is now held at federal government level. The esteem in which Sir Phillip was held by the Australian tourist industry was summed up in these comments of the President of the Australian Federation of Travel Agents, Case Muskens: He was a believer in the tourism industry. He was a fighter for it. He showed total dedication. Muskens recalled that it was Sir Phillip who formed the Travel and Tourism Industry Advisory Committee and demonstrated his genuine concern for the industry by chairing the Committee's meetings. Mr Muskens added: After he retired from politics he maintained his interest in the industry and demonstrated this by agreeing, at my request, to chair the domestic tourism ' summit conference' last year. May I add my own words and say that Sir Phillip was a fighter for small business in the Government of his day. He was responsible for the extended role and charter of the Commonwealth Development Bank. He instigated the first national small business awards and he fought for the extension of the amount allowed for the retention of profits by private companies. This role of Sir Phillip's is often forgotten in this place. He was a brave and courageous man, as was shown by the way in which he faced the last days, weeks and months of his life. Sir Phillip, his faith and his family are at this time an inspiration to all of us. Question resolved in the affirmative, honourable members standing in their places. Mr HAWKE(Wills-Prime Minister)(2.49) —I move: That this House expresses its deep regret at the death of Anthony Sylvester Luchetti, a former member for the division of Macquarie, who passed away on 11 July 1984, places on record its appreciation of his long and meritorious public service, and tenders its profound sympathy to his family in their bereavement. Mr Speaker, Tony Luchetti was a member of this House for the division of Macquarie from 1951 until his retirement in 1975. The quarter of a century in which he served as a member covered the long period of Opposition for the Australian Labor Party up to 1972, and therefore, as with a number of other Labor members of that period, Tony Luchetti's service as a member of the Opposition Executive for 10 years from 1961 to 1971 did not receive its just reward of ministerial office. He served on a number of parliamentary committees, including the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and the Joint Committee on the Broadcasting of Parliamentary Proceedings. He was also a member of the Select Committee on Voting Rights of Aborigines in 1961 and of the Joint Select Committee on the New and Permanent Parliament House from 1967. He also served as Deputy Chairman of Committees from 1970. I had the opportunity in recent years of meeting Tony on a number of occasions. His commitment both to his Party and to the interests of his nation remained active and undimmed. Tony Luchetti's contribution to his Party and to this Parliament was significant and it was long standing. On behalf of the House, I convey to his widow and to his family our sincere sympathy. Mr PEACOCK(Kooyong-Leader of the Opposition) —I join with the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) on behalf of the Opposition in supporting the motion before the House. Tony Luchetti was a very good man. When I came into the Parliament at the beginning of 1966 he was, as the Prime Minister said, serving on the front bench of the Opposition. He was a pleasant, capable, courteous man who was keenly interested in Australian history. It is my recollection that he was a direct descendant of an arrival in the First Fleet. I recall also that in coming into the Parliament in 1951 he followed in the seat of Macquarie Ben Chifley, for whom he acted as campaign director in 1929-an extraordinary period of service to the Australian Labor Party. He was a member of his Party for 62 years. The Prime Minister spoke of his work as Deputy Chairman of Committees. Those of us who served in the Parliament with Tony in the chair knew how fair he was. I extend to his wife, his daughter and his two sons the sympathy of the Opposition . He was a man who clearly showed throughout his life a great commitment to the matters that he believed in, enshrined in the platform and the principles of his Party. He was liked and respected on both sides of the Parliament. He was a good man and a fair man and he gave outstanding service to his Party. Mr SINCLAIR(New England-Leader of the National Party of Australia) —I join in the motion of condolence moved by the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) and supported by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock). Tony Luchetti was a good bloke. All of us who knew him regarded him as perhaps the epitome of the old generation blue collar worker who was so prevalent in the affairs of the Australian Labor Party in the days when he began his long term of office with that Party. He certainly served an incredible term as an office bearer and as a parliamentary member of the Labor Party. He won the respect and admiration of us all. In his private life outside politics he had an incredible diversity of interests. He was twice Mayor of Lithgow. He was an ex-journalist but he also worked for a time in the oil industry, in brick making, in the iron works, in coal mining, and in insurance, estate and travel agencies, and he even owned a cattle property. I well remember during the days of the Whitlam Ministry his making an observation during a debate in this Parliament that all Australia does not exist to the east of the Blue Mountains. He had emphases in that respect which certainly won support from my colleagues in the National Party. We join in extending our deepest sympathy to his wife and family. Mr LIONEL BOWEN(Kingsford-Smith-Minister for Trade) —I join with other speakers in supporting this motion of condolence. I, like a number of others, first joined Tony Luchetti in the Parliament in 1969. As the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) said, it was evident that Tony had spent a lifetime in service to the people of Australia and particularly to the Australian Labor Party. He spent a long period in opposition and it must have been frustrating for a person like him never to have had the opportunity to serve in a Ministry. As has been said, he understood the pitfalls of life. As was said by the Leader of the National Party (Mr Sinclair), he had a diversity of interests both in employment and in the sorts of people he sought to help. He represented tough, hilly country and the people, I think, had the same characteristics. But he had the ability to understand everybody's need. It is significant that his maiden speech was made during the debate on the Budget of 1951. He said that he followed Ben Chifley. He mentioned the need for economic change and he said that it was necessary to help the underdog in Australia-the very principles which the Labor Party has always been about. Tony Luchetti was a splendid example of what the Labor Party has to offer to public life and we are very proud of him. In a lighter vein, those of us who had a chance to serve in the Ministry from 1972 to 1975 were reminded by Tony Luchetti that not enough was being done for the electorate he represented. He persuaded me that I should build a telephone exchange in Bathurst. There was a need for it and it was built. I thought it appropriate that the foundation stone ought to be laid by him. It was not until then that I realised that his christian names were Anthony Sylvester. By the time one adds 'Anthony Sylvester' to 'Luchetti' one has one of the largest foundation stones that one can find anywhere in Australia. I think this was a delightful tribute to pay to him because the man had enormous qualities which we recognised. I know that he died in harness. He was actually serving at the Labor Party's State conference when he took ill. I had only sent him some expressions about a quick recovery when I received a letter from him saying that he would soon be back on deck. The letter was written in handwriting that was very shaky indeed and tragically he passed away soon after that. I join all others in expressing condolences to his widow and family. Mr FREE(Macquarie) —I wish to be associated with the motion moved by the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) and supported by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock), the Leader of the National Party of Australia (Mr Sinclair) and the Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Lionel Bowen) in expressing condolences to the family of the late Anthony Sylvester Luchetti. The passing of Tony Luchetti at the age of 80 in the early hours of 11 July brought to an end a remarkable lifetime of service to his district and to the nation. Before entering this Parliament, Tony Luchetti served for 15 years as an alderman of the Lithgow City Council and was twice mayor of that city. He succeeded Ben Chifley in 1951 as the member for Macquarie and held the seat for 24 years. He was a member of the Parliamentary Labor Party 's front bench from 1961 to 1971. He served as a Deputy Chairman of Committees for five years and he was a member of numerous parliamentary committees. He was also throughout his life a great supporter of that great sport of rugby league. There are many features of Tony Luchetti's life and career which we would all admire and, indeed, envy. He had a long and unbroken career as a member of this House and an even longer period of active and prominent involvement in politics. At the tender age of 12 he was already busy distributing anti-conscription material in the 1916 referendum campaign. His relationship with the people he represented was one to which we would all aspire, but one which is rarely achieved. He enjoyed the love and respect of all he represented-people from all walks of life and from all parts of the political spectrum. Tony Luchetti also had his disappointments. It was his misfortune to come to Parliament relatively late in life and after a period of bitter struggle within the Labor Party. It was his misfortune to sit in opposition for the first 21 of his 24 years in this place and, despite his years of service on the front bench and despite his outstanding work in national development and resource policy, he was destined never to become a Minister. On his retirement in 1975 he received many honours including membership of the Order of Australia, election to the position of Freeman of the Cities of Bathurst and the Blue Mountains and life membership of the Australian Labor Party. His retirement, however, was from Parliament and certainly not from politics. For the last nine years of his life he remained an active and leading participant in Party affairs, continuing to represent his district at forums of the Party. Indeed, it was at the annual conference of the New South Wales branch of the Party in June that he collapsed, suffering a month's illness before he passed away. I extend sympathy to a fine lady-his widow, May-and to his children, Kath, Bill and Anthony, and their families. I mourn the passing of not only a generous and loyal friend and a great son of the Labor movement but also, in the words he used when referring to his predecessor, Chifley, in his maiden speech in 1951, a great and good Australian. Mr SIMMONS(Calare) —I also wish to be associated with the condolence motion that has been moved today on the passing of Tony Luchetti. On Wednesday, 11 July 1984 , Australia lost a great citizen with the passing of Anthony Sylvester Luchetti, AM. His passing was deeply felt by many people in the central-west of New South Wales but none more than in his own city of Lithgow-a city he loved greatly and, in turn, a city that greatly loved and admired Tony Luchetti. His 24 years of service in this Parliament was not his only level of community service. He was active in many local community and sporting bodies for years. Tony served on the Council of the City of Lithgow for 13 years, including two periods as mayor-in 1942 and in 1950. Despite retirement from the Parliament after the traumatic events of 1975, he continued his activity in community and political affairs. Indeed, each local, State and Federal election campaign gave him a chance to lend his experience to a cause he espoused for most of his life. Mr Speaker, Tony Luchetti was in every sense of the word an institution in the political life of New South Wales, particularly the New South Wales branch of the Australian Labor Party. The Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Lionel Bowen) and my colleague the honourable member for Macquarie (Mr Free) referred to the events relating to his passing. The Deputy Prime Minister indicated that he died in harness. Indeed, if Tony Luchetti had any sort of control over life and death, I am sure that he would not have wanted to depart from this world in any other way , in that his initial illness occurred at the New South Wales State Conference of the Australian Labor Party in June and he died during the week of the National Conference in July. I knew Tony Luchetti as a friend for a number of years, but particularly during the years following 1977 when I first stood as the endorsed Labor candidate for the Federal division of Calare. Tony was a great friend and gave me tremendous assistance in those two unsuccessful campaigns in 1977 and 1980. My success in 1983 in many respects was aided by Tony Luchetti's advice and his experience over those years. I have never met a person who did not respect Tony Luchetti both as a person and as a parliamentary representative. The fact that he had so little difficulty retaining his seat in this Parliament for almost a quarter of a century is an indication of the respect of the constituents of his old seat of Macquarie, almost a half of which is presently included in my division of Calare . To his widow, May, his daughter, Sister Kath, and sons, Bill and Tony, I extend the condolences of the people of the central-west of New South Wales. His passing will be deeply felt by all those people who knew him to be a fine Australian. Mr KEATING(Blaxland-Treasurer) —I would like to be associated with the motion of condolence moved by the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) and seconded by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock). I knew Tony Luchetti quite well. Indeed, I had the pleasure of his company in this Parliament for three years, between 1969 and 1972. Rarely has there been a more political man than Tony Luchetti. As the honourable member for Macquarie (Mr Free) said, he was active in the Australian Labor Party at the age of 12 years and yet he was still an active member of the Party when he died, aged 80. Indeed, he was a very radical figure and in the 1930s was a member of the Lang Labor Party. He was a Lang candidate against Ben Chifley in the seat of Macquarie in the 1930s and 1940s. We may have seen him in much mellower times but, in those hectic days of Labor when issues were passionately fought over, he was in there fighting. He was actively involved throughout the period of the unity conferences and great divisions in the Labor Party in the 1930s. He was a delegate from New South Wales on the national executives and national conferences of the Labor Party in those years. He was a very active man. His friend in here was Rex Connor. I developed a great friendship with the two of them and found great similarities between them. As you know, Mr Speaker, as a result of my own associations with the former Premier of New South Wales, Jack Lang, I found a common bond between the three. Indeed, Tony Luchetti seconded the motion which I moved in 1971 at the New South Wales Conference to readmit Jack Lang as a member of the Labor Party. It was a very emotional debate and one which I and, I think, most of the delegates at that conference will not forget. It is a tragedy that he never saw office as a Minister. Indeed, it is a great tragedy that the years of division in the Labor Party denied public office to all of the major figures of the Labor Party in the 1950s and 1960s. He was one of those casualties, but it never twisted his view of the world; it never marred his capacity, perception or judgment. On the day that he left here I think that his view was as sound as that of anyone who came here fresh. The honourable member for Macquarie has already mentioned his service to the people of Lithgow. The Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Lionel Bowen) referred to the fact that Lithgow is a hard electorate of working class people. Lithgow is certainly a hardworking town. Tony Luchetti was very much a product of that geography and of that period. I know of no member who served constituents as earnestly, as fully or as passionately as he did. He never let up in pursuing their interests. Even in his declining years here and after he left the Parliament he was active. Long after he ceased being the member for Macquarie, he went around community organisations and made representations on people's behalf. He was a very significant figure. It may be worth mentioning that when he collapsed at the New South Wales Australian Labor Party Conference he was debating a motion against me on the issue of the entry of foreign banks into Australia. I held him in the highest regard. He was one of the great figures of the Labor Party. Like so many people of his period-Anstey, Lang, Curtin and Connor-he was part of Labor's great tradition. Mr UREN(Reid-Minister for Territories and Local Government) —I wish to be associated with the tribute to Tony Luchetti. I went to Lithgow in April 1951. Chifley died in June 1951. Tony Luchetti was pre-selected as the candidate for the Australian Labor Party in 1951 and succeeded Chifley. I cut my teeth in the Labor Party in Lithgow at that time. I was Tony Luchetti's campaign director in 1954. I worked very closely with him. I might say that in my years in politics I have never known a local member, even considering the present honourable member for Lowe (Mr Maher), to be Tony Luchetti's equal. He was a great local member. He knew everybody from one end of the electorate to the other. He was a traditionalist. I am glad that the Treasurer (Mr Keating) raised some of the questions of history. Few members of this House have gone through the struggles and the histories of the Labor movement as did Tony Luchetti. He was a very young man when he joined the movement. The division occurred in the early 1930s. He supported Lang and Chifley supported the Federal body. If honourable members look at the record they will find that, in those divisions between Luchetti, Chifley and Lawson, Luchetti was the one who marshalled the major Labor vote of those days and the preferences put Lawson into government. The Labor movement in New South Wales and the nation as a whole have learnt much from the 1930s. Through all those years, Luchetti continued with his struggle. As I said, in 1951, after all those years of waiting, he was pre-selected and became a member. As honourable members well know, he had an outstanding record. He represented the Party on the front bench. I learnt a great deal from Tony Luchetti. I am pleased to see that two of his sons, Anthony and Bill, are in the gallery. I extend to them my sympathy, as I do to his wife, May, and his daughter. Dr KLUGMAN(Prospect) —I wish to associate myself briefly with the remarks made by everyone who has paid tribute to Tony Luchetti. One of the reasons I do so is that either the honourable member for Macquarie (Mr Free) or the honourable member for Calare (Mr Simmons) mentioned that he died in harness. I remind those honourable members who were not members of parliament during the period 1972- 1975 that he was in harness then also. In about 1973 he was involved in a very significant car smash. He received extensive injuries to his chest and literally finished up in harness. As I recall, aged 70 and in pain, he did not want to stand for Parliament in 1974 but was pressed by the Party into doing so. Everybody realised that it was an electorate which was difficult to hold and that he had a huge personal vote. The 1974 election did not look to be as clear cut as the 1984 election will be, and he volunteered to stand again and was successful. Tony Luchetti's background has been spoken of by others today. I admit that when I entered Parliament I was prejudiced against him. I was not a keen supporter of the Lang type of Australian Labor Party. However, I got to know him well and I respected his views on most issues, and I think he felt the same as far as I was concerned. I admit that I could never understand the way in which he continued, after he left Parliament in 1975, to remain so completely involved in local electorate work. I am sure the honourable members for Macquarie and Calare, who have already paid tribute to him, would also pay tribute to him for the help he gave them in winning those two seats for the Labor Party. He was prepared to attend every little function. We had adjoining electorates and it was difficult for me to believe what he was prepared to do. I admit that they were the sorts of things that I am not prepared to do, but my seat was never as marginal. Mr Hayden —But you worked hard. Dr KLUGMAN —As the seat of the Minister for Foreign Affairs was marginal when he won it, I think he would share my views on some of the chores associated with holding a marginal seat. I do not very often speak on these occasions; I am not sure that I have done so before. However, I pay real tribute to Tony Luchetti and his wife, May. She also is a real political animal. She would attend every State conference and as many other party functions as were relevant and important, showing what I consider to be a basic approach of most Labor Party members in trying to help the people at the bottom. She represents that point of view, as did Tony Luchetti, during the years in which I knew him. Question resolved in the affirmative, honourable members standing in their places. Mr HAWKE(Wills-Prime Minister) —I move: That this House expresses its deep regret at the death of the Honourable Kevin Michael Kiernan Cairns, a former Minister and member for the division of Lilley, who passed away on 6 July 1984, places on record its appreciation of his long and meritorious public service, and tenders its profound sympathy to his family in their bereavement. Many members were saddened during the recess to hear of the death of Kevin Michael Cairns, who was a former member of this House for the division of Lilley . Kevin Cairns was born in Sydney in 1929. He was elected to the House of Representatives in 1963 and retained his seat of Lilley at each subsequent election until 1972. In 1972 he was defeated by 35 votes by the late Frank Doyle , but retrieved the seat in 1974 and held it until his defeat in 1980 by its current holder. Kevin Cairns was a man of definite views and incisive expression. Many members, including at times, I believe, some in his own Party, did not agree with some of those expressions of view. But I believe that everyone who knew him would have respected the intensity and the integrity with which he held those points of view. His parliamentary career was marked by membership of a number of committees, including the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Expenditure. He also served as Minister for Housing in the McMahon Government in 1971-72. Mr Speaker, again I am sure that all members will join with me in conveying our deepest sympathy to his widow and family. Mr PEACOCK(Kooyong-Leader of the Opposition) —Mr Speaker, it is with a great sense of sadness that I join in support of the motion before the House moved by the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke). As the Prime Minister said, Kevin Cairns was first elected to this Parliament for the seat of Lilley in 1963. With the exception of one interruption-namely, from 1972 to 1974-he held that seat until 1980. When I first came to the Parliament what is now the second back row of the Government benches was the back row, and I sat with Kevin Cairns and Nigel Bowen , as he then was, in that row. I saw how assiduous Kevin was in the preparation of his material. I had known what a fighter he was in advocating a cause through the various Federal bodies of the Party that he attended. The amount of work and the preparation which went into even speeches on the adjournment, with the use of a slide rule, et cetera, to substantiate an argument, really had to be seen to be believed. He became Deputy Government Whip and rose to be Minister for Housing in 1971 and 1972. There are few persons I have served with in this Parliament who were as tough a fighter for what they believed in. He was a tough, dedicated and principled man. He was thought of by many-and I know he thought himself-to be one of the shrewdest political analysts around. I have to say that, whilst I joined issue with him on many matters, he proved to be right. For all that we had disagreements on some policy issues, it was a great pleasure for me in every election campaign that I have contested since my election to this Parliament to assist him in his seat of Lilley. At election after election Kevin and I would do street meetings and conduct various drives. He was motivated by an acute sense of political principle but he had one of the most mischievous senses of humour that I have ever known, perhaps with the exception of the former member for Moreton. He was absolutely unremitting in the pursuit of what he believed to be right. No matter how close his friendship with one, whilst it would not affect that friendship, he would tenaciously fight for a cause as he perceived it. I had great respect for Kevin Cairns and I feel a great sense of loss. I extend my condolences on behalf of the Liberal Party to Tonia and their seven children. May I add that Kevin's daughter, Pauline, who works for the honourable member for Darling Downs (Mr McVeigh), is in the chamber today. Mr SINCLAIR(New England-Leader of the National Party of Australia) —Mr Speaker, I share in the condolence motion moved by the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) and supported by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock). Kevin Cairns was a good family man, a good Catholic and a very good representative of the seat of Lilley . Something was said earlier today of others in their representative capabilities. I doubt that any were more assiduous in their devotion to their constituents than Kevin. He was prepared to take up the cudgels on behalf of any in his own electorate, and I know he attended many of those functions which the honourable member for Prospect (Dr Klugman) suggested some of us do not always enjoy. It is certainly true that Kevin, in his representation here, pursued his particular philosophy and views with an assiduousness that many others might well emulate. I guess most of us have sat in the chair of our dentist and have been subjected to their views from time to time. Kevin not only had those views and forced them on us in the dentist's chair; he then went off and studied economics and applied those theories that he had in a very practical way both in the electorate at large and in the Federal Parliament. He had a particular concern for family issues and it is in that field that we all best remember his parliamentary contribution. As Minister for Housing in the McMahon Ministry, he also made a very worthwhile contribution in trying to encourage the extension of the availability of housing and the concept of private ownership, which we on this side of the House support. To his wife Tonia and to his four sons and three daughters, including Pauline, who is in the gallery today, on behalf of the National Party of Australia I extend our deepest sympathy. Mrs DARLING(Lilley) —I wish to record my condolences at the death of the Hon. Kevin Cairns by supporting the motion before the House. Kevin was the member for Lilley until October 1980 when I was elected to that position. During his term of parliamentary service he was most noted for his position as Minister for Housing from March 1971 to December 1972. He experienced the uncertainties of the job which all in this House share; that is, he held Lilley from 1963 to 1972 and then lost to the late Frank Doyle by 35 votes. Kevin was re-elected in 1974 and then held the seat until 1980. He faithfully represented the philosophy of his Party, the Liberal Party of Australia, during his term of office. The job of a Federal representative is not an easy one. All in the House recognise this. Kevin shared that with us and he gave all his energies to representing the electorate of Lilley. We shared an interest in the redevelopment of Brisbane Airport. Of course, Kevin was known in Brisbane for the lobbying he did to get the redevelopment off the ground. Some of our emphases were different but certainly he led that first move to get Brisbane Airport redeveloped. I did not know Kevin Cairns very well when I was running as an opponent of his. It was not until I became the member for Lilley, when I sometimes saw him in the electorate and we spoke together about things, that I got to know him better personally. I last spoke to him when we were both mourning the passing of another former member for Lilley, the late Frank Doyle, just a couple of months before Kevin's passing. He was a family man and I pass on my sympathy to Mrs Cairns and to her seven children. Mr HOWARD(Bennelong) —I wish to support this motion. I liked Kevin Cairns immensely and I found what the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock) described as his impish sense of humour a very attractive quality. I met Kevin Cairns when I became a member of the Parliament in 1974 and he came back as the member for Lilley after an interruption of only 18 months. Like the Leader of the Opposition, I had occasion to campaign with Kevin Cairns. The electorate of Lilley was always a very marginal one and not an easy one for him to hold. I often marvelled at how well he did to hold it for the Liberal Party of Australia . Kevin Cairns had a different background from many people in the Liberal Party. He brought to the Liberal Party an experience of a segment of the Australian community that perhaps on occasions in the past has been underrepresented. As many honourable members will know, he grew up and was educated in Sydney although he entered politics through a Queensland constituency. He could easily have trodden the path of many people who joined the right wing of the Australian Labor Party in New South Wales and his political experience and career could have been very different. But what he brought to the Liberal Party with his experience and in his contribution was a very deep sense of social justice, conditioned by his religious and philosophic beliefs which he applied to a basically free enterprise approach to economic issues. This produced a view of issues that was different from that of many of his parliamentary colleagues and this added to the diversity and richness of debate in which many of us were involved. When I first came into the Parliament in 1974, I was closely associated with Kevin Cairns and the late Frank Stewart in the non-party debate on the proposed Family Law Act. I then got to understand the depth of feeling and commitment that Kevin and, indeed, the late Frank Stewart and many other honourable members on both sides of the House had regarding the likely impact of that piece of legislation on the structure of the Australian family. I wish to join other members in expressing my sadness at Kevin Cairns's untimely death at the age of 55. I extend my very deep sympathy to Tonia and to her seven children. Mr JOHN BROWN(Parramatta-Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism and Minister for Administrative Services) —I wish to speak to this condolence motion for Kevin Cairns. From the day that I first joined this Parliament in 1978, I developed a very close personal relationship with Kevin Cairns which continued despite his absence from the Parliament, and I often reflect upon how that happened. I think that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr Howard) summed it up rather well. Kevin Cairns and I shared a common background, both coming from the poor working class of the western suburbs, and we were both, for better or worse, products of the Christian Brothers. Something else the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party said is also true. Kevin Cairns was a victim of the cataclysmic uprising in the Australian Labor Party in the early 1950s, which manifested itself more in Brisbane and the rest of Queensland than perhaps in other places. I think it is true to say, and I am sure Kevin would not have minded my saying it, that his contribution to the Parliament and to the nation had he sat with honourable members on this side of the House would have been just as great as it was when he sat with honourable members on the other side of the House. I say this because he had a political philosophy and a humanity that transcended political borders. Kevin Cairns represented all that is good and decent about the human spirit. I mourn the passing of a good Australian. Mr RUDDOCK(Dundas) —Madam Deputy Speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak briefly to this condolence motion. This is a sad day for the Parliament because many of us knew Sir Phillip Lynch, Mr Luchetti, Kevin Cairns and Sir Alister McMullin. When four such distinguished people who have contributed significantly to our nation have died, each of us has to choose the person about whom we will make some personal comments. I want to make my comments in relation to Kevin Cairns because in the time that he and I were in the Parliament I came to like him very much. I saw the nature of the contribution that he made to the Parliament. The strength of his views has already been mentioned. In those areas in which he was involved, firstly as Minister for Housing, before I came into Parliament, and later as a member of parliamentary committees, he was able to make a very significant contribution as a parliamentarian. Honourable members will recall with great pleasure the role he played as the first Chairman of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Expenditure . I know that he was greatly proud of the work of that Committee and its reports . They have been contributions not only to the Liberal and National parties when in Government but also to the present Government when looking at the way in which expenditure matters should be dealt with. I served for a time as Chairman of the Joint Select Committee on the Family Law Act. Kevin was a member of that Committee and he was able to bring to the study of the Family Law Act his great experience, his great concern, his real interest in economic matters and in matters affecting people, and particularly his concern for families. He saw then matters of great import in the Family Law Act. I think he would see them today as having just as great an import and would want us to reflect upon the impact of that Act and the way in which family life is being impacted upon in Australia. He made comments about economics. It may be opportune to remind honourable members that he put greater weight upon the need for infrastructure expenditure. He reminded us frequently that we ought not to be cutting back on public works expenditure, which is expenditure in the productive area of our economy, and that we ought not to be seeking to put additional people on the government payroll. He even counselled us against appointing extra research assistants for members of parliament. Notwithstanding the emphasis that many of us might put on the productive role of research work, he did not see it as productive and as building up Australia's economic infrastructure. It may be that on the occasion of this Budget, those words are more important than we think. Mr BARRY JONES(Lalor-Minister for Science and Technology) —I share the experience of my colleague the Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism (Mr John Brown), in that on entering this Parliament in 1978 I formed one of my closest friendships opposite with the Hon. Kevin Cairns. We spent a lot of time together. When Labor was in opposition he would come over and sit in front of the seat in which the honourable member for Cook (Mr Dobie) is now sitting. We would talk and pass relevant comments. He was only 55 when he died. He was born in 1929, a vintage year, as the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) would agree. He is yet another of those we mourn today who died prematurely. That reflects the extraordinary strains of this strange calling in which we find ourselves. Kevin Cairns was originally trained as a dentist, but after a while extraction and repair work ceased to have its charm and he turned towards economics and politics. As has also been rightly said, he came from a Sydney working class background. Given a change in the political wheel of fortune he could just as easily have found himself in the Australian Labor Party. He was very conservative on moral issues, but liberal, almost radical, on welfare and social issues generally. He was a very independent thinker and was particularly interested in economic theory and in theology. He drew much of his world view from the Rerum Novarum of Pope Leo XIII. He made very independent and interesting contributions, especially during the adjournment debates. I enjoyed his company. I enjoyed his friendship, something that transcends politics. I pass on my sincere condolences to his family. Mr DONALD CAMERON(Moreton) —One of the last things that Kevin Cairns asked me to do was to convey his apologies to certain individuals attending the funeral of Phillip Lynch in Melbourne, apologies to the effect that he could not attend because of his health at that time. I am quite sure that Kevin was the type of person who would be quite happy for me to use this opportunity to mention also the passing of Sir Phillip Lynch and Tony Luchetti. It was my privilege to enter this Parliament at the same time as the late Phillip Lynch, in 1966. As the Minister for Science and Technology (Mr Barry Jones) stated, two of the three people whose passing we mourn today were relatively young men who served in this place for the better years of their lives. That service has certainly taken its toll. Phillip Lynch was a remarkable Australian and contributed much to his country. I extend my personal condolences to his family. I am quite sure that the same strength that took him quietly to his passing will stand by his wife, Leah, and his boys, who have taken the lesson that their father delivered in that last stage. I knew Tony Luchetti only in his latter life. In a few words I could describe Tony Luchetti as a man who was very easily loved. To people on this side of the chamber he was an example of the fact that all the good people do not come from the one side of politics. Tony had an ability to breach differences and to be very easily liked. Even had he not performed well in his electorate, his very personality would have ensured that the people of Macquarie would have regarded him as the man to be their member. My association with Kevin Cairns goes back a long way. I first heard of Kevin Cairns through the lips of my father, who is now 77. He still maintains that this story is true: His dentist at Stones Corner pulled out the wrong tooth in his mouth. That was the first time I heard the name of Kevin Cairns. Years after that, when Kevin was the member for Lilley and I was a young Liberal, my association with him developed to the extent that, prior to my nominating for the Federal seat of Griffith, I went to him. He was the one person whose advice I sought. I can still hear his words. It was in a little restaurant in Edward Street, Brisbane, that he said to me: 'Don, nominate, but you won't win it'. Many years later, in 1982, Kevin came to me and sought my advice on renominating for Lilley-I notice that the honourable member for Lilley (Mrs Darling) is present-and I said: 'Kevin, don't nominate, you won't win it'. In the years between 1966 and 1984, at the time of his passing, there were many opportunities for me to get to know Kevin and his family extremely well. Kevin was a remarkable man, and I can well understand how he and the Minister for Science and Technology (Mr Barry Jones) would have a real empathy. As the years pass I have come to the conclusion that intellectually brilliant people such as the Minister and Kevin Cairns live a fairly lonely existence in that they have difficulty in relating to those whom I might describe as ordinary people. Often they are misunderstood because of this particular gift. I can well understand that empathy existing between those two people. In relation to Kevin Cairns's contribution to this place, I do not believe that I am exaggerating for one moment when I suggest and place permanently on record that if any one person in this place could claim almost total responsibility for the reconstruction and rebuilding of the Brisbane Airport it was the late Kevin Cairns. I hope that the Government, which saw fit to continue using his services on the Independent Air Fares Committee, might see a way of recognising that effort by naming some part of the Brisbane Airport complex after him. He was a brilliant man in terms of his ability to pick up degrees. I do not think there are any members in this Parliament who could share with him the honour of having three degrees. He had a degree in dentistry and then in later years he obtained a degree in arts and a degree in economics. Kevin was born in Sydney at the time of a world depression and his boyhood was spent during those years when the world was tearing itself apart in World War II. These events contributed in a very definite way to ensuring that Kevin Cairns, the man, was a compassionate person who cared truly for all people. Just as the Minister for Science and Technology observed earlier when referring to Sir Phillip Lynch that he did not wish to be misunderstood, I hope that what I am about to say about Kevin will not be misunderstood. Kevin's inability always to communicate well sometimes led to misunderstandings, and perhaps the harshest treatment was meted out by some of those he was entitled to expect would treat him better. But Kevin also had another quality-that of forgiving and forgetting, looking ahead to tomorrow and to what had to be done for the good of all men. I hope that those comments accurately portray the other side of the man . On the human side, one can portray a man who sometimes had to be reminded to put on the right shoes. Minor absentmindedness often goes with the brilliance to which I alluded earlier. He had qualities which, once you knew Kevin Cairns, you could appreciate and truly admire. May I, in concluding my comments today, express thanks for the fact that as a member of this Parliament I was able to get to know Kevin as well as I did. In 1974 I was present in the early hours of the morning when he was counted out by 35 votes. He was defeated by Frank Doyle. The primary vote was counted and the distribution of preferences took all night. I happened to be at Kevin's home at that time. I was with him in the good times and the bad times. I am quite sure that Kevin has moved on believing that that which awaits him is something that we all face sooner or later and that behind him he has left a truly wonderful family. To Tonia and his seven children I publicly extend the condolences and sorrow that we all feel at the passing of this fine Australian. Mr CROSS(Brisbane) —It is not well understood by the zealots of political parties that one can make good friends of people on the other side of politics. Those of us in this House know that is the truth. There are many people on the other side of the House whom we respect and who are our friends. I met Kevin Cairns in the 1955 campaign when he first stood for the Brisbane Federal division. He was a young dentist from Stones Corner standing for what was a safe Labor seat at the time. I was working for his opponent and my predecessor, the Hon. George Lawson. Notwithstanding the fact that he contested the seat of Brisbane three times-I opposed him twice organisationally and he was the Liberal candidate when I was elected in 1961-we always had a good relationship with one another and became firm friends. I do not wish to repeat many of the things that have been said about his being a fine family man and a devout Catholic or that his working class background normally would have paved for him a path in the Australian Labor Party. During the struggles in the Labor movement in the 1950s for and against the industrial groups he joined the Liberal Party of which he remained an impeccably loyal member until his death. Inside the Liberal Party and this House he worked for his beliefs in the family, for Christian values and for issues such as better social services and housing. He always showed humanity, compassion and a social conscience. At the time he was appointed a Minister he was one of the first Catholics appointed to such a position in the Liberal Government. His dedicated service paved the way for others who followed him. Having been defeated and later re-elected, Kevin Cairns took a great interest in the parliamentary superannuation scheme and the remuneration and working conditions of members of parliament. All members of this Parliament owe Kevin Cairns a great debt for his often very successful efforts on our behalf. On his defeat in 1980 Kevin Cairns worked as an economic consultant for the Queensland Tourist and Travel Corporation and Mount Isa Mines Ltd. He served this Parliament as a member of the Independent Air Fares Committee under the Fraser Government and continued to serve under the Hawke Government. At his death he was President of the Queensland Economic Society. His funeral was a sincere and moving tribute to his life and work. My family and I join in the tributes paid to Kevin Cairns and we extend sympathy to his wife Tonia and his devoted family. We are all the poorer for his passing. Mr DOBIE(Cook) —I rise to pay a brief deeply felt tribute to my close friend for the past 18 years, Kevin Michael Kiernan Cairns. For those of us who attended Kevin's requiem on 11 July, it was a sincere service of tribute to a man who had served his electorate and party with distinction, who had served his friends with warmth and loyalty and who, above all, had distinguished his life with a dedication, devotion and love to and for his wife Tonia and their seven children . At Kevin's funeral service a moving eulogy was given by his long term friend, the Reverend Dr S. J. Eddy. There can be no finer words to include in a tribute to Kevin Cairns. I certainly cannot match them. I seek leave to have those words incorporated in Hansard. Mr SPEAKER —There are some rules about incorporation. I ask the honourable member to consult with me afterwards. Mr DOBIE —I shall. I have spoken with the Leader of the House (Mr Young) on this matter. I hope that the eulogy paid by Dr Eddy can be known to the House because in it were some magnificently fine words of the man's history, his humour, his personality and his humility. I regret that the techniques do not allow those to be included. I conclude by offering my sympathy and that of my mother, who was his friend, staunch political ally and supporter and, in fact, his electoral chairwoman. These sympathies go with continuing affection and concern to Tonia and the family. Mr BEAZLEY(Swan-Minister for Aviation) —I did not serve in Parliament with Kevin Cairns. My appreciation of him extends to my brief experience with him as Minister for Aviation. It has already been mentioned in this place that Kevin Cairns was a member of the Independent Air Fares Committee. It has also been mentioned that he possessed some features of ideology, some idiosyncracies, that did not sit readily within the mainstream of the political parties on either side of the House. As I got to know Kevin Cairns well over the last 18 months I found that certainly to be true. He was, as a result of those idiosyncracies, a very good adviser to a Labor Minister for Aviation. He used his position on the Independent Air Fares Committee to advance that body as a protector of the aviation consumer insofar as its terms of reference permitted him to do so. He respected the confidentiality, as he had to and recognised that he should, of the proceedings of that Committee but that did not stop him from developing very definite views on what the future of the airline system ought to be and what the function of the airlines already within the system ought to be. I found him a very sound adviser on the future of Trans Australia Airlines and the comments that he made to me in frequent conversations with him on that subject played a very significant role in forming my own attitudes to that organisation. My discussion with him made me realise, of course, that he had very considerable breadth of knowledge and wisdom. I spoke to him a few days before he died. He expressed himself as cheerfully then as he always did in anticipation of continuing the work he had done. That was not to be and that, of course, is an occasion for very great sorrow to all of us. The Independent Air Fares Committee does not attract much public attention but it is very significant within the aviation industry. The work that Kevin Cairns did on that Committee was his last very considerable contribution to public life . His selection for that Committee by the previous Government was justified. I would have had serious difficulty in not recommending his continuation. That situation did not arise, unfortunately for all of us, and I extend, on behalf of the aviation industry, our condolences to his family which was by him much beloved. Mr MOORE(Ryan) —I wish to be associated with the condolence motion in respect of Kevin Cairns. The Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party (Mr Howard) and the honourable member for Parramatta and Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism (Mr John Brown) said that Kevin came from Sydney to Brisbane as a dentist where he joined up with a group of young people who subsequently went on to State politics, local government and senior positions in Queensland. In his early role in the Liberal Party, as I recall it, not only did he contest the seat of Brisbane but also he played a very significant part in the background to the party structure in Queensland. By his very nature and background he provided a certain association or connection that the Liberal Party sadly lacks in many areas today. His contribution to policy was probably far more important than a lot of us have given him credit for. Kevin came to national significance and showed his merit during his period as a member of parliament. His particular associations were never hidden. He was a very strong economic advocate, sometimes in controversial circumstances. I think his merits were recognised by both sides of the House. I know that Kevin was very much at a loss following his defeat in 1980 and felt that his contribution ought to be continued. Certainly his merits were known to me. When it was my turn again to be President of the Liberal Party in Queensland , Kevin was one of the first persons I sought out to see whether his health was good enough to enable him to rejoin and play a significant role in the executive . However, that was not to be. I regret that that did not occur. I would like to support the condolence motion and pay my respects to his family. Mr YOUNG(Port Adelaide-Special Minister of State) —I would also like to be associated with the condolence motions in respect of each of the people who have been mentioned today. However, I will restrict my remarks to the condolence motion relating to the late Kevin Cairns. I did not know Kevin Cairns very well before I became a member of the House in 1974 and he returned as the member for Lilley. I knew of him and I had formed an opinion of him, but by 1980 I had to admit that my opinion of him in 1974 was quite wrong. Kevin Cairns was one of the more interesting members of this House. Certainly he was one of the hardest working members of the House. As the Minister for Science and Technology (Mr Barry Jones) pointed out, it was very difficult to pinpoint Kevin Cairns's political locality. Some days he could be quite radical; other days he would be extremely reactionary. It was very difficult to point to where Kevin Cairns lay in the political spectrum. But the thing that changed my mind about him-it was not that I changed my opinion about some of the more extreme views he expressed in the 1960s-was the passion that expressed on some of the issues which I thought were important, the way he went about expressing them in the House and the time he made available to express his views in the dining room, the corridors or anywhere else outside this chamber that one happened to run into him. An interesting feature of Kevin Cairns's career was that although he did not return to the Ministry after being re-elected in 1975, although he was on the back benches, one would have thought he was in the Ministry. He spoke on every conceivable subject that came before the House. As mentioned earlier, he made a couple of thousand speeches about the Brisbane Airport. In between times he spoke, as I say, on almost every subject from welfare to foreign affairs or whatever else came before the chamber. He was a classic example of how a person could best use his time as a back bencher in government, which is a difficult role in this chamber. I came to respect Kevin Cairns for the role he played in this House, I was shocked by his untimely death and I express to his family my heartfelt sympathy. Dr HARRY EDWARDS(Berowra) —Mr Speaker, I hope I do not exceed the patience of the House in rising twice to speak to these condolence motions. However, I say to the House that this is the first time I have ever risen to speak to such a motion. It came as a great shock to a number of the honourable members on this side of the House that within a few weeks of the death of Sir Phillip Lynch the Hon. Kevin Cairns, another close personal friend, should die. Kevin, as has been pointed out, was a highly qualified member of parliament. He was an economic consultant, a lecturer and a dental surgeon. He was a deep thinker and a very humane man who contributed much to this place. I want to add something to what has been said previously. I was closely associated with Kevin Cairns on the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Expenditure. As I recall, he was a foundation member of the Committee and in 1977, after the relatively brief tenure as Chairman of the Hon. Vic Garland, he was elected Chairman of the Committee. He remained Chairman until the loss of his seat in 1980 and in that way presided over the firm establishment of this Committee as an important committee of this House. Under his chairmanship, a number of important reports were prepared during that period. Perhaps the most significant report was the one entitled 'Parliament and Public Expenditure', which has in fact been widely read and quoted not only in this country but also overseas. With his early death, Australia has lost a very able and highly esteemed public figure and citizen. I extend my deepest sympathy to his wife Tonia and his family. As I do not wish to try the patience of the House by rising a third time, I also at this time express my deep sympathy on the death of Tony Luchetti. As a relatively youthful member who was elected to this House in 1972 I know that Tony Luchetti took a quite fatherly interest in new members of both sides of the House. I extend to his family my deepest sympathy. Mr KEATING(Blaxland-Treasurer) —I would like to make a few brief comments and associate myself with the motion of condolence on the occasion of the death of Kevin Cairns. I had a lot of respect for Kevin and I liked him very much. I was a member of this place for many years when he was also a member. One could but admire the fact that he was such an unusual cerebral fellow. As I think the Minister for Science and Technology (Mr Barry Jones) said, he had three degrees, two of which I think he took after he entered public life, which is a tribute to him. I think it is sad to reflect upon the fact that from his middle thirties until 1980, when he was defeated, a large part of his life was spent in the Parliament representing a marginal and difficult seat. One cannot help reflecting upon the deprivations upon his family life over those years, particularly in view of the fact that he had such a large family. In my terms it is exceedingly sad that we have lost him at the age of 55. Someone said that he came from the western suburbs of Sydney. Indeed, he was a Belmore boy. Some reference was made to Frank Stewart. Both he and Frank came from and grew up in Belmore. A lot of his values were those of Frank Stewart. I identify with a lot of those values. I suppose that in some respects that is why I found so much in common with him. I do not for a moment seek to demean his membership of the Liberal Party of Australia but it is true, as other speakers have said, that it might have been possible under some circumstances, particularly on some issues, for him to have sat very easily inside the Australian Labor Party. I particularly enjoyed meeting him at the Hotel Kurrajong when members used to sit in session after hours. These sessions were mostly chaired by the Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Lionel Bowen). The honourable member for Balaclava (Mr Macphee) was an active participant for many years and I note that the honourable member is nodding his head in agreement. Of course, Kevin participated as well. They were very enjoyable conversations. We used to wonder why we stayed up so long. We finally woke up to the fact that the coffee we were being served was very concentrated. I always wondered why we were sitting there until two or three in the morning arguing over the questions of the day. But I enjoyed the association that I had with him. I mourn his passing and I certainly express my deepest condolences to his wife Tonia and his family. Mr KATTER(Kennedy) —I want to make very brief reference to the fact that Kevin Cairns had a dominant dedication to bringing before this House and Australia the unmistakable importance to this nation of the family unit. This was an absolute obsession with him. I think it is extremely sad that he died during the year of the family. His dedication to the maintenance and integrity of the family was such that when I was absent from the historic vote on the Family Law Bill-absent I might mention at a South Pacific Conference which was held in Brisbane-I received a telegram which said: 'You are irretrievably and totally excommunicated-Freeman, Cardinal of Sydney'. It was not the honourable member for Moreton who sent it so we know who did. As I said, Kevin Cairns was totally dedicated to the family. Tonia and her family are clear evidence of the fact that the family that prays together stays together. Kevin stood by that and he was a wonderful asset to this nation. Mr LIONEL BOWEN(Kingsford-Smith-Minister for Trade) —I wish to join with others in speaking to this condolence motion. I was not going to because I appreciate that the time is late but I could not really let the opportunity pass without saying how much I appreciated Kevin Cairns, despite the fact that he was a political opponent-a very severe and aggressive one. But he did raise issues with which we were all concerned. Those issues concerned what was best for this country, and in particular involved matters of social justice. I have never forgotten his interest not only in the people he represented but also in the welfare of the people of this House. While we were in Opposition we always felt we had an ally in Kevin Cairns if we were trying to get some better benefits bestowed on us in Opposition by the Government. I think he understood that people in public life did have commitments, particularly to their families, and perhaps needed to have an income to ensure that families could be provided for. I appreciate what my colleague and friend the Treasurer (Mr Keating) said about what we used to discuss when we met each other after Parliament had met at places such as the Kurrajong Hotel. Perhaps we could have moved Parliament to the Kurrajong; we would have had a better Government even though we were in Opposition at the time. We must consider, though, Kevin Cairns himself. He had a lot of principles that really related to the Australian Labor Party and to the betterment of society. I remember telling him that I once went to his old school when he was not present. The principal praised the fact that so many of his pupils had attained success in public life. He was anxious to praise the fact that Kevin Cairns had become a Minister of the Government. But I thought the principal made a most amusing speech by saying that whilst he taught Kevin his science, he never taught him his politics. Mr CARLTON(Mackellar) —I want to say just a few words about Kevin Cairns. I think my predecessor in the electorate of Mackellar, William Charles Wentworth, would want to join with me in this because they were very close friends. Kevin came to visit me in 1971 just after I had taken over from John Carrick as General Secretary of the Liberal Party of Australia. He came in with a whole lot of charts, diagrams and various pieces of collected research material. You might recall, Mr Speaker, that at that time the Liberal Party was approaching its gotterdammerung in the 1972 election. He said, 'Look, there is no reason why we should lose this election; I have it all worked out here'. It was worked out almost mathematically; so I sat down with him and we worked out various stratagems that would make us successful in the election. Unfortunately-I think the honourable member for Port Adelaide (Mr Young) had a bit to do with this- Bishop Carroll made a statement that it was not really a mortal sin for people to vote for the Australian Labor Party. One or two other statements were made at the same time, I think by Nugget Coombs and Ken Myer, which took a lot of our work apart. Mr Barry Jones —One or two by your Prime Minister, as well. Mr CARLTON —I would not be as uncharitable as that. Out of that particular situation I developed a friendship with Kevin which I really valued. He used to sling off at me because he said that I had really deserted the faith and the Irish; I was three-quarters Irish so why did I have such Anglo-Saxon characteristics? I used to say to him: 'Look, you have this rather Celtic mysticism in your economics and it certainly infuses the whole economic view you put forward'. He thought that I was far too much of an economic rationalist. I must say that when he joined the Independent Air Fares Committee I thought that his view was an example of the way he was going, and my view on that was an example of the way I went. He also used to remind me that my grandmother was a Connolly and that she had a relative who was shot by the British in 1916. He used that as a warning not to get too caught up with the English, as it sometimes led to unsatisfactory outcomes. I wish to make a final point about Kevin, because he was an extraordinary man and he certainly influenced this Parliament in many ways which people will not fully understand. Often when we got to the airport to go home at the end of a parliamentary week, Kevin would say to me in all seriousness: 'What have you done for Australia this week?' It is pretty sobering for a politician to have to answer that question. I still ask myself that question at the end of each week and when I do I think of Kevin Cairns. Mr LEO McLEAY(Grayndler) —Kevin Cairns was a kindly man. I remember when I was first elected here only a few years ago, the honourable member for Prospect (Dr Klugman) told me that he would do me a great favour and resign from the Standing Committee on Expenditure so I could be put on it. That was the first time I met Kevin Cairns. He was a man who was good company and who took an interest in people. He took an interest in me and showed me, as a new member of Parliament, some things that even colleagues in my own Party may not have pointed out to me. That has been reflected in what other people have said today. Kevin Cairns was one of the few members of this House who managed to cross the philosophical line between the parties. Many of us do not manage that. There was no bitterness in Kevin; there was kindness and friendship from him in the time I knew him. I think Kevin was very much a product of his religion, his strong commitment to social justice and his belief that one had an obligation to do the best that one could for the well-being of his fellow man. He never forgot where he came from and I recall that he often used to ask me what things were like in Belmore, where he had come from and which is now part of my electorate. He had a very firm friendship with Frank Stewart and often used to talk to me about the things that he and Frank used to talk about. I think the Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism and Minister for Administrative Services (Mr John Brown) summed up many of our thoughts about Kevin Cairns. Kevin was always interested in telling a story about someone else, and today we have heard a number of stories about him. I recall that we were in Launceston one night with the present Minister. Kevin was not all that keen on buying a round of drinks; he used to tell us that he had a large family to support and that that was what caused him to be a bit short from time to time. I remember that the Minister ordered a round of drinks and then he and I steadfastly refused to pay; so Kevin finally fished $5 out of his pocket, looked at John Brown and said: 'Well, Brownie, you are the first one to manage that for a long while'. We all had a laugh about it. Kevin was the sort of fellow who brought happiness to the lives of a lot of people. He was very much like Tony Luchetti, whom honourable members have also talked about today. They never rose to dizzy heights in this Parliament but they probably had more of an impact on what happened to their country than many people who have received more promotion but who probably will be forgotten much quicker. From the breadth of the people who have spoken today, it is clear that Kevin Cairns had an impact on many of our lives and had a great impact on the country for which he worked so very hard . I guess we should all hope that many more people like him and Tony Luchetti come into this Parliament. Australia is most certainly a better place for their having been here. Mr HODGMAN(Denison) —I wish briefly to associate myself with the motion of condolence. In many ways Kevin Cairns and Phillip Lynch were similar. They both had a tremendous love for Australia, they both had a commitment to their faith and they both were prodigious workers. I think the honourable member for Grayndler (Mr Leo McLeay), who just resumed his seat, summed it up superbly when he pointed to the fact that tributes have come from everywhere. The last speech that Kevin Cairns made in this Parliament was on 17 September 1980. It is indexed under communism, the economy, living standards and the family. It mentions a number of people-characters in this House. The honourable member for Prospect (Dr Klugman) and the honourable member for Gellibrand (Mr Willis) get a mention. One sentence in the speech could honestly be Kevin Cairns's epitaph. He had been talking about the honourable member for Oxley (Mr Hayden) and about the St Patrick's Day parade, and in the middle of it all he said: Poor people have a love of freedom as well as those people who might have a lot to lose. That sums up Kevin Cairns superbly. Question resolved in the affirmative, honourable members standing in their places. Mr HAWKE(Wills-Prime Minister) —I move: That this House expresses its deep regret at the death of the honourable Sir Alister Maxwell McMullin, a former senator and President of the Senate, who passed away on 7 August 1984, places on record its appreciation of his long and meritorious public service and tenders its profound sympathy to his family in their bereavement. Sir Alister McMullin was a senator for New South Wales from April 1951 until June 1971. During that period he was President of the Senate for a record term of 18 years, from September 1953 until August 1971. During his 20 years in the Senate, Sir Alister also served on various parliamentary committees, including the Joint Committee on the Broadcasting of Parliamentary Proceedings and the Joint Select Committee on the New and Permanent Parliament House. Sir Alister's contribution to this Parliament over two decades, particularly as President of the Senate, was appreciated by all his colleagues. I convey to his widow and family our sympathy and condolences. Mr PEACOCK(Kooyong-Leader of the Opposition) —I support the motion which the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) has moved. Sir Alister McMullin had a long and distinguished career in the Senate. The Prime Minister has referred to the fact that he served for 18 years as President of the Senate. He was a man of very great influence in the Liberal Party, particularly in New South Wales, both before and after he was elected to Parliament. It really was a remarkable achievement to be elected to the Senate in 1951 and then to be elected President of that body in 1953; in a little over two years he was elected to preside in that chamber. Those who can recall that event will remember that it was a very intense campaign against Senator Ted Mattner of South Australia, who had been President of the Senate until Sir Alister defeated him. Sir Alister filled the position as President of the Senate with dignity and impartiality. He was an enormous figure of a man. He brought great presence to the role of President, but beyond that he was one of the first and continued to be one of the principal advocates for a permanent Parliament House. He wanted it to be built on Capital Hill. He is undoubtedly remembered as an outstanding contributor to the Parliament, a great Australian whose contribution to the Senate and to the Parliament was undoubtedly immense. Mr SINCLAIR(New England-Leader of the National Party of Australia) —I join in speaking to the condolence motion moved by the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) and supported by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock), particularly regarding the contribution that the late Sir Alister McMullin made as President of the Senate and in so many other ways during his very long term as a senator for New South Wales. He was the leader of the coalition Senate team on many occasions during that period. Above all he epitomised the strength of the Senate and the maintenance of the bicameral system. As the Leader of the Opposition has suggested, he was a big man. He was a big man in every way. For many years he resided in the Hunter Valley at Scone at St Aubins horse stud , which is a magnificent property. There, with his wife and family, he had a life quite apart from that here in the Parliament. As the President of the Senate for a record term of 18 years he added dignity and stature to the Parliament both here and during his many representations of the Parliament overseas. He added distinction to this place. To his wife, his daughter and his granddaughter, who is married to a constituent of mine in Uralla, on behalf of the National Party of Australia I extend our deepest sympathy. Mr O'KEEFE(Paterson) —I join in speaking to the condolence motion because I had a long association with the late Sir Alister McMullin, firstly as a citizen of the Scone district, where he conducted a cattle property and bred excellent horses. He was a first-class judge of both cattle and horses. Sir Alister was a prominent citizen in all phases of country and community life. He was well known and respected throughout the Hunter Valley. Indeed beyond that area, here in Canberra and overseas, his great contribution was recognised. He led many deputations overseas, of a parliamentary nature and in other spheres. He was an earthy man. He loved the soil. St Aubins is one of the finest properties in the Hunter Valley. It was always a pleasure to meet Sir Alister on his property of which he was so proud. The property, which is on the New England Highway south of Scone, is one of the show places of the Hunter Valley. Sir Alister was a member of the Liberal Party. He became a senator in 1951. As has been stated previously, he was President of the Senate from 1953 to 1971, where he was respected by members of both sides. It was a pleasure to see him acting as President of the Senate on many occasions when a row would erupt between the parties and Sir Alister would say that he thought the Senate ought to do such and such. He was so respected that the parties on both sides agreed to what he suggested. He served in the Royal Australian Air Force from 1940 to 1945 as a flight lieutenant. He was the first Chancellor of the Newcastle University. He was Chairman of the Scott Memorial Hospital at Scone where he died on the seventh of this month. He had helped in the project to build that hospital. He was Chairman of the Joint Select Committee on the New and Permanent Parliament House. He was the Deputy Chairman of the National Library of Australia Council. He was a keen supporter of the National Library and was one of those responsible for its establishment and what we see today. He had a long and distinguished career. He was truly a great Australian. We mourn his passing and express deepest sympathy to his wife, Lady McMullin, his daughter, Katherine , and her husband. Mr CONNOLLY(Bradfield) —I wish to be associated with the motion of condolence which is before the House on the death of Sir Alister McMullin, who served this Parliament as a senator and later as President of the Senate between 1953 and 1971. He gave long and distinguished service to the Liberal Party and to Australia. Sir Alister was a very proud son of the Hunter River region of my State, New South Wales. Apart from war service with the Royal Australian Air Force, he spent most of his life at Scone where, with his wife, Lady McMullin, he bred a very fine range of race horses on their property, St Aubins. He was always a very keen sportsman. As President of the Senate, as has been said, he had a very great presence, but he should be remembered especially for the leadership he gave to the establishment of the National Library which, in many respects, stands today as a monument to his determination that the national capital should have a building worthy to house the national collection. Of particular significance to all members of this Parliament should be the fact that during his period as Chairman of the Parliamentary Library Committee the Government was persuaded to establish the research and information service which is now regarded as one of the best services of its type to parliamentarians anywhere in the world. As the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) has said, Sir Alister was also in the forefront of the debate to build a new Parliament House. While initially he preferred the lakeside site, I am sure that he would be pleased with the results to date of the decision taken by the Parliament. On an international level, Sir Alister will be especially remembered for his outstanding work as Chairman of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. In its service he worked tirelessly and travelled extensively to strengthen the objectives of the Association, which he saw as the living embodiment of all that is best in the Westminster system to protect our democratic traditions and rights. Sir Alister was always a strong champion of the need to improve education for all Australians. It was most appropriate that in later years he accepted the post as the first Chancellor of the Newcastle University, which later awarded him an honorary doctorate of letters. His love for his wife and family was second only to his lasting desire to serve the people of the Hunter Valley, New South Wales and those many hundreds and thousands of Australians who live in the outback of this great continent and to whom he tried so hard to bring the Parliament through his frequent visits. I am particularly indebted to Sir Alister as I had the honour to serve as his private secretary while he was President of the Senate, an experience which gave me an insight into this truly remarkable man. I extend to his wife, Lady McMullin, his daughter, Katherine, and her husband my deepest sympathy at their sad loss. Mr SPEAKER —Before putting the question, I wonder whether the House would allow me to make a couple of comments about the late Sir Alister McMullin's involvement with the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. Not only was he Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Commonwealth of Australia branch from 1953 to 1971; he also served as Chairman of the General Council and member of the Executive Committee of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association between 1959 and 1960 and 1970 and 1971. He attended numerous conferences and was Chairman of the Association when its conference was held in Australia in 1970. He attended many General Council meetings and the local CPA area conferences in which Australia has played such an important part. He was also instrumental in initiating the Australasian Presiding Officers conferences and hosted the first of these conferences, which was convened in Canberra in June 1968. In an anecdotal vein, in 1969 I attended a regional conference in Sydney as a State parliamentary representative. As usual the State branches of the CPA in Australia were getting stuck into the Federal branch. As a State member, I happened to support the view of the Federal branch. Incidentally, I had been endorsed for a Federal seat at that time. I will always remember Sir Alister's appreciation. In fact, it won me a few free whiskies when I came to the Federal Parliament. Sir Alister played a very active role in the CPA, and I felt I should mention it. Question resolved in the affirmative, honourable members standing in their places. Mr YOUNG(Port Adelaide-Leader of the House) —by leave-I move: That this House authorises- (1) the Speaker to make arrangements for the preliminary proceedings relating to the introduction of the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 1984-85, all or part of the second reading speech of the Treasurer, and all or part of the reply to that speech by the Leader of the Opposition to be filmed by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation; (2) the direct, live, telecast of all or part of that film and the accompanying sound of the proceedings by any television station provided that a station telecasts both speeches live and gives approximately equal time to both speeches , and (3) the use by any television station of any part of the filmed proceedings and accompanying sound in subsequent news, current affairs and documentary programs. Mr Speaker, I understand that you have been acting as a sort of arbiter in the negotiations that have taken place in this matter. I understand also that the Manager of Opposition Business (Mr Sinclair) and the Leader of the Opposition ( Mr Peacock) have been kept informed of the guidelines which have been laid down by you in relation to this unique televising of the presentation of the 1984 Budget and the reply to it. I think it would be wise to mention that a great deal will depend not only on the presentation by the two main performers in this unique exposure, which will give the Parliament a higher profile, but also on all members of the Parliament in terms of the decorum which will be kept in the House during the proceedings. As the motion states, all or part of the proceedings can be televised. To the extent that this is very much an experiment on the way in which Parliament can be presented to the people, I think the guidelines which have been laid down by you and agreed to by both sides of the House are an acceptable start to the way in which Parliament may be televised. Debate interrupted. Mr SINCLAIR(New England-Leader of the National Party of Australia) —Mr Speaker, before responding to the motion relating to the television coverage of the Budget Speech, I seek your indulgence briefly to extend the sympathies of this House to the family of the late John Ferguson. Mr SPEAKER —I will allow that course to be followed. Mr SINCLAIR —In talking about so many of our former colleagues, I think it would be inappropriate if we did not also pay our respects to the late John Ferguson, who for so many years played an important role in the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and in his latter days worked with you, Mr Speaker. He was a remarkable contributor to this place and to the CPA. I think all members of this place would wish to join in extending to his family our deepest sympathy for their loss. Mr SPEAKER —I thank the Leader of the National Party of Australia for directing the House's attention to the matter. I, of course, had a very strong association with John Ferguson in both of his roles. Condolences, unfortunately, are a privilege usually reserved for Clerks. I thank the Leader of the National Party for raising that. Debate resumed. Mr SINCLAIR(New England-Leader of the National Party of Australia)(4.26) —The Opposition does not oppose the motion which has been moved by the Leader of the House (Mr Young). We have a number of qualifications in regard to the introduction of television in this place. Those of us who were present at the joint sitting in 1974 well recall the extent to which the lighting in this chamber made the place unbearable. It was not something that any of us wished to suffer at any length. I will be interested to see the effect, when the House resumes after the dinner break, of the lights we see placed around the chamber. Mr Hawke —We could see how well people are lit up. Mr SINCLAIR —Some of us are lit up for various reasons. I am not too sure whether this will involve heating up as well as lighting up. As the Prime Minister says, the lighting will be a fairly important part of the whole proceedings. The second aspect that concerns us is the degree to which the chamber will lose the essential atmosphere of a forum for debate. While I think it is quite proper for occasions such as this, which are so significant in the parliamentary calendar, to be televised, I wonder at the wisdom of extending the provision in the way that it has been extended in other chambers. I know that essentially that is not part of the motion now before us, but it is an inevitable consequence. I hope that in the presentation of both the Budget Speech and the reply of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock) it will be possible to preserve the character of Parliament rather than make it another stage, for I think that that would be to the detriment of the institution. The third qualification I have is that, in addition to the motion that has been moved, a number of bases for television coverage were set out in a letter received by me from the Clerk of the House on 15 August 1984. I suggest to the Leader of the House that, so that those bases will be available for members in the future who might have some interest in the matter, he might see fit to table them. They will then be part of the parliamentary record and can be used in the future to give some idea of the general qualifications that are to be imposed. They include, firstly, an obligation that the material that is to be telecast will be telecast approximately equally for either side of the House. Secondly, while freedom is given for material to be replayed in part, or extracts from both the Speech of the Treasurer (Mr Keating) in presenting the Budget and from the Leader of the Opposition in his reponse, those two shall be approximately equally displayed. In that way there will not be undue emphasis on one side of the debate or the other; rather, there will be an equality of presentation. It is on that basis that the Opposition supports the motion moved by the Leader of the House. I ask the Leader of the House whether he would allow those other matters to be tabled so that they will be available on the record. Mr SPEAKER —I think the material is probably my property. A precis containing some alterations that have been made has been circulated. I will ensure that that material is made available to all honourable members, if they wish to see what happened during the negotiations. Question resolved in the affirmative. Mr SPEAKER —I call the Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism to give notice of a motion. Mr Sinclair-On a point of procedure, Mr Speaker, has it not always been customary for the first call on notices to be given to the Leader of the Opposition? Mr Peacock-Can we have an explanation as to why it has been changed? Mr SPEAKER —It is not usual for the Leader of the Opposition to get the call because the Leader of the Opposition rarely gives notice of a motion. Mr Peacock-As you are aware, Mr Speaker, you usually give the call to members of the Opposition. However, I have a feeling that the Minister and I intend to give notice of a similar sort of motion. I will not pursue the matter in order that we can hear the Minister's notice of motion and be associated with it. Mr JOHN BROWN(Parramatta-Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism, Minister for Administrative Services and Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry and Commerce) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That this House- (1) congratulates the International Olympic Committee, the United States Olympic Committee, the Los Angeles Olympic Organising Committee and the people of the United States of America on the excellent preparations for and presentation of the Games of the Twenty-third Olympiad recently concluded in Los Angeles; (2) congratulates the Australian Olympic Federation, its elected officials, and all members of the Australian Olympic Team including the headquarters staff, section and team managers and particularly the athletes (both medal winners and non-medal winners) on the magnificent way in which they represented Australia at the Los Angeles Olympic Games; (3) recognises the importance of the ideals of the Olympic movement and the significance of these ideals to the development of world peace, international goodwill and understanding between nations; (4) deplores the propensity over recent olympiads for some countries, or groups of countries, to use the Olympic Games as a means of political protest; and (5) encourages all members of the international Olympic movement to do everything in their power to ensure that they are represented at the Games of the Twenty-fourth Olympiad in Seoul, Republic of Korea, in 1988. Motion (by Mr Young)-by leave-agreed to: That so much of the Standing Orders be suspended as would prevent the honourable member for Parramatta (Mr John Brown) proceeding with his notice of motion forthwith. Motion Mr JOHN BROWN(Parramatta-Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism, Minister for Administrative Services and Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry and Commerce)(4.31) —I move: That this House- (1) congratulates the International Olympic Committee, the United States Olympic Committee, the Los Angeles Olympic Organising Committee and the people of the United States of America on the excellent preparations for and presentation of the Games of the Twenty-third Olympiad recently concluded in Los Angeles; (2) congratulates the Australian Olympic Federation, its elected officials, and all members of the Australian Olympic Team including the headquarters staff, section and team managers and particularly the athletes (both medal winners and non-medal winners) on the magnificent way in which they represented Australia at the Los Angeles Olympic Games; (3) recognises the importance of the ideals of the Olympic movement and the significance of these ideals to the development of world peace, international goodwill and understanding between nations; (4) deplores the propensity over recent olympiads for some countries, or groups of countries, to use the Olympic Games as a means of political protest; and (5) encourages all members of the international olympic movement to do everything in their power to ensure that they are represented at the Games of the Twenty-fourth Olympiad in Seoul, Republic of Korea, in 1988. Despite the smog, the security and the setbacks the Los Angeles Games had all the glorious characteristics of its many predecessors-superb athletic prowess and the magnificent spirit of companionship. Many icy winds of controversy, of war and political expedience have threatened to snuff out the modern Olympic flame since it was lit in Greece 88 years ago but for the thousands of athletes who competed in Los Angeles it burnt as brightly as ever. From the time that Rafer Johnson, that former great American decathlete, lit that flame, its warmth spread to the hundreds of thousands of spectators who lined the stands and to the millions around the world who saw the Games on television. I believe, and I am sure this Government believes, that the Olympic movement is of great importance to the world. The Los Angeles Games made a great contribution to that movement by revitalising the Olympic spirit. Despite the boycott, 140 countries competed in the Los Angeles Games and they will be remembered as the greatest of the modern Olympic Games. I think it is fair to say that the United States of America owed those Games to the Olympic movement. Its attempt to boycott the Moscow Games of 1980 was a brutal assault upon the Olympic movement. That assault was paralleled by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics organising the boycott of Los Angeles. But despite those boycotts the Games went on, bigger, brighter and better than ever. Australia has a very proud record in the history of the Olympic Games. We are one of the three countries that have contested every modern Olympic Games. We share that honour with the United Kingdom and Greece. As usual our athletes served us magnificently. Our result-four gold medals, eight silver medals and 12 bronze medals, which put us tenth overall in the 140 countries that competed-was our best overseas record ever in an Olympic Games. The medals we won are now part of Australian folklore. Gold medals were won by four young Australians in the 4,000 metres cycling pursuit, Grenda, Nichols, Woods and Turtur. The names of those great Australians have now been entered in the Olympic annals. It was not only a victory in a sporting event; it was a victory over the cyclists of the United States where $4m had been spent developing a new machine. So those medals had some extra gloss. Jon Sieben's win in the 200 metres butterfly had to be seen to be believed. Twenty metres from home he was a 100:1 chance, but the fighting spirit of the Australian youth got him to that line first, not only winning an Olympic gold but also breaking the Olympic and world records. Mr Braithwaite —He is a Queenslander, is he not? Mr JOHN BROWN —He is a Queenslander, but not everybody is perfect. Glynis Nunn's win in the women's heptathlon-a South Australian lady-paralleled her win in the Commonwealth Games in Brisbane. Anybody who was watching the television that day -I guess all Australian eyes were glued to the television set-would have been stirred by the magnificent effort in the last event, the 800 metres, which resulted in her winning the gold medal by a mere five points. Then there is the super-heavyweight weightlifter Dean Lukin, the great Australian character from Port Lincoln in South Australia. He came to the podium needing to lift 240 kilograms to win that gold medal. Of course the Americans started to snigger and said: 'Who does he think he is trying to lift 240 kilograms? He is kidding'. Well, Dean hoisted that 240 kilograms high in the air to the surprise of the Americans but not of the Australians, and to the cheers of millions of Australians who were glued to their television sets. This Australian was then the super-heavyweight weightlifting champion of the world. I guess it is true to say he is the one super-heavyweight in the world who is not a product of steroids or any other form of drug or additives. Apart from all that we had magnificent efforts in a lot of other sporting events which I will not go into. However, I might mention, as Dr Charlesworth is in the House, that some Australians seem to be disappointed that we did not win the gold medal in hockey. Let me tell honourable members that all of those teams which contested the hockey event still consider Australia to be the world's best team. The fact that it did not win the gold medal was an aberration on previous performances. I guess the success of the Australian men's hockey team can be measured in terms of the Australians who have been inspired to play hockey over the last four years. It is now Australia's quickest growing sport because of the effort of Rick Charlesworth and his team mates who have made Australia the world 's most pre-eminent hockey country. In a whole lot of other sports the same situation has evolved. Australians produced their best ever personal records, breaking Australian, Commonwealth and, in some cases, Olympic records. Mr Speaker, I give credit to the previous Government for setting up the Australian Institute of Sport. I think it is true to say that the young athletes who went to the Games representing the Institute of Sport-which is still a baby in terms of other institutes around the world-performed magnificently. All of them improved on their best performances. A lot of them made the finals and some of them won medals. It speaks very highly for the future of the AIS that its athletes managed to do so well. One sad thing about Australia's part in the Los Angeles Games is the fact that 20 of our young athletes have come back to go on the dole. This is something which must be corrected. We cannot allow the situation to continue. Our young athletes subject themselves to a whole range of disadvantages in order to bring glory to Australia on sporting fields. Many of them prejudice their futures in employment and in education and disallow themselves any reasonable form of social existence in order to achieve high standards in their particular sport. To match the rest of the world we as a nation must do something to see that these young athletes are supported. We all gain reflected glory when the athletes stand on that dais. We puff out our chests, beat our breasts and say: ' What a good thing it is to be an Australian'. We have to do something to help these young kids. In the next week or two the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) and I will be announcing the formation of Australia's first sports commission. It will be staffed by 15 or 16 of the luminaries of Australian sport, all dedicated to helping the elevation of sport within Australia. A part of that commission will be the formation of a sports aid foundation, staffed by people who are very well known in the business world, which will be seeking contributions from the public and private sectors and from individuals to enable us to assist those young kids who performed so nobly to help us all feel better as Australians. I read a cutting in the Los Angeles Press the day after the Games which mentioned the very high standard of women athletes in the United States. It went on to say that that was the product of the 10,000 sporting scholarships that are available to American women in universities. We do not even scratch the surface in comparison with that. But for $3m, which should not be hard to raise from government and private business areas, we could provide 300 of our young athletes with $10,000 each to enable them at least to compete on some form of equal basis with their competitors from around the world. The Olympic spirit and the ideals of the Olympic movement do more to promote peace, understanding and good will in this world than any of the other forums devised by man. If anybody doubts that, let him look at the closing ceremony of the Los Angeles Games when thousands of fit young athletes, black and white and from various political persuasions and varied socio-economic backgrounds, joined together in a marvellous communion of spirit because they are all enjoined by a love of sport. This is something that the world cannot provide in any other way. That is why I included in my motion a clause about boycotts. The boycott in 1980 by the United States of America and some of its friends was no less than the boycott by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and its sphere of influence in 1984. I felt some sense of ridicule last week when I heard the former Prime Minister talking on radio in Sydney about how boycotts could be avoided in the future. It seemed to fit rather oddly with his efforts in 1980 to promote the boycott which was a very black spot on Australian sporting history. What made me feel worse about it was when I picked up a newspaper on my return from Los Angeles and read what the shadow Minister, Mr Fisher, had said. The newspaper stated: The Olympic Games would be boycotted by a Federal coalition Government should the circumstances of the Moscow Olympics be repeated, the Opposition spokesman for sport and recreation, Mr Fisher, said yesterday after releasing the coalition's sport and recreation general policy statement. I say quite clearly that this Government would not tolerate any idea of a boycott of an Olympic Games by an Australian team to support any form of political protest. As I have said, the Olympic movement provides the world with one of its great avenues to promote peace and understanding. Any attempt to boycott it because of some doubtful political reason would be disputed by us in every way. The motto of the Olympic movement 'Citius, Altius, Fortius'-swifter, higher, stronger-is an ideal that we all could follow. That is what the Olympic Games are all about. I would like to think that the support that this Government has given to our Olympic team in this year, which amounts to about $6m overall, including $1.4m to outfit and send that team to Los Angeles, is money well invested. I forecast that in the ensuing years the deeds of our Olympians in 1984 in Los Angeles will reflect themselves in the greater number of young Australians who will participate in the varying sports because of the exploits and the achievements of the heroes and heroines. In conclusion, I believe that the 1984 Games were as good as any that have been conducted since 1896. They were in fact a love letter to the world-a love letter as pertinent in 1984 as they were to the ancient Greeks and to the good French baron who started the Olympic movement with those Games in Athens in 1896. The message of the Olympic spirit, of human striving, human exertion, and human triumph, is still as good as gold in 1984 as it was in any other era. I was very proud to be Australia's representative at the 1984 Olympic Games in Los Angeles. I assure all members of this House that the Australian representatives, our athletes, performed creditably not only on the field but also off the field. They were a magnificent group of young Australians who were representing this country in the highest ideals of our history. I pay credit to them and, on behalf of all members of this House, particularly those of the Government, I pay great tribute to them. Mr FISHER(Mallee)(4.45) —The Opposition joins the Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism (Mr John Brown) in this motion congratulating our Olympic team and our officials for their participation and performance in Los Angeles. I do not intend to make the types of political remarks that the Minister made as I believe they are not appropriate at this time. This year Australia sent to the Olympic Games the best qualified and best supported team that we have ever sent to any Olympic Games. The Australian team comprised 250 athletes and 84 officials. It was the largest team that had ever left this country. Dressed in pure Australian wool, they did our country proud both in competition and in appearance. Of course, this has been possible by the long term commitment of the former Government, which is being extended by the present Government, and also the generous commercial and public support, particularly through the very successful telethon. Australia has been in a position, therefore, to fund a fully representative team; that is, a team with the important qualifications of quantity and quality. I believe that in speaking to this motion we should also acknowledge the support from both the former Government and the present Government of $1.5m, the contribution of the Australian Olympic Federation of $1.3m and the enormous corporate assistance that amounted to in excess of $3m. We should also acknowledge the important contribution of the Australian public through the Channel 10 network's Olympic telethon. Australians saw an exhilarating and heartwarming telethon run by Network 10 to raise the funds for the Olympic team and $1.3m was raised after operating expenses were deducted. This allowed the Australian Olympic Federation to field an elite but representative team in both the winter and summer Olympics. I also believe that we should briefly compliment the Los Angeles organising committee on its excellent venues and range of facilities which recognised the needs of the athletes; the 10,000 volunteers and paid employees who were used to run the Games; and, at the head of it all, the man charged with the executive responsibility for their organisation and staging, Mr Peter Ueberroth. I join the Minister in congratulating the athletes who were so successful both in competing and in winning the various medals that were won for our country. I am quite sure that if this Federal Parliament ever wanted a clear indication that spending on sport at the Federal level paid dividends, it came when the Australian flag was raised high above the Coliseum and Advance Australia Fair rang out through the radios and televisions of half the world. We achieved 24 medals. Gold is gold. I believe that the gold medals that were won deserve special mention. Those of us who watched it on television will not forget Glynis Nunn who won, with such a sublime performance, probably the most gruelling of all events for women, the seven-event heptathlon, giving Australia its first gold medal in track and field since the Mexico City Olympics in 1968. None of us will forget Jon Sieben's gold medal in the 200-metre butterfly on the Friday. As his head coach, Terry Buck, said: Even if every nation on earth had been here, you sure as hell couldn't take that away from him. He beat the best there is West Germany's Michael Gross and broke the world record into the bargain. That's genuine gold. Of course we also remember with great affection Dean Lukin, that remarkable gentle giant, and his final determined lift. None of us will forget our four cyclists in the 4,000-metre team pursuit-Michael Grenda, Kevin Nichols, Michael Turtur and Dean Woods-for their co-ordination and team performance and the talent that overcame some of the most superior technology that the world has seen. We understand the increasing worry for the International Olympic Committee and the alternatives that must be discussed in the future, including spreading the Games through a number of countries or returning them permanently to their birthplace in Greece. The Opposition fully supports the attempts that are presently being made by Brisbane to host the 1992 Games. We are a mature nation and I believe we have the capacity, as we showed in Melbourne in 1956 and in the Commonwealth Games in 1982, to host these Games and to do it very successfully. Despite much criticism, the United States of America deserves a great deal of praise. It has done well to host the Games. Like the Minister, I am disappointed that politics has once again entered into the Olympics with the withdrawal of the Soviets. Unfortunately, the Olympic Games presents a forum at which any group of individuals or of nations can demonstrate and gain a captive audience. Boycotts, exclusions, terrorism and blatant political intervention have hacked away at the Olympic spirit for almost a century, but it is important that they have not managed to destroy attitudes or dedication among competitors or genuine sports fans. Some of our athletes may be disappointed in their final achievements. While there are only three medals-gold, silver and bronze-to be won, by any standards, qualifying for an Olympic final is a remarkable performance, and all our athletes are to be congratulated on their dedication, talents and performance. I congratulate Mr Judy Patching and Mr Syd Grange, of the Australian Olympic Committee. Our congratulations also go to Mr Bill Hoffman, the General Manager of the Australian Olympic team and to all the officials. The pressures upon these people have been significant, and their dedication to the success and well -being of our athletes is commendable. The Olympics capture the spirit of dedication, effort, sacrifice and fellowship which attends the aspiring participants. There is nothing inherently wrong with good-will, noble action, fierce competition, universal participation, idealistic goal setting, athletes' rights or human dignity. These are the principles representing the elevated aspects of mankind, which enable us to travel the high road. I will quote the words of Dr Cheffers, the recently appointed Executive Director of the Australian Institute of Sport in Canberra. He said: The Olympic Games will overcome this latest onslaught just as they have survived similar attacks in recent history. Although the spirit of Olympianism will be attacked, the symbols bent, even ruptured, the Games will survive. How correct he is! Sport has always been a major factor in the identity of Australia and Australians. It is part of our psyche and a significant part of our being. Our Olympic team has ensured that this is further enhanced and reinforced. Dr CHARLESWORTH(Perth)(4.53) —As a member of the 1984 Olympic team, I suppose it is appropriate that I should say something on this matter. I take this opportunity very briefly to endorse the motion of the Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism (Mr John Brown), and to say, as a member of the team, that we all felt we were representing Australia. Perhaps what is lost on many people is that more than anything we were representing ourselves as individuals. In my discipline and in many other disciplines we were a group of people who over a period had built up a rapport, had worked very hard to achieve a goal, had spent a great deal of time, and-these words are often used-'sacrificed a great deal'. I do not think that happens in sport. We made conscious sacrifices. We got involved in what we were doing because we wanted to, because it was something we really enjoyed and because it gave us a great deal of satisfaction. Of course, the Olympic Games meant a great deal of media attention to what was going on. As the Minister has already outlined, the Olympic Games more than anything represent the very pinnacle of achievement in sport for very many Australians and for people all over the world. For us who competed, and as someone who has been intimately involved, I think the opportunity to achieve excellence in anything is something that we should all aspire to. The Olympic Games provide the opportunity to do that in a sporting sense. The Olympic Games represented for many of us a very confusing pattern of success and failure, and many of us would like to live those moments again. Perhaps we will enjoy seeing those moments again on television. Having been there, I can say that it is an experience that I would not like to have missed out on, and I am delighted to have been able to represent Australia and perhaps this Parliament by being a part of the Games. The Games in Los Angeles were not perfect, but I do not think that most things very often are. I certainly think the Games were worth while. As long as I remain in this place, I hope that we will be able to allow the Australian Olympic Federation and other sporting bodies in this country to get on with the job of providing opportunities for its sports men and women and that we will support them in every way. Perhaps in future Australia's success at that level will be even greater than it has been. Mr SHIPTON(Higgins)(4.55) —I am pleased to support this motion and to support the Opposition shadow spokesman on sport and recreation, the honourable member for Mallee (Mr Fisher) in endorsing the motion moved by the Government which states: That this House- (1) congratulates the International Olympic Committee, the United States Olympic Committee, the Los Angeles Olympic Organising Committee and the people of the United States of America on the excellent preparations for and presentation of the Games of the Twenty-Third Olympiad recently concluded in Los Angeles; I was privileged to attend the first six days of those Olympic Games, and I can bear witness to the spirit and the reality of the motion moved in the House today. I support the motion and give great credit to the Australian athletes, not only those athletes who won medals, although I pay a particular tribute to them, but also to all the other Australian athletes who took part. As Baron de Coubertin, who founded the first Olympic Games, said: 'The important thing is to take part'. I think that spirit was perhaps forgotten by many in their interpretation of these Olympics. On a number of occasions I met Australian athletes, who were not medal winners but who took part, and they were a most impressive group. I was impressed at how humble they were and on occasions at how shy they were. They were there to do their best and give of their best for Australia, and they did just that. I remember talking to one of the girl canoeists who had a spark in her eye when she said she was out to win a medal. Regrettably it was not gold but she was there as a humble Australian, doing her best for Australia. Credit needs to be given to the former Government in this place for the funds that it committed to the Australian Institute of Sport after the failure of Australia and Australian athletes in the Montreal Olympic Games. Australia has come from a long way back since then on the international athletic arena. That is a great thing and a great credit to Australian athletes. The formation and the foundation of the Australian Institute of Sport helped Australia achieve its most credible performance at these Games. I noticed in this morning's Press that Judy Patching is to retire from his position. Great tribute needs to be paid to Judy Patching, who has been General Manager of two Australian Olympic teams and who has occupied the position of Secretary-General of the Australian Olympic Federation, for the contribution that he has made to Australia, to Australia's Olympic teams and to Australia's participation in the Games. I first met Judy Patching when he was a coach. I was an athlete at the time, though not an Olympic one. Mr McVeigh —But you would have been a sprinter; a bit of speed. Mr SHIPTON —I was even a hammer thrower. Judy Patching has made a great contribution to athletics, to sport and to Australia. On the day that he has announced his retirement from the Australian Olympic Federation tribute needs to be paid to him for the contribution that he has made. Tribute also ought to be paid to our AOF delegates. I refer particularly to Kevan Gosper for the part that he has played in achieving Australia's Olympic place in the world and in the participation of Australian athletes. Kevan Gosper was a great athlete; he was a 400-metre and 440-yard runner. On behalf of the Opposition, I must repeat what the shadow spokesman for sport said in this House today, and that is that the Opposition is fully behind Brisbane's application for the Olympic Games. I hope and trust that Australia, Brisbane and Queensland get those Games. Opposition members-Hear, hear! Mr SHIPTON —I have support not only from Queenslanders behind me but also from honourable members from other parts of Australia, who sit behind me. I ask the Minister whether the Government is supporting the Brisbane application for the Games. Does the Minister remain silent? Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER(Mrs Child) —Order! I ask honourable members to drop the level of conversation a little. It is very difficult to hear the honourable member. Mr SHIPTON —Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, for your assistance. I note that the Government is not prepared to support the Opposition when the Opposition says that it is wholeheartedly behind the Lord Mayor of Brisbane, the city of Brisbane and the people of Queensland in their application for the Games. At the conclusion of the Olympics, good wishes were given to Seoul and to South Korea for the conduct of the Games of the XXIV Olympiad. I trust that all will go well for Seoul. I hope that the Seoul Olympics are conducted. I believe that they should be a great success. I then look forward to the Olympics being held in Brisbane. Something needs to be said about the Soviet boycott of the Los Angeles Games. In boycotting the Games, the Soviet Union made a major international political mistake in that the Soviets were not missed. They are currently conducting their own Friendship Games. It was a tragedy that they did not participate in the Olympic Games. Although they were not missed, their boycott was bad for international sport. I will finish on a good note. All of us on both sides of this House congratulate not only the medal winners, but all the participants. I travelled back to Australia with two medal winners, Michael Grenda and Michael Turtur, who were members of the cycling team which won the 4,000-metre team pursuit. Mr Hodgman —Michael Turtur is from Tasmania. Mr SHIPTON —Yes, he is. They are great Australians. They were very humble about their gold medal victory. I met these two gold medallists, Michael Turtur and Michael Grenda, the very afternoon they won their gold medals. They were anxious to return to their families in Australia. I pay tribute to them for that. They were very humble in victory and they emphasised the spirit of Australia. They went out and did it. They did not have the $50,000 bicycles that the Americans had or their advanced state of technology. Michael Turtur and Michael Grenda went out with Kevin Nichols and Dean Woods and did a great job for Australia. That for me sums up the spirit of the Games. It was a great Olympics for Australia. There were great disappointments and in them the true spirit of the Olympics comes through. De Castella, poor Deek, came fifth in the marathon, a marvellous performance. That is worth reiterating and reflecting on. The important thing is to take part. He is a great champion, a world champion. In taking part, Robert De Castella did his best and performed greatly for Australia. More will be heard of him and of those other athletes who did not win medals but who did their best to represent Australia. Australia has participated in the Olympics since 1896. An Australian from Melbourne, young Edwin Flack, won the 800-metre and 1500-metre races in the first Games. Australia has been present at Games since then and the spirit of Australian athletes has not decreased since Edwin Flack won in 1896. The important thing is to take part and to win medals if possible. I pay tribute to the Australian athletes who took part in the Olympics. Mr FISHER(Mallee) —Mr Speaker, I claim to have been misrepresented. Mr SPEAKER —Have you been misrepresented during the debate? Mr FISHER —Yes, Mr Speaker. Mr SPEAKER —You are entitled to correct that. Mr FISHER —The Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism (Mr John Brown) in his speech referred to a headline taken from the Canberra Times that said that the coalition would boycott the Games again. I did not say that. At my policy launch when asked by the media whether the Opposition would take similar action I simply stated, in retrospect, that in future a different decision may be taken. As I supported the decision then, and I remind members on the other side of the House that so did many of them, I had no reason to change from that view. Question resolved in the affirmative. Mr CARLTON(Mackellar) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That the Nursing Homes Fees Determination Principles 1984, formulated under sub -section 40AA (7) of the National Health Act 1953, be disallowed. Mr Lindsay proceeding to give a notice of motion-- Mr SPEAKER —Order! I ask the honourable member to look at the Standing Orders and to reframe his motion. The honourable member's notice is out of order. Mr CONNOLLY(Bradfield) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That this House- (1) Condemns the Hawke Government for its failure to initiate discussions with the Queensland Government and the Douglas Shire Council on the Cape Tribulation to Bloomfield road, and (2) urges the Federal Government to accept the Opposition's 3 point proposal to minimise environmental damage following road construction, and ensure long term protection of the Daintree rainforest, as a basis for discussion with the Queensland Government and the Douglas Shire Council. Mr MOUNTFORD(Banks) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move and the honourable member for Grayndler (Mr Leo McLeay) will second: That this House- (1) congratulates the Canterbury-Bankstown District Rugby League Football Club for attaining its golden jubilee year of operation; (2) records its appreciation to those involved with the club for their efforts in giving thousands of young people the opportunity to participate in Australia' s finest competitive game, and (3) notes with satisfaction the club's fine competitive record over the past 50 years including 2 first grade premiership victories. Mr DONALD CAMERON(Moreton) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That this House- (1) expresses its appreciation that the Government has now understood and recognised the harmful effects of material promoting hard-core pornography and violence upon our youth; (2) notes the Government's intention to now establish a select committee of inquiry to investigate the harmful effects of the new censorship and customs laws, and (3) condemns the Government for introducing this half-way measure and for allowing the continued sale of this objectionable material for an indefinite period instead of revoking the laws which make this inquiry now necessary. Mr KENT(Hotham) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move and the honourable member for Macarthur (Mr Hollis) will second: That this House- (1) notes- (a) with revulsion the new outbreaks of racial violence against the Tamil minority in Sri Lanka, and (b) that the Sri Lankan armed forces and navy is engaged in indiscriminate shooting of innocent by-standers and shelling villages in Tamil areas; (2) calls on the Government- (a) to express to the Jayawardene Government the abhorence and opposition of the Australian people to racial violence, and (b) to take up the plight of the long suffering Tamils in international forums such as the United Nations. (c) to refuse any request by the Sri Lankan Government for military aid, but instead to provide aid to the Tamil minority through the International Red Cross . Mr RUDDOCK(Dundas) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That this House- (1) notes with concern reports of threatened retaliation by the Prime Minister against Ministers not ''toeing the line'', and that these Ministers may be demoted when portfolios are allocated after the next election, and (2) reassures these Ministers that they have no cause to worry as, after the next election, they will all be seated on the left of the Speaker. Mr RONALD EDWARDS(Stirling) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That this House- (1) notes that- (a) the National Australia Bank is forecasting a rise of about 14 per cent in private sector housing in 1984-85; (b) according to the bank, one of the major factors for this continued strong growth is the federal Government's First Home Owners Scheme, and (c) consumer confidence is significant in the performance of the housing industry, and (2) calls upon the Government to extend the charter of the Housing Loans Insurance Corporation to cover borrowers as well as lenders to the housing industry. Mr MILLAR(Wide Bay) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That this House- (1) deplores the action of the ABC Board in granting spouse entitlements in respect of homosexual partners of ABC staff; (2) asserts that such action is not consistent with provisions of the Sex Discrimination legislation; and (3) resolves that the ABC within its charter to inform and entertain, does not possess the authority or propriety to concern itself with sexual preferences or sexual aberrations. Mr HOLLIS(Macarthur) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move, and the honourable member for Hughes (Mr Tickner) will second: That this House- (1) notes that- (a) from 20 August to 24 August 1984 an international conference on high strength low alloy steel is being held at the University of Wollongong, and (b) this is the first time this important annual conference has been held outside the USA, and (2) congratulates the University of Wollongong and the organising committee for arranging this conference in Wollongong, the steel capital of Australia. Mr TUCKEY(O'Connor) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That this House calls on the Premier of New South Wales- (1) to recollect his recent legislative and verbal persecution of self-employed doctors acting to protect their remuneration earned in government hospitals; and (2) to explain his silence and inaction regarding the actions of New South Wales Government grain handlers who in defence of their $1,000 per week incomes are presently disrupting vital wheat exports and denying the creation of 80 new jobs for fellow Australians. Mr GEAR(Tangney) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That this House- (1) notes that the current redistribution of federal electoral boundaries is the first time that an independent and impartial body free from political influence has carried out this task; (2) congratulates the Government on introducing fairness into the electoral system; and (3) calls on the Western Australian Liberal Party to end the outrageous gerrymander in the Western Australian Legislative Council and emulate the federal Government's initiative in electoral fairness. Mr LUSHER(Hume) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That this House notes that despite the honourable member for Hume's continuing representations to the Minister for Health, and despite the passage of more than 2 months since the House last sat, the electorate of Hume, which covers 50,000 square kilometres and includes in excess of 110,000 Australians still has only 2 Medicare offices and that major towns like Yass, Harden, Cootamundra, Temora, Gundagai, Tumut, Junee, West Wyalong, Forbes and Grenfell have no Medicare office and that the citizens resident in these towns are required, unlike other Australians, to either rely on the mail or to travel significant mileages to conduct their business with Medicare. Mr REEVES(Northern Territory) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That this House- (1) expresses its deep concern at the Northern Territory Government's decision to compulsorily acquire the assets of Federal Hotels Limited, in the Northern Territory, including the recently constructed casino complexes at Alice Springs and Darwin, and (2) calls on the Northern Territory Government to reconsider its decision in the light of the damaging effects such government intervention in private enterprise could have on future private investment in the Northern Territory. Mr COLEMAN(Wentworth) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That this House- (1) Notes- (a) the resignation from the UNESCO Secretariat of Dr Peter Lengyel, the Australian editor of UNESCO's International Social Science Journal, because of what he considered to be gross mismanagement within the Secretariat; (b) the explanation for Dr Lengyel's resignation given by the Australian Ambassador to UNESCO, His Excellency the Hon. E. G. Whitlam, is that Dr Lengyel is a foreign-born naturalised Australian, and (c) Mr Whitlam's further suggestion that other naturalised Australians in UNESCO have a resentment of delegates and officials from third world countries, and (2) calls on the Minister for Foreign Affairs to instruct Mr Whitlam to desist forthwith from insulting naturalised Australian citizens. Mr TICKNER(Hughes) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move and the honourable member for Phillip (Ms McHugh) will second: That the House- (1) welcomes the return of Father Brian Gore to Australia and congratulates him on his courageous stand in support of human rights in the Philippines; and (2) further welcomes Father Gore's announced intention to give his support to the campaign by Aboriginal Australians to acquire just land rights. Mr HICKS(Riverina) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move and the honourable member for Wakefield (Mr Andrew) will second: That this House- (1) reminds- (a) the Prime Minister of his pre-election pledge in Griffith within the Riverina electorate that a tax or excise would not be placed on wine, (b) the Government of its breaking of that promise in the last Budget, and (c) the Government of how ineffective and damaging its 2J tax was, and (2) calls on the Government not to make a similar mistake in its Budget to be presented on 21 August 1984. Mr CADMAN(Mitchell) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That this House- (1) notes with grave concern the level of the current account deficit; (2) calls on the Government to take no action which will further jeopardise the prospects for economic recovery; and (3) shares the same alarm as Mr John Stone regarding the economic irresponsibility of the 1984-85 Budget. Dr THEOPHANOUS(Burke) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That this House- (1) notes- (a) with concern the Opposition's proposal to abolish the Australian Manufacturing Council and the Industry Advisory Councils, and (b) that this approach is in complete contradiction to the planning and consultative approach of the Labor Government, and (2) rejects the Opposition's approach as a recipe for industrial disaster. Mr HODGMAN(Denison) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That this House deplores the fact that, under the Government, an average Australian worker is currently paying $17.50 more each week in taxes and that therefore any tax cut of less than $17.50 a week still leaves Australian workers paying higher taxes than they did under the previous government. Mr GOODLUCK(Franklin) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That this House deplores and condemns the decision and influence of the left wing of the ALP to include in the ALP party platform abortion on demand. Mr BRAITHWAITE(Dawson) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That this House- (1) notes- (a) Labor's election promise of sympathetic consideration to be given to a sugar underwriting scheme within 12 months of gaining office; (b) the extra costs in fuel and increased taxation caused by decisions of this government; (c) the offer of $5 million in rural adjustment assistance, in recognition of these problems, made by the Queensland Government; and (d) the response of the Labor Members on behalf of the Minister for Primary Industry, that any decision on further assistance will not be made until March 1985, and (2) condemns the Government for its ignorance of the problems in the sugar industry, its refusal to help, and its blithe disregard to the misery it is causing to many families throughout sugar areas of Queensland. Mr HODGMAN(Denison) —I give notice that, on the next day of sitting, I shall move: That this House- (1) Condemns the Government for its apathetic attitude to the welfare of West Papuan refugees who have crossed from Irian Jaya into Papua New Guinea, and (2) Calls upon the Prime Minister to abandon his current policy of indifference towards this major international human rights issue. Mr SPEAKER —Before proceeding, I remind honourable members that there are some rules regarding the contents of notices of motion. It seems that during the recess those general guidelines have been forgotten and I ask honourable members to note them in future notices of motion. Mr PEACOCK —I refer the Minister representing the Attorney-General to the report on today's Australian Broadcasting Corporation program World Today concerning the Age tapes. Has the Director of Public Prosecutions, Mr Temby, submitted his final report on the tapes to the Attorney-General? Has the Attorney-General or any of his officers sought in any way to alter, amend or edit that report? If so , are the deletions a cover-up, and of whom and why? When will the report, which was expected to be tabled in the Parliament today, be presented to us? Mr LIONEL BOWEN —I understand that the report has been received by my colleague the Attorney-General and will be tabled but due to other factors in the Senate it will not be tabled until later this evening. In respect of the matters that the honourable gentleman has adverted to, I am not aware of any deletions or omissions. Mr Peacock —Will you ascertain those matters and inform the House? Mr LIONEL BOWEN —I will ascertain them. I think the important thing to say is that the report will be tabled. I understand that the only reason it has not been tabled until now is the minor adjournment in the Senate following condolences. Mr WELLS —My question is directed to the Prime Minister. What is the Government' s purpose in providing substantial personal income tax cuts in the Budget? How is this consistent with the Government's commitment to continue to restrain the Budget deficit and thereby keep pressure off interest rates? Mr HAWKE —Mr Speaker-- Mr Lusher —You are not going to leak the Budget, are you, Bob? Mr HAWKE —No, I would not do that. Mr Tuckey —Mr Speaker, I take a point of order. Surely this is a matter for the Budget Speech. It must come under the standing order that deals with matters on the Notice Paper for the day. Mr SPEAKER —There is no point of order. Mr HAWKE —Honourable members opposite have not learnt over the recess. There is no hope for them. I am indebted to the honourable member for Petrie for his question. It is quite clear that income tax cuts are essential for two related reasons. They are essential to stimulate consumer demand and so maintain the magnificent economic recovery which has emerged under the supremely successful economic policies of this Government. They are also necessary to underpin the accord which has been integral to the success of those policies which have produced record economic growth. Mr Peacock —It is $22 a week extra that they have to pay. Mr HAWKE —I am glad to hear the reference by the Leader of the Opposition to $22 a week. He will come to regret that he ever mentioned that figure. At the same time as these income tax cuts will be brought in, the details of which will be properly announced by the Treasurer tonight, a significant reduction in the size of the deficit and in the demands by the public sector in the capital market will have been achieved. By contrast to these realistic and totally successful economic policies we have the so-called economic policies of the Opposition which are riddled with contradictions and smack of hypocrisy and humbug. It is not surprising that we should see this because when we look at the Opposition's shambolic performance in government we would not expect anything else. The only misfortune for the Australian people is that it has not learnt. What the Australian people have witnessed in recent days is the Leader of the Opposition wandering around the country preaching that we should have higher tax cuts, increased government expenditure and, at the same time, a reduced deficit. Mr Tuckey —Mr Speaker, I take a point of order. I draw your attention to the Notice Paper which tells us that at 8 p.m. the Treasurer will present the Budget for 1984-85. Mr SPEAKER —Order! I remind the honourable member for O'Connor that the blue sheet is not the Notice Paper. Mr Tuckey —I am sure that will be found on the Notice Paper. Standing order 144 states: The following general rules shall apply to questions . . . Questions cannot refer to- (a) debates in the current session; or (b) proceedings in committee not reported to the House. Questions cannot anticipate discussion upon an order of the day or other matter . Surely-- Mr SPEAKER —There is no point of order. I suggest that the honourable member read the Notice Paper. Mr HAWKE —We can understand why Opposition members do not want Question Time if this is the best they can do. The sort of apology for economics that the Leader of the Opposition is going on with would not get him a pass mark in high school economics-a fact that is well known by the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party, hot breath Howard. We know that the Leader of the Opposition has stopped having sun lamp treatment for the front of his face. I can assure the House that he will have a very tanned neck with hot breath Howard breathing down it. Mr SPEAKER —Order! I suggest that the Prime Minister withdraw that remark. Mr HAWKE —Of course I mean the honourable member for Bennelong. At least the honourable member for Bennelong, after his temporary aberration at the time of the last election, is being somewhat honest in this area. Honourable members will recall that on 19 March the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party said that if he had the choice between a significant cut in income tax and a reduction in the deficit he would go for a reduction in the deficit. Against the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party saying he is against a tax cut the Leader of the Opposition is being totally dishonest in this matter. He has made the spurious claim that the average worker is $22 a week worse off. He knows that that is not true but we assume that he would give a tax cut to make up for that. That would cost $6 billion in a full year. Mr Speaker, I ask you and the House to take note of the other things that the Leader of the Opposition has been promising in the area of the deficit in addition to that increase of $6 billion. He says firstly that he would repeal the new tax arrangements for lump sum superannuation at a cost of $300m in a full year. He would reject the income test for pensioners aged 70 and over. What is the cost of that? It is $230m. He would reject the removal of the $1,000 rebate on dividend income. The cost? It would be $100m annually. He would oppose the reduction in the threshold tax rate for incomes, including the minors, which would cost $70m in a full year. I ask the people of Australia to dwell upon the next promise of the Leader of the Opposition. He has given an unequivocal commitment to build the Alice Springs to Darwin railway. He wants to be very careful about that. There is a fellow in the Northern Territory who is interested in this and he has his eyes on the job as well. He need not worry because the honourable member for the Northern Territory will hold his seat. That is a measure of the Opposition's economic responsibility-$1 billion. What else? What about this little gem? The Opposition has promised to repeal the levy on the Fortescue oil field. The cost of that additional handout to the Esso company and Broken Hill Proprietary Co. Ltd would be $300m. He has promised an increase in the investment allowance at a full year cost of about $60m. At the Brisbane Press Club on 20 March the Opposition Leader indicated the Opposition's support for re-establishing the bicentennial water resources program costing $350m. Those items alone would come to $2.5 billion. If we add to that $2.5 billion the cost of the $22 tax cut-$6 billion-what the Leader of the Opposition is talking about, and this is what should be understood in the context of the responsible Budget that is going to be brought down by the Treasurer tonight, is an increase in the deficit of another $7.5 billion. I conclude by saying that it is perfectly clear that this temporary, transient Leader of the Opposition, to be replaced after the next election by one of the two or three aspirants, has a massive credibility gap. He cannot do his sums and the people of Australia know he cannot do his sums. Mr BURR —Will the Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry and Commerce tell the House what procedure would have been followed by Customs if there had been a conflict of evidence over a Customs entry by an ordinary Australian? Mr JOHN BROWN —The conditions that are followed by the Customs Service are similar for every Australian no matter what his background. Mr GAYLER —Is the Minister representing the Attorney-General aware of apparent criminal activity within the racing industry in Australia, particularly having regard to the recent death in New South Wales of a horse trainer, such death being brought about by obvious foul play, and more latterly the switching of horses in an event at a race meeting held at Eagle Farm last weekend, accompanied by a huge betting coup throughout the country? What action, if any, can this Government take by referring such criminal activity to the National Crime Authority? Mr LIONEL BOWEN —The matter relating to the National Crime Authority comes under the Special Minister of State. However, what the honourable gentleman has said about the infringement of law is a very serious matter. There has already been a very horrendous murder in New South Wales. Of course, the recent incident last week in Queensland relating to horse racing has ramifications in all States and the amount of money involved probably runs into $1m. The National Crime Authority legislation, which this House eventually passed, talks about relevant offences being the subject of the Authority's jurisdiction. It is interesting to note that those offences relate to vice, corruption, illegal gambling and the question of two or more people being involved in crime of a systematic and high technology nature. I would think that what the honourable gentleman has quite appropriately raised could seep right into all aspects of society. It is not related only to the substitution of one horse for another in a horse race. It is a question of organised crime taking an interest in racing as well as being interested in a number of other matters. Of course, a number of people have suffered dramatically from it. I refer particularly to the murder that took place in New South Wales. So this matter should not be treated lightly. I think the honourable gentleman has raised a very valuable point. From my reading of the legislation the National Crime Authority has jurisdiction but in the first instance it would need to have the approval of what is called the Inter-Governmental Committee on which the States will have appropriate representation. So maybe it would be helpful, if the Queensland Government felt that there should be some inquiry, if relevant representations were made by the Government of Queensland to the Crime Authority, to suggest that it might be interested in undertaking an examination. The power is there. The matter is very serious. It affects not only Queensland but other States, particularly New South Wales. It is a question of whether police forces ought to be involved in the gathering of crime intelligence. I would think that the sooner action was taken, the better. I welcome the honourable member's question, and I take note of the fact that the people in Queensland are doing all in their power to try to find out who have been guilty of the fraud that has already been perpetrated. But I make the point that the matter also extends into other States, particularly New South Wales. One would hope that as soon as the Inter-Governmental Committee is able to establish itself, pursuant to the National Crime Authority, a matter such as this could be speedily examined. Mr TUCKEY —I address my question to the Special Minister of State. I refer to the Minister's completion of a Customs entry form for unaccompanied baggage at Adelaide on 5 July 1984. Will the Minister confirm that in completing this form he claimed, firstly, that he was not importing the goods on behalf of any other person, and secondly, that they were his bona fide unaccompanied baggage. Mr SPEAKER —That is nothing to do with his- Mr Young —Mr Speaker, no- Mr SPEAKER —Order! It occurs to me that this matter is not a matter of the Special Minister of State's administration and it should be referred to another Minister. Mr Sinclair —On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Government members interjecting- Mr SPEAKER —Order! I wish that honourable members would remain quiet. This is a serious matter, and I am prepared to listen to the Leader of the National Party. Mr Sinclair —Mr Speaker, the Minister is responsible for his own acts. As I understand it, his overseas visit was made as a Minister and, as a Minister, he returned to Australia and he filled in that form as a Minister. In that light, I submit that the question is quite proper for his answer. Mr SPEAKER —It stretches the definition of 'public duties' quite a way. The question should better, perhaps, have gone to the Prime Minister. The Special Minister of State has indicated that he wishes to answer it, so I shall call the Special Minister of State. Mr YOUNG —I should have thought, Mr Speaker, that it was the most famous piece of luggage in Australia's history, so I have no desire to hide behind what may be the formalities of the House in answering the question directed to me by the honorary member for O'Connor. First, this matter has now been looked at by Mr Black, QC, every aspect of it, in spite- Mr Peacock —Rubbish, look at the report. Mr YOUNG —Honourable members wanted me to answer; just wait on. The form to which the honourable member for O'Connor refers has been published. It is published as part of the Black Report on an Inquiry into the Circumstances Surrounding the Making of a Customs Declaration. I do not know whether the honourable member has taken the trouble to get a copy of it, but he will see at the back of it how the form has been filled out. If he goes to the trouble of reading the Black report, he will see that Mr Black attended to every problem that has been concerned with that form. He will also see that Mr Black said in his report that every piece of evidence that he required and every person to whom he required to speak was made available to him. Nothing that he required at that inquiry was kept away from him, or anything that he wanted to inspect. On the basis of what I had done and on the basis of the evidence given by myself and by people from the Department of Administrative Services and from Customs, and members of my family-- Mr Sinclair —You wrongly filled in the form. Mr YOUNG —I wish that the right honourable member for New England would keep quiet. He would give his right arm to have a report like this one. Mr Sinclair —You wrongly filled in the form. Mr YOUNG —The only way in which the right honourable member will get a report like this is to sign it himself. If the honourable member for O'Connor goes to the trouble of reading the report, he will see that on every point that has been raised by the honourable member for Bennelong over the last three or four weeks, the Leader of the Opposition, the honourable member for New England or whoever has been at the forefront of firing the shots for the Opposition-- Mr Sinclair —You wrongly filled in the form. Mr SPEAKER —Order! The Leader of the National Party will cease interjecting. Mr YOUNG —I know that they are frustrated and angry; I know they wish they could get a little more out of it but the fact is that this exhaustive inquiry has taken place and Mr Black has found no improper conduct at all. I know that would be very strange in relation to the behaviour of members of the Liberal Party, but that is what has happened. The answers to the questions of the honourable member for O'Connor are in the report. Mr GEAR —My question is directed to the Prime Minister. What is the Government's response to calls for the abolition of the Economic Planning Advisory Council? Mr HAWKE —I am indebted to the honourable member for Tangney for this question. I must say that I am rapidly coming to the belief that a guardian angel is looking over the interests of the Government because every now and again the Opposition releases a so-called-obviously I say 'so-called'-policy statement. Successive releases of these pieces of policy have been consistently met with derision on the part of commentators right around Australia. I thought that members of the Opposition may have learnt but, no, the guardian angel still smiles upon us because we have recently had the release of their so-called industry policy. An essential, integral part of this industry policy is that they will abolish EPAC. This comes as a most remarkable surprise. I am glad they have said it because it will mean further that they will not be believed; they will not be credible in the eyes of the Australian people. As the people of Australia know, EPAC was constituted under legislation passed by this Parliament following the outstanding success and the spirit of the National Economic Summit Conference held in this chamber in April of last year. The operation of EPAC has enabled the spirit of the Summit to continue on the basis that this Government has never said that it has a monopoly of all wisdom in matters of economic policy. We believe there is great accumulated wisdom and experience in the business world- the large and the small business world. There is great wisdom and experience in the trade union movement. There is great wisdom and experience at the level of municipal government and there is wisdom and experience at the level of State government as well as within welfare organisations and the like. EPAC brings those people together so that we can test theories, ideas and possible policies with each other. EPAC has played a very important part in the emergence of the economic policies which have been so outstandingly successful in this country. I do not need to refer to the statements that have been made by members of EPAC repudiating the thinking of the Liberal Party in putting forward this policy. I suppose in a sense the editorial in today's Age put it quite properly, when it said: Its- That is, EPAC's- abolition would be provocative and unhelpful. That is an accurate summary of what we would expect from the Liberal Party- something provocative and unhelpful-because if we analyse the disaster into which these people brought Australia during seven years of conservative rule, the single element which most distinguished that policy was the process of confrontation-deliberate confrontation, not just with the trade union movement of this country but also with the business community. Honourable members opposite increasingly became alienated from any group in the community which had any source of wisdom and experience about what was happening in the economy. They set themselves against the trade unions and they refused to take the advice of business. What they thought was good government was a process of setting Australian against Australian and group against group. Against that, this Government came in and said that it would bring this country together, and an important part of bringing Australia together following the Summit was the creation of EPAC. It is very strange that the Leader of the National Party of Australia, who has just been demolished by the honourable member for Port Adelaide, is reported as having said last month: Business has told people to beware of Labor. The National Party Leader, Mr Ian Sinclair, has criticised what he called the sycophantic attitude of some big business to the Labor Government. Here they are, coming out and accusing the business community of being sycophantic towards the Australian Labor Government. Now it may come as some surprise to these people on the other side of the House, who have proved in government that they are incompetent in economic management and have proved in opposition that they have no capacity to learn, that the Australian business community wants to co-operate with this Labor Government because it knows that this Labor Government is about the business of restoring healthy economic growth in Australia. The Australian business community knows that what is good for business, for the trade union movement and for the social welfare beneficiaries of this country, who depend upon a healthy economy, is a government which will co-operate with business and the trade unions to bring about economic growth. The test is in the facts and the facts show that as a result of the operation of this process of co-operation this country under this Government moved from a situation of negative economic growth under that group of people on the other side to having, through 1983-84, the highest rate of economic growth in the whole of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Those are the results. Mr Cowan —Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. The Prime Minister is using Question Time to launch his election speech. Mr SPEAKER —Order! There is no point of order. Mr HAWKE —I remind the honourable member that it is just another gentle step in the inexorable process of the demolition of the Opposition in this country. As I said, that process of co-operation with the business community and with these other groups embodied in EPAC under legislation passed in this county has produced the situation to which I refer-the highest rate of economic growth in the whole of the OECD. I conclude by saying to the Leader of the Opposition that I hope that in the weeks and months ahead of us he goes to the people of Australia and stays committed to this proposition for abolishing these instruments of co-operation. Mr HOWARD —Does the Prime Minister recall saying on a recent edition of the Sunday program that the now restored Special Minister of State would have to live by the standards which he set himself in his speech to the Parliament on 27 April 1982? Does the Prime Minister also recall that in that speech in April 1982 the Special Minister of State called for an independent valuation of certain goods brought into Australia by the former Prime Minister? In view of Mr Black's disavowal of the need for an independent valuation of the goods involved in the recent case, how does the Prime Minister reconcile his acceptance of the Black Report on an Inquiry into the Circumstances Surrounding the Making of a Customs Declaration with his fervent declaration on the Sunday program? Mr HAWKE —I have no difficulty with this at all. I remind members of the Opposition-I thought the opportunity may have come earlier in the day-that they seem to be speaking about a report which has condemned the Special Minister of State as though he has received a report like the one that Mr Justice Woodward gave to Peter Nixon when he was here and which condemned him. The Special Minister of State did not get a report condemning him. He got a report of complete, total exoneration. Let me remind the House of what is said in the report. Mr Howard —Are you, too, going to skate around the question? Mr SPEAKER —Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting. Mr HAWKE —I know that the honourable gentleman asks his questions but does not want the answers, because he does not like the truth and never has. What did Mr Black say in respect of the Special Minister of State? I refer to page 132 of the report. This is what he said: I have concluded that there was no intention to evade duty, no attempt to evade duty and no attempt wilfully to mislead any customs officer. He went on to say that there could have been more care. I do not avoid that paragraph. He said: I conclude that Mr Young, notwithstanding the difficulty with which he was presented by the circumstances and by the wording of the form-- I interpolate by making the point that a very common pattern of behaviour on the part of the Opposition is emerging in regard to official inquiries. If the Opposition does not like the result of an inquiry it attacks the adequacy of the umpire. What happened when Mr Justice Cross made his findings which involved the Leader of the National Party of Australia? Never has there been a report which so completely demolished the integrity of a member of this Parliament as did the findings and observations of Mr Justice Cross in respect of the Leader of the National Party. What was the reaction of the Opposition in that case? The Opposition impugned the integrity, the competence and the capacity of the umpire , Mr Justice Cross. There was no problem about the appointment of the inquiry. We set it up. When the report comes down and completely exonerates the Special Minister of State, what do members of the Opposition do? Again, the competence, the independence, the impartiality and the integrity of Mr Black are put into question. Mr Black said: I conclude that Mr Young, notwithstanding the difficulty with which he was presented by the circumstances and by the wording of the form, should have taken more time and exercised greater care so that questions could not reasonably have arisen . . . Having said that, he directly went on to say: On the facts as I have concluded them to be, I am of the view that the circumstances fall short of impropriety and that a positive finding that there was no impropriety should be made. On page 133 of the report Mr Black gave his conclusions. Mr Howard —I take a point of order. I addressed a question to the Prime Minister regarding a statement he made on the Sunday program about three weeks ago. He has now occupied four minutes on an answer in which he has made no reference at all to that part of the question. Mr SPEAKER —The Leader of the Opposition is making a point, not a point of order . I call the Prime Minister. Mr HAWKE —I can assure the Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party that he will get his answer in full, but he is not going to avoid having presented to him in this House and having the people of Australia hearing at the earliest opportunity the full statement of exoneration by Mr Black in respect of the Special Minister of State. Mr Black, in his conclusions in respect of the Hon. M. J. Young, said: There was no impropriety in the actions of the Hon. M. J. Young. Mr Young did not at any stage use or attempt to use his official position to his advantage or to divert any person from the proper and impartial performance of his duty. I express no conclusion as to whether any breach of a law of the Commonwealth may have occurred. My reasons for taking this course appear in Part XII of this Report. He concluded by saying: It should not be inferred that I make any finding that a breach of the law of the Commonwealth may have occurred in the actions of the Hon. M. J. Young. The honourable member for Bennelong referred to a statement that I made on the Sunday program. He is correct. I said quite clearly and unequivocally then that there would need to be a clear exoneration of the Minister because, as distinct from our predecessors, we have impeccable standards of integrity in this Government. Opposition members-Ha, ha! Mr HAWKE —Laughter from the other side of the House will never cover the fact that during the seven years of the former Government it was pockmarked by a consistent series of resignations and withdrawals from the Ministry. Nine Ministers resigned or withdrew. Now that the Australian Labor Party is in government we have integrity in government. We have a situation in which, having established an inquiry, we will accept the results of the inquiry. In respect of that aspect of the question which goes to the valuation of the goods, anyone who reads in detail the report of Mr Black will find that in respect of this question of the valuation of the goods by the Customs officer there is a complete repudiation of any possibility of a cover-up or a conspiracy for that figure to have been arrived at in any way involving improper conduct on the part of Mr Young, members of his family or any Customs officer. I am proud to say that the Black report entirely meets the standard which I set before it came out, that is, there had to be a complete exoneration. There has been such a complete exoneration and the country is fortunate to have now restored the services of an outstanding Minister. Mr Tuckey —Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. I seek leave to table the pieces of paper referred to by the Special Minister of State which state clearly that the things were his bona fide goods and not the property of his wife. Leave not granted. Ms MAYER —I ask whether the Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism is aware of some media reports, especially an article in the National Times, regarding his absence from a Press conference called by the organiser of the Australia Games to be held in Melbourne early in 1985? Was the Minister not duty bound to attend such a Press conference given his presence in Los Angeles? Mr JOHN BROWN —I thank the honourable member for her question. I did read that article. It seems to me a pity that a writer of such talent wastes his time writing such negative, carping and misleading articles. I attended the Los Angeles Games in three capacities. Firstly, I attended as Minister for sport. Mr Peacock —How much did it cost? Mr JOHN BROWN —It cost a lot less than it used to cost the Leader of the Opposition to stay at the Pierre in New York so the Leader of the Opposition need not ask such questions. I doubt that any Australian who can think will support the contention of that article that I should not have been in Los Angeles. After all this Government has been responsible more than any other for the promotion of sport in Australia. All of those kids there competing for Australia were very pleased to see a representative of the Government to see them compete. The author of the article also called into question my right to be in Los Angeles at some other period. I was in Los Angeles some months ago as the Minister for tourism. I think it is true to say that many tens of thousands of Australians, who did not have jobs before, have jobs because of this Government' s promotion of tourism. Many thousands of Australians have jobs directly as a result of my visit to Los Angeles where I unleashed Paul Hogan on an unsuspecting American audience. The success of that campaign is acknowledged even by a dumb Opposition. During this particular period I was having discussions with our advertising agency about another advertisement by Paul Hogan, also about to be unleashed, which will further increase the hundreds of thousands of Americans who are coming to Australia and which will provide jobs for young Australians for whom the Opposition could never provide jobs in all of its years in government. I now come to the nefarious Press conference. The day I arrived in Los Angeles I was asked by Mr Jim Barry, the Chairman of the Australia Games Foundation, whether I would attend a Press conference. My staff told him that I could not because I had a previous engagement with our advertising agent. He said that it was not of that much importance anyhow and that it did not matter. One day before the conference he was again informed or messages were left at his hotel that I would not be there. When the conference was held Mr Barry, who is a rather pleasant gentleman but who does not know too much about how to handle these geniuses in the Press gave a very inexpert and unwise answer, which he knows to be untrue. I must say that to his credit he has latterly apologised to me for whatever damage those particular Press reports incurred when they arrived back in Australia. I might say also that the other members of his Foundation who happened to be in Los Angeles at the time-Judy Patching, the Secretary-General of the Australian Olympic Federation, Syd Grange, the Chairman of the same organisation and John Cheffers, the Director-General of the Australian Institute of Sport-were not even informed that the Press conference was on, it was so unimportant. When I did not arrive he gave a very unwise answer to the Press, which was later blown into a big story. Mr Peacock —Unwise or incorrect? Mr JOHN BROWN —Incorrect, but also unwise. Members of his Foundation are mortified by the statements that arose from that conference because they understand that if it were not for my efforts, as a Minister in this Government, in getting $1.3m to stage the Australia Games they would never occur. Mr Barry is a source of embarrassment to his Foundation because he sought to criticise the Government. In fact, the Government has enabled the Australia Games to take place. As I said before, he has been man enough to apologise and I accept his apology. I now turn to the good news. The Australia Games in Melbourne next January will be an outstanding success. Many of the Eastern bloc athletes who did not go to Los Angeles will be in Melbourne. The Games will be almost a mini-Olympics and they will be a great addition to the Victorian sesquicentenary year. Mr SINCLAIR —My question is directed to the Minister representing the Minister for Industry and Commerce. In light of his earlier answer that Customs procedures are the same for all Australians, will he advise the House-- Mr Lusher —Similar. Mr SINCLAIR —I beg your pardon; similar for all Australians. Obviously they are not the same. Will the Minister advise the House what verification procedures he introduced to assess whether the valuation given by the Special Minister of State were accurate? Mr JOHN BROWN —Customs officers in Australia have a great reputation for honesty, which is based on a great record, as a couple of honourable members on the other side have found to their great cost. I will refer to the Minister the question of the verification of the value of the goods and I will obtain an answer as quickly as possible. Let me make a couple of points. I said before that the procedures are the same for all Australians, and that is a fact. It is to the credit of the former Prime Minister-one of the few things I can find to his credit-that he issued instructions to the Bureau of Customs that every returning VIP, Minister of the Crown, or anyone else was to be treated in exactly the same fashion. As far as I am concerned, as the Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry and Commerce, that is the case. In regard to the specific question, I will seek an answer from the Minister and give it to the right honourable member . Mr HUMPHREYS —Can the Special Minister of State inform the House of the progress of the current Federal redistribution? Opposition members interjecting- Mr YOUNG —The Opposition should take more interest in this matter than it is taking in teddy bears. Members of the House will be interested to know that the final determination for the Australian Capital Territory will be made on 31 August. The final determination for South Australia will also be made on 31 August, as will the final determination for Western Australia. In Tasmania, public hearings will take place from 20 August to 24 August. No final determination is likely before 14 September. In Queensland, public hearings will be held from 27 August to 31 August. No final determination is likely before 17 September. In Victoria, there will be public hearings from 3 September to 7 September, with no final determination likely before 30 September. In New South Wales, public hearings will be held from 10 September to 14 September, and no final determination is likely before 10 October. At the conclusion of all determinations a copy of determinations, submissions, objections, maps and reasons will be presented to the Minister and the Commissioner. These will then be tabled by the Minister. The divisional boundaries will be gazetted separately and before the tabling. The new divisional rolls could be ready approximately by the end of October. Mr HOWARD —I address another question to the Prime Minister. I again remind him that on the Sunday program three weeks ago he said that the Special Minister of State would have to live by the standards which he set himself in his speech to the Parliament on 27 April 1982. I ask the Prime Minister whether the Special Minister of State in that speech proclaimed: Nothing is more important than the way in which . . . Ministers behave themselves and set an example to other people in Australia. Does the Prime Minister really believe that the Minister responsible for the Australian Federal Police has fully met this standard, in view of his own admission that he signed a false Customs declaration form, the finding of Mr Black that he was careless and Mr Justice Hope's finding that he made unauthorised and improper disclosures which gave rise to a real danger of significant damage to national security? Mr HAWKE —I believe that the findings of Mr Black show without any question that the Special Minister of State has met the standards which were reasonably expected, not only by all members of this House but also by the people of Australia. I hope that those on the other side of the House will continue on this pathetic exercise because the people of Australia know that this Government acted honourably, immediately and openly in this matter and that, as a result of the inquiry, the Special Minister of State has been found to have acted without any impropriety at all. It is the case that Mr Black said that the Special Minister of State could have acted with more care. But he went on to say that there was no impropriety, no suggestion of improper influence, by the Minister. I simply conclude by saying this- Mr Peacock —The inquiry was a sham and you know it. Mr HAWKE —I hear the Leader of the Opposition saying- Mr Peacock —The inquiry was an absolute sham and you know it. Mr SPEAKER —Order! The Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting. Mr HAWKE —Mr Speaker, once again the guardian angel smiles, because we now have the Leader of the Opposition saying that Mr Black's inquiry is a sham. He vilifies- Questions without Notice Questions without Notice Questions without Notice Questions without Notice Questions without Notice Questions without Notice Questions without Notice Mr Peacock —I take a point of order, Mr Speaker. I said that it was a sham from the moment it was appointed. Mr SPEAKER —Order! That is not a point of order. The Leader of the Opposition will-- Mr Peacock —I said it was a sham because the occupant of the Prime Ministership- - Mr SPEAKER —Order! I warn the Leader of the Opposition. That is not a point of order. You are not taking a point of order. Mr Peacock —No, Mr Speaker, but I can legitimately ask: Why are you warning me? Mr SPEAKER —I am warning you because I have pointed out that there is no point of order and have asked you to resume your seat and you have defied the Chair. I call the Prime Minister. Mr HAWKE —I am indebted to you, Mr Speaker. The Leader of the Opposition is going further and further down the gurgler he has created for himself because now he has joined the Leader of the National Party, who vilified Mr Justice Cross. Now the Leader of the Opposition is vilifying Mr Black, QC, an honourable and respected member of the Victorian Bar. He will not get away in the judgment of the Australian people with this continuation of the process of, when inquiries are set up, attacking the umpire and the result. I say to the Opposition: Keep on doing it-- Mr Peacock —I said it right from the start. Mr HAWKE —You-- Mr Peacock —You rigged the terms of reference. Mr SPEAKER —Order! The Leader of the Opposition will cease interjecting. He has been given a good deal of tolerance. Mr Peacock —I take a point of order, Mr Speaker. I do not need to apologise to Michael Black. Mr SPEAKER —Order! I suggest that the Leader of the Opposition comes to his point of order. Mr Peacock —I branded the inquiry a sham from the moment this fellow got caught out. It was a sham. Mr SPEAKER —Order! The Leader of the Opposition will come to his point of order. Mr Peacock —The point of order is this: The Prime Minister continually alleges that there is a degree of mendacity coming from this side of the House but uses lies himself throughout answers. Mr SPEAKER —Order! Mr Peacock —There has to be a means whereby the Opposition can defend itself. Mr SPEAKER —Order! The Leader of the Opposition will-- Mr Peacock —I am not going to sit here and listen to these wranglings going on for 10 minutes-- Mr SPEAKER —Order! I warn the Leader of the Opposition. Mr HAWKE —The Leader of the Opposition has condemned himself out of his own mouth. No one on this side of the House needs to say any more. He has joined the albatross in condemning the judiciary and members of the Bar who conduct independent inquiries. I simply conclude by saying this-- Mr Peacock —You nobbled him from the start. Mr HAWKE —Mr Speaker, do you hear this latest edition to the slurs? The Leader of the Opposition said that I nominated him. Because I nominated Mr Black, does that question the integrity of Mr Black? Mr Peacock —I said you nobbled him. Mr HAWKE —I nobbled him. Mr Peacock —You did not give him sufficient terms of reference. Mr HAWKE —Mr Speaker, it gets better and better. I misheard the Leader of the Opposition. Mr SPEAKER —Order! Mr HAWKE —Go on, go on. Mr SPEAKER —Order! The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. I point out to the House that the Chair is placed in a difficult position with the knowledge that the Budget Speech is to be presented tonight. Normally action would have had to have been taken against some honourable members in the last 20 or 25 minutes. I hope the House will reserve some decorum otherwise some honourable members will be missing when the Budget Speech is being read. Mr HAWKE —Mr Speaker, I misheard the Leader of the Opposition. I thought he interjected and said I nominated Mr Black, but he said: 'No, no, you misheard me . I did not say you nominated him. I said that you nobbled Mr Black'. Now the guardian angel smiles and smiles and smiles-look at the glum faces behind the Leader of the Opposition-because after the Leader of the Opposition has vilified Mr Justice Cross, he is now saying that an honourable member of the Victorian Bar accepted a situation in which the Prime Minister of Australia nominated an independent member of the Victorian Bar. I simply say to the Leader of the Opposition and to all of those around and behind him-and there will not be many for much longer-that I hope he continues in this House and outside it to attack Mr Black in saying that I nobbled him. It is an insult to his integrity to say that he would have accepted that task, pursued it to conclusion and submitted a report to me if he believed that he had been nobbled. Tomorrow we will give the Opposition an opportunity to pursue this matter. I express the fervent hope that it will continue on the path it has pursued so despicably in this House today. Mr SPEAKER —I present, pursuant to statute, the reports of the Auditor-General dated 26 June 1984 on efficiency audits of the Installation and Maintenance of Airway Facilities by the Department of Aviation, the Control of Prohibited Immigration by the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, Administration of Widows' Pensions, and Supporting Parents' Benefits by the Department of Social Security, Collection of Sales Tax by the Australian Taxation Office, and of the Administration of the Disability Pension and Service Pension Schemes by the Department of Veterans' Affairs. Motion (by Mr Young)-by leave-agreed to: (1) That this House, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliamentary Papers Act 1908, authorises the publication of the reports of the Auditor- General on efficiency audits of the Installation and Maintenance of Airway Facilities by the Department of Aviation, the Control of Prohibited Immigration by the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, Administration of Widows' Pensions and Supporting Parents' Benefits by the Department of Social Security, Collection of Sales Tax by the Australian Taxation Office, and of the Administration of the Disability Pension and Service Pension Schemes by the Department of Veterans' Affairs. (2) That the papers be printed. Mr HAWKE(Wills-Prime Minister) —For the information of honourable members I table the report on an Inquiry into the Circumstances Surrounding the Making of a Customs Declaration on 5 July 1984. The report tabled today contains a number of minor editorial and spelling changes as compared with the report released on 17 August. These have been made by Mr Black or with his authority. Mr Peacock —Where is the statement? Mr Young —I will make a statement tomorrow. Mr SPEAKER —Is any action proposed? There seems to be a crossed state of debate. Mr Young —Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister made it obvious during Question Time that time will be made available tomorrow for a debate on this matter. Mr COHEN(Robertson-Minister for Home Affairs and Environment) —I wish to make a personal explanation. Mr SPEAKER —Does the Minister claim to have been misrepresentated? Mr COHEN —Yes. Mr SPEAKER —The Minister may proceed. Mr COHEN —On the AM program on 10 August 1984, the honourable member for Bradfield (Mr Connolly) stated: Ever since last December I have been asking Mr Cohen publicly and in parliament to enter into negotiations with the Queensland Government to see whether some alternatives could be considered in relation to the problem with Daintree. He has refused to do so, which demonstrates quite conclusively that the Labor Party is not interested in serious environmental protection. In a notice of motion he repeated my refusal to negotiate with the Queensland Government. It was at my initiative in November 1983 that a rain forest conference was arranged to discuss what action was required to preserve the rain forest areas of this country. The Queensland Government participated in that conference. On 22 March this year, I wrote to- Mr SPEAKER —The Minister will go directly to where he has been misrepresented. Mr COHEN —I will summarise it very briefly, Mr Speaker. I have met with Mr McKechnie, Mr Tenni, and a number of Queensland officials on this matter and the honourable member for Bradfield keeps on repeating what is downright untrue. Mr MacKellar —When did you get it? Mr COHEN —I was just about to give the dates. I will be happy to provide them for the honourable member later. Mr PEACOCK(Kooyong-Leader of the Opposition) —I wish to make a personal explanation. Mr SPEAKER —Does the Leader of the Opposition claim to have been misrepresented? Mr PEACOCK —Yes, grievously, by the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) a short time ago. Mr SPEAKER —The Leader of the Opposition may proceed. Mr PEACOCK —I have consistently said, in regard to the Black Inquiry into the Circumstances Surrounding the Making of a Customs Declaration, from the moment it was established that it was a sham. I was misrepresented by the Prime Minister when he alleged that I impugned the character of Mr Black. I did not. I simply say, and continue to say, that the inquiry was a sham. It had no powers; it could not compel evidence; it did not see adequate evidence; witnesses did not give evidence under oath. Despite the fact that it had less power than the Prime Minister-- Mr Young —On a point of order. Is this a personal explanation? Mr SPEAKER —The Leader of the Opposition will come to the point. This is debate, not explanation. Mr PEACOCK —The Prime Minister said it was a sham- Mr SPEAKER —The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. Mr PEACOCK —Because of the powers or lack of them that were given to the inquiry . Mr SPEAKER —I inform the House that on Tuesday, 7 August, the President of the Senate and I, in the company of the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) and the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock), attended the official opening of the new parliament building of the Papua New Guinea national Parliament in Port Moresby by His Royal Highness, the Prince of Wales. Honourable members are informed that the Speaker's chair and the chamber table in the new building are gifts from the Australian Parliament. This presentation continued the tradition of exchange of gifts of symbolic parliamentary significance between Commonwealth parliaments on such occasions and confirmed the close ties between the two legislatures. The Clerk —Petitions have been lodged for presentation as follows and copies will be referred to the appropriate Ministers: To the Honourable Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: The petition of certain citizens of Australia shows that the current discriminatory application of sales tax on confectionery at the rate of 20 per cent is an unfair and unjust burden on this important manufacturing industry and your petitioners therefore pray that confectionery be treated in a similar fashion to all other foods, including snack foods, which are exempt from sales tax. by Mr Baldwin,Mr Beazley,Mr Blunt,Mr Brumby,Mr Carlton,Mr Charles,Mr Coleman,Mr Dobie,Mr Drummond,Dr Harry Edwards,Mr Ronald Edwards,Mr Gorman,Mr Hawke,Mr Holding,Mr Howard,Mr Hurford,Mr Keating,Mr Kerin,Mr Leo McLeay ,Mr Moore,Mr Allan Morris,Mr Ian Robinson,Mr Rocher,Mr Saunderson,Mr Snow,Mr Spender,Dr Theophanous,Mr Uren and Mr West. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens respectfully showeth that: 1. They call on the House of Representatives and the Government of the Commonwealth to reject the recommendations of the Commonwealth Schools Commission contained in 'Funding Policies for Australian Schools' concerning proposed increases in State aid to private schools and the proposed community standard for education funding. 2. They call on the House of Representatives and the Government of the Commonwealth to declare a three year moratorium (1985-1987) on increases in State aid to private schools and on grants for new private schools and for increased private school enrolments. 3. They call on the House of Representatives and the Government of the Commonwealth to re-affirm their primary obligation to government schools and to implement all 1983 ALP election promises for increased funding to government schools. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Chynoweth,Dr Everingham,Mr Fisher,Mr Griffiths,Mr Hicks,Mrs Kelly,Mr Kent,Mr Milton,Mr Newman,Mr O'Neil,Mr Scholes,Mr Scott and Mr Staples. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens respectfully showeth; that Regulations and an Ordinance now before the Parliament amend the Customs ( Prohibited Imports) Regulations and the Customs (Cinematographic Films) Regulations and supersede the A.C.T. Objectionable Publications Ordinance in such a manner as to be harmful to society by removing from existing Commonwealth law- the power to prevent the importation and sale of hard-core pornography (e.g. X- rated videos) and publications which consistently incite the use of hard drugs; the power to prevent the importation and sale of grossly obscene publications, including those associated with blasphemy; the power to require imported video tapes/discs for non-commercial use to be registered by the Film Censorship Board. Your petitioners humbly pray that the House of Representatives, in Parliament assembled: should disallow the new Regulations and Ordinance and ensure- that the Attorney-General enforce existing laws; that Censors more appropriately reflect responsible community attitudes; that further measures be taken in association with the States to protect Australians, particularly women and children, from exploitation; and that because of the importance of this issue to society, a conscience vote be permitted to all Members of Parliament. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Andrew,Mr Blunt,Mr Burr,Mr Dawkins,Mr Ronald Edwards,Mr Goodluck,Mr Groom,Mr Newman,Mr O'Neil,Mr Rocher and Mr Scott. To the Honourable Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. We the undersigned citizens of the Commonwealth do humbly pray that the Commonwealth government 1. Uphold the principle that the seeds and cuttings of plants are a public resource and a common heritage to all and that accordingly seeds should be freely available to all, freely multipliable, able to be sold, exchanged, exported and imported by anyone who wishes. This is seen as a matter of national food security. 2. Recognize that plant breeding is a highly co-operative venture often involving private enterprise at the very last stages after basic seed collection , storage, and research has been publicly funded. 3. In view of the aforementioned paragraphs, recognize that any system giving ' property' or ownership rights over seeds to individuals, organisations or enterprises in inappropriate and unjust. 4. Recognize that legislation establishing plant patenting schemes overseas has had serious adverse effects namely: (i) a slowing-down of scientific information exchange and exchanges in basic plant breeding materials, that is, germ plasm, (ii) subordination and/or curtailment of public breeding programmes, (iii) farmer unrest at seed prices, (iv) monopoly control of seed production and sales has passed into the hands of giant petrochemical and drug corporations also marketing crop chemicals, (v) increased uniformity of crop varieties leading to a vulnerability to pest and disease attack. 5. Reject any proposal to legislate for any system such as the drafted Plant Variety Rights Act, which gives exclusive ownership rights over seeds to individuals, organisations or enterprises. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Baldwin,Mr Duffy,Mr Kerin,Mr Milton,Mr Snow,Mr Staples and Mr Steedman. To the Honourable Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. That the Sex Discrimination Bill 1983 contains provisions inconsistent with principles of justice and equality which could be used to: Undermine civil liberties and religious freedom; Entrench abortion funding and render liable to action Hospitals, Doctors and Nurses, who conscientiously refuse to become involved in morally objectionable operations; Deny to parents their rights to insist that the school 'community' provide an environment conducive to the development, including moral development of their children. Deny to parents their rights to have their children enjoy single-sex sporting activities e.g., boys cricket team, boys football team, etc. Your petitioners humbly pray that the Parliament assembled should amend the Bill so as to prevent the possibility of its use in the manner stated above and urge, because of the importance to society of all principles involved, that a conscience vote on the Bill be permitted to all Members of Parliament. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Connolly,Mr Dobie,Mr Hicks,Mr Hunt,Mr Morrison,Mr Sinclair and Mr Spender. To the Honourable Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled, Parliament House, Canberra, A.C.T. 2600. We, your petitioners, humbly showeth: That permitting kangaroos to be commercially exploited when permissible cropping rates are unknown and the means of enforcing controls or protective laws are completely ineffective in this land, is allowing this unique animal to follow the path to rarity or extinction along which all wild animals have gone when subject to exploitation in similar circumstances. We Australians, have the right to see kangaroos in reasonable numbers on the landscape: We find the commercial slaughter of the kangaroo to be abhorrent and unjustified. Commercialization of wildlife should be stopped, particularly as exemplified by the kangaroo industry. We your petitioners therefore humbly pray that you will: 1. Ban the export of products made from kangaroos. 2. Take action to see that State Governments prohibit the commercial killing of kangaroos. by Mr Andrew,Dr Blewett,Mr Steele Hall,Mr Hurford,Mr O'Neil and Mr Wilson. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. This petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth that: 1. We are completely satisfied with the design of the existing Australian national flag. 2. We are aware it properly reflects the immutable characteristics of Australia , namely: The Union Jack-itself the creation of 3 Christian crosses-represents the nation 's historical origin, and the source of its language and law. The Southern Cross on an azure blue background signifying its place in space. The large star depicting the advent of Federation in 1901. 3. We know the flag has been a source of inspiration to generations of Australians in peace and war. 4. We recall that millions of native-born Australians and newcomers to these shores from other parts of the world have become united under its proud symbolism. 5. We are certain that any change to the flag will produce division in the Australian community. Your petitioners therefore pray that your honourable House will: Propose and pass a motion that 'the existing Australian national flag remains sacrosanct from change'. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Blunt,Mr Drummond,Mr Hicks and Mr Rocher. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth that: 1. Omega by sending low frequency signals, penetrating sea water enables hunter killer submarines to establish their position and to launch a ''first strike'' attack. Omega is also used by AWACs, the flying radar stations, and for other military purposes. 2. Omega is an important U.S. military base and a potential nuclear target. A nuclear attack on Omega would have a disastrous effect on Victoria and Melbourne . 3. Omega and other U.S. bases in Australia endanger, rather than protect us. They add a new unnecessary menace to a nuclear arms race that must be stopped, if we are to survive. Your petitioners pray that Members and the House assembled will close Omega. by Mrs Child,Mr Kent,Mr Milton and Mr Steedman. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: 1. That the overwhelming majority of Australians are completely satisfied with the existing Australian National Flag. 2. That we are totally opposed to any change in the Australian National Flag as provided in Section (3) of the Flags Act, unless such proposed change is first voted on by the people of Australia and passed by a majority of voters in a majority of States. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Ewen Cameron,Mr Fife and Mr Lusher. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of certain citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: That the Australian flag symbolises the continuity between Australia's past, its present and its future. That the presence of the Union Jack on the flag represents not a subservience to Britain, but a reminder of our inheritance of the fruits of hundreds of years of struggle for individual liberty against the forces of tyranny and oppression; Nonetheless recognises the rights of Australians should they wish as a people to change the design of their flag. Your petitioners humbly pray that no change be made to the Australian flag except with the consent of the people in a referendum. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Carlton,Mr Drummond,Dr Klugman,Mr Lusher and Mr Ruddock. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: That in November 1978 more than sixty-two per cent of the voters of the Australian Capital Territory in a Referendum rejected the introduction of Territorial Government or Local Government in the Australian Capital Territory. That until the findings of the Commonwealth Grants Commission Inquiry into Australian Capital Territory finances have been made public and there has been a Referendum of the voters of the Australian Capital Territory as to their attitude to Territorial or Local Government. Your petitioners most humbly pray that the Government take no further action or legislation in respect of Territorial or Local Government in the Australian Capital Territory. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Carlton,Dr Harry Edwards and Mr Hawker. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: We the undersigned petitioners do humbly pray, that you know of our deep concern for the safety of airline passengers flying the Qantas direct S.P. flights between Sydney and Los Angeles. The imposition of a tour of duty of up to 20 hours for Flight Attendants operating this flight, appears not only unreasonable but possibly unsafe. Passengers need the critical measure of safety that alert Flight Attendants provide in emergencies. We need you to assure that Qantas will not take any action that will lessen the effectiveness of its Flight Attendants in an emergency. Thank you for ensuring that our airline maintains its Safety First approach. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Baldwin and Mr Dobie. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully shows: That we, the undersigned request the Government to abandon its 1983 decision to alter the A.C.T. Classification of Publications Ordinance forthwith. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Braithwaite and Dr Everingham. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully shows that we are disturbed that the barriers to the importation of hard core pornography have been lifted in the A.C.T. We are concerned that pictorial material classified to depict extreme sexual fetishism and explicit violence can be legally marketed in our country if an adult asks for them. Furthermore we are appalled at the classification of ''Publications which consistently incite the use of hard drugs'', for such sale and distribution. We, the undersigned, request the Government to abandon its 1983 decision to alter the A.C.T. Classification of Publications Ordinance forthwith. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Beddall. To the Honourable the Speaker and the Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully shows: (1) That we unreservedly oppose the Federal Government's proposals in relation to the censorship laws designed for the Australian Capital Territory; and further we oppose any such proposal on censorship laws becoming law in any State in Australia. (2) That we consider it right and proper that the citizens of this nation be consulted, and their views and desires respected in the formulation of law in censorship and similar areas. (3) That it is with alarm the proposed censorship laws are regarded by citizens living in a society based on christian ethics. In essence Australia is a Christian nation and our nation's laws must reflect and uphold our established values. Legislation which sanctions behaviour repugnant to Christians, is legislation not appropriate to Australia. Moreover, it is legislation which condones the destruction of the very fabric of our society. Legislation which promotes the degradation, abasement and exploitation of people, both young and old, and of our nation, is unacceptable. (4) That we the undersigned request the Government to heed the points in this petition, and abandon its 1983 decision to alter the Australian Capital Territory Classification of Publications Ordinance forthwith. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Braithwaite. To the Honourable the Speaker and the Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned electors of the Commonwealth of Australia respectfully shows: That we, electors of the Commonwealth of Australia, view with extreme concern and express forthwith our complete abhorrence of the relaxation of the former Federal laws concerning censorship classifications to allow publication and importation of hardcore pornography. Therefore we, the undersigned, do fervently request the Federal Government to repeal the ''A.C.T. Classification of Publications Ordinances'' as they affect publications and videos. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Donald Cameron. To the Honourable the Speaker and the Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully shows that we are shocked and deeply concerned, especially for our children, that the Government should seek to relax the restriction of pornographic material into our country, through the alteration to the Classification Ordinance. We the undersigned request the Government to abandon its 1983 decision to alter the A.C.T. Classification of Publications Ordinance forthwith. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Donald Cameron. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully shows that because videocassettes are a particularly powerful media form now easily accessible to the general public for private home viewing, and believing that the likelihood of minors obtaining or otherwise viewing, obscene and pornographic videocassettes is very high even with careful parental oversight, we the undersigned protest at the removal of previously existing censorship bans , and in particular request the Government to abandon its 1983 decision to alter the A.C.T. Classification of Publications Ordinance forthwith, which now allows into the community such pictorial material as 'relished descriptions of violence ' and 'publications which mildly advocate the use of soft drugs such as marijuana' (Category 1), and 'sado-masochism'), 'extreme fetishism' (e.g. necrophilia), 'anal intercourse with consent' (Category 2), and other such depraved and repugnant activities; and non-pictoral material referred to as ' hardcore' paperbacks containing 'relished child pornography, e.g. incest, and school teacher/student', and 'extreme sexual torture' (both Category 2), in the conviction that the ready availability and increasing public consumption of same will be a blight on our society, stimulating individual dissoluteness and leading to unlawful behaviour with innocent persons. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Donald Cameron. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully shows that grave concern has arisen among he people of Inglewood, Qld. in respect of the changes of legislation proposed with regard to the A.C.T. Classification of Publications Ordinance. We are certain that this legislation if passed and implemented will have grave and destructive repercussions on individuals young and old and our 'fair Australia' at large. It is unthinkable that any government with a sense of responsibility and the common good of the people at heart, would bow to pressure from kinky minority groups who are demanding these changes. We the undersigned, request the Government to abandon its 1983 decision to alter the A.C.T. Classification of Publications Ordinance forthwith. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Ian Cameron. To the honourable Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectively shows that we are deeply concerned to hear that the barriers to the importation of Hard Core Pornography: publication which incite Terrorism and the publications containing extreme violence and/or sexual violence are to be lifted. We anxiously request that the Government abandon its 1983 decision to alter the A.C.T. Classification of Publications Ordinance forthwith. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Dr Everingham. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully shows that we have recently examined the Attorney-General 's proposals for Commonwealth Censorship procedures for publications, along with publications classifications ordinance, and standards for classification of printed materials. We believe that approval of this material, presented by the lower house, will shortly be in the hands of the Senate. Not only are we concerned that availability of clearly pornographic material is being facilitated in the national capital, but that the States may well be influenced by this legislation to follow suit. We urge you to do all in your power to oppose the bill. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Dr Everingham. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully shows that there are fellow Australians who are greatly saddened by the lack of love and concern being shown by the government for the minds, emotions and ultimately the behaviour of our society by its belief that what we teach via the medium under consideration will not affect attitudes and behaviour. We the abovesigned therefore request the government to abandon its 1983 decision to alter the A.C.T. Classification of Publications Ordinance forthwith. by Dr Everingham. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament Assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully shows : That they are concerned about the flood of pornographic and other objectionable materials that has followed recent amendments to Customs Regulations, and are strongly opposed to the new Classification of Publications Ordinance now before Parliament. We the undersigned request the Government to abandon its 1983 decision to alter the classification of Publications Ordinance forthwith. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Hayden. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully shows we find it to be totally unacceptable that the following recent amendments to Customs Regulations and the making of the new classification of Publications Ordinance of the A.C.T.: (a) A person is free to import or to produce any film, video tape or video disc , notwithstanding that it deals with matters of sex, drugs, crime, cruelty, or revolting phenomena in a manner that is likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult person so long as it does not depict child pornography, encourage terrorism or gratuitously depict extreme violence or cruelty. (b) A person is free to deal commercially with material of this character so long as it has been given some classification rating by the Censorship Board even an X rating. (c) In the A.C.T. the common law offences of obscene libel and conspiracy to corrupt public morals have been abolished to the extent to which they apply to printed matter, films or videos that have been given a classification rating. (d) Films and video tapes and discs depicting unnatural sexual behaviour, even bestiality could be accorded a classification rating. (e) The private circulation of the most extreme hardcore pornography is in practical terms wholly unregulated. Instead of relaxing the laws on the importation of pornography and publications which incite the use of hard drugs, we believe that the Government, as being responsible for the direction of our nation should be more restrictive in its legislation in regard to pornography and material which encourages drug abuse. We, the undersigned request the Government to abandon its 1983 decision to alter the A.C.T. Classification of Publications forthwith. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Katter. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully shows: That we object in the strongest possible way to the importation of all forms of pornography, and liberalising the use of hard drugs. These are, we feel, detrimental to all family units and are the cause of the destruction of our society which we value extensively. We implore that the Attorney General and all other members of the present Government, treat this with the utmost urgency and abandon the 1983 decision to alter the A.C.T. Classification of Publication Ordinance forthwith. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr McVeigh. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully shows: That we wish the Parliament to reconsider New Commonwealth Procedure for Publications and to impose barriers to the importation, production, distribution and possession of any book, film, video tape or the like that depicts, expresses or otherwise deals with matters of sex, drug misuse or addiction, crime, cruelty , violence or revolting or abhorrent phenomena in a manner that is likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult person. We the undersigned request the Federal Government to abandon its 1983 decision to alter the ACT Classification of Publications Ordinance forthwith. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr McVeigh. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully shows that we are grossly displeased with the 'New Commonwealth Censorship procedures for publications.' It is very apparent that by its introduction you are oosing control of the Youth, adolesence, and older generations of our Wonderful Country. It is Righteousness that exalts a country and anything less than that degenerates and abases a country. For the 'Law' on Censorship to continue in its present 'New' form can only do one thing; That is, bring our country down. We the undersigned are requesting that the Laws be tightened considerably in this matter. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Millar. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully shows: That we are concerned about the flood of pornographic and other objectionable publications (including films and video Cassettes) that has followed recent amendments to Customs Regulations. We, the undersigned, request the Government to abandon its 1983 decision to alter the A.C.T. Classification of Publications Ordinance forthwith. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Moore. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully shows: That we are very disquieted about the Federal Government's proposals in relation to the censorship laws it has designed for the Australian Capital Territory and presumably as a model to be followed by the States in the name of uniformity, we note that under Category 2 distribution will be permitted, under certain conditions, of publications which consistently incite the use of hard drugs. We believe that distribution of such publications can only be harmful to our people. We the undersigned request the Government to abandon its 1983 decision to alter the A.C.T. Classification of Publications Ordinance forthwith. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Wells. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully shows, that we are gravely concerned for the standards of our society on a moral basis and for the upholding of the family unit. We believe that the 1983 A.C.T. Classification of Publications Ordinance does not positive enhance wholesome morality and the sanctity of marriage. We the undersigned request the Government to abandon its 1983 decision to alter the A.C .T. Classification of Publications Ordinance forthwith. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Wells. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: That we, the loyal citizens of Australia firmly express our strong opposition to any proposals to remove or undermine the importance of the place of God and/ or the Queen in our national life, and democratic institutions. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray: that the Parliament assembled reaffirm our nation's total dependence on God the Creator in accordance with our Australian Constitution, which commences with the words ''Humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God'', and the Standing Orders of both the Senate and the House of Representatives which prescribe that Parliament each day shall open with a special prayer to Almighty God and the Lord's Prayer. We also call on the Parliament assembled to re-affirm our genuine loyalty to our Head of State, the Queen of Australia, Elizabeth II-'God save the Queen'. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Dr Harry Edwards and Mr Allan Morris. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of certain citizens of Australia shows- That we wish to make known our opposition to the granting to Aborigines of Land Rights for the Uluru National Park in the Northern Territory. Your petitioners therefore pray that as a National Park this area should remain the property of all of Australia's people and not a minority group. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Blanchard. To the Honourable Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives of the Australian Parliament in Canberra assembled. The petition of certain citizens respectfully showeth: That currently pharmaceutical companies are not automatically liable for damage or death caused by their products and individuals attempting to obtain just compensation from these companies are disadvantaged by having to take legal action against multinational corporations. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray: 1. Appropriate legislation be formulated so that pharmaceutical companies are made automatically liable for damage or death caused by their products which will obviate the need for the adversary system in law. 2. Appropriate legislation be formulated to ensure open enquiry in cases of medical incompetence or negligence leading to death or injury. 3. Appropriate legislation be formulated to allow relatives or ''next friends'' access to medical records in cases of injury or death resulting from medical incompetence or negligence. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Blanchard. To the Honourable Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives of the Australian Parliament in Canberra assembled. The petition of certain citizens respectfully showeth- That there are far too many prescription drugs available and that abuse of these constitutes a serious problem. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray: 1. That all drugs shall be prescribed and supplied by their approved (GENERIC) names only. Trade (Brand) names will not be used in any circumstances. 2. That information concerning possible side-effects of all drugs must be made as freely available as the drugs themselves. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Blanchard. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth that: 1. We assert that TAFE, with over 1 million students, requires greatly improved resources if it is to continue to train Australia's skilled workforce effectively. 2. We call upon the Commonwealth Government to provide greatly increased funds to ensure that TAFE is accessible to all Australians, unlike the present time when thousands of people are turned away from TAFE colleges each year. 3. We urge the Commonwealth Government to equip TAFE workshops with the advanced technology used in modern Australian industries, and to expand TAFE's capital works program so that sufficient quality accommodation is available for TAFE teachers and students. 4. We ask that the Commonwealth Government greatly increase TAFE's recurrent expenditure, so that TAFE can respond quickly and flexibly to industry, Government and community demands. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Blunt. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth that: 1. The Federal Labor Government's retirement income policies are piecemeal, inconsistent and make no provision to encourage people to save towards their retirements; and 2. the Government's proposed assets test legislation is iniquitous and, if enacted, its effects would be discriminatory. Your petitioners humbly pray that the House of Representatives, in Parliament assembled, urge the Government to: 1. scrap its proposed assets test legislation; 2. either institute a broad enquiry into Australia's retirement income and taxation systems or await the outcome of the Senate Standing Committee on Social Welfare's work on this matter; and, 3. following the report of such a wide enquiry institute a retirement income policy which is fair and equitable, that encourages self-provision and which will be non-discriminatory. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Blunt. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia showeth that: 1. the Hawke Government's retirement income policies are piecemeal, inconsistent and make no provision to encourage people to save towards their retirements; and 2. the Government's proposed assets test legislation is iniquitous and, if enacted, its effects would be discriminatory. Your petitioners humbly pray that the Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled institute a retirement income policy which is fair and equitable, that encourages self-provision and which will be non-discriminatory. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Shipton. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned electors of Australia respectfully showeth: That the Australian flag reflects Australia's membership of the Commonwealth of Nations, her position in the southern hemisphere, and her federation of original colonies. Recognises that the flag as a symbol of pride for most Australians, such that several organisations, including the ALP, incorporated the flag in their motifs. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Australian Government will resist moves to change the Australian flag, or if change is contemplated that the question be put to the Australian people by referendum to seek their views. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Braithwaite. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned electors of Australia respectfully showeth: That ABC radio transmission from 4QA Mackay is antiquated and operate on transmitters installed in 1947-48 to service a region in which the area and population has doubled in the intervening 36 years. The signal from 4QA is below strength so that station 4QN at Townsville has a far better signal strength into the Mackay hinterland than 4QA, a distance of only 70 km from Mackay and over 300 km from Townsville. The 4QN news programmes are of no interest in the Mackay region and in emergency situations such as cyclones, the 4QA frequency has limited penetration within the region. That while FM programmes are available in Rockhampton and Townsville, Mackay, with a regional population of 100,000 people, has been by-passed when towns of smaller size have the advantages of FM radio. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Government and the Department of Communications will move urgently to rectify both these anomalies. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Braithwaite. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of certain undersigned citizens of Australia, electors of the division of Casey and Deakin, shows our concern at the decisions to make budget cut-backs to our Public Hospitals, resulting in the lack of increased facilities and bed capacity to service Medicare. Thus creating even longer waiting lists of people needing attention. This includes pensioners and others on low income who cannot afford private insurance cover. Your petitioners therefore pray that the Government will take such action as necessary to ensure that these cut-backs do not occur, and ensure that increased facilities will be available. Your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Carlton. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of certain undersigned citizens of Australia, electors of the Division of Casey and Deakin, shows our concern at the lack of opticians, chiropodists, chiropractors, and dentists available to assist those in need of their services under the Medicare scheme. Your petitioners therefore pray that the Government will take such action as is deemed necessary to ensure that these services are made available to Pensioners and those on low income who cannot afford to pay for private treatment. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Carlton. To the Honourable, The Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth- That in view of the recent standardisation of insulin and insulin syringes, having the effect of increasing the cost of both items to the Diabetic in general, and as every insulin-dependent Diabetic must use the same, daily or twice daily according to medication. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that syringes be made available on the N .H.S. and that insulin prescriptions revert to 10 bottles as previously supplied . And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mrs Child. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. We the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully believing that: there is demonstrated evidence of a need for child care facilities by staff, users, and potential users of the National Library of Australia and surrounding buildings in Parkes, ACT; there are at present no such existing facilities; provision has already been made for inclusion of the facilities in planned extensions to the Library, Humbly petition that your Honourable House reverse the decision by the Minister of Home Affairs and Environment disallowing provision for child care facilities in the extensions to the National Library of Australia. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Cohen. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully show: That the potential noise hazard to residents of Sandgate, Shorncliffe, Brighton , and Nudgee Beach (including 4,000 aged people), will become intolerable when the new Brisbane Airport is operative in 1987, if protective action is not taken . Your petitioners therefore pray that the Federal Government will, when the redevelopment of the Brisbane Airport becomes operative, ensure that: (i) no jet aircraft use the 32'14' crosswind runway; (ii) the Department maintain the curfew on the runway from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mrs Darling. To the Honourable the Speaker, and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: That we, being residents of Queensland, strongly condemn the situation that exists, where the Federal Government allows all pensioners to earn a certain amount a week or in an ''Earnings concession year'' to supplement their pension without affecting their entitlement to a full pension . . . . then the Queensland State Government takes the money back as increased rent for Queensland Housing Commission rental houses and units. And your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Parliament accept that the money earned by Pensioners and unemployed tenants of the Q.H.C. should not be taken away from them in increased rents as the meagre supplementary income they are allowed is needed by people already living on incomes below the poverty line . And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mrs Darling. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. This Petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: That we, loyal citizens of Australia firmly express our wish to have the traditional place of Her Majesty The Queen as Head of State retained in our national and constitutional and democratic affairs and institutions and also strongly advocate the retention of our present Australian National Flag, standing for historic and loyal links with the United Kingdom, the nation which founded our Australian way of life. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Dobie. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives of the Parliament of Australia assembled. We, the undersigned, plead that the House of Representatives will vote in favour of the Senate resolution calling for the appointment of a Select Joint Committee to examine the effects upon children of viewing pornographic, violent and obscene video material, because not all parents are supervising all children all of the time, and not all video outlets are impoverishing themselves by compliance with the law. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that you will give this matter your earnest consideration, and your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Drummond. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of certain citizens of Australia shows - That, with the exception of the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory, all State Parliaments have enacted chiropractic legislation. That chiropractors provide a safe, effective and economical health care service that is complementary to medicine. That the introduction of a Federally funded health care system restricted to the services provided almost exclusively by the medical profession restricts the freedom to select the health care practitioner of one's choice and does nothing to reduce the high cost of health care in Australia. That a financial disadvantage will be incurred by those citizens utilizing chiropractic care, many of whom find that their health complaints do not respond satisfactorily to traditional approaches. Your petitioners therefore pray that the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled ensures that chiropractic services are included in Medicare when it is introduced. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Drummond. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled, the undersigned citizens of Australia showeth that: We protest the proposed relocation of the Artillery and Infantry Schools from North Head, Singleton and Holsworthy to the Central Tablelands of New South Wales, and the Cobar district. We humbly pray that the Honourable Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled, will ensure that the current investigation being carried out in the Central Tablelands is ceased forthwith and that no Military Establishment be located in the Central Tablelands of New South Wales. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Dr Harry Edwards. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: The petition of concerned people respectfully showeth their desire to stop the commercial exploitation of the kangaroo. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that your Honourable House re-apply the ban on the export of kangaroo products. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Dr Harry Edwards. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: The Petition of the undersigned respectfully showeth that we believe that there are unresolved economic, social, biological, genetic, environmental, technical and ethnical problems associated with the mining of URANIUM and the development of nuclear power, in particular: (a) to the proven contribution of the nuclear power industry to the proliferation of nuclear weapons and the increased risk of nuclear war; and (b) the absence of procedures for the storage and disposal of radioactive wastes to ensure that any danger posed by such wastes to human life and the environment is eliminated. Your petitioners most humbly pray that: (1) No new Uranium mines be commenced; (2) No new contracts for the sale of Uranium be approved; (3) Uranium mines presently in production cease with the fulfilment of current contracts; (4) No new Uranium is supplied to countries making or testing nuclear weapons. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Ms Fatin. To the Honourable the Speakers and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: The petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth that we believe that tertiary students and their welfare are critical to the economic and cultural future of Australia and that students are currently condemned to living at little more than half the poverty line. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray: 1. That Members acknowledge that an increase in higher education participation and in the quality of the learning process will not be achieved without an overhaul of the Tertiary Education Assistance Scheme. 2. That, as a consequence of item 1, a substantial rise in the level of T.E.A.S ., at least to the level of the single adult unemployment rate, be a primary priority in the 1984 Federal Budget. 3. That instead of the principle of student dependancy on parents to the age of 25 currently at the foundation of T.E.A.S., students be recognised as independent of parents from age 18. 4. That the regulations surrounding T.E.A.S. which make the allowance amongst the most difficult of all Government payments to obtain, be overhauled significantly as soon as possible in consultation with student groups. 5. That tribunals, consisting of student and community representatives be empowered to grant T.E.A.S. in cases of particular hardship which may fall outside the T.E.A.S. regulations. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Gear. To the Honourable Speaker and Members of the Legislative Assembly of the Commonwealth Government of Australia in Parliament of Australia. The petition of the undersigned citizens of the Country of Australia, respectively ask: That the Government of Australia be responsible for the staffing and financing of the Australian Cadet Corps as run in Government Schools. The undersigned pray that the Law be changed so as to allow all students who wish to take part, the opportunity to participate, regardless of their financial position. by Mr Hawker. To the Honourable speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of citizens of Australia respectfully show: We are concerned that- (a) recent increases in jobs notified to the Commonwealth Employment Service ( CES) and (b) increases in the numbers of employment programs and training schemes now being administered by the CES mean the CES no longer has sufficient staff to deliver a high quality service to both the unemployed and employer. Your petitioners therefore pray that-the Commonwealth Government immediately take steps to rectify this deplorable situation and ensure that the CES has additional staff to deliver a high quality of service to all those wishing to use its services. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Humphreys. To the Honourable Speaker and members of the House of Representatives in the Assembly of Parliament the undersigned citizens of Australia humbly petition you to: Educate everybody that a kangaroo culling programme must exist as civilisation has interfered with Australia's climate causing over population of the Red and Grey kangaroo. Professional shooters kill humanely their culling is accurately recorded all are easily controlled by the National Parks and Wildlife Association. The Australian Taxpayer cannot cope with the high costs. Trust twisting radical Conservationists are lowering our Markets, causing: Vast indiscriminate shooting and poisoning. Unnecessary cruel starvation. Hindering efficient culling programmes. Promote blackmarketing. Unnecessary embarrassment to the Australian Public. Abolishing accurate kill recordings. The first step to the extinction of the Red and Grey Kangaroo. No concern for the other 62 varieties of Australian Kangaroo that are not involved in professional culling programmes. by Mr Hunt. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of certain citizens of Australia shows that: Woorabinda Aboriginal Reserve (Population over 600), west of Rockhampton Queensland, is severely isolated because of 34 kms of unsealed road which can become impassable in wet weather, extremely high telephone installation charges (over $1,100 per phone) being asked by Telecom Australia, and poor radio and television reception. Your petitioners therefore pray that the Australian Government will: (a) provide funds to the Duaringa Shire Council to seal the 34 kms of the Duaringa-Bauhinia Downs road which is now unsealed, and which services Woorabinda; and (b) call on Telecom Australia to provide telephone installations at a much more reasonable cost. by Mr Katter To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of certain citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: Recent X rated violent pornography allowed legal distribution, particularly with regard to distribution through sale and hire of video cassette recordings through commercial and retail outlets, is detrimental to the community at large because it gives wide circulation to concepts of human exploration and victimisation, sexual pleasure through violence to others, and explicit details of violent sexual assault-namely rape. Your petitioners humbly pray that: Censors be asked to give due regard to the social effect of the release of violent pornography and that a weighting factor for this be included in the rating of films. Producers, distributors, and the owners of cinemas concerned with the production, distribution, and showing of violent pornography be required to register with the Federal government, and give full disclosure of their financial interests to the government with the proviso that such disclosures will be open to the public. The Federal Government pursue ways of achieving the best effect for the community as a whole-that is, the abolition of violent pornography. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Lindsay. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia, and in particular the citizens of the Weddin Shire, respectfully showeth: That we, the loyal citizens of Australia, and in particular the citizens of the Weddin Shire, firmly express our strong opposition to the classification of the Weddin Open Cadet Unit as a unit to receive limited support only under the restructured Army Cadet Scheme. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Minister for Defence direct the Australian Army to re-classify the Weddin Open Cadet Unit as an open, community- based, regional cadet unit (R.C.U.). And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Lusher. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Australia in Parliament assembled: The humble petition of the undersigned citizens respectfully showeth that they are concerned that the Amendments to the Repatriation Act 1921, which are to be introduced during the present Parliament will have a profound and marked effect on the lives of ex-servicepersons and dependants. We therefore respectfully request that before these amendments go to the second reading stage in the Parliament that ex-service groups and individual ex- servicepersons be given ample time to consider and suggest modifications to the proposed Amendments. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that these views be considered at the draft stage of the new legislation. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Morris. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: The petition of certain citizens of Australia shows that many women and families are being seriously disadvantaged by the fact that domiciliary midwifery fees are not an item refundable on the Basic Medical Benefits Schedule . Domicilliary Midwifery care would cost the Government far less than routine hospitalization for childbirth and, because it is a responsible choice on the part of the birthing family, should not be excluded from the range of options on the basis of cost. Your petitioners therefore pray that the Basic Medical Benefits Schedule be amended to include Domicilliary Midwifery Care. by Mr Ian Robinson. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of we, the undersigned citizens of Australia, respectfully showeth: That the introduction of Medicare has not resulted in a cheaper, fairer system of health care as promised by the Federal Government. Rather, it is an expensive, bureaucratic scheme, depersonalising medical services and conducive to medical mediocrity. While recognising the responsibility which exists to assist those in need, we humbly request the Government to review this system which moves towards the nationalisation of Australian medicine. by Mr Ruddock. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of certain citizens of Australia shows their concern for the present unresolved economic, social, biological, genetic, environmental and technical problems associated with the mining of uranium, the development of nuclear power and the proliferation of nuclear weapons. Your petitioners therefore pray that your Honourable House will 1. prohibit the establishment in Australia of nuclear power plants and all other stages of the nuclear fuel cycle. 2. declare a moratorium on all mining and treatment of uranium in Australia. 3. prohibit the export of Australian uranium. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Staples. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: The undersigned strongly protest at any proposal to use Darkes Forest as the site for the second Sydney Airport on the following grounds: 1. The effect of noise on the residents of and visitors to the northern suburbs of Wollongong. 2. The effect on the environment of the Darkes Forest area and catchment areas generally. 3. The airport would mean the prohibition of hang gliding, the areas unique tourist and recreational attraction. The Petitioners humbly pray that the Parliament assembled reaffirm that there be no airport in the Darkes Forest area. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Tickner. To the Honourable the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. We the undersigned citizens of the Commonwealth respectfully request that the Australian Government negotiate with the Australian Council of Trade Unions significant taxation relief for lower and middle income earners together with improvements in the social wage with particular emphasis on improving the position of those reliant on social security payments. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr West. To the Honourable the Speaker and the Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the electors of the Division of Herbert respectfully showeth that there is a pressing need for major reform in pre-registration nurse education. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Government will announce a policy that all pre-registration nurse education will be transferred to the higher education sector at Degree level by the completion of the 1988- 1990 triennium. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Lindsay. To the Honourable the Speaker and the Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the electors of the Division of Wide Bay respectfully showeth that there is a pressing need for major reform in pre-registration nurse education. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Government will announce a policy that all pre-registration nurse education will be transferred to the higher education sector at Degree level by the completion of the 1988- 1990 triennium. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Millar. To the Honourable the Speaker and the Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the electors of the Division of Ryan respectfully showeth that there is a pressing need for major reform in pre-registration nurse education. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Government will announce a policy that all pre-registration nurse education will be transferred to the higher education sector at Degree level by the completion of the 1988- 1990 triennium. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Moore. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of certain citizens of Queensland, Australia, respectfully showeth that we are totally opposed to any change in the Australian National Flag as declared in the Flags Act (1953). Your petitioners humbly pray that Parliament in its wisdom will take no action to change the Australian National Flag. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Lindsay and Mr Millar. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of certain elected representatives and officers of Local Governments in Australia shows that; General Revenue Grants to Local Government under Personal Income Tax Sharing entitlements have increased by 8.2 per cent in 1983-84 over 1982-83, The inflation rate over the same period was 11.2 per cent, The increase in grants to State Governments over the same period was 11.8 per cent, Increased demands are being made on Local Government Authorities to participate in Federal Government programs e.g. Community Employment Program, The Labor Party made a pre-election commitment to allocate not less than the real value of the previous year's allocation in General Revenue Grants to Local Government. Your petitioners therefore pray that the Government will amend the Local Government (Personal Income Tax Sharing) Act of 1976, to provide a real term minimum guarantee to Local Government general revenue sharing arrangements in 1983-84, and in future years. by Mr Braithwaite. The Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Australia in Parliament assembled: The Humble Petition of the undersigned citizens from the Central Coast area of New South Wales, respectfully showeth that they are concerned that the Veterans Act 1984 which is to be introduced into Parliament may contain provisions that will make it more difficult to have disabilities accepted as war caused or service related to the disadvantage of veterans and their dependants. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that these views be considered at the draft stage of the new legislation. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Robert Brown. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: The humble petition of certain elected representatives and officers of Local Authorities in Australia shows considerable concern that the Australian Bicentennial Road Development Program levy, at 2 cents per litre on petrol and diesel, was indexed in the 1984 Budget, but that funds raised from indexation of the levy will go into consolidated revenue, and not specifically into expenditure on road funds. It has been estimated that indexation of the levy will raise $491 million over the next six years to 1988-89, of which Local Government could have expected to receive $58 million. This is a further denial of funds to Local Government, following $13 million lost this year from Personal Income Tax Sharing entitlements. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Government will amend the Australian Bicentennial Road Development Trust Fund Act, such that funds raised through indexation of the levy will be placed in the Trust Fund, and used for much needed road construction work. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Ewen Cameron. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: The Petition of certain electors of the Division of Wentworth respectfully showeth their concern that the Soviet authorities continue the persecution of the Nobel Peace Prize winner and the great spokesman for freedom, Dr Andrei Sakharov, and in so doing have ignored protests from all over the world including the unanimous resolution of this House adopted on 30 May 1984. Your Petitioners humbly request that the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled urge the government to rename Canberra Avenue, Griffith, A.C.T., which runs alongside the Soviet Embassy, Andrei Sakharov Avenue. by Mr Coleman. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petitioner of the undersigned citizens of the State of Western Australia showeth that the Attorney-General amended the Customs (Prohibited Imports) Regulations under the Customs Act 1901, to permit the importation of obscene and indecent pornography into Australia. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Government will restore the former section 4A of the Customs regulation to prohibit the importation of material that is obscene, indecent or blasphemous. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Drummond. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: The petition of certain electors of the Division of Forrest respectfully showeth that the Australian Citizenship Act contains provision for the Oath of Allegiance to Her Majesty Elizabeth II Queen of Australia, her heirs and successors, and an Affirmation of Allegiance to Her Majesty Elizabeth II Queen of Australia, her heirs and successors: That the said Oath and Affirmation of Allegiance are supported by the overwhelming majority of Australians. Your petitioners humbly pray that members of the House of Representatives in Parliament Assembled will ensure that the present Oath and Affirmation of Allegiance are retained; and would strongly oppose any attempt to remove all reference to God and the Queen from the Oath of Allegiance, and any attempt to remove all reference to the Queen from the Affirmation of Allegiance. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Drummond. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of certain citizens of Tasmania shows: 1. Although Australia is endowed with vast quantities of natural gas, Tasmanians are denied reasonably priced access to those resources. It should be shared equally between all Australians. 2. The Tasmanian householder using liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) pays $35-40 for an average household cylinder. In Melbourne, the same cylinder can be purchased for as little as $23.77. 3. A Tasmanian family on retriculated gas supply pays double the price of a Melbourne family on natural gas. 4. Tasmanian commercial and industrial users, paying high prices for their gas, are penalized. Four petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Commonwealth Government gas subsidy of $20.31 per tonne should be increased to Tasmania to compensate for Bass Strait freight charges. The subsidy should be raised so that Tasmanian users pay no more than the average of Australian users. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Groom. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of the State of Victoria sheweth our concern over the continuing taxation of Parents' Club bank accounts by way of the Bank Account Debit Tax. Your petitioners therefore pray that- Parent clubs being set up by Government Regulation in the State of Victoria ( Regulation XLII) be recognised by the Australian Government as education auxiliaries, in the same way as are School Councils. The Treasurer move immediately to exempt Parent Clubs from the tax in the same way as are School Councils. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Hawker. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: The petition of concerned people of the Electorate of Hume respectfully show their desire to stop the spread of Patersons Curse. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that Your Honourable House (the Government) act to implement the biological control of Patersons Curse. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Lusher. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: The humble petition of the citizens of New South Wales respectfully show: last year, over 3,300 people died on Australian roads; alcohol is a factor in 50 per cent of road deaths; alcohol advertisements do not show the perils of driving after drinking alcohol ; alcohol advertisements are glamourous and increase their effect on teenagers, indicating drinking alcohol as the social pastime. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the parliament will legislate to ban the advertising of alcohol from commercial television and radio. by Mr Maher. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Pariament assembled. The humble petition of certain citizens of Whyalla South Australia electors of the Division of Grey respectfully showeth that an operation was introduced to Australia for 'Downs Syndrome' children. This operation consists of reducing the size of the tongue of the children which helps them to breathe through their nasal passages, and also enables them to speak much more clearly. There are certain setbacks. 1. The operation can only be performed in Melbourne at present. 2. The operation which in our opinion is a necessity for the well being of these children is not covered by medicare. 3. The operation costs approximately two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500) . We hope to change all this by producing this petition to federal parliament. We are signing this petition so that 'Downs Syndrome' Children do not have to be denied this treatment and can live their lives to the best of their ability. Your petitioners humbly pray that the Government takes steps to make this operation available under medicare and the appropriate action to ensure that any loss incurred travelling to and from the service centre for such operations are fully recoverable. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr O'Neil. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: We the Citizens of the City of Woodville and supported by the citizens of South Australia, being deeply concerned over the threat of closure of the Woodville Plant of General Motors-Holdens, respectfully show- 1. That the management of General Motors-Holdens has failed over a period of more than two (2) years to give any assurances that the Woodville Plant would continue in operation. 2. That a recent statement attributed to the GMH Managing Director, quote: 'The overall objective of our South Australian rationalisation plan has been to eliminate all productive activities on the Woodville site' end of quote. This statement has not been refuted. 3. That the elimination of the Woodville Plant will cause enormous social dislocation, hardship and misery to the citizens of Woodville and South Australia. Your petitioners therefore pray that the Parliament of Australia will condemn this callous disregard for the citizens of Woodville and South Australia, and do all in its power to force General Motors-Holdens to retain its operations at the Woodville Plant. by Mr Scott. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: We, the representatives of National and State community organisations humbly petition Parliament and respectfully showeth: The surplus 'Melbourne' aircraft carrier is in reasonably good condition and capable of being refurbished, and used by the community in a manner which can show a recompense to the nation for the huge amounts previously expended on the vessel. The proposed utilisation encompasses low cost hostel-type accommodation mainly for young people, plus using the existing facilities such as laundry, catering and health, showers, wash basins and toilets. Progressively refurbished until the previous accommodation facilities for 1,300 sailors are fully restored, the project would then each year be a sound commercial proposition. The petitioners respectfully urge that the Federal Government retain possession of the vessel instead of disposing of same, and that a committee be established to examine our plans for the project and report to Parliament on their feasibility or otherwise. Because the sale of the vessel is imminent, the petitioners humbly request the early action is taken to implement the above request, and emphasise that all the organisations concerned work on behalf of young people. by Mr Tickner. The Honourable, the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of Australia in Parliament assembled: The petition from parents representing the government schools in New South Wales respectively showeth that: 1. They call on the Federal Government to re-affirm publicly that its primary obligation is to government schools. 2. They support the Federal Government's policy decision which have reduced funding to wealthy private schools and which have broken the nexus between government and non-government school costs. 3. They endorse the Federal Government's opposition to the provision of a 'base grant' to all non-government schools. 4. They ask that the Federal Government create a general recurrent resource base which is adequate for government schools through the provision of increased recurrent funding. 5. They call upon the Federal Government to negotiate agreements with State/ Territory Governments which will ensure a planned programme of improvements in governments schools throughout the coming decade. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Uren. Petitions received. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER —Mr Speaker has received a letter from the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock) proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely: The Government's weak and irresponsible handling of the Young affair. I call upon those members- Mr PEACOCK(Kooyong-Leader of the Opposition) —Madam Deputy Speaker, would you hear me before you call on the members? Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER(Mrs Child) —Certainly. Mr PEACOCK —Because of the nature of the day itself, reality would dictate that, no matter how important this matter is that I have submitted, namely, the Government's weak and irresponsible handling of the Young affair, I think it would be appropriate, with the Budget due shortly, that I withdraw the letter today. Perhaps we might write another note another day. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER —Would the honourable gentleman put in writing his withdrawal of the matter of public importance to Mr Speaker? Mr PEACOCK —Yes. Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER —I thank the honourable member. Sitting suspended from 6.30 to 8 p.m. Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation for proposed expenditure announced. Bill presented by Mr Keating, and read a first time. Mr KEATING(Blaxland-Treasurer)(8.00) —I move: That the Bill be now read a second time. In doing so, I present the Budget for 1984-85. It is just 18 months since the Australian people elected a Labor Government-at a time of severe economic crisis. Australia was in the grip of the most savage economic recession in fifty years; the economy was in severe decline; unemployment had grown by 270,000 in the previous twelve months and inflation was rising at 11.5 per cent. A remarkable transformation has taken place in the Australian economy since I presented the Labor Government's first Budget 12 months ago. Tonight, I am proud to be able to tell the Australian people that we now have strong economic growth, many more jobs, a substantial fall in inflation and declining interest rates. The Government's policies are on track; they are producing the results we sought-results that our opponents and many commentators said were not achievable in such a short time. We have shown the Australia people that their trust in us was well founded. This Budget consolidates and builds upon those successes. But it aims to do much, much more. Australia now has before it an historic opportunity to embark upon a new growth path. That is, the achievement of non-inflationary growth-sustainable economic growth -that will provide the lasting jobs so desperately needed by the unemployed- growth that will provide real benefits to other needy groups in our society. We can take this path, or we could opt for a return to the sickness of the 1970s-with high inflation, low growth and declining job opportunities. There can only be one path to take. There is no real choice. This Budget is directed at ensuring that the opportunity does not pass us by. RECENT ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE Mr Speaker, at the time of the last Budget, there was much debate about the economic strategy this Government adopted to tackle Australia's worst recession since the 1930s. Some thought we were expanding Commonwealth spending too much; others believed we were being too timid. Whatever views were held then, I believe that by any measure the achievements of the past 12 months have far exceeded expectations. No one could seriously argue that we could have done better. In the past year- and-a-half of the Labor Government, Australia has undergone a transformation. In the year between the June quarters of 1983 and 1984, economic growth was over 10 per cent, the best performance in the 25 years for which quarterly national accounts have been compiled. This means Australia was the fastest growing economy in the Western World. In the same year, 230 000 Australians found jobs, compared with the 240 000 who lost them the year earlier. Inflation fell to 6 1/2 per cent; and declined over the course of the year, so that during the last six months it was running at an annual rate of about 5 per cent. That means our inflation rate is finally falling to about the same level as our major trading partners. Profits recovered, interest rates fell and business investment began to pick up . Central to that success was the Accord on prices and incomes between the Government and the Australian trade union movement. The Accord has been a remarkable success-and the contribution of the ACTU to that outcome has been vital. Where the last Government was unable to stimulate the economy because of fears of wages and prices breaking out-thus causing inflation to accelerate-this Government has been able to restore a strong rate of growth, but in the company of falling inflation. This has only been possible because the Accord has given the Government an agreed basis of wage and price restraint. That restraint, that moderation, has restored health to business, producing profits that can now be ploughed back into expansion and jobs. On the basis of the Accord, the Government was able to employ the traditional arms of policy to set the economy on the path to recovery. Budget policy was structured to employ a deficit of sufficient power to re- start the economy, and an effective monetary policy was applied to finance it, without adding to inflationary pressures. The policy of fighting inflation and unemployment simultaneously, championed by the Labor Party during the last election campaign and now employed as the policy of the Government, has borne fruit quickly. At long last, an Australian Government has provided a comprehensive and coherent economic policy within which all sections of the community can work together. THE 1984-85 BUDGET Our strategy this financial year will be to continue with the co-operative approach pioneered last year and to consolidate and build upon these achievements. The strategy will seek to ensure that economic recovery continues, that inflationary pressures are further reduced and that job prospects are further improved. We have the policies to overturn the history of more than a decade, a history of economic stops and starts, of recoveries that were frittered away in one senseless, destructive price and wage round after another. This time, with the co-operation of all Australians and the Australian trade union movement, the story will be different. Australian workers can continue moderation in their pay claims in the clear knowledge that the nation will be the better for it and that their own position will be more secure. In recognition of the restraint practised to this time and on the basis of its continuation, the Government will provide in this Budget a significant cut in personal income tax, particularly for those on low and middle incomes. At a cost of $1300 million in 1984-85, and over $2100 million in a full year, all taxpayers are to receive a reduction in tax, with the biggest percentage reductions going to lower income earners. We will introduce a new five step tax scale, replacing the old three step scale , in order to make the tax system more progressive and fair. At the lower end of this scale, the tax rate on income between the threshold and $12,500 a year is to be reduced from 30 cents in the dollar to 25 cents. This will mean that taxpayers earning less than $240 a week will enjoy a tax reduction of almost 17 per cent. All taxpayers earning between $240 a week and $538 a week will have a tax cut of $7.60 a week. The majority of Australian employees earn between these amounts and most taxpayers will receive the $7.60 tax cut. This will assist in the quest for continuing income restraint and to that extent will underpin the Prices and Incomes Accord, and should command the full support of the trade union movement. It will also boost family incomes, and hence will stimulate consumer spending as the year progresses. People with incomes above $28,000 a year will also receive a tax cut, but its size will gradually diminish as income exceeds $538 a week. These tax changes will take effect from 1 November. As well as tax cuts for those in employment, the Government regards it as imperative that social welfare recipients and beneficiaries, particularly those in greatest need, receive support in this Budget. To this end the Budget provides a social welfare package that will cost $430 million in 1984-85 and $683 million in a full year, over and above the normal indexation arrangements. The Government has decided to raise indexed pensions and benefits, including the unemployment benefit, from the first payment in November 1984, by $2.50 per week for single people and by $4.20 per week for couples. That increase will lift the single pension rate to $91.90 a week and the combined married rate to $153.30. It will more than compensate beneficiaries for the effect of the introduction of Medicare on the indexation adjustments to pensions. Also, under the usual indexation arrangements those pensions and benefits will further increase in May 1985. In addition to these increases in general pensions and benefits, the Government is providing special assistance targeted to those groups most in need. From November 1984 we shall be giving substantial extra help to pensioners who rent and to those with children. Supplementary rental assistance will increase by 50 per cent to $15 a week; additional pensions and benefits will increase by $2 to $14 a week per child, while the mother's and guardian's allowance will increase by $2 to $10 a week. In all, since the Government took office, the pension income of a sole parent pensioner with two children in privately rented accommodation will have gone up by some $30 a week, an increase of over 25 per cent. A further increase of $2 per week will be provided from May 1985 to single unemployment beneficiaries 18 years of age and over with no dependants. These changes mean that the single adult unemployment benefit will have increased by over $20 a week, or by about 30 per cent, since this Government won office. The Government is particularly concerned about the structure of the various forms of assistance to young people, and will undertake a fundamental review of present arrangements in time for the next Budget. In the meantime, tertiary education allowances will be increased by 10 per cent ; allowances under the Secondary Allowances Scheme will be increased by 15 per cent; and the family income limits applying to both schemes will be extended by 10 per cent. Also in advance of this review, the maximum rate of unemployment and sickness benefit for single people aged 16 and 17 years will be increased by a further $5 to $50 per week for those who have been in continuous receipt of benefit for six months or more. The Government recognises that unemployment is a principal cause of poverty in Australia. The unemployed have borne the brunt of the failure of previous economic policies for too many years. That is why the Government in its first year of office and now in this Budget has substantially increased benefits to the unemployed and provided major job creation programs. However, the fundamental task before us is to create permanent employment. For this reason the overwhelming objective must be to maintain the momentum of economic recovery so as to maximise employment growth. And to do that we need more investment. That will happen this year; there will be more investment. But to encourage it further, the Budget incorporates a number of initiatives in the area of business taxation. First, the rate of depreciation on new non-residential income-producing buildings will be increased from 2.5 per cent to 4 per cent. That will provide a significant boost to the construction industry. Secondly, the tax system is to be changed to allow companies to transfer losses between different members of their company groups where there is 100 per cent common ownership. This should significantly improve the cash flow position of many companies undertaking new investments. Thirdly, the Government has agreed to provide a concession long sought by the mineral exploration industry. After tonight, money spent on general mining exploration will be deductible against income from any source, thereby providing considerable assistance to many members of the mining industry. These three initiatives, combined with the very generous accelerated depreciation provisions legislated by this Government, provide a sound environment for business investment in coming years. They will, at substantial cost to the Government, provide considerable financial support for business investment. It must be recognised, though, that the cost to the Budget of these measures, particularly the accelerated depreciation provisions, will grow rapidly over the course of the decade. Therefore, the Government has decided not to alter that aspect of the former Government's legislation which sets 30 June 1985 as the date by which plant and equipment must be ordered to qualify for the investment allowance. However, the Government will extend to 30 June 1987 the date by which plant must be in place to qualify for the allowance. This will be of particular assistance for firms undertaking large projects with lengthy lead times. Aside from those changes, a number of other adjustments are being made to the tax system. Zone rebates for those living in remote areas are to be increased by 25 per cent, and de facto couples are to become eligible for the dependent spouse rebate. Also, new rebates are to be introduced to ensure that people whose sole income is derived from unemployment, sickness or special benefits do not have to pay tax. The Government has decided to make few other changes to the tax system, the major exception being the tax treatment of beer and wine. First, the tax arrangements for low alcohol beer are to be restructured. These are in two categories. The first comprises very low alcohol beer which contains less than about one per cent alcohol. Until now this has been exempt from tax. The second, much larger, category is that of light beer which typically contains about a half or two-thirds of the alcoholic strength of ordinary beer, which until now has been taxed at the same rate as full strength beer. The Government believes that this tax structure should be changed in recognition of the lower alcohol content. For this reason, the Government has decided to reduce the excise on ordinary light beer by 8 cents per litre, or about three cents a can. The Government has also decided to remove an anomaly by imposing a sales tax on very low alcohol beer at the same rate which now applies to soft drinks-that is, 20 per cent. The new sales tax will raise about $6 million a year. However, lowering the excise on ordinary light beer will cost the Government about $12 million a year. The Government is also concerned that the previous tax regime discriminated heavily against beer and spirit drinkers in favour of wine which has not been taxed at all. Against that background, a sales tax of 10 per cent on wine and alcoholic cider is to be introduced from tonight. This is expected to increase revenue by $49 million in 1984-85 and $62 million in a full year. To avoid any risk of double taxation, the excise collected last year on fortifying spirit will be refunded to producers. BUDGET OVERVIEW As I have stressed, this Budget is about economic growth, it is about embarking upon a new growth path. One of the major contributions any Government can make towards encouraging that growth is to create the conditions which open the way for further falls in interest rates. I say further falls, because in the last year we have seen very significant reductions. Lower interest rates will greatly encourage business investment-and if this economy is to grow, we need investment. For that reason the Government, in framing the Budget, has kept a careful eye on the overall impact on financial markets. The end result is a Budget deficit for 1984-85 of $6745 million, a reduction of $1216 million on last year's deficit. This will be equal to 3.3 per cent of gross domestic product, a marked reduction from last year's 4.3 per cent. This will reduce the overall borrowings of the public sector, and help minimise pressure on interest rates-to the benefit of all Australians. In sum, the Government has kept its three-fold commitment for the 1984-85 Budget. We will substantially cut personal income tax. We will increase social security spending, and in particular direct the extra assistance to those most in need. And we will reduce the Budget deficit by over $1200 million. Australia can be confident that this strategy will provide a basis for further strong economic growth in 1984-85. We expect non-farm growth to average 5 per cent, a little larger than last year 's excellent figure. But overall growth will not match non-farm growth because last year's strong outcome for the rural sector will not be repeated. For that reason, we believe gross domestic product-that is, for the total economy-this financial year will be about 4 per cent higher than in 1983-84. Such growth will see a further large increase in jobs, and another fall in the unemployment rate. By June next year, we expect that since coming to office over 400 000 new jobs will have been created in Australia. That will place us well on the way to fulfilling our election-time promise to create 500 000 jobs in three years. Underpinning those achievements, inflation will remain at its lowest level in more than a decade. With continued wage moderation and a non-inflationary monetary policy, the rise in the consumer price index is expected to be a little over 5 per cent between the June quarters 1984 and 1985-a dramatic change from the 11 1/2 per cent inflation rate we inherited from our predecessors. As I said at the outset of my speech, it is just 18 months since the Labor Government was elected in the midst of a grave economic crisis. While it was clear before the election that the Australian economic situation was grim, it was not until after the election that the full truth was revealed to the Australian people. It became apparent to all sections of the Australian community that the situation was drastic-that, unless this Government could lead the way out of recession, Australia would be condemned to another decade of economic stagnation and decline. At the National Economic Summit a consensus emerged that the crisis would be overcome only by the application of the right policies and by all Australians working together. It was agreed that we would all need to make sacrifices and work in harmony if Australia were to recover. We have made those sacrifices, we have worked in harmony and we are now experiencing the early fruits of our efforts. Now we must advance even further. We must build upon the foundations that we have, together, so successfully laid . We must seize the opportunity now to embark upon a new growth path for Australia. We will do that with this Budget. OUTLAYS Mr Speaker, I will now move on to discuss the outlays side of the Budget in more detail. Budget outlays are estimated to rise by 13.0 per cent in 1984-85, an increase which is lower than the outcome for any year since 1979-80 and follows an increase of 15.6 per cent in 1983-84. In real terms the estimated outlays growth in 1984-85 is 6.1 per cent, compared with 7.7 per cent in 1983-84 and 6.5 per cent in 1982-83, the last year of our predecessors. The major part of this financial year's outlays growth is accounted for by increases in the larger less-discretionary items of expenditure and the full- year effects of programs introduced last year. In the former category, payments to the States, public debt interest and social welfare entitlements under existing legislation involve virtually automatic increases in outlays. For 1984-85, two particular items have been of notable importance in terms of their contribution to outlays growth. First, the full-year operation of Medicare alone contributes 2.2 percentage points of the total 6.1 per cent real growth in outlays. I mention Medicare because it replaced a tax expenditure in the form of the health insurance rebate and transferred a formerly private expenditure to a direct public outlay. The introduction of Medicare more than accounts for the increase in outlays as a proportion of GDP over last year. Secondly, escalating public debt interest payments-the legacy of past Budget deficits and their necessary financing-will contribute a further 1.6 percentage points of that growth in 1984-85. Other program initiatives taken last year that contribute to increased outlays in 1984-85 include the First Home Owners Scheme, the Community Employment Program and increased funding for social welfare and education. I outlined earlier some of the new spending initiatives for this year in the social welfare area. But this Budget also provides for a range of new and expanded initiatives in other areas. I will now discuss the major ones. Details of individual programs are contained in Statement No. 3 and other Budget Papers; more information will be provided, as appropriate, by the relevant Ministers. SOCIAL SECURITY AND WELFARE As I have already announced, the Budget allocates some $430 million to new social welfare programs or improvements in existing programs; these measures have a full-year cost of $683 million. This package includes an increase in pensions and benefits to individuals, including an increase of over 10 per cent in unemployment and sickness benefits for certain single beneficiaries aged 16 and 17. It also provides substantial additional assistance to low-income families with children. Child Care This Government is also providing increased expenditure on the Children's Services Program which will increase from $113 million in 1983-84 to about $158 million this year, bringing the increase over the past two years to more than 60 per cent. Care of the Aged A New Home and Community Care Program will be negotiated with the States and the Northern Territory to provide care to the aged and to younger disabled persons. The proposed program would integrate Commonwealth and State activities and involve estimated expenditure by the Commonwealth exceeding $300 million over three years. Assistance for Aboriginals Funding for Aboriginal advancement programs administered by the Department of Aboriginal Affairs will be increased by 14 per cent to $234 million. Priority will be given to improving water, sewerage, housing and other services for Aboriginal communities, including fringe dwellers. EDUCATION The Budget provides $4544 million in direct spending on education, representing a real increase of nearly 4 1/2 per cent, the largest in eight years. The Government's strong commitment to education is shown by increases for both the tertiary and the schools sectors announced over recent weeks. Against a background of significant unmet student demands for tertiary places, the increased funding is designed to create an additional 15 000 places in universities and colleges by 1987. In addition, it is estimated that a further 15 000 full-time places will be created in TAFE institutions over the same period. In recognition of increased student and staff numbers, capital grants for building programs in higher education will increase by 20 per cent to $64.8 million in 1985. In the schools sector the Government's 1985 Schools Commission guidelines represent a new era in the Commonwealth's approach to schools. The Government has decided to provide financial support for all schools according to an eight year plan. This plan provides for Commonwealth recurrent grants to government schools to increase by almost 50 per cent over the eight year period to 1992. EMPLOYMENT AND TRAINING The employment situation has improved considerably over the past year and is forecast to improve further in 1984-85. But the number unemployed is still far too high and our responsibility in this area, especially to the long-term unemployed, remains. An amount of $1111 million is provided in 1984-85 for labour market and related employment and training programs, double the provision for 1982-83. Included in this total is expenditure on the Community Employment Program which will increase by 44 per cent to $410 million. We also propose to develop a national strategy in the field of occupational health and safety, for which $12.1 million is available in 1984-85. HOUSING Total outlays from the Budget on housing for this year are estimated at $1252 million, an increase of 21 per cent on 1983-84 and up 69 per cent on funding provided by the previous Government in 1982-83. $623 million will be provided to the States this year under the Commonwealth State Housing Agreement. This includes a net increase of some $50 million for public and crisis accommodation. The level of Federal funds provided for this priority area will be over $200 million higher than when the Government came to office. The increase in funding, together with the renegotiation of the Commonwealth State Housing Agreement, provides the basis for a 10 year program to attack housing-related poverty. First Home Owners Scheme The First Home Owners Scheme has been a major success. Since it was announced, industry activity has increased by about 25 per cent and housing interest rates have fallen significantly. Against this background the income limits for the scheme have been reviewed for those who contract to buy or build a house after tonight. The upper income limit of $27,900 will remain unchanged for families, joint applicants and sole applicants with dependent children. A new threshold of $20 000 a year will apply for maximum assistance. The changes will mean that no family, joint applicant, or sole applicant with a dependent child who is currently eligible will be excluded from assistance. For sole applicants without dependants, income limits will be half those for other applicants. In reviewing income limits the Government was concerned to ensure that assistance went to those most in need. The changes to income limits for sole applicants without dependants recognise that they typically have fewer financial commitments than families. The scheme will continue to give significant support to first home buyers and the housing industry. Expenditure will be $265 million in 1984-85-an increase of over 85 per cent. This will assist a further 80,000 Australian households into home ownership in addition to the 55,000 first home buyers who were assisted under the scheme last financial year and who will continue to receive assistance this year. CAPITAL EXPENDITURE AND WORKS Total Budget payments for capital purposes (including capital grants and advances) are estimated to rise by 11 per cent to about $5630 million. Expenditure on civil works funded directly from the Budget is estimated at $497 million, an increase of over $168 million on 1983-84. This includes $127 million in Budget-financed civil works for airports including Brisbane, Perth, Darwin and Canberra. Major new projects to commence construction this year will include the Adelaide Commonwealth Centre, the Townsville Airport redevelopment and, in the defence program, the Tindal RAAF Base in the Northern Territory. In the ACT, civil works expenditure in 1984-85 is estimated at $293 million, an increase of $120 million on 1983-84. This includes $109 million for the Parliament House Construction Authority. POLICIES CONCERNING WOMEN Later tonight the Prime Minister will table a document setting out in detail an assessment of the impact of this Budget on women. Let me highlight some of its contents. Our tax cuts will be of significant benefit to working women. Our special rebate will ensure that needy women living on benefits will be saved from having to pay tax this financial year. The Government's welfare initiatives are generous and women will be the major beneficiaries of our decisions. The Government has paid particular heed to the needs of sole parents, one of the most disadvantaged groups in our society. The Government has also made provision in this Budget for the Affirmative Action Pilot Program currently being undertaken by 28 of our leading companies and three of our tertiary education institutions. Funds have been provided to allow the newly proclaimed Sex Discrimination Act to operate effectively across Australia. CULTURE, SPORT AND RECREATION The Budget provides $340 million to the ABC, an increase of nearly 13 per cent on 1983-84. The Australia Council is to receive $43.6 million for arts funding, an increase of 14 per cent, and $5.4 million has been provided for the National Institute of Dramatic Art. The Budget provides $65 million for sport and related programs in 1984-85, an increase of $24 million over last year. This includes $8.9 million for the Australian Institute of Sport-almost double the funding of two years ago. This has underpinned the facilities and coaching for many of our athletes in the Olympic Games. A new three year program costing $27 million is proposed for the construction of additional international standard sport facilities in the States and Territories. INDUSTRY ASSISTANCE AND DEVELOPMENT Tourism Reflecting the importance which the Government attaches to the growth and employment potential of this industry, funding for the Australian Tourist Commission will rise by $3.3 million to $22.8 million in 1984-85, bringing the increase over the past two years to 128 per cent. Research and Technology Transfer To encourage the introduction of new technologies in Australia's manufacturing industry, the Government has decided to establish a nation-wide advisory service on computer-assisted manufacturing at a cost of $2 million in 1984-85. Motor Vehicle Industry As part of revised assistance arrangements for the motor vehicle industry announced by the Minister for Industry and Commerce in May 1984, the Government will fund a five year program for Australian design and research activities. This year the Government will enter into commitments of up to $20 million for these activities. Primary Industry The Government fully recognises the significant contribution of primary industry to the national economy. The funding of wool promotion has at last been put on a secure and predictable basis. This year's allocation is $26 million, an increase of 30 per cent. Because of developments in financing by the Australian Wheat Board, the Wheat Finance Fund is to be wound up and returned to growers on 1 July 1985, while growers' contributions in respect of 1983-84 season deliveries-estimated to exceed $50 million-will be returned within the next few months. Trade Promotion An additional $3.4 million is provided for an expanded program of trade promotion activities, taking total expenditure for trade promotion-including the overseas promotion of rural products-to a level 36 per cent above that for 1983- 84. The increased funding will permit an intensified effort in the Japanese, Chinese and North American markets. Emphasis will be accorded to the promotion of high technology, and co-funding of trade promotion activities initiated by the States will also be undertaken. Funding under the Export Market Development Grants Scheme, which was increased by $10 million in 1983-84, has been increased by another $10 million to $125 million. Sufficient funds have been provided to meet all outstanding claims under the Export Expansion Grants Scheme which will be wound up this year following its termination by the previous Government. TRANSPORT Roads Grants to the States and the Northern Territory for roads will total $1245 million in 1984-85, an increase of 46 per cent or $394 million on the level of two years ago. Bass Strait Passenger Services A grant of $25 million is to be paid to Tasmania to complete the purchase of a replacement for the ''Empress of Australia''. This will include costs associated with the upgrading of associated facilities. The Tasmanian Government will subsequently assume responsibility for the service. DEFENCE The Budget provides $5820 million for defence, an increase of 8.1 per cent on 1983-84 outlays; the adjusted underlying real increase will be about 3.3 per cent. REVENUE MEASURES I referred earlier to the personal income tax cut and to some of the other revenue measures contained in this Budget. I now elaborate a little; additional details are being released separately. Medicare Levy In order to continue to shelter low income earners from the Medicare levy, the income thresholds at which the levy becomes payable are to be increased from 1 July 1984. For single persons the threshold will increase to $7110, or about $135 per week . For married couples and sole parents the threshold rises to $11 803, plus an additional $1330 for each child. For example, married couples with two dependent children will pay no Medicare levy until their taxable incomes exceed $14 463 per annum-almost $280 per week. Also reflecting the effects of earnings growth, we have decided to increase the ceiling on the maximum levy payment from $700 to $750 per annum with effect from 1 November 1984. Social Security Beneficiary Rebates The Government has decided to introduce special taxation rebates for unemployment, sickness and special benefit recipients. For 1984-85, the maximum rebate will be $50 for single beneficiaries and $75 for married beneficiaries. This measure will ensure that persons wholly or mainly dependent on these social security benefits do not become liable for income tax. The maximum amount of rebate will reduce by 12 1/2 cents for each dollar of taxable income in excess of $4783 for a single beneficiary and $7989 for a married beneficiary. Pensioner Rebate Following the personal income tax cut, the $250 pensioner tax rebate will now begin to shade out at the higher income of $5534. This means that single pensioners benefiting from the rebate will pay no tax until their income exceeds $106 per week. Dependent Spouse Rebate The Government has decided to remove the taxation discrimination whereby a dependent spouse rebate has been available only to taxpayers who are legally married. With effect from 1 July 1984, eligibility for the dependent spouse rebate will be extended to a de facto spouse. A housekeeper rebate will no longer be available in respect of a de facto spouse. Zone Rebates The basic amounts of income tax zone rebates for people living in remote areas are to be increased by 25 per cent, with effect from 1 November 1984. In a full year, the Zone A rebate will be $270 and the Zone B rebate will be $45. In special zone areas, the full-year rebate will be $938. The boundaries of the special zone areas are also to be adjusted to reflect the changes in town populations arising from the 1981 Census results. This adjustment will only be made, however, where it is to the advantage of taxpayers. Taxation of Wine With the introduction of the general sales tax on wine and alcoholic cider mentioned earlier, the present sales taxes applying only to imported alcoholic grape wines and alcoholic cider will be converted to customs duties with effect from 8 p.m. tonight. However, because of certain GATT obligations in respect of wine, the duties to be applied to imported alcoholic wines will be equivalent to a sales tax of 10 per cent, rather than 20 per cent. This reduction in protection is not expected to result in any significant increase in wine imports. Fortifying spirit excise paid or payable in respect of 1983-84 will be refunded in full; this will avoid the double taxation that might otherwise have been borne by fortified wines. Against this background, an independent inquiry into the grape growing and grape product industry will be held to investigate all aspects of the structure of this industry with a view to making recommendations to government to overcome the industry's economic and regional problems. Diesel Fuel Certain off-road uses of diesel fuel attract a rebate of excise duty of 7.155 cents per litre. When the system of indexing rates of excise was introduced last Budget, the diesel fuel rebate was left outside the system. The Government has now decided that the rebate will be indexed, with effect from 1 February 1985. Aviation Fuel Excises Excise duties on aviation gasoline and aviation turbine fuel will be increased by 0.25 cents per litre from 8 p.m. tonight. This measure will help to improve the level of cost recovery from the aviation industry. Bank Account Debits Tax Following a review of various aspects of the Bank Account Debits Tax, the Government has decided to permit three additional exemptions from the tax, namely: * school parents and citizens associations and other support groups for institutions which are themselves exempt; * non-business local councils and government bodies, except where they conduct substantial business activities; and * debits of less than $1. To offset the cost of these further exemptions, the rate of tax on debits of $ 10 000 or more will be increased from $1 to $1.50. Primary Producers Two measures relating particularly to primary producers will be introduced. The scheduled termination date for the immediate deduction for expenditure incurred on fencing to help eradicate bovine brucellosis and tuberculosis in livestock will be extended by two years, to 30 June 1986. Secondly, the prescribed minimum values for natural increases in livestock, which have applied since 1936, are to be increased. The new values for 1984-85 and later income years are $1 for sheep, $5 for cattle and horses, and $4 for pigs. Business Taxes I indicated earlier that the Government would be introducing significant new tax benefits for business. The transfer of losses within company groups, increased depreciation provisions for non-residential income-producing buildings , and writeoffs for mineral exploration expenditures will all enhance the prospects for a continuing investment recovery in Australia. The Government recognises that continued reform of the tax system is essential. In the context of its review of the tax laws, careful consideration will be given to the appropriate long-term tax regime for business and investment. Measures to Counter Avoidance and Evasion This Government will remain unrelenting in its efforts to counter tax avoidance and evasion. Additional measures will be taken to strengthen the collection mechanisms for various taxes, including increases in levels of penalty for late payments and other breaches of taxation laws. The Budget also provides for a significant increase in the compliance staff of the Taxation Office in order to increase the proportion of tax returns subject to audits. MONETARY POLICY The overall objectives of monetary policy in 1984-85 will continue to be to provide for strong economic growth while accommodating no more than the minimal cost and price increases that might flow from the effective operation of the Prices and Incomes Accord. In considering an appropriate monetary projection range, likely changes in the velocity of circulation of money need to be considered, as well as real growth, and the progress that can be made against inflation. Last year M3 velocity increased by about 6 per cent. Such strong growth is not unusual in the early stages of recovery. In 1984-85, however, velocity is expected to grow at a much more moderate rate of about 1 1/2 per cent. On this basis, the Government has adopted a conditional projection for M3 growth between the June quarters of 1984 and 1985 of 8-10 per cent. Monetary projection this year is complicated by a measurement problem. This arises because the removal from 1 August of maturity controls on bank deposits will enable the banks to compete for the first time for deposits which previously had to find a home with non-bank financial institutions. There is no basis on which to forecast how much of this ''re-intermediation'' will occur, but the scope is very large. To the extent that the banks attract deposits from non-bank institutions, M3 will be increased but there will be no change in underlying monetary conditions. Because of this measurement problem the Government will pay increased attention to broader monetary aggregates, which are less affected by deregulation, and to other indicators of financial conditions. As information on the extent of re-intermediation becomes available later in the year, we will review the conditional M3 projection. At that time, we will also consider whether the projection should be modified in the light of changes in the economic outlook. The Government believes that the substantial reduction in the domestic deficit of $1600 million in this Budget, supported by the major reforms instituted at the Loan Council meeting in June, will be welcomed by the financial markets. This outcome, together with the continuing progress being made against inflation, provides considerable scope for further interest rate falls during 1984-85. Consistent with the policy outlined above, the Treasury is announcing tonight details of the next bond tender for an amount of $1200 million. CONCLUSION Mr Speaker, this Budget will consolidate and strengthen the economic recovery. Within the context of a significant reduction in the Budget deficit, we have delivered a substantial tax cut and implemented a social welfare package that will be of considerable benefit to needy Australians. The reduction in the Budget deficit will help to relieve inflation and interest rate pressures. In turn, the reduction in these pressures will encourage the further strengthening of investment spending essential to economic growth and hence to the well-being of all sections of the community. The tax cuts will ensure the continuing moderation of wage pressures-moderation that has been central to putting the recovery on a sound footing. In these ways this Budget will consolidate the recovery, thereby providing scope to pursue stronger economic growth which in turn will enable us to attack the inequities that still abound in our society. I commend this Budget to the House. (The Budget Statements for 1984-85 are included as an appendix at the end of this day's proceedings.) Debate (on motion by Mr Howard) adjourned. Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation for proposed expenditure announced. Bill presented by Mr Keating, and read a first time. Mr KEATING(Blaxland-Treasurer)(8.59) — I move: That the Bill be now read a second time. This Bill seeks appropriations of the consolidated revenue fund in 1984-85 totalling $4,502,666,000. Of this amount, $1,711,770,500 was authorised by the Supply Act (No. 2) 1984-85; the balance of $2,790,895,500 would be authorised by this Bill. The Bill provides for proposed expenditure on the construction of public works and buildings, the acquisition of sites and buildings, certain advances and loans, items of plant and equipment which are clearly definable as capital expenditure and expenditure on new policy initiatives for which legislation has not previously been provided. Provision is also made for grants to the States under section 96 of the Constitution and for payments to the Northern Territory. An amount of $130m is included under the Advance to the Minister for Finance, $ 10m more than was provided in the Supply Act (No. 2) 1984-85 which this Bill, when enacted, will subsume. The need for the increase reflects pressures placed on the Advance in recent times due, inter alia, to the inclusion in the Appropriation Bill (No. 2) of programs of a kind formerly funded under special appropriations-for example the Commonwealth employment program. Details of the proposed expenditures are set out in Schedule 2 to the Bill and the main features were outlined in the Budget Speech. I commend the Bill to the House. Debate (on motion by Mr Steele Hall) adjourned. Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation for proposed expenditure announced. Bill presented by Mr Keating, and read a first time. Mr KEATING(Blaxland-Treasurer)(9.03) —I move: That the Bill be now read a second time. The purpose of the Bill is to appropriate moneys of the Consolidated Revenue Fund for the recurrent and capital expenditures of the parliamentary departments for the year ending 30 June 1985. The total amount sought is $43,680,000. Of this amount, $17,222,000 was authorised by the Supply (Parliamentary Departments ) Act 1984-85, the balance of $26,458,000 being sought in this Bill. An amount of $150,000 is included under the Advance to the President of the Senate, $50, 000 more than was provided in the Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Act 1984-85 . The increase reflects a change in approach whereby contingency amounts previously included in the individual estimates for the Senate have been excluded on the basis that urgent and unforeseen requirements may be met from the Advance. I commend the Bill to the House. Debate (on motion by Mr Steele Hall) adjourned. Mr KEATING(Blaxland-Treasurer) —I present the following papers for the information of honourable members in connection with the Budget of 1984-85: Budget statements 1984-85 Estimates of Receipts and Summary of Estimated Expenditure for the year ending 30 June 1985 Civil Works Program 1984-85 Payments to or for the States, the Northern Territory and Local Government Authorities 1984-85 Government Securities on Issue at 30 June 1984 Australia's Overseas Development Assistance Program 1984-85 National Income and Expenditure 1983-84 Income Tax Statistics Ordered that the papers be printed. Mr YOUNG(Port Adelaide-Leader of the House) —by leave-I move: That standing order 48A, as amended by the sessional order on 29 February 1984 relating to the adjournment of the House, and standing order 103, 11 o'clock rule, be suspended for this sitting. I have moved this motion for the purpose of making sure that all the Budget measures will be introduced. Question resolved in the affirmative. Mr HAWKE(Wills-Prime Minister) —For the information of honourable members, I present a document entitled 'Women's Budget Program: An Assessment of the Impact on Women of the 1984-85 Budget'. This document represents the first occasion on which the Federal Government has published a comprehensive assessment of the impact of a Federal Budget on women. Bills presented by Mr Hurford, and read a first time. Mr HURFORD(Adelaide-Minister for Housing and Construction and Minister Assisting the Treasurer)(9.07) —I move: That the Bills be now read a second time. These nine Bills will give effect to the proposal announced in the Budget Speech to impose sales tax on Australian alcoholic grape wines and ciders and to adjust the level of sales tax on non-grape wines and imported grape wines and ciders. The Bills will impose tax on these beverages at the new rate of 10 per cent. These Bills do not change any of the exemptions from sales tax, nor any of the classifications of goods into particular tax rates. These matters are covered by the schedules to the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act. Some deletions of existing exemptions, as well as changes in the sales tax classification of goods, to give effect to Budget announcements, are, however, proposed by the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Amendment Bill 1984 that I will introduce shortly. That Bill will specify the alcoholic grape wines, non-grape wines and ciders to be subject to the new 10 per cent rate of tax to be imposed by this Bill. As the new rate of sales tax is to be imposed from 8 p. m. tonight these Bills, when enacted, will take effect at that time. The sales tax is basically a tax on wholesale sales and, in the ordinary case of sales by a wholesaler to a retailer, the new rate of tax will accordingly apply to sales made at or after 8 p.m. tonight. As usual, an explanatory memorandum covering technical aspects of these Bills and the Sales Tax ( Exemptions and Classifications) Amendment Bill providing a detailed statement of the effect of these measures is being circulated to honourable members. The result of the imposition of the new 10 per cent sales tax rate and other changes announced in the Budget will be a net increase in revenue estimated at some $44m in 1984-85 and $56m in a full year. I commend the Bills to the House. Debate (on motion by Mr Braithwaite) adjourned. Bill presented by Mr Hurford, and read a first time. Mr HURFORD(Adelaide-Minister for Housing and Construction and Minister Assisting the Treasurer)(9.09) —I move: That the Bill be now read a second time. This Bill will amend the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act to alter the sales tax classification of certain goods, principally beer, wine, cider and similar alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages, as announced by the Treasurer (Mr Keating) in the Budget Speech. The Bill will also restore an exemption from sales tax, removed in 1983, for film used in the production of commercial motion picture films. The Bill will eliminate avenues for avoidance of sales tax through the export and re-import of goods, as announced by the Treasurer on 7 May this year. The Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act , which this Bill amends, classifies particular goods as exempt from sales tax, specifies the circumstances of the exemption, and places other goods in one or other of the tax rate categories. Goods not specifically dealt with by the Act are taxable at the general rate of 20 per cent. I turn now to discuss in more detail the changes proposed by this Bill. Under the present law, Australian beer is exempt from sales tax, but beer containing more than 1.15 per cent alcohol, that is, full strength and low alcohol beer, is subject to excise. With the introduction of very low alcohol beers, that is, beer containing not more than 1.15 per cent alcohol, an undesirable situation has arisen. Presently, the higher alcohol beers are excisable and brewed soft drinks are taxable at the general rate of 20 per cent, but very low alcohol beers are free from both excise and sales tax. The Government believes that there is no basis for this discrimination in the case of very low alcohol beers and, accordingly, they are now to be subject to tax at the same rate as brewed soft drinks. This change will operate from 8 o'clock tonight. The sales tax treatment of very low alcohol imported beers, which are presently taxable at the general rate, will remain the same. I have already mentioned, in my comments on the Sales Tax Amendment Bills Nos 1 to 9, that the Government has decided to impose sales tax on Australian alcoholic grape wine and cider and to adjust the level of sales tax on non-grape wines and on imported grape wines and ciders. Under amendments proposed by those Bills, sales tax will be imposed on such beverages at the new rate of 10 per cent. The Government's decision follows a review of the overall sales tax and Customs duty treatment of wine and cider. Apart from Australian wine and cider, virtually the whole range of alcoholic beverages bears some kind of federal tax. The Government believes that it is inappropriate to maintain any exception. At present, Australian grape wines and ciders are exempt from sales tax. Imported grape wines and ciders, as well as all non-grape wines, however, are taxable at the general rate of 20 per cent. The Bill will classify, in a new Sixth Schedule to the Act, those wines and ciders that are to be subject to the new 10 per cent rate of tax. Specifically, cider, mead, perry, sake and grape wine, as well as other similar fermented alcoholic beverages such as fruit wine, vegetable wine and wine made from other food sources, will be covered by the new Sixth Schedule. However, alcoholic beverages containing not more than 1.15 per cent alcohol, generally regarded as non-alcoholic, and those that consist of, or contain, beer, spirits, other than fortifying spirits, liqueurs or spirituous liquors will be excluded. In the case of imported grape wine, which is presently subject to sales tax at the general rate of 20 per cent, the effect of the change proposed by the Bill will be to reduce the rate of sales tax to 10 per cent. The Government has decided, however , to retain the protection presently accorded to locally produced wine. Accordingly, an additional ad valorem Customs duty will be imposed on imported alcoholic grape wines at a rate equivalent to a 10 per cent sales tax. My colleague the Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry and Commerce (Mr John Brown) will shortly introduce the Customs Tariff Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1984 for this purpose. Additionally, the Bill will alter the sales tax treatment of Australian and imported non-alcoholic, non-grape wines. These wines, which are presently taxable at 20 per cent, will now be exempt from tax. This change too will operate from 8 o'clock tonight. I mention that Australian non-alcoholic grape wine and cider will remain exempt from sales tax. A deficiency in the law, which has led to a sales tax avoidance practice involving the exportation and importation or re-importation of certain goods, will also be countered by measures in this Bill. The Government's clearly enunciated policy is to smash the tax avoidance industry, and that policy applies equally to the sales tax avoidance industry. This Bill will alter the exemption from sales tax which is presently available for certain goods which, upon importation, qualify for duty-free admission by virtue of provisions in the Customs tariff. As the law is presently framed, a wide range of usually taxable goods, both imported and of Australian manufacture, could be obtained tax-free by being exported and subsequently imported or re-imported, other than as passengers' personal effects. Apart from motor vehicles, there was little or no specific restriction on the wide range, value and quantity of goods which might be involved. The loophole was therefore being used to avoid tax, particularly on goods subject to high rates of tax, otherwise payable on taxable goods, including furs, jewellery, boats and electronic equipment. By this Bill the intended operation of the law, which is to exempt from sales tax at the time of importation or re-importation two particular classes of goods , will be restored. The first class comprises Australian manufactured goods which would have been exempt if they had gone into use or consumption in Australia, but because they are first exported and then imported back into Australia, become taxable by reason of being imported goods. The second class comprises goods in respect of which sales tax has already been paid and has not been refunded. The changes will prevent the loss of many millions of dollars of potential revenue. This particular measure will be made effective in relation to importations and re-importations of goods occurring after 7 May 1984, which was the date on which the Treasurer announced that the law would be amended in this way. The final measure proposed by this Bill is to provide an exemption from sales tax for certain cinematograph film for use in the production of commercial motion picture films. Whilst most cinematograph film used in the production of motion picture films can qualify for exemption as an aid to manufacture, in some situations for technical reasons only, certain classes of film can fall outside the scope of the present exemption. This Government has accepted claims by the motion picture industry that this is anomalous when compared with the 'aids to manufacture' exemption available to other classes of manufacturers. The Bill will correct this anomaly. The alteration will apply on and after tomorrow, 22 August 1984. As I mentioned earlier in my speech on the sales tax amendment Bills Nos 1 to 9, an explanatory memorandum covering technical aspects of those Bills and this Bill is being made available to honourable members. This provides greater detail on the goods affected by these measures. I commend the Bill to the House. Debate (on motion by Mr Braithwaite) adjourned. Bill presented by Mr John Brown, and read a first time. Mr JOHN BROWN(Parramatta-Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism, Minister for Administrative Services and Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry and Commerce)(9.16) —I move: That the Bill be now read a second time. The Customs Tariff Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1984 which is now before the House proposes amendments to the Customs Tariff Act 1982 which are to operate on and from 8 p.m. tonight. The changes contained in the Bill are complementary measures to changes in the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Act which were introduced earlier this evening. The sales tax amendments impose sales tax on locally produced and imported alcoholic wine and cider and on beers with an alcoholic strength of not more than 1.15 per cent by volume. The requirements under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade necessitate that internal taxes be applied equally to imported and like domestic products. The sales tax legislation already introduced carries this out. Equalisation of the sales tax on the imported and local products does, however, alter the levels of assistance accorded the locally produced goods. For this reason it is necessary to amend the relevant rates in the Customs tariff. In each instance the sales tax that applied to the imported goods was 20 per cent. In regard to beer and cider the full 20 per cent rate has been converted into an equivalent customs duty. However, for grape wine Australia has entered into commitments under the GATT not to increase the customs duty above certain specified bound levels. Negotiations have been taking place with the principal countries supplying wine to the Australian market with a view to accommodating the sales tax within the level of the binding on the customs duty. With these considerations in mind, the Government has decided to replace the present sales tax on imported wine by a customs duty equivalent to a sales tax of 10 per cent. This action is seen as being fully consistent with Australia's obligations under the GATT. I commend the Bill to the House. Debate (on motion by Mr Braithwaite) adjourned. Mr JOHN BROWN(Parramatta-Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism, Minister for Administrative Services and Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry and Commerce)(9.21) —I move: Customs Tariff Proposals Nos. 7 to 9 (1984), Excise Tariff Proposals No. 2 ( 1984) and the Customs Tariff (Coal Export Duty) Proposals (1984). The proposals I have just tabled relate to proposed alterations to the Customs Tariff Act 1982. The proposals formally place before Parliament, as required by law, tariff alterations made by Commonwealth of Australia Gazette notice during the recent recess. Customs Tariff Proposals No. 7 (1984), operative on and from 1 July 1984, propose the deletion of certain phasing rates of duty contained in Schedule 3 to the Customs Tariff Act. These rates have become redundant by the passage of time and their retention is therefore unnecessary. These changes have no effect in relation to the rates of duty currently applying to the goods involved. Proposals No. 7 also contain six changes to the Customs Tariff Act which are of an administrative character. These changes relate to: (1) The insertion of a new provision for simple amine salts of the chemicals 2, 4-D and 2, 4, 5-T in schedule 3 to the Customs Tariff Act in order to comply with a ruling of the Customs Co-operation Council. Duty rates are not affected. (2) An amendment to sub-item 56.07.1 in Schedule 3 to the Customs Tariff Act. This change avoids possible problems in applying the terms of that sub-item in the absence of any tolerance provisions in the Customs Tariff Act in relation to the precise content of materials of which goods are composed. Duty rates are not affected. (3) Amendments to apply minimum rates of duty to diving boots and ski boots in Schedule 3 to the Customs Tariff Act 1982. This action is in accord with the Government's sectoral policy for the textiles, clothing and footwear industries. (4) An amendment to specifically provide for hot stamping machines in tariff item 84.35 in Schedule 3. This change follows a ruling of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The rates of duty which applied to these machines under their previous classification are transferred to the item in which the Tribunal has ruled the goods are classified. This action restores the levels of assistance determined by the Government for these goods. (5) The introduction of a developing country margin of preference of five percentage points for tariff sub-item 85.19.9 and the abolition of the developing country quota applying to that classification. (6) The amendment of concessional tariff item 53 and the creation of a new item 55 in Part 1 of schedule 4 to the Act. These items provide for separate concessional arrangements for goods to which a commercial tariff concession order applies and which are subject to an agreement between Australia and Canada under the Canada-Australia trade agreement or Australia and New Zealand under the Closer Economic Relations trade agreement. The general tariff rate applying to goods entered under these items has been reduced from 6 per cent to 5 per cent for tariff simplification reasons. Finally, proposals No. 7 contain a change to legal note 2 in Part II of Schedule 4 to the Customs Tariff Act relating to the concessional entry of certain handicraft goods. The change corrects a drafting anomaly in the note and does not affect duty rates. Customs Tariff Proposals No. 8 (1984), operative on and from 6 July 1984, implement the Government's decision on the Industries Assistance Commission's report on computer hardware and software; typewriters, calculating and other office machines; parts and accessories and recording media. Under the decision the new duties applying to goods are as follows: (1) Computers, office machines and other goods classified within tariff items 84.52, 84.53, 84.54 or 84.55 of Schedule 3 to the Act, with the exception of cathode-ray display terminals, stapling machines and parts-dutiable at a general rate of 2 per cent; (2) cathode-ray display terminals classified within tariff item 84.53 and sub- item 84.54.9-dutiable at a general rate of 15 per cent phasing to 2 per cent after one year; (3) stapling machines and parts therefore classified within tariff sub-items 84 .54.1 and 84.55.1 respectively-dutiable at a general rate of 15 per cent; (4) diodes, transistors and similar semi-conductor devices, light emitting diodes and electronic micro-circuits classified within tariff sub-item 85.21.1- dutiable at a general rate of 2 per cent; (5) other electronic components classified in tariff sub-item 85.21.9-dutiable at a rate of 35 per cent phasing to 20 per cent after three years; (6) computer software classified within tariff sub-item 92.12.1-admissible free of duty; (7) rigid disc packs or rigid disc cartridges classified within tariff sub-item 92.12.1 or paragraph 92.12.21-dutiable at a general rate of 20 per cent; and (8) other magnetic recording media classified within tariff sub-item 92.12.1 or paragraph 92.12.29-dutiable at a general rate of 30 per cent phasing to 20 per cent after two years. There is no change in the duties applying to other goods included in this report. Proposals No. 8 also align the terminology used in legal note 3 to chapter 84 of Schedule 3 to the Customs Tariff Act on the equivalent note in the Customs Co-operation Council nomenclature. Finally, these proposals insert a new note 10 to Chapter 84 to clarify the scope of the phrase 'cathode-ray display terminals'. Customs Tariff Proposals No. 9 (1984), operative on and from 18 July 1984, contain a change arising from the Government's decision on the Industries Assistance Commission's interim report on electric motors. Under the decision the general rate of duty applying to alternating current motors classified within tariff sub-item 85.01.2 is 30 per cent. This rate restores the duty to the level applying immediately prior to 1 October 1983. The rate will be reviewed by the Government following receipt of the Industries Assistance Commission's final report which is due on 16 April 1985. A summary of alterations contained in these proposals has been circulated to honourable members. I commend the proposals to the House. Excise Tariff Proposals No. 2 (1984) which I have just tabled formally place before the Parliament, as required by law, alterations to the Excise Tariff Act 1921, introduced during the winter recess by Gazette notices, under the authority of section 160B of the Excise Act. The proposals abolish the excise duty on spirit used to fortify Australian grape wine, with effect from 8 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on 22 June 1984 as announced by the Treasurer (Mr Keating) on the same date. The proposals give effect to the excise duty arrangements for indigenous crude oil operative from 1 July 1984 as announced jointly by the Treasurer and the Minister for Resources and Energy (Senator Walsh) on 18 April 1984. Essentially, these arrangements impose an excise duty on 'new' oil from on-shore and existing off-shore projects. The proposals also decrease the excise duty on naturally occurring liquefied petroleum gas from $49.23 to $36.96 per kilolitre on and from 1 July 1984 as announced by the Minister for Resources and Energy on 27 June 1984. In addition, the proposals increase the number of decimal places in the excise rate for beer from 2 to 5. This change took effect on and from 18 July 1984. Finally, the proposals abolish, on and from 18 July 1984, the requirement that Australian gin must be made only from grape, grain or fruit spirit. A similar requirement for imported gin was abolished from 1 January 1983 . I commend the proposals to the House. The Customs Tariff (Coal Export Duty) Proposals (1984) that I have just tabled formally place before Parliament, as required by law, an alteration to the Customs Tariff (Coal Export Duty) Act 1975 introduced during the winter recess by Gazette Notice No. 1 (1984) under the authority of section 273EA of the Customs Act. Customs Tariff (Coal Export Duty) Proposals (1984) provide for exemption from payment of coal export duty on high quality coking coal produced from certain open cut mines if specified quantities of underground coal from those mines are included in export shipments. These changes, which operate on and from 28 May 1984, were announced by the Minister for Resources and Energy on 29 May 1984. I commend the proposals to honourable members. Debate (on motion by Mr Braithwaite) adjourned. Mr JOHN BROWN(Parramatta-Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism, Minister for Administrative Services and Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry and Commerce)(9.33) —I move: Excise Tariff Proposals No. 3 (1984) and the Customs Tariff Proposals No. 10 ( 1984). Excise Tariff Proposals No. 3 and Customs Tariff proposals No. 10 which I have just tabled introduce certain tariff changes foreshadowed by the Treasurer (Mr Keating) in his Budget Speech. These proposals are operative from 8 o'clock this evening. Excise Tariff Proposals No. 3 lower the rate of duty in respect of certain beer and redefine beer for the purposes of the Excise Tariff Act. These proposals also increase duties in respect of manufactured tobacco products and aviation fuels. Customs Tariff Proposals No. 10 make complementary changes to the Customs Tariff Act in respect of the duties applying to certain beer, manufactured tobacco products and aviation fuels. Summaries of alterations contained in these proposals have been circulated to honourable members. I commend the proposals to the House. Debate (on motion by Mr Braithwaite) adjourned. Bill-by leave-presented by Dr Blewett, and read a first time. Dr BLEWETT(Bonython-Minister for Health)(9.34) —I move: That the Bill be now read a second time. This Bill is an omnibus Bill implementing many of the major social security and repatriation initiatives of the 1984-85 Budget. It also gives effect to the Government's policy on the asset testing of pensions announced by the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) in the House on 1 June 1984. The Budget measures contained in this Bill amount to an increase in expenditure on income security and social welfare of $397m in 1984-85 and $616m in a full year. On top of the $938m increase in expenditure that automatically results in 1984-85 from factors such as increased numbers of pensioners and beneficiaries, and the indexation of pensions and benefits, this increase is considerable and demonstrates the Government's commitment to improving the lot of the poor and disadvantaged. It has necessarily been achieved within an overall economic strategy that, of itself, also will be of substantial benefit to low income groups by reducing unemployment and inflation. The Bill provides substantial increases in assistance for those most in need. For example, a sole parent with one child and renting privately will receive in November 1984 up to $11.50 a week, or 9.6 per cent, more as a result of the measures contained in this Bill. At the same time, the Bill also provides for the application of an assets test to ensure that resources will not be dissipated on those who do not require assistance. I will give details of the financial impact of these measures as I deal with each major initiative. BUDGET MEASURES Social Security Act 1947 The major Budget initiatives dealt with in Part II of this Bill consolidate and extend the steps taken by the Government in last year's Budget to provide additional assistance to those in greatest need in our community. The Bill provides for a special increase in the basic rate of all indexed pensions and benefits for single people and married couples. Additional assistance will be provided to single adult unemployment beneficiaries without dependants, to private renters, and to pensioners, beneficiaries and other low income families with children. Increase in Pensions and Benefits One of the Government's major concerns is to improve the adequacy of pension and benefit rates by raising, over time, the basic pension and benefit rates to 25 per cent of average weekly earnings. As progress towards this objective, we have decided to increase the rate of all indexed pensions and benefits by $2.50 a week for single people from November 1984. Married couples will receive an extra $4.20 a week. In the absence of these increases, the rates of indexed pensions and benefits would have remained unchanged in November 1984 due to the negative movement in the consumer price index in the six months ending June 1984. Without this increase, the single pension as a proportion of average weekly earnings would have represented about 23.2 per cent. It is estimated that this measure will lift the single pension as a proportion of average weekly earnings in November 1984 to about 23.8 per cent. The maximum rate of pension or benefit for single adults, other than unemployment beneficiaries with no dependants, for whom special provision is made in this Bill, will be lifted to $91.90 a week, and for a married couple to $153.30 a week. Under the income test, a single person without children will be able to have income of $213.80 a week before the pension ceases. For married couples without children, pension will cease at $356.60 a week. These limits are higher where there are children. The limits are also higher for age pensioners aged 70 or over, to whom a more lenient income test applies. Some 1,934,000 pensioners and 213,500 beneficiaries will benefit from this initiative at an estimated cost of $192.1m in the current financial year and $279m in a full year. The new rates for pensions and supporting parents' benefits will operate from pay day 1 November 1984, while unemployment, sickness and special benefit instalments will be paid at the new rates on and after that date. Initiatives for the Unemployed One of the Government's major election commitments was to restore progressively the rate of unemployment benefit for single adults to parity with the standard rate of pension. Before November 1978, the single adult rate for unemployment beneficiaries was set at the same level as the single rate of pension and sickness benefit. After its exclusion from automatic pension and benefit indexation arrangements by the previous Government, its real value declined substantially. Single adult unemployment beneficiaries were thereby subjected to the greatest discrimination and required to bear the greatest burden during the economic recession. Since coming to office, we have moved progressively to end this discrimination by closing the gap between this group and single pensioners and sickness beneficiaries. We increased the rate by $4.25 a week in May last year, and then by $4.95 a week in November 1983. As well, we provided for automatic indexation of the rate from May this year, which added $3 a week, in addition to a special increase in May of $2 a week. In keeping with our election commitment, this Bill provides further assistance. From November 1984, the rate of unemployment benefit for single people aged 18 years and over who have no dependants will be increased by $2.50, bringing that rate to $81.10 a week, and, it will be increased by $2 a week, in addition to any automatic indexation increase, from May 1985. These initiatives will affect some 381,000 beneficiaries at an estimated cost of $39.4m in the current financial year and $89.4m in a full year . In our first Budget, we increased the rate of benefit for single unemployment and sickness beneficiaries aged 16 and 17 years by $5, to $45 a week, from November 1983. This Bill provides for a further $5 a week increase for this group from November 1984, where they have been in continuous receipt of an income security payment for 6 months. An estimated average of some 13,600 young beneficiaries will benefit from this increase. The estimated cost will be $2.3m in the current financial year and $3.5m in a full year. To ensure that single beneficiaries aged 16 and 17 years with dependants receive the same level of basic assistance as other single pensioners and beneficiaries caring for dependent children, their maximum rate of benefit will be increased to the standard rate of pension from November 1984. Normal indexation provisions will apply in future. This will be of particular benefit in tragic cases where the loss of both parents has given young people the responsibility of caring for younger brothers and sisters. An estimated 300 beneficiaries will benefit from this initiative at an estimated cost of $0.5m in the current financial year and $0.7m in a full year. Assistance to Renters Rent assistance is available at the moment for pensioners, supporting parent beneficiaries and long term sickness beneficiaries, that is, those of 6 or more weeks standing, who have little or no income apart from the pension or benefit and pay private rent or lodging. The maximum rate of payment currently is $10 a week. In recognition of the particular difficulties faced by people forced to pay high rents in the private market, the maximum rate of rent assistance will be increased by 50 per cent to $15 a week from November 1984. This will significantly improve the level of assistance to eligible pensioners and beneficiaries who rent privately. The rate of incentive allowance paid to people in sheltered workshops and to invalid pensioners undertaking activity therapy and adult training programs, will also be increased to $15 a week from November 1984. Some 288,000 pensioners and 17,300 sickness beneficiaries will benefit from this initiative, at an estimated cost of $46m in the current financial year and $66.6m in a full year. Assistance for Pensioners, Beneficiaries and other Low Income Families with Children In keeping with this Government's strong commitment to improving the level of assistance provided to low income families with dependent children, we have built on the priority we gave these families in last year's Budget by again increasing payments to them. From November 1984 the maximum rates of additional pension or benefit paid for each child of a pensioner or beneficiary and the family income supplement paid to assist low income working families, will be lifted by $2 to $14 a week per child. Together with the $2 increase also provided last year, these payments will have been increased by 40 per cent since 1983 when this Government came to office. These measures will benefit an estimated 287,000 pensioner and 128,500 beneficiary families, as well as 27,000 families in receipt of the family income supplement. They will cost an estimated $60.8m in the current financial year and $89.5m in a full year. The Bill also provides for a 25 per cent increase in the rate of mother's/ guardian's allowance from November 1984, bringing the maximum rate to $10 a week . This allowance is provided in recognition of the greater needs of sole parents relative to other pensioners and beneficiaries with dependent children, and is paid in addition to additional pension or benefit paid for each child. An estimated 258,000 pensioners and beneficiaries will benefit from this measure at an estimated cost of $18.5m in the current financial year and $26.8m in a full year. Repatriation Act 1920 Repatriation budget initiatives are also dealt with in Part II of this Bill. Pension increases are to extend to service pensioners and to those in receipt of war or defence widows' pensions. In addition, increases are made in the rates of pensions payable to orphans, pension additions for certain amputations or loss of vision, and attendant allowance. Other initiatives for increases in recreation transport allowance, clothing allowance and funeral benefit will be achieved by amendment of regulations. Increase in Pensions and Allowances Repatriation service pensions are similar to age and invalid pensions except that, where granted on the ground of age, they are available at the age of 60 for men and 55 for women. Service pension rates are calculated by reference to the rates of age pension payable under the Social Security Act 1947, and accordingly, single service pensioners receive an increase of $2.50 a week and married couples will receive an increase of $4.20 a week from 8 November 1984. Some 401,000 service pensioners will benefit from this initiative. War and defence widows will also receive an additional $2.50 a week to maintain parity with social security widow's pensions. This initiative will affect some 59,000 war and defence widows. Increases in additional pension for children, guardian's allowance and rent assistance, which apply to social security pensioners, will also flow to service pensioners in similar circumstances. Some 5,600 repatriation pensioners will benefit from increases in additional pension for children and a further 300 families will benefit from increases in guardian's allowance. Some 12,000 service pensioners are affected by our initiative in relation to rent assistance. These measures will cost an estimated $37.3m in the current financial year and $60.3m in a full year. The Bill provides for increases in allowances paid to veterans suffering certain amputations or loss of vision, in attendant allowance and in pensions paid to orphans. The increases will have effect from 8 November 1984 and represent movements in the consumer price index in the twelve months since increases in last year's Budget. Additions to pension may vary according to the type of disability. The range of benefits will be from $5.50 per week for loss of a leg below the knee, up to $35.90 a week for the loss of both legs. These amounts represent an addition to any general rate disability pension otherwise payable. Higher amounts for certain other amputations are adjusted automatically in line with any movements in the consumer price index and were increased in May of this year. They will remain unchanged in November 1984 due to the negative movement in the consumer price index in the six months ending June 1984. The rate of attendant allowance is to be increased from $25.90 to $26.90 a week in the case of the veteran who is blind or is suffering a cerebro-spinal injury. In the case of a veteran who has both arms amputated or who is blind and has lost hearing or speech, the allowance is to be increased from $51.80 to $53.80. This allowance is also paid in addition to any general disability pension. A double orphan's pension will be increased from $36.90 to $38.40 a week while the increase for a single orphan will be from $18.45 to $19.20 a week. These measures will cost an estimated $70,000 in the current financial year and $100, 000 in a full year. The opportunity has been taken to make a number of minor consequential amendments to the Acts dealt with in this Bill, to update the indexed rates of pensions and benefits to reflect the actual position of those rates as at November 1984. ASSETS TESTS In his statement to the House on 1 June 1984, the Prime Minister announced the Government's decisions on the report of the Panel of Review of the Proposed Income and Assets Test. The Prime Minister said: It is time for us all to recognise that the real issue is not whether we should have an assets test, but what is the fairest and best form of assets test. As long as we have a needs-based welfare system, it is necessary to have a measure of need which takes account fully of the financial resources of a person . Clearly, it is not fair for those with little or no assets to be treated on the same basis as those with substantial assets. Yet this is the effect of a means test which looks only to a person's income. Traditionally, the measure of need in the Australian social security system has been a means test based on both income and assets. In 1976 the assets component of the means test was removed. Since then, there has been widespread concern about wealthy people receiving a pension, especially where their asset wealth was arranged to avoid producing income. Inevitably, the absence of an assets test provided greater opportunities for the circumvention of the income test. Avoidance schemes are now widely available and readily accessible. If no steps are taken to discourage the proliferation of these schemes, basic inequities are increased, resources are misdirected, and public confidence in the pension system is undermined. The Government believes it is necessary to take account of both assets and income in any pensions test in order for it to be both a fair measure of need and equitable to all members of the community. The key features of the assets test are as follows: The test will apply to all social security and repatriation service pensions that are currently subject to the income test, but the majority of people receiving these pensions will not be affected by the assets test. It will not apply to blind pensions, to unemployment, sickness or special benefits, to repatriation war or defence widows' pensions, or to repatriation disability pensions. It will come into effect on pay day 21 March 1985 for social security pensions and pay day 14 March 1985 for repatriation service pensions. The principal home owned and occupied by the pensioner, no matter what its value, is completely excluded from the test. So is that part of the land surrounding the home, known as 'curtilage', that is used for domestic purposes. The land allowed for domestic purposes cannot exceed the size of a normal building block in the immediate area and also cannot exceed two hectares, which is approximately five acres. In the case of a farm, market garden, hobby farm or bush block, this means that an area of up to two hectares will be treated as ' curtilage' if it is used mainly for domestic purposes. Other exemptions include prepaid funeral expenses, including the cost of a cemetery plot, awards for valour not held for investment or hobby purposes, and special aids for disabled people such as wheelchairs, hearing aids, and orthopaedic irons and braces. The first $70,000 of other assets is exempt for single pensioners who live in their own homes. For married couples who occupy their own homes, the first $100, 000 of other assets is exempt. These exemption levels are $50,000 higher for non -home owners such as people renting. The eligibility limits for fringe benefits and for repatriation medical treatment for service pensioners are $80,000 for single persons and $115,000 for married couples living in their own homes. An additional $50,000 is added to these limits for non-home owners. All these limits will be indexed annually for movements in the consumer price index. These limits, in conjunction with the exemptions outlined above, are most reasonable and give due recognition to people's efforts in accumulating assets to provide themselves with financial security. At the same time, they will ensure that the misdirection of resources to people with substantial wealth who do not have a real need for pensions is addressed. Above these limits, assets will have the effect of reducing the maximum rate of pension by $26 a year for every $250 of assets, that is, by $1 per fortnight for each $250 of assessable assets. On the basis of estimated rates of pension applying in March 1985, no pension will be payable where assessable assets exceed about $116,000 or $177,000 respectively for single pensioners and married couples who occupy their own homes. For those who do not occupy their own homes, the corresponding amounts are $166,000 and $227,000. The assets test and the current income test will apply separately but only one will determine the amount of pension to be paid. The actual rate payable will be the lower of the rates produced by the income or the assets test. The value of assets to be taken into account will be their net market value. This means the amount of money a person could reasonably expect to receive if the assets were to be sold, less any debts on that asset such as a registered mortgage or a hire purchase debt. It does not mean the amount paid for the asset, its insured value or its replacement cost. To minimise intrusion into the personal affairs of a pensioner, a net market value of $10,000 is set on contents of the pensioner's principal home and other personal effects where they are used primarily within the home for private and domestic use. The valuation of assets in this area is based largely on self- assessment. Pensioners can claim a lower amount if they consider $10,000 to be in excess of the actual net market value of these assets. Where they consider that the net market value of those assets exceeds $10,000, people will be required to notify that value. The departments of Social Security and Veterans' Affairs will normally accept the pensioner's advice; only where there is strong evidence suggesting that there has been a substantial undervaluation or overvaluation will the departments query the information supplied. Any such follow-up would be by telephone or mail. Officers of the departments will be available to help pensioners fill in the form in their own homes in circumstances of ill health. In no case, however, will officers enter a home to value or check the valuation of household contents or personal effects. In cases where professional valuation of assets such as real estate, farms or businesses is required, the valuation will be arranged through the Australian Taxation Office at no cost to the pensioner. Special arrangements will apply to people who move from their home into a nursing home, mental hospital or long term hospital care and retain ownership of their former home, and to other people who are temporarily absent from their home. In the case of people who move into a nursing home, the value of their former home will continue to be exempt for two years after they enter the nursing home or similar institution. This benefits mainly single people as the home is exempt for a married couple as long as one remains in the home. For those who are temporarily absent from their homes, the value of their home will continue to be exempt for up to one year. Periods of absence prior to March 1985 when the assets test starts are not counted in calculating these exempting periods. There are a wide variety of arrangements under which people enter aged persons homes. Where such a home is the principal residence and pensioners have acquired a right or interest in relation to the home, such as a right to accommodation for life, they will be allowed the home owner's exemption, and any charge or donation paid to obtain such accommodation or equity in the home would be exempt . Other people in aged persons homes who have no right or interest in the home, will be allowed the extra $50,000 exemption as non-home owners. The Bill contains provisions to ensure that the income or assets test is not circumvented by pensioners depriving themselves of income or assets without receiving adequate value in return. Similar provisions apply in the current income test but, in the absence of an assets test, they have had limited effect. However, to allow for modest gifts, such as to relatives or charities, pensioners will be permitted to dispose of assets to the value of $2,000 if single or $4,000 combined for a married couple, in each year without affecting pension entitlement. As announced by the Prime Minister in the House on 1 June 1984, any gifts or other forms of divestment which occurred on or after that date can affect pension once the test is introduced. These provisions will not, however, prevent pensioners selling or reducing their assets for legitimate reasons, such as buying consumer goods, maintaining or improving their homes, or financing holidays. Their purpose is to ensure that people cannot avoid the test, and thereby continue to receive a pension, by transferring or gifting their assets to family or friends. Public subsidy of such arrangements is not a purpose of the pension system. The exclusion of the principal home and the asset exemption levels mean that the assets test will not affect the majority of pensioners. However, special provision is made to ensure that people affected by the assets test are not placed in severe financial hardship. In keeping with the intention of the assets test, these provisions will generally apply only where it would be unreasonable or impossible to sell or raise money on an asset, and that as a result of not exempting all or part of the assets the pensioner would have insufficient income . They will be administered on a case by case examination of individual circumstances, but will not be generally available to people whose hardship results from having deprived themselves of assets or income. In addition, people of age pension age who are affected by the assests test and have at least 70 per cent of their assets excluding exempt property such as their principal home in non-liquid form may, if they choose, be paid a loan. The loan is payable on the basis that the assets test does not apply, and is the difference between the pension payable under the income test and any pension that would otherwise have been payable under the assets test. In line with the recommendation of the Gruen Panel, interest on the loan will be levied at a commercial rate. For this purpose, it has been decided to use a rate related to the most common rate charged by trading banks on overdrafts of less then $100, 000. This is currently 13.5 per cent. It is intended to apply the rate prevailing at July each year for each succeeding 12 months. The value of the loan, plus interest, will be a statutory charge on the person's assets. Generally, the loan will be recoverable only from the person's estate, but in no case will the value of an estate be reduced below $100,000. Social security pensioners unhappy with decisions made under the assets test will be able to utilise the established appeals system. In the first instance, they will have the right to have decisions which affect them reconsidered by a Department of Social Security review officer. If such a review is unsuccessful, they can seek further review by the Social Security Appeals Tribunal. An additional right of appeal exists to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. Under the Repatriation Legislation Amendment Bill 1984, which is presently before the Parliament, a review process will be provided for people dissatisfied with service pension decisions. Reviews will be conducted by senior delegates of the Repatriation Commission. If a further review of the merits of the case is desired, a service pensioner can appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. These provisions will apply from 1 January 1985 and, therefore, be in operation for service pensioners affected by the assets test. It is difficult to estimate the overall effect of the assets test on outlays, owing to the lack of data on pensioners' assets holdings and income distribution . When the assets test is in full effect in 1985-86, it is expected to save in the order of $60m in pension outlays. After allowing for the costs of administration, the net savings will be about $50m. Net savings will rise steadily in subsequent years with the number of pensioners, and increasing wealth of potential pensioners. For example, it could be expected that Australians in future will take more assets to retirement through the growth of entitlement to superannuation lump sums, and through the coming to retirement of a generation whose lifetime accumulation of assets, unlike their parents, has not been affected by the Depression and the Second World War. The savings in later years also will be greater to the extent that artificial schemes to avoid the income test would have proliferated in the absence of an assets test. Establishment costs are higher than on-going administrative costs. This, together with the commencement of the operation of the test in March 1985, means that there will be a net cost of about $12m in 1984-85. Savings in pension outlays are estimated to be about $18m and establishment costs are estimated to be about $30m. The assets test seeks to reduce significant inequities in the current pensions income test and to address the increasingly important problem of income test avoidance. Most importantly, it strengthens our capacity to provide further increases in assistance for Australians in need through the types of measures we have introduced in this Bill, in the period ahead when the ratio of aged to working Australians is going to be rising. The majority of pensioners will be unaffected by the introduction of the assets test. Those who will be affected will be those who will be able to adequately support themselves without a pension. The system of administration depends heavily on self-declaration, which makes the administration less costly and less intrusive. Overall, it is a simple and fair system of assets testing. Mr Deputy Speaker, the measures contained in this Bill demonstrate the Government's commitment to assisting those most in need in our community. I commend the Bill to the House. Debate (on motion by Mr Braithwaite) adjourned. Bill-by leave-presented by Mr Dawkins, and read a first time. Mr DAWKINS(Fremantle-Minister for Finance)(10.05) —I move: That the Bill be now read a second time. The purpose of the Bill is to make provision for the financing of the prospective 1984-85 Budget deficit. In the Budget speech the Treasurer announced that the Budget deficit in prospect for 1984-85 is estimated to be some $6.74 billion. This gives rise to a prospective deficit in the Consolidated Revenue Fund of about the same magnitude. As expenditure from the Consolidated Revenue Fund cannot legally exceed the moneys available to it, there is a need to seek authority to finance certain expenditures from borrowings to the extent that amounts appropriated by the Pariament for expenditure from that fund exceed estimated revenues. Successive governments have, for many years, introduced legislation in the form of a Loan Bill to authorise payments, or to reimburse the Consolidated Revenue Fund from the Loan Fund to meet defence and certain non-defence expenditures. Under existing standing authorities, some $2.7 billion of expenditure can be charged to Loan Fund, leaving a shortfall of some $4.045 billion for which separate funding authority is required. This Bill seeks authority to borrow moneys accordingly. I should make it clear, however, that the Bill does not authorise defence or other expenditures additional to those otherwise authorised by Parliament. The amount of borrowings that may be undertaken pursuant to the proposed legislation is, in the case of defence expenditure, the amount for which appropriation is sought for defence purposes in Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 1984- 85, that is, some $5.57 billion, and any moneys for defence purposes that may be approved in subsequent Appropriation Acts during 1984-85. The effective limit is likely to be significantly less than these amounts as defence expenditures cannot be charged to Loan Fund until the legislation is enacted. The legal limit for borrowing for non-defence purposes is determined by the level of borrowing authority approved by the Loan Council. Together, it is estimated that these limits will be sufficient to enable the financing of the Budget deficit. I commend the Bill to the House. Debate (on motion by Mr Braithwaite) adjourned. Mr LIONEL BOWEN(Kingsford-Smith-Minister for Trade)(10.08) —At Question Time today, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Peacock) asked when the Government would be in a position to table the report of the Special Prosecutor, Mr Ian Temby, QC , in relation to what has been called the Age materials. In the last few minutes the Attorney-General (Senator Gareth Evans) has tabled the report in the Senate. In accordance with the answer I gave the honourable gentleman, I now ask, pursuant to section 20 of the Special Prosecutors Act 1982, for leave to present the report of the Special Prosecutor, Mr Ian Temby, QC, into the Age materials, dated July 1984, together with a statement by the Attorney-General. I also ask the leave of the House to move a motion to authorise the publication and printing of the report. Leave granted. Mr LIONEL BOWEN —I present the following papers: Report of the Special Prosecutor, Mr Ian Temby, QC, into the 'Age' materials, dated July 1984, and statement by the Attorney-General. Motion (by Mr Lionel Bowen)-by leave-agreed to: (1) That this House, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliamentary Papers Act 1908, authorises the publication of the report of the Special Prosecutor, Ian Temby, QC, into the 'Age' materials; and (2) That the paper be printed. Motion (by Mr Young) proposed: That the House take note of the papers. Debate (on motion by Mr Sinclair) adjourned. The following Bills were returned from the Senate without amendment or requests : Cocos (Keeling) Islands Self-Determination (Consequential Amendments) Bill 1984 Income Tax Assessment Amendment Bill (No. 3) 1984 Income Tax (Companies, Corporate Unit Trusts and Superannuation Funds) Amendment Bill 1984 States Grants (Schools Assistance) Amendment Bill 1984 States Grants (Tertiary Education Assistance) Amendment Bill 1984 States Grants (Education Assistance-Participation and Equity) Amendment Bill 1984 Commonwealth Schools Commission Amendment Bill 1984 Excise Tariff Amendment Bill 1984 Liquified Petroleum Gas (Grants) Amendment Bill 1984 Chicken Meat Research Amendment Bill 1984 Pig Meat Legislation Amendment Bill 1984 Australian Meat and Live-stock Corporation Amendment Bill 1984 Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Policy Council Bill 1984 Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Selection Committee Bill 1984 Bills returned from the Senate Bills returned from the Senate Live-stock Slaughter Levy Amendment Bill 1984 Live-stock Slaughter Levy Collection Amendment Bill 1984 Live-stock Export Charge Amendment Bill 1984 Public Service Reform Bill 1984 Members of Parliament (Staff) Bill 1984 Merit Protection (Australian Government Employees) Bill 1984 Bounty (Two-Stroke Engines) Bill 1984 Australian National Airlines Commission Retention Bill 1984 Australian National Airlines Amendment Bill 1984 Air Navigation Amendment Bill 1984 States (Tax Sharing and Health Grants) Amendment Bill 1984 Local Government (Personal Income Tax Sharing) Amendment Bill 1984 Statute Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill (No. 1) 1984 Remuneration and Allowances Amendment Bill 1984 Life Insurance Amendment Bill 1984 Insurance (Agents and Brokers) Bill 1984 Commonwealth Banks Amendment Bill 1984 Weights and Measures (National Standards) Amendment Bill 1984 Social Security and Repatriation Legislation Amendment Bill 1984 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage (Interim Protection) Bill 1984 Message received from the Senate agreeing to the amendments made by the House of Representatives to the Insurance Contracts Bill 1984. Assent to the following Bills reported: Supply Bill (No. 1) 1984-85 Supply Bill (No. 2) 1984-85 Supply (Parliamentary Departments) Bill 1984-85 Audit Amendment Bill 1984 Australian Bicentennial Road Development Trust Fund Amendment Bill 1984 Road Grants Amendment Bill 1984 Copyright Amendment Bill 1984 National Crime Authority Bill 1984 National Crime Authority (Consequential Amendments) Bill 1984 Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Bill 1984 Commonwealth Electoral Legislation Amendment Bill 1984 Cocos (Keeling) Islands Self-Determination (Consequential Amendments) Bill 1984 Income Tax Assessment Amendment Bill (No. 3) 1984 Income Tax (Companies, Corporate Unit Trusts and Superannuation Funds) Amendment Bill 1984 States Grants (Schools Assistance) Amendment Bill 1984 States Grants (Tertiary Education Assistance) Amendment Bill 1984 States Grants (Education Assistance-Participation and Equity) Amendment Bill 1984 Commonwealth Schools Commission Amendment Bill 1984 Excise Tariff Amendment Bill 1984 Liquefied Petroleum Gas (Grants) Amendment Bill 1984 Chicken Meat Research Amendment Bill 1984 Pig Meat Legislation Amendment Bill 1984 Australian Meat and Live-stock Corporation Amendment Bill 1984 Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Policy Council Bill 1984 Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Selection Committee Bill 1984 Live-stock Slaughter Levy Amendment Bill 1984 Live-stock Slaughter Levy Collection Amendment Bill 1984 Live-stock Export Charge Amendment Bill 1984 Public Service Reform Bill 1984 Members of Parliament (Staff) Bill 1984 Merit Protection (Australian Government Employees) Bill 1984 Bounty (Two-Stroke Engines) Bill 1984 Australian National Airlines Commission Retention Bill 1984 Australian National Airlines Amendment Bill 1984 Air Navigation Amendment Bill 1984 States (Tax Sharing and Health Grants) Amendment Bill 1984 Local Government (Personal Income Tax Sharing) Amendment Bill 1984 Statute law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill (No. 1) 1984 Remuneration and Allowances Amendment Bill 1984 Life Insurance Amendment Bill 1984 Insurance (Agents and Brokers) Bill 1984 Commonwealth Banks Amendment Bill 1984 Weights and Measures (National Standards) Amendment Bill 1984 Social Security and Repatriation Legislation Amendment Bill 1984 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage (Interim Protection) Bill 1984 Insurance Contracts Bill 1984 Bill received from the Senate, and read a first time. Ordered that the second reading be made an order of the day for the next day of sitting. House adjourned at 10.12 p.m. The following notices were given: Mr Donald Cameron to amend notice of motion No. 432 standing in his name by deleting part 2 of the notice. Mr Hunt to amend notice of motion No. 1 for general business Thursday No. 6 standing in his name to read as follows: That this House condemns the Government for its illogical and damaging policies on the mining and export of Australian uranium, which will lead to- (1) the development of the Northern Territory being placed in jeopardy; (2) no further development of uranium resources in States other than at Roxby Downs in South Australia; (3) the potential for thousands of jobs being lost; (4) the loss of thousands of millions of dollars of investment; (5) the abandonment of proposals for a uranium enrichment industry which would have meant greater earning from secondary processing of Australian uranium; (6) valuable and long-standing relationships with some of Australia's most important trading partners being placed in jeopardy; and (7) possible retaliatory actions by the French Government and other European Economic Community nations such as the dumping of subsidised surplus agricultural products into Australia's Asian/ Pacific Basin and Middle East markets. Mr John Brown to present a Bounty (Agricultural Tractors) Amendment Bill, and a Bounty (Tractors Cabs) Amendment Bill Mr Hurford to move- That in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, the following proposed work be referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works for consideration and report: Improvements to on-base housing, RAAF base, Darwin Northern Territory. The following papers were deemed to have been presented on 21 August 1984: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage (Interim Protection) Act- Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 176. Aboriginal Development Commission Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 135 . Air Force Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 187. Air Navigation Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 188. Audit Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, Nos. 125, 127, 189. Australian Bureau of Statistics Act-Australian Bureau of Statistics-Proposal for collection of information-1984-No. 5-Quarterly collection of local government data. Australian Capital Territory Supreme Court Act-Rule of Court-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 110. Australian Federal Police Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 164. Australian Meat and Live-stock Corporation Act-Orders-1984- L3/84-Quality Assurance Programmes and Inspections-Live-stock. MQ8/84-Amendment to MQ6/83-High Quality Beef to EEC-1984 Control Scheme. Australian National University Act-Statute-No. 173-Enrolment, Courses and Degrees Amendment No. 19. Banking Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, Nos. 111, 168. Bankruptcy Act-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 155. Bounty (Agricultural Tractors) Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 130. Bounty (Penicillin) Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 123. Papers Broadcasting and Television Act-Regulation-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 104. Commonwealth Banks Act-Regulation-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 160. Commonwealth Employees (Redeployment and Retirement) Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, Nos. 133, 134, 192. Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, Nos. 121, 122, 165, 166. Commonwealth Teaching Service Act-Determinations-1984, Nos. 1, 2. Compensation (Commonwealth Government Employees) Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 163. Conciliation and Arbitration Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 147. Copyright Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 175. Customs Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, Nos. 128, 137, 191. Dairy Industry Stabilization Levy Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 124 . Defence Act-Determinations-1984- No. 22-Pay of Reserve Force Members. No. 23-Cadet Forces Allowances. No. 24-In Port Allowance and Settling In and Settling Out Allowance. No. 25-Pay of Reserve Force Members. No. 26-Flying Allowance. No. 27-Outfit Allowance and Chaplain's (Reserves) Equipment Allowance. No. 28-Indonesia Living Allowance. No. 29-Flying Allowance and other allowances. No. 30-Special Royal Navy Allowance paid to RAN Members Posted to and Serving in Britain. No. 31-Diving Allowance. No. 32-Living Out Allowance. No. 33-District Allowance, Recreation Leave and Long Service Leave. No. 34-District Allowance and other allowances. Defence Act, Naval Defence Act and Air Force Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 146. Defence Amendment Act-Interim Determinations-Statutory Rules 1984, Nos. 119, 151, 152, 153, 154, 177, 178, 182. Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefits Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, Nos. 118, 185, 186. Dried Vine Fruits Equalization Act-Regulation-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 149. Dried Vine Fruits Equalization Levy Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 150. Environment (Financial Assistance) Act-Agreement between the Commonwealth of Australia and the State of Queensland, dated 6 June 1984. Excise Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 126. Export Finance and Insurance Corporation Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 159. Family Law Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 139. Fisheries Act-Notices, Nos. 123A, 123B, 125. Foreign Fishing Boats Levy Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 167. Health Insurance Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, Nos. 109, 162. High Court of Australia Act-High Court of Australia-Directions-Building and Precincts-Conduct of Persons-Amendment, dated 13 June 1984. Income Tax Assessment Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 172. Industrial Research and Development Incentives Act-Regulation-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 194. Lands Acquisition Act-Statements (6) of lands acquired by agreement authorised under sub-section 7 (1). Live-stock Slaughter (Export Inspection Charge) Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 120. Loan (Income Equalization Deposits) Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 129. Long Service Leave (Commonwealth Employees) Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 193. Meat Inspection Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, Nos. 115, 116. National Crime Authority Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 132. National Health Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, Nos. 148, 161, 169. Pay-roll Tax (Territories) Assessment Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 173. Petroleum Retail Marketing Sites Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 144. Postal Services Act- Australian Postal Commission-By-laws-Postal (Staff)-1984-Amendment No. 1. Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 105. Primary Industry Bank Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 108. Proclamation by his Excellency the Governor-General fixing the date on which the following Act shall come into operation-Sex Discrimination Act 1984-1 August 1984. Public Service Act- Appointments-Department- Health- Corbett, T. Taylor, A. Social Security-Carter, C. Determinations-1984-Nos. 5, 6, 14, 16, 17, 18. Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, Nos. 107, 112, 131, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144, 145. Quarantine Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 174. Radiocommunications Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 184. Remuneration Tribunals Act-Remuneration Tribunal Determination- 1984/21-Holders of public office on the Foreign Investment Review Board and other bodies. 1984/22-Holders of public office on the Foreign Investment Review Board and other bodies. Seat of Government (Administration) Act- Determinations listing fees for purposes of- Chiropractors Registration Ordinance, dated 3 August 1984. Dentists Registration Ordinance, dated 27 July 1984. Surveyors Ordinance, dated 1 July 1984. Veterinary Surgeons Registration Ordinance, dated 5 June 1984. Ordinances-1984- No. 17-Classification of Publications (Amendment). No. 18-Landlord and Tenant (Amendment). No. 19-Remuneration (Amendment). No. 20-Health Commission (Amendment). No. 21-Unlawful Games. No. 22-Liquor (Amendment). No. 23-Lotteries (Amendment). No. 24-Poker Machine Control (Amendment). No. 25-Police Offences (Amendment). No. 26-Pool Betting (Amendment). No. 27-Rates (Amendment). No. 28-Sewerage Rates (Amendment). No. 30-Surveyors (Amendment). No. 31-Water Rates (Amendment). No. 32-Crimes (Amendment). No. 33-Notaries Public. No. 34-Testamentary Guardianship. No. 35-Community Development Fund (Amendment). No. 36-Civil Liability (Animals). No. 37-Pounds (Amendment). No. 38-Business Franchise (Tobacco and Petroleum Products). No. 39-City Area Leases (Amendment). No. 40-Dentists Registration (Amendment). No. 41-New South Wales Acts Application. No. 42-Health Commission (Amendment) No. 2). Regulations-1984- No. 12 (Motor Traffic Ordinance). No. 13 (Veterinary Surgeons Registration Ordinance). No. 14 (Poker Machine Control Ordinance). No. 15 (Police Offences Ordinance). No. 16 (Surveyors Ordinance). No. 17 (Dentists Registration Ordinance). No. 18 (Business Franchise (Tobacco and Petroleum Products) Ordinance). Specifications-Business Franchise (Tobacco and Petroleum Products) Ordinance- Specified amounts for purposes of the Ordinance, dated 30 July 1984 (2). Sex Discrimination Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, Nos. 179, 181. States Grants (Petroleum Products) Act-Amendments of the schedules to the subsidy schemes in relation to the States of- New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania, dated 1 July 1984. Queensland, dated 21 June 1984. States (Tax Sharing and Health Grants) Act-Regulation-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 138. Stevedoring Industry Levy Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 170. Student Assistance Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 171. Superannuation Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, Nos. 113, 136, 156, 157, 183, 190. Telecommunications Act- Australian Telecommunications Commission By-laws- Telecommunications (Charging Zones and Charging Districts)-Amendments Nos. 46, 47. Telecommunications (Community Calls)-Amendment No. 38. Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 106. Therapeutic Goods Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 158. Transfer of Prisoners Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 180. Weights and Measures (National Standards) Act-Regulation-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 195. Wool Industry Act-Regulations-Statutory Rules 1984, No. 117. The following answers to questions were circulated: (Question No. 726) Mr Spender asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 9 November 1983: Will he bring up to date the information contained in the answer to question No . 1253 (Hansard, 10 October 1978, pages 1658-63) and provide information as at 1 July for each of the years 1978 to 1983 inclusive when updating the answers to parts (1), (7) and (8) of that question. Mr Scholes —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Since the provision of the information contained in the answer to question No. 1253 (Hansard, 10 October 1978, pages 1658-63), the following developments have occurred: (a) The Joint Project, Woomera was terminated on 30 June 1980; (b) Solar Observatory at Learmonth, Western Australia, was established under an exchange of notes between Australia and the United States of America constituting an agreement for the establishment, maintenance and operation of a solar observatory. The agreement entered into force on 27 October 1977 with an initial non-terminable period of ten years. Thereafter the agreement may be terminated by either party on twelve months notice. The co-operating agencies are the US Air Force and the Australian Department of Science and Technology. The Observatory monitors solar activity to assist in the prediction of solar activity which can disrupt military and space communications. It commenced operations in 1979; (c) TRANET Smithfield-On 29 July 1979 a new memorandum of implementing procedures relating to the TRANET station at Smithfield between the US Department of Defense and the Australian Department of Defence as co-operating agencies came into effect. In 1980 Australia agreed to the location of portable tracking equipment at the station in connection with the testing phase of the US NAVSTAR Global Positioning System. In 1982 the station ceased to be designated as Station 112 and is now known as TRANET Smithfield and designated Station 545; (d) Joint Tropical Trials and Research Establish- ment-The initial period of the JTTRE Memorandum of understanding (MOU) under which the joint Australian/ United Kingdom program of tropical testing is carried out expired in 1980: However, the MOU contained provision for continuation of the program after that date on the basis of termination or variation by mutual consent or by 12 months notice by either Government. It is under this provision that the program is continuing. Arising out of internal re-organisation the UK Co-operating Agency is now the Controller Research and Development Establishments, Research and Nuclear, Ministry of Defence. JTTRE facilities are located at Innisfail, Cloncurry and Cowley Beach, Queensland; (e) The flight of Royal Australian Air Force Mirage aircraft from Butterworth previously detached to Tengah in Singapore now deploys on a periodic basis from Butterworth to Paya Lebar; (f) The Headquarters Australian Defence Co-operation Group, Papua New Guinea was disbanded on 1 January 1983. Defence personnel providing administrative support to Australian loan personnel and formed units operating in Papua New Guinea under the defence co-operation program are now located in the Australian High Commission, Port Moresby; and (g) Sinai Multinational Force and Observers-Since 25 April 1982, an Australian contingent of 99 personnel and eight UH1H helicopters together with some 35 New Zealand personnel and two New Zealand UH1H helicopters has operated the Rotary Wing Aviation Unit (RWAU) of the Multinational Force and Observers (MFO) at El Gorah in the Sinai. In addition, Australia provides seven officers on the MFO Headquarters staff. The RWAU provides primary transportation for MFO observer verification missions, logistic support flights, and airfield, flight control and meteorological services at El Gorah. The RWAU operates in accordance with an exchange of letters between the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Director- General MFO tabled in Parliament on 17 March 1982. 2. No defence-related facilities in Australia were operated solely by a foreign power between 1978 and 1983. The following table lists the facilities which were operated jointly by Australia and a foreign power in those years, the foreign power and designated co-operating agency, and the number of foreign and Australian personnel involved: DEFENCE-RELATED FACILITIES IN AUSTRALIA JOINTLY OPERATED BY AUSTRALIA AND A FOREIGN POWER FOR WHICH THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE IS THE AUSTRALIAN CO-OPERATING AGENCY Foreign Foreign Power Personnel and Including Australian Name of Co-operating SOFA Personnel SOFA Date Facility Agency Personnel (See Note 2) Personnel 1 July 1979- 30 June 1980 Joint Project, Woomera UK Ministry of Defence 22 102 Nil 1 July 1979- 30 June 1983 Tranet, Smithfield US Defense Mapping Agency 1 (Since 1980) 2 1 (Since 1980) North West Cape Naval Communication Station US Navy Average 365 RAN: varied 41-48, average 44 Civilian: varied 204-216, average 210 Varied 340-424, average 365 Joint Tropical Trials and Research Establishment (JTTRE) UK Ministry of Defence 3 6 Nil Joint Defence Space Research Facility (JSDRF), Pine Gap US Department of Defense Varied 220-249, average 236 Varied 218-245, average 233 Varied 115-120, average 118 Joint Defence Space Communications Station (JDSCS), Nurrungar US Air Force Varied 204-217, average 210 Varied 188-205, average 193 Varied 185-192, average 190 Notes: (1) This table does not include information relating to facilities in Australia which are operated primarily for scientific or for other civil purposes, e.g., the NASA facilities, the OMEGA Navigation Facility. While some of these facilities may from time to time provide information that is useful for Defence purposes, they are not operated by or for Australian or foreign military authorities; nor is it accurate to describe their basic purpose and functions as defence-related. (2) These figures relate to Australian personnel employed by each facility, but do not include Australian Federal Police on security duty. The normal AFP contingent at each facility is: North West Cape Naval Communication Station-8 Joint Defence Space Research Facility-15 Joint Defence Space Communications Station-17. 3. Annual operating costs to Australia of the defence-related facilities for which the Department of Defence is the Australian co-operating agency are shown in the table below: 1978-79 1979-80 1980-81 1981-82 1982-83 $'000 $'000 $'000 $'000 $'000 Woomera Joint Project 1,717 1,640 . . . . . . Tranet, Smithfield 79 80 72 106 118 North West Cape 1,416 1,560 1,517 1,676 1,837 JTTRE, Innisfail 74 124 169 161 192 JDSCS, Nurrungar 3,613 4,488 5,433 5,676 6,686 JDSRF, Pine Gap 626 691 853 985 1,212 Notes: (1) Includes costs of Australian Federal Police, but not costs that may be incurred by other Departments and authorities which are not funded by Defence . (2) Includes provision for Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefits Scheme, furlough etc. from 1978-79. (Question No. 717) Mr Lloyd asked the Minister for Communications, upon notice, on 8 November 1983 : How many subscribers throughout Australia have had their local call charges increased with (a) the introduction of Countrywide Calling and (b) the conversion from manual to automatic exchanges. Mr Duffy —The answer to the honourable member's question, based on advice from the Australian Telecommunications Commission, is as follows: Telecom does not keep details in a readily available form of the numbers of subscribers who have experienced an increase in local call charges for the reasons stated in the honourable member's question. With reference to Countrywide Calling however, the honourable member is aware that Telecom has made several changes to zoning boundaries so that many people in extended zones will continue to have access to an untimed local call to their service town. (Question No. 844) Mr Leo McLeay asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 29 November 1983: (1) What inter-departmental committees (a) does the Minister's Department and ( b) do instrumentalities under the Minister's control (i) participate in and (ii) chair. (2) What is the subject matter of these committees' inquiries. Mr Scholes —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The following list of inter-departmental committees has been drawn up according to guidelines provided by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. Under these guidelines, an inter-departmental committee is a committee involving two or more departments established at the specific direction of the Government. The authority for its establishment is either a Cabinet decision or the approval in writing of the Prime Minister. As several departments may be represented on each committee, I have only included the subject matter for committees which are chaired by my Department. This will avoid unnecessary repetition by other participating departments. (1) (a) (i) The Department of Defence participates in the following inter- departmental committees. Inter-Departmental Committees on which Defence participates Administrative Security Equipment Working Committee Antarctica (General) Antarctica Minerals Anti-trust IDC Atomic Tests Veterans' and Aboriginal Claims Australian Public Service Housing Scales and Standards. Coastal surveillance Committee of Officials-Agent Orange Commonwealth Co-ordinating Group on Mapping, Charting and Surveying Commonwealth Counter-Disaster Task Force Commonwealth Shipping & Manning Arrangements and the Future of Surplus Cape- class Vessels Computer Security Advisory Group Economic Assessments Board Law of the Sea Task Group Motor Transport Maritime Delimitation with Indonesia National Assessments Board National Disaster Relief (Health) Operational Committee on Conditions of Overseas Service Overseas Property Committee Permanent Heads Committee on Intelligence and Security Policy Committee on Conditions of Overseas Service Preference Matters (Selective Tendering) Production Board Proposed Reciprocal Status of Forces Agreement Between Australia, New Zealand and the United States Relations with ASEAN Review of Proposals by Commonwealth Departments and Instrumentalities to Own, Replace or Lease Aircraft Security, Construction & Equipment Committee Soviet Representation in Australia Special IDC on Protection against Violence (SIDC-PAV) Standing Consultative Committee on Occupational Health Standing IDC on Offsets Torres Strait Treaty Visiting Ships Panel (Nuclear) (1) (a) (ii) The following is the list of inter-departmental committees which my Department chairs and the subject matter of those committees. Inter-Departmental Committees chaired by the Department of Defence Accommodation for Married Service Personnel Considers issues related to the accommodation for Service personnel. Air Co-ordinating Committee (chaired jointly with the Department of Aviation) Resolves joint operational problems by mutual agreement and submits recommendations to the respective Departments. Defence Committee Provides advice on: defence policy as a whole; the co-ordination of military, strategic, economic, financial and external affairs aspects of defence policy; matters of policy or principle and important questions having a joint service or inter-departmental aspect; other matters of defence interest as are referred to the committee by or on behalf of the Minister; and carries out such investigations as it thinks fit for the purpose of advising the Minister. Defence (Conditions of Service) Committee Considers major issues concerning rates of pay and financial conditions of service for members of the Defence Force as a basis for recommendations to the Minister for Defence. Defence (Conditions of Service) Subordinate Committee Considers issues as a basis for recommendations to the Minister for Defence or to the Defence (Conditions of Service) Committee. Emergency Broadcasting Committee Reviews existing broadcasting facilities and recommends what additional facilities, if any, would be required to maintain broadcasting communication following a major disaster arising from civil defence or natural causes. (1) (b) (ii) There are no inter-departmental committees participated in or chaired by instrumentalities under my control. (Question No. 959) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Territories and Local Government, upon notice , on 7 December 1983: (1) Did the Canberra Commercial Development Authority enter into a sub-lease on 27 April 1983 with Myer New South Wales Ltd for a term commencing on 16 October 1978. (2) Did that sub-lease contain a clause (3) (a) (i) which expressly provides that a minimum annual rental should be paid by equal monthly instalments in advance from the date of commencement of the lease, and on each month thereafter . (3) Did Myer New South Wales Ltd (a) fail to pay rent for 11 months and (b) make the first instalment payment of rent on 25 September 1979. (4) Did the sub-lease unlike other sub-leases entered into by the Canberra Commercial Development Authority not contain a provision for providing a penalty for late payment of rent. (5) Why did the lease not contain a penalty provision when other leases did contain such a provision. (6) How many sub-leases in the Belconnen Centre do not have such a clause imposing a penalty for late payment. (7) What action was taken by the Canberra Commercial Development Authority to recover (a) rent, (b) marketing fund contributions and (c) outgoings, when in arrears. (8) Did the agreement for sub-lease, referred to in the sub-lease, and entered into by the Canberra Commercial Development Authority and Myer New South Wales Ltd, and not on the public record, in relation to payment of rent, varying the sub-lease rental provisions as contained in the registered sub-lease. (9) Did any other document between the parties, and not on the public record, vary the terms of the sub-lease. (10) Did rental, marketing fund contributions and share of outgoings outstanding, amount to $958,950.95 in September 1979. (11) Was this matter the subject of inquiry and comment by the Auditor-General; if not, will he seek advice from the Auditor-General on the adequacy of action taken to recover arrears of rental and the failure to incorporate in the sub- lease, adequate and normal penalty provisions for failure to pay rent when due. Mr Uren —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) No. The Canberra Commercial Development Authority entered an agreement to lease on 8 October 1980 and pursuant to that agreement entered into a sub lease on 7 April 1983 which was registered on 9 May 1983. Both documents provided for a term commencing 16 October 1978. (2) Yes. (3) (a) Yes. (b) Yes. (4) No. (5) N/A. (6) Nil. (7) There was continuous understanding between the CCDA and Myer that when negotiations in respect to several lease terms (not being the sum payable in rental) under dispute were resolved payment would be effected in full. General agreement was reached in approximately mid 1979 and payment of all rental and associated charges was made in September 1979. There was at the time of payment still no executed lease documentation. This was signed by the Authority 8 October 1980, some 12 months after Myer had begun paying rent. No penalty was involved because no documentation providing for a penalty was in existence until 8 October 1980. (8) As far as it can be interpreted, the answer to the question is no. (9) No. (10) Yes. (11) Yes. On 18 May 1979 the Auditor-General requested information concerning the lease agreement with Myer, payment of rent, and marketing and outgoing contributions. On 11 June 1979 the Canberra Commercial Development Authority informed the Auditor-General that final negotiations concerning the lease agreement were taking place, and that rent and outgoings would be calculated and paid from 16 October 1978. (Question No. 1029) Dr Everingham asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 29 February 1984: (1) Is he able to say whether the Conference on Disarmament in Europe agreed on any measures to verify military detente or disengagement or make such measures politically binding. (2) What militarily significant and specific proposals has Australia made in international forums to provide such verification or enforcement. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The Conference on Disarmament in Europe has as its objective the negotiation of confidence and security building measures, designed to reduce the risk of military confrontation in Europe, which would be militarily significant, politically binding, verifiable and applicable to the whole of Europe, defined as stretching from the Atlantic to the Urals. The first session of the Conference opened in Stockholm on 17 January and ended on 16 March. It was marked by opening presentations by the participants (the United States, Canada, and all the states of Europe except Albania) and the tabling of proposals by North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and the neutral/non-aligned group for confidence building measures and by Warsaw Pact advocacy of its proposal for a ' non-use of force' agreement between East and West. The second session of the Conference opened on 8 May. Substantial negotiations have yet to commence, although the Warsaw Pact has now also tabled, on 8 May, its own set of proposals . (2) Although Australia does not participate in this European Conference, the Government believes that peace and security in Europe is vitally important for all countries. On 17 January I sent a message to the Chairman of the CDE expressing the Government's best wishes for a successful conference and its hopes for a positive outcome. Australia has consistently stressed on all appropriate occasions the importance of concluding arms control agreements that are adequately verifiable thereby providing confidence that such agreements are being complied with. Australia has given strong support to the United Nations study on concepts of security which should result in recommendations directly relevant to matters of detente and military disengagement, whether in Europe or elsewhere. An Australian expert has been nominated to participate in this study. Australia has also strongly supported an initiative of the Federal Republic of Germany to set up a United Nations study into confidence building measures, which will also be of direct relevance to the CDE and the verification of military detente and disengagement. (Question No. 1030) Dr Everingham asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 29 February 1984: (1) Has Australia opposed a United Nations resolution condemning nuclear war as the most monstrous crime. (2) Can he say what is classed by Australia as a more monstrous crime. (3) Does Australia support (a) the 24 April 1952 United States paper 'Essential Principles for a Disarmament Programme,' (b) the 1973 US-Soviet Agreement on the prevention of nuclear war and (c) the Kellogg-Briand pact (Treaty of Paris) outlawing war. (4) Does Australia adhere to the McCloy-Zorin principles and propose a compromise between the 1962 US and Soviet Union disarmament programs. (5) Will he declare his support at the UN for urgent summit discussion of the 1978 McKnight Draft Treaty as updated in The Forgotten Treaties-A Practical Plan for World Disarmament published this year by the Law Council of Australia; if not, (a) what are the objections, (b) what are the alternatives and (c) when will Australians have Australian alternative drafts circulated for public information and discussion and as an example to other nations in developing public opinion in favour of placing human survival before national sovereign military power. (6) Will he (a) acknowledge that existing systems of deterrence and negotiation from strength based on national sovereign military power are counter-productive as a security system in an age of omnicidal weapons and that in such an age no nation can be trusted to be prosecutor, judge and executioner in its own disputes and (b) sponsor in conjunction with any concurring nation a constitutional convention of all peoples to direct their sovereign representatives to compel internationally established arbitration of international disputes and internationally established enforcement of disarmament as the only alternative to the arms race and to override sovereign national military interests. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) This apparently refers to resolution No. 38/75 sponsored by the Soviet Union, one of whose operative paragraphs condemns nuclear war in these terms. Australia and 18 other countries voted against this resolution and 30 abstained. The reason for Australia's negative vote was that this Soviet draft resolution seemed essentially directed at making propaganda against the United States and its allies, not seeking to promote agreement. The Government does not believe that the UN General Assembly and the debate there on disarmament should be occasions for seeking to heighten, rather than reduce international tensions. (2) Australia's opposition to nuclear war and its active support for measures to prevent it is not brought into question by the decision to vote against the resolution referred to in (1) above. The Government's position on this has been clearly stated in many recent public statements. (3) (a) While Australia would endorse the 24 April 1952 US paper 'Essential Principles for a Disarmament Programme', most of these principles have been elaborated and supplemented in the drafts under consideration in the current negotiations on a comprehensive program of disarmament in the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva. (b) Australia supports the 1973 US-Soviet agreement on the prevention of nuclear war, which remains in force. (c) The 1928 Kellogg-Briand pact (Treaty of Paris) was superseded by the United Nations Charter to which Australia, of course, fully subscribes. (4) The 1961 McCloy-Zorin principles were endorsed unanimously by the UN General Assembly in Resolution 1722 (XVI) of 20 December 1961. Australia participated in that decision. These principles and the 1962 American and Soviet disarmament programs are direct antecedents of the continuing multilateral negotiations in the Conference on Disarmament (and its predecessor bodies) on a comprehensive program of disarmament. Australia has been participating actively in these talks since joining the Committee on Disarmament in 1979. (5) The publication of the McKnight draft disarmament treaty by the Law Council of Australia is an important demonstration of the deep concern which the issues of peace and disarmament arouse throughout the Australian community. In accordance with my instructions our Ambassador for Disarmament in Geneva has sent copies of the book The Forgotten Treaties to the leaders of each of the forty delegations in the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva and to selected members of the United Nations Secretariat. Regrettably negotiations on the proposed comprehensive program of disarmament ( which would be along much the same lines as that envisaged by the McKnight draft treaty) became bogged down in the lead-up to the Second Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly on Disarmament and subsequently last year the General Assembly gave the matter very little consideration and referred the draft CPD back to the Conference on Disarmament, asking for a report in 1984. The Conference on Disarmament has re-established an ad hoc subsidiary body on the comprehensive program and its mandate provides for the renewal 'as soon as the cir- cumstances are propitious for that purpose, (of) its work on the elaboration of the Program with a view to the submission to the General Assembly , not later than at its forty-first session, of a complete draft of such a program'. The indications are, however, that the Conference is unlikely to take the matter any further this year and there are no indications of prospects for early agreement on such a program. In these circumstances Australian efforts will be directed at securing whatever progress on disarmament appears possible in these unpropitious times, without, of course, losing sight of the ideal of a Comprehensive Program of Disarmament. (6) (a) Until better systems of restraint are in place aimed at leading to nuclear arms control and disarmament, I accept that the principle of deterrence is the only practical option available to avoid serious international nuclear instability and overt nuclear conflict. (b) I do not detect any disposition on the part of the nations of the world to accept compulsory arbitration of international disputes or international enforcement of disarmament. Australia will continue to work for the negotiation of international disarmament agreements which attract consensus since it is only through agreement by all parties concerned that any real progress can be made in the field of disarmament. (Question No. 1031) Dr Everingham asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 29 February 1984: Is he able to say whether Pershing missiles in Europe will reduce the interval between launch and target to 6 minutes, making greater the danger of an automatic launch in response. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The flight time for the Pershing II ballistic missile will depend on the distance between the point of launch and the intended target. I understand from public sources that the flight time is approximately 13 minutes when the missiles are flown to their maximum range. The warning time for these missiles could, however, be less. The Government understands the concerns of those who believe that deployment of Pershing II missiles in Europe could lead to an increased likelihood of an ' automatic launch in response' by the Soviet Union. The Government does not believe, however, that such a response would be an inevitable consequence of the Pershing II deployments. In the first place, short flight and warning times do not constitute a new development: similar flight times apply in the case of Soviet SS20 missiles which were first deployed in 1977 and to submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) which have been in the arsenals of both sides since the mid 1960s. Secondly, although Soviet policy on all aspects of nuclear doctrine is not entirely clear there is good reason to believe that, as with the United States, control over nuclear weapons in the Soviet Union is exercised at the highest political level. The Government has not seen any indication that that situation has changed as a result of the Pershing deployments. It is a fundamental element of Australian foreign policy that the world's nuclear weapons stockpiles should be reduced and eventually eliminated. Australia's position has been to urge that agreements should be reached between the superpowers which would lead to both qualitative restraints and quantitative reductions in nuclear forces. It strongly supported the bilateral negotiations between the United States and the Soviet Union on reductions in strategic arms ( START) and on limitations on intermediate range nuclear forces (INF) and expressed its regret when they were broken off at the end of 1983. Australia has called on a number of occasions for the early resumption of talks between the superpowers that would bring about limitations and reductions to their nuclear arsenals. (Question No. 1032) Dr Everingham asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 29 February 1984: (1) Is he able to say whether (a) each 2 SS-20 deployments in Europe have replaced 3 SS-4 or SS-5 missiles, with some 600 missiles reduced to 473 by December 1983, and aggregate yield decreased by a factor of 1.7 because of lower yield per missile and (b) the triple warheads of SS-20 missiles are more accurate in targeting than the warheads of Cruise or Pershing II missiles being deployed in Western Europe from late 1983. (2) Can he summarise the points of differences between the negotiators at intermediate nuclear force disarmament talks concerning the above issues. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1)- (a) A statement to this effect was made by the Soviet First Deputy Defence Minister and Chief of the Soviet General Staff, Marshal of the Soviet Union, Nikolai V. Ogarkov, at a press conference in Moscow on 4 December 1983. The Government has no reason to dispute Marshal Ogarkov's statement. (b) the reverse would appear to be the case. Figures given in the 1983 SIPRI Yearbook indicate that Pershing II and Cruise missiles have greater accuracy than the SS20. Table 1.1 on page 6 of the Yearbook gives the following figures for CEP (Circular Error Probable) for the three missiles: (CEP is the accepted measure of missiles accuracy: the smaller the CEP, the more accurate is the missile) CEP Missile (metres) SS20 400 Pershing II 40 GLCM 50 (2) The major points of difference in the negotiations on intermediate range nuclear forces were as follows, according to published United States reports (no compar- ably detailed account from Soviet sources is available but what has been said by the Soviets does not lead us to question the United States account). (i) The geographical scope of the proposed limitations The Soviet Union wanted these to be limited to continental Europe and adjacent waters (thereby leaving Soviet INF Systems in Soviet Asia outside the framework of the negotiations) while the US, and later its Asian allies, argued for a ' global' solution, that is, one that would encompass Soviet INF systems throughout the Soviet Union and not just in the European part of the USSR. They said they did not want Soviet SS20s simply to be relocated from Europe to Asia. (ii) The nature of the systems to be included in the negotiations The US originally wanted to limit discussions in the first phase of the negotiations to land-based missiles, which it considered to be the most destabilising systems, and to include aircraft at a later stage. The Soviet Union wished to include aircraft from the outset. (iii) The British and French nuclear systems The Soviet Union said that it should be compensated in the negotiations for the existence of the British and French independence nuclear deterrents. This was adamantly opposed by the US, British and French governments and by the other members of NATO. (iv) United States missiles in Europe The Soviet Union said that deployment of new US missiles in Europe would be unacceptable. It claimed that there was already rough parity in the nuclear balance in Europe and that NATO's INF deployments would disturb that situation to the detriment of the Soviet Union. (It maintained this claim throughout the negotiations despite the fact that its own deployment of SS20 missiles continued from the time that the negotiations commenced in November 1981 and that SS20 numbers rose from around 170 in late 1981 to 351 by March 1983.) During the negotiations there was some progress towards resolution of the first three of these issues as a result of both sides showing some flexibility but neither departed from its opening position on the fourth, which was whether or not there could be new US missiles in Europe. When the NATO deployments commenced the Soviets walked out of the talks, saying they would not return to the negotiations until NATO indicated its willingness to withdraw the missiles. This remains the Soviet position. While NATO has indicated that it is willing to continue to talk and that missiles already deployed could be removed as part of an agreement, it has remained firm that it will not withdraw its missiles as a precondition to resuming talks. (Question No. 1082) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Communications, upon notice, on 2 March 1984: How many (a) males and (b) females have been engaged in (i) the Minister's Department and (ii) any statutory authorities reporting to the Minister, as temporary employees under the community employment program, in each of the months December 1983 and January and February 1984. Mr Duffy —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Department of Communications-The Department has not employed any males or females under the community employment program between December 1983 and February 1984. Telecom Australia-As Telecom has so far made no application for community employment program grants for employment creation, no persons were engaged as temporary employees under the program. However, Telecom has been involved in negotiations with officials of the Department of Employment and Industrial Relations with a view to identifying projects and activities which could receive support under CEP. It is probable that, once full consultation with relevant staff associations have been concluded, Telecom will formally seek approval for several projects under CEP. Australia Post- Male Female December 1983 1 . . January 1984 1 4 February 1984 1 1 Action is in hand towards employment of other persons so that all approved Australia Post projects under the program will be operational shortly. Overseas Telecommunications Commission (Australia) -No males or females were engaged by OTC as temporary employees under the community employment program between December 1983 and February 1984. AUSSAT-No males or females were engaged by Aussat as temporary employees under the community employment program between December 1983 and February 1984. Australian Broadcasting Corporation- Male Female December 1983 Nil Nil January 1984 Nil Nil February 1984 Nil 8 Australian Broadcasting Tribunal-No temporary employees were engaged by the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal under the community employment program between December 1983 and February 1984. Special Broadcasting Service-No temporary employees were engaged by the Special Broadcasting Service under the community employment program between December 1983 and February 1984. (Question No. 1093-1120) Mr Ruddock asked all Ministers, upon notice, on 5 March 1984: (1) What positions in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd divisions of the Minister's Department have been filled with officers recruited from outside the career public service since 1 April 1983. (2) What are the names of all officers so appointed, their experience and background and the salary paid to them, if other than the normal salary paid for a similarly designated position. Mr Dawkins —The honourable member has asked identical questions of all Ministers, as indicated by the above question numbers. The following answer to the honourable member's question is provided on behalf of all Ministers with their concurrence. It also includes that information provided separately by the Minister for Primary Industry on 1 June 1984, Hansard pages 2756-7: (1)- APPOINTMENTS OF PERMANENT STAFF TO THE FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD DIVISIONS FROM 1 APRIL 1983 TO DATE* Third Division First Second Above Department Division Division Base level base level Aboriginal Affairs 1 13 2 Administrative Services 128 10 Attorney-General's 1 92 9 Aviation 199 61 Communications 26 11 Defence 390 69 Defence Support 2 122 29 Education and Youth Affairs 1 37 8 Employment and Industrial Relations 363 20 Finance 25 3 Foreign Affairs 35 7 Health 1 88 38 Home Affairs and Environment 1 4 Housing and Construction 132 41 Immigration and Ethnic Affairs 40 12 Industry and Commerce 354 6 Primary Industry 72 17 Prime Minister and Cabinet 1 2 Resources and Energy 14 6 Science and Technology 10 6 Social Security 1727 77 Special Minister of State 1 13 Sport, Recreation and Tourism 2 Territories and Local Government 39 11 Trade 1 28 2 Transport 27 10 Treasury 31 1 Veterans' Affairs 2 542 22 Total 2 10 4555 478 * Figures are based on appointment advices received in the Office of the Public Service Board and processed through its computerised statistical recording system between 1 April 1983 and 30 April 1984. (2) The names of persons appointed to the Australian Public Service (APS) are published in Commonwealth of Australia periodic gazettes bi-annually. The last such periodic gazette was issued on 13 February 1984. I do not consider it appropriate to outline the experience and background of each person so appointed , both on grounds of the considerable work that would be involved in preparing this information, a use of resources that I am not prepared to authorise, and the breach of personal privacy involved. Appointments to the APS are made in accordance with statutory provisions oversighted by the Public Service Board, which are directed to protecting the merit principle. I note that the Public Service Reform Act recently passed by the Parliament ensured that the merit principle is provided for explicitly in the Public Service Act. In regard to the salary paid to outside appointees, appointments to the Service are made to particular levels, which have specified salary ranges, Appointees usually commence at the minimum of the range. In certain circumstances the Public Service Board or the Board's Regional Director, as appropriate, may, taking into account the particular qualities of the appointee, approve a commencing salary above the minimum. It is not possible for an appointee to receive a salary outside the range set down for the position to which he/she is appointed. (Question No. 1128) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister representing the Minister for Resources and Energy, upon notice, on 5 March 1984: (1) What consultants have been engaged to work for the Minister or the Minister 's Department since 1 April 1983. (2) What is the name of each consultant, or if a company or partnership, the name of the corporation or partnership. (3) For how long was each consultant engaged. (4) What fee is to be or has been paid to each consultant. (5) What special background and experience does each consultant possess to enable the consultant to undertake the engagement. (6) Was the merit principle applied in each case; if so, in what manner. Mr Barry Jones —The Minister for Resources and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) to (5) Consultants engaged by the Department fall into three categories. These are: Category A-consultants individually selected and engaged in accordance with standing arrangements approved by the Public Service Board. Category B-consultants individually selected and engaged following approval from the Public Service Board. Category C-consultants selected from a competitive field and engaged following approval from the Public Service Board. Category A-Dr. A. Gleadow 2 days no fee charged. Reimbursement of expenses only . Dr Gleadow presented lectures on the application of fission track dating for assessing thermal history of sediments. He is a leading specialist in this technique. Dr M. Solomon 2 days no fee charged. Reimbursement of expenses only. Prior to his commencement with the Department as a senior principal research scientist, Dr Solomon held discussions with professional staff concerning the development of a work program for the Division of Petrology and Geochemistry. Dr A. Stolz 1 day no fee charged. Reimbursement of expenses only. Dr Stolz, Reader at the School of Surveying, University of New South Wales and Chairman of the Academy of Sciences Geodesy Sub-committee consulted on the establishment of a National Geodetic Data Centre in the Division of National Mapping. Mr. P. R. Mora 2 1/2 days $258.00 plus expenses. Mr Mora assisted in the development and implementation of a computer program for the processing of seismic data for which he had background experience with the Stanford University Geophysics Department. Banks Bros and Street, Shipbrokers 30 hours $950. Banks Bros and Street conducted a world wide search to find vessels suitable for charter by BMR to carry out long term marine research programs. They were assessed as being the best equipped shipbrokers to conduct this search. Dr A. G. Duba 1 day no fee charged. Reimbursement of expenses only. Dr Duba, a geophysicist with an international reputation for his work on electrical conductivity, presented a lecture on electrical conductivity as a monitor of changes in solid state. CSIRO National Measurements Laboratory 2 days no fee charged. Reimbursement of expenses only. Dr W. M. Steel, a leading optic expert with CSIRO, inspected the Division of National Mapping Photographic Zenith Tube to assess lens replacement. Dr G. West 2 days no fee charged. Reimbursement of expenses only. Dr West, a world wide expert on electromagnetic and seismic geophysics, presented a lecture on Borehole Electromagnetics and Inter Borehole Audio Frequency Seismics. Professor A. Tweedie to be completed late 1984 no fee charged. Reimbursement of expenses only. Professor Tweedie, a specialist in the geographic aspects of water resource use and management, is preparing a text on water use for publication as part of the volume 'Water' in the Atlas of Australian Resources. Professor P. Molnar 5 days no fee charged. Reimbursement of expenses only. Professor Molnar, a world authority in earthquake research and earth movements, consulted on earthquake research. Davies and Collinson, Solicitors $430.00. Davies and Collinson, who are experienced in the field of mineral physics, provided legal advice on patenting the Dowhole Omnidirectional EM Probe. Mr I. R. Sluiter 2 days no fee charged. Reimbursement of expenses only. Mr Sluiter provided advice on the palynological examination of fossil material. Expertise of this very specialised nature was not available from other sources. Ms D. Outram 2 1/2 days $705.00. Ms Outram conducted an effective writing course for officers of the Department. Ms Outram has conducted similar courses for other Government Departments. Dr. T. Mernagh 4 days no fee charged. Reimbursement of expenses only. Prior to his appointment to the Bureau of Mineral Resources, Dr Mernagh attended a familiarisation inspection of the Tasmanian University Laser-Raman facility and microprocessor attachment. Dr M. Neudent 1 1/2 $185.00. Dr. Nuedent presented seminars on the sedimentalogy of the Mt Isa area and its bearing on the origin of the mineral deposits. He is a specialist in this field and experienced in sedimentalogy of the Mt Isa region. Mr R. Franzi 9 hours $500.00. Mr Franzi provided advice on the feasability of upgrading a winch to be used on a marine survey vessel. He is a mechanical engineer with specialised knowledge of this work. Category B-Prof D. M. Green, Prof B. Hobbs, Prof B. Runnegas, Prof J. Veevers April 83 for 5 years no fees charged. Reimbursement of expenses only. An advisory group comprising of the above mentioned Professors was established to assist the Bureau of Mineral Resources in preparing a series of volumes on the geology of the Australian continent as a project to commemorate the Australian Bicentennial. These internationally accepted authorities will enhance the scientific quality of the publications. Mr. J. R. Davidson 12.9.83-21.9.83 $1050 plus expenses. Mr Davidson was engaged to review the Bureau of Mineral Resources system for interpreting Bass Strait seismic data. He has had wide petroleum experience in this field particularly in relation to the Bass Basin. Dr B. Nisbet 22.9.83-12.10.83 $4000 plus expenses. Dr Nisbet was engaged to carry out structural geological research into the establishment of a copper-gold mineralization project in Queensland. He was selected due to his experience in the region as well as his specialist expertise. Mr M. Hudson 3 days $3000 plus expenses. Mr Hudson developed and presented a course on effective negotiating skills. He is used widely in Australia to present this particular course. Tour Hosts Pty Ltd 1 day $1897. On the recommendation of the Department of Foreign Affairs, Tour Hosts Pty Ltd were engaged to provide interpreters for the sixth round of Australia/Japan Consultations on Co-operation in Energy Research and Development. Woollard, Michell and Young, Quantity Surveyors $16,500. Woollard, Michell and Young were appointed as assessors under the Ranger Project Government Agreement to make estimates of the cost of rehabilitation of the Ranger Project Area as at 31 March 1984 and 31 March 1985. They have previously been engaged to make assessments under this agreement. Urban Studies Group of the Institute of Australian Geographers completed by April 1984 $6,000. This group were engaged in the preparation of explanatory commentaries to accompany each map in the seven volume Atlas of Population and Housing, 1981 Census. The group is a professional organisation with subject specialists experienced in this facet of work. J. Toterdell 20/2/84-13/4/84 $3,000. Ms Toterdell was engaged to extract, tabulate and interpret strategic data for the preparation of palaeographic maps. She has had extensive experience in this field and has previously been engaged by the Bureau of Mineral Resources. Dr R. Ellis April to June 84. No fee charged. Reimbursement of expenses only. Dr Ellis has been engaged to provide specialist computing and geophysical input to BMR's program on earthquake hazards. His expertise in this field has previously been utilized by the Bureau of Mineral Resources. J. C. Kinna completed March 1984 $3,000 plus expenses Mr Kinna was engaged to provide advice on the technical and structural aspects of a resource rent tax in the petroleum sector. He has had considerable experience in providing advice to governments in this field. Dr J. E. D. Kerr up to 14 days $250 per day plus expenses. The Commonwealth is involved in a litigation case involving the South Australian Oil and Gas Corporation and Delhi Petroleum Pty Ltd. Dr Kerr is being used by the Deputy Crown Solicitor and the Commonwealth's counsel as a person who can testify to the operations of the Petroleum and Minerals Authority as it applies to this case. Category C-EPI Consultants. 60 Days $21,000 plus expenses. EPI Consultants produced a series of advisory booklets on energy conservation under the National Energy Conservation Program. Their extensive involvement in the preparation of closely related material for the Municipal Association of Victoria provided relevant experience in this project. Mrs J. E. Lau. Completion by June 1984. $1,340. Mrs Lau will prepare a text on groundwater resources for publication as part of the volume 'Water' in the Atlas of Australian Resources. She has had previous experience in writing groundwater commentaries for the Department. Computer People Pty Ltd. 155 hours $5,890. Computer People Pty Ltd provided system support for the Department's HP250 Computer Management Information System . Their professional expertise in HP250 computer systems was superior to that of other tenderers. Dr J. L. Symonds. Seven month period from 1 December 1983. $32,000 plus expenses. Dr Symonds is preparing a comprehensive report on the involvement of Australians in the British atomic tests programs at Maralinga and Emu, South Australia. Dr Symonds was previously a Division Head with the Australian Atomic Energy Commission and is now an energy/nuclear consultant. P A Computers and Telecommunications. 8 weeks-February-April 1984. $28,000. PA Computers and Telecommunications were engaged to examine existing and planned ADP systems and advise on what in-house or other computing facilities are necessary to meet Departmental Central Office requirements. They provided the lowest quote of those firms assessed as being suitable to undertake the task. PA Computers and Telecommunications. 4 weeks-June-July 1984. $17,250. PA Computers and Telecommunications have been engaged to assist with the evaluation of ADP tenders. This task is an extension of the above listed consultancy. PA Computers and Telecommunications. 3 weeks-May-June 1984. $11,300. PA Computers and Telecommunications have been engaged to review existing word processing facilities in the Department's Central Office (1 week) and BMR (2 weeks) and to provide recommended future strategies in the light of scheduled ADP upgrading. This task is an extension of the above two consultancies. Siromath Pty Ltd. Completed May 1984. $2,000. Siromath Pty Ltd were engaged to carry out a literature search and provide a preliminary evaluation in relation to extended containment and surveillance as a means of safeguarding large scale nuclear power station reprocessing plants. Siromath has considerable nuclear experience and familiarity with the types of plant and instruments involved. Siromath Pty Ltd. 30 weeks. $53,950 plus expenses. Siromath Pty Ltd are engaged to conduct an evaluation of techniques in Nuclear Material Accountancy. In addition to nuclear experience Siromath has some expertise with the specific statistical techniques under examination and considerable experience in a variety of scientifically oriented statistical areas. McLennan Magasanik Associates. Completion by July 1984. $47,500. McLennan Magasanik Associates are undertaking studies into the marketing of solar thermal systems in industry in Australia. They possess appropriate expertise and provided the lowest tender. McLennan Magasanik Associates. Completion by July 1984. $22,500. McLennan Magasanik Associates are undertaking an assessment of solar pond technology and application in Australia. Their tender indicated appropriate expertise and satisfied all tender specifications. McLachlan Group Pty Ltd. Completion by July 1984. $49,650. McLachlan Group Pty Ltd are undertaking a study into the feasibility of solar thermal electric systems for Australia. Their tender indicated appropriate expertise and satisfied all tender specifications. N.S.W. Department of Agriculture. Completion by July 1984. $16,000. The N.S.W. Department of Agriculture is undertaking a study into the opportunities to reduce energy consumption in tillage operations. The Department possesses appropriate expertise and provided the lowest tender. Australian Dairy Corporation. Completion by July 1984. $29,500. The Australian Dairy Corporation is undertaking a technical and economic assessment into the effect of energy conservation methods and practices on milk concentration technologies. Their tender indicated appropriate expertise and satisfied all tender specifications. Data Science Pty Ltd. May-December 1984. $38,000. Data Science Pty Ltd has been engaged to participate in the design, data modelling and implementation of a petroleum exploration data index for the Bureau of Mineral Resources. Their tender indicated appropriate expertise and satisfied all tender specifications. B. R. Senior and Associates. May-December 1984. $40,000. B. R. Senior and Associates has been engaged to participate in design, data modelling and implementation of a petroleum exploration data index for the Bureau of Mineral Resources. Their tender indicated appropriate expertise and satisfied all tender specifications. (6) Detailed guidelines on the engagement of consultants were issued by the Public Service Board, in consultation with the Department of Finance, in 1978. A copy of these have been provided to the honourable member The guidelines cover situations where the consultant is selected from a competitive field and those where only one consultant can provide the required service. The above groupings of consultants engaged by the Department since April 1983 indicate the category within which they fall. (Question No. 1145) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 5 March 1984: (1) What consultants have been engaged to work for the Minister or the Minister 's Department since 1 April 1983. (2) What is the name of each consultant, or if a company or partnership, the name of the corporation or partnership. (3) For how long was each consultant engaged. (4) What fee is to be or has been paid to each consultant. (5) What special background and experience does each consultant possess to enable the consultant to undertake the engagement. (6) Was the merit principle applied in each case; if so, in what manner. Mr Holding —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) to (5) Mr J. P. Harkins-Barrister/Solicitor, former Deputy Chairman of the Commonwealth Legal Aid Commission and former Director of the Australian Legal Aid Office, 1978-1980 and 1974-1978 respectively. Conducted an inquiry into Aboriginal Legal Aid from 7 September 1983 to August 1984. Fee paid to date is $ 66,056-expected total fee is $89,000. Dr H. C. Coombs, M.A. Ph.D.-ANUTECH Pty Ltd former Chairman of the Australian Council of Aboriginal Affairs, 1968-1976; Chancellor Australian National University, 1968-76; Chairman Australian Council for the Arts, 1968-74. Conducted an inquiry in relation to the National Aboriginal Conference from October 1983. The consultancy arrangement is continuing and fee paid to date is $64,000. Expected all-up fee is $83,000. Dr A. Hamilton-Professor of Anthropology, Macquarie University, New South Wales . Consultant to the Aboriginal Land Commissioner during the Mt Barkly Northern Territory Land Claim. Fifteen days, completed, at a fee of $3,237. Mr P. McQueen-Senior Barrister/Solicitor, formerly with Central Australia Legal Aid. Counsel assisting the Aboriginal Land Commissioner during the NGADI/WALPIRI Land Claim, completed in seventeen days at a cost of $4 403. Professor B. Sanson-Professor of Anthropology at the University of Western Australia. Consultant to the Aboriginal Land Commissioner during the Upper Daly Land Claim. To date, eight days at a cost of $979. The consultancy arrangement continues. Mr P. Tiffen-Senior Barrister/Solicitor. Counsel assisting the Aboriginal Land Commissioner during the Upper Daly Land Claim; to date, eight days at a cost of $650. The consultancy arrangement continues. Dr N. Williams-Anthropologist and Research Consultant with the Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies. Consultant to the Aboriginal Land Commissioner during Murranji Land Claim; to date, fourteen days at a cost of $2,853. The consultancy arrangement continues. Mr P. Tiffen-Senior Barrister/Solicitor. Counsel assisting the Aboriginal Land Commissioner during the Murranji Land Claim; to date fourteen days at a cost of $4,010. The consultancy arrangement continues. Dr J. Bern-Senior Lecturer in Anthropology at the University of Newcastle. Consultant to the Aboriginal Land Commissioner during the Jawoyn Land Claim; to date, thirty-six days at a cost of $11,266. The consultancy arrangement continues. Mr M. Ward-Senior Barrister/Solicitor. Counsel assisting the Aboriginal Land Commissioner during the Jawoyn Land Claim; to date, thirty-six days at a cost of $13,110 with an expected total fee of $30,900. Dr I. Keen Ph.D.-Anthropologist at the University of Queensland. Consultant to the Aboriginal Land Commissioner during the Castlereagh Bay and Howard Island Closure of Seas. Three days completed at a cost of $514. Mr G. Hiley-Senior Barrister/Solicitor. Counsel assisting the Aboriginal Land Commissioner during the Castlereagh Bay and Howard Island Closure of Seas. Seven days completed at a cost of $2 265. Mr A. R. Castan-Queens Counsel, Melbourne. Consultant to the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs allowing the Minister direct access to Senior Counsel for advice on sensitive and complex legal questions concerning Aboriginal Affairs Policy. For much of that time his only advice has been as a member of a panel of lawyers advising the Minister in the development of Aboriginal land rights and related legislation. 1 April 1983 to 30 June 1984. The expected total fee is $34 ,000. (6) Detailed guidelines on the engagement of consultants were issued by the Public Service Board, in consultation with the Department of Finance, in 1978. A copy of these guidelines has been provided to the honourable member. The guidelines cover situations where the consultant is selected from a competitive field and those where only one consultant can provide the required service. All of those consultants engaged since April 1983 were engaged in accordance with standing arrangements approved by the Public Service Board. (Question No. 1170) Mr Jacobi asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 7 March 1984: (1) Is it a fact that certain persons have recently been charged in Western Australia with conspiring to defraud the Commonwealth; if so, (a) when were the charges laid, (b) under what provisions of which Commonwealth Act were the persons charged and (c) are extradition proceedings pending. (2) Further to the Attorney-General's answer to question No. 203 (Hansard, 8 September 1983, page 640) relating to conspiracy charges brought against Mr Brian Maher, can the Attorney-General indicate whether the proceedings have been completed and when judgment is expected. Mr Lionel Bowen —The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: 1. Yes. (a) First instance warrants alleging the offences were issued in Brisbane, Queensland, on 28 February 1984. The warrants were dealt with pursuant to the Service and Execution of Process Act and the defendants concerned were arrested in Perth in early March 1984. (b) All charges were laid pursuant to section 86 (1) (e) of the Crimes Act 1914 alleging conspiracy to defraud the Commonwealth. (c) Yes, the proceedings came on for hearing in the Perth Court of Petty Sessions on 18 April 1984 and have been adjourned to 20 June 1984. 2. Proceedings have not been completed against Brian James Maher. Committal proceedings relating to charges of conspiracy to defraud the Commonwealth are listed to commence against Maher and his co-defendants in Brisbane on 16 July 1984. On 17 April 1984 the Full Court of the Supreme Court of Queensland allowed Maher to withdraw his appeal and quashed the extradition order made in relation to Maher's extradition to Perth. Both orders were by consent because the charges against Maher will now be dealt with in Brisbane. (Question No. 1182) Mr Blanchard asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education and Youth Affairs, upon notice, on 27 March 1984: (1) Which non-government schools in Western Australia have been allocated funds from the participation and equity program. (2) What amount has each school received. (3) Have these schools specified the projects which the grants will provide; if so, what are the projects. (4) What amount has the Western Australian Education Department been allocated under the participation and equity program. (5) In what way will this Department allocate the amount amongst state schools. Mr Dawkins —The Minister for Education and Youth Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1 to 3) The following schedules show the non-government schools in Western Australia which have been allocated funds from the participation and equity program, the amount each school has received and the projects approved for those grants. (4) The Western Australian Education Department has been allocated a total of $ 3.851m, of which $1,928,813 has been committed on continuing projects under the transition from school to work program. (5) Details of the basis on which the balance is to be allocated amongst State schools have not yet been supplied by Western Australian authorities, though I understand this is under active consideration by the Commonwealth/State Participation and Equity Program Committee for Western Australia which has been established recently. The Commonwealth Schools Commission guidelines specify that approximately 75 per cent of the available funds are to be allocated to school-based activities with the balance being available for system-level initiatives and support programs. School/Grantee Project/Program description Grant $ Catholic Education Office, Western Australia, 6 Salvado Road, Wembley, Western Australia 6014 PEP Development Unit, to support, co-ordinate and develop the program for all participating non-government schools. 102,570 Kearnan College, Manjimup Curriculum review for years 10-12 and development of alternatives; careers guidance for all students in years 8-12. 7,000 St Joseph's School, Northam Careers and PEP co-ordination for all students, including unemployed school leavers. 5,000 St Joseph's College, Spencer Park PEP co-ordinator and increased counselling to students. 7,000 St Thomas Aquinas School, Bedford Career education program and careers co-ordinator to develop an alternative year 11 course via staff and parent workshop. 8,000 Clontarf, Bentley Work preparation officer to assist with work experience placements for emotionally and behaviourally disturbed boys. 3,400 Christian Brothers College, Fremantle Continued development of a year 11 alternative course, extending careers counselling to an integrated life skills course, language and learning and extension of the ESL program. 8,000 St Patrick's College, Geraldton Career education and counselling co-ordinator, focusing on boarding students' needs and additional work experience for students. 7,000 Stella Maris College, Geraldton Year 11 alternative course for girls, enhancing their numeracy, literacy, communication skills, self-esteem and social development. 5,000 St Mark's College, Highgate Co-ordinator to develop and evaluate year 11 course for boys and develop manual/ industrial arts section of the course. 7,000 St Brendan's College, Hilton Continue employment of a careers education co-ordinator for individual and small group guidance, important for girls from non-English speaking backgrounds. 8,000 Christian Brothers College, Kalgoorlie Development of courses at year 11, continuing work of PEP co-ordinator for careers education (years 8-10), careers counselling (years 10-12), work experience and staff in-service. Assist proposed amalgamation with Prendiville College. 7,000 Mercy College Senior School, Koondoola Alternative courses to extend subject grid offering in years 11 and 12, through widening students' range of options. 7,000 St Mary's Secondary College, Christian Brothers College, Leederville Extension of joint-school year 11 courses and development of a school-based ' alternative' maths course for year 10 students. 8,000 St Brigid's College, Lesmurdie Co-ordination and development of careers education program within the curriculum for girls in years 8-12. 6,000 Aquinas College, Manning Curriculum review and development of alternative year 11 course for all students . 5,000 Salvado College, New Norcia Development of Stage II of market gardening section of the years 8-12 agricultural course at this country boarding school. Optional for years 8-10 and for specialist study in year 11-12. 10,000 St Norbert College, Queens Park Development of career education program by providing clerical assistance and additional equipment for industrial arts program. 6,000 De Vialar College, Samson PEP co-ordinator to develop an extensive life skills program for this female and predominantly migrant school enrolment. 6,000 Sacred Heart College, Sorrento Development of year 11 course, particularly for Aboriginal girl boarders, and to introduce an industrial arts workshop to increase students' practical skills. 8,000 All Saints College, Bull Creek To commence a co-educational alternative year 11 course for students not presently catered for in life and job skills. 4,000 Christian Aboriginal Parent-Directed School, Coolgardie Grant for salaries of trade teachers, to provide an understanding of work and life skills in addition to normal curriculum. 8,000 Kulkarriya Community School, Fitzroy Crossing A program for 15 and 16-year-old Aboriginal girls to collect information from their community and school to produce literature and teaching aids in the context of job experience, to enhance their communication skills, confidence, literacy, organisational, and printing skills. 12,230 Arinya High School, Graylands As a complement to school care studies to provide an alternative program to equip students with social interactive skills, enhanced self concepts, and realistic views of the world of work. 4,800 Albany Seventh Day Adventist School, Albany Development of a course designed to promote a range of skills to assist students in post-school work and living. 4,000 (Question No. 1191) Mr Aldred asked the Special Minister of State, upon notice, on 27 March 1984: What was the name, designation, and salary of each person employed on the staff of Mr Justice Lionel Murphy during the period that he was the Attorney-General. Mr Young —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Mr Justice Murphy was Attorney-General and also Minister for Customs and Excise from 19 December 1972 to 10 February 1975. In addition, he was Leader of the Government in the Senate during this period. During that time the staff establishment entitlement of Ministers was varied, but all positions available to Mr Justice Murphy during all or part of the period are listed below. Occupants from time to time are shown in parentheses, their precise length of service in each position is not available. Part-time Scientific Adviser (Professor H. Messel) Press Secretary (Mr G. Negus, Ms E. Enright) Ministerial Officer Grade 2 (Mr L. Maher, Mr T. Wright, Miss M. Barron) Ministerial Officer Grade 1 (Miss M. Barron, Miss P. Mullins) Assistant Private Secretary-two positions-(Mr P. Crawford, Miss M. Minter, Miss P. Mullins, Miss R. Shields) Secretary/Typist (Ms K. Scott, Ms C. Hall) Steno/Secretary Grade 1-up to three positions-(Miss P. Mullins, Miss R. Shields , Miss O. Dungca, Miss G. Sheedy, Miss L. Stephenson, Miss M. Minter) Salary levels increased several times over the period. Annual salaries as at 10 February 1975 were: Part time Scientific Adviser, $7,500; Ministerial Officer Grade 2, $13,036-13, 590; Ministerial Officer Grade 1, $10,625-11,368; Assistant Private Secretary, $ 8,312-8,791; Press Secretary, $14,300-14,862; Secretary/Typist, $7,353-7,833; Steno/Secretary Grade 1, $6,636-6,995. (Question No. 1231) Mr Rocher asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 2 April 1984: (1) How many actions have been commenced to date under section 45D of the Trade Practices Act. (2) How many of these (a) have been settled or withdrawn, (b) are still pending (excluding cases subject to appeal), and (c) have been decided by a court of first instance. Mr Lionel Bowen —The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) At least 87 actions have been commenced to date. An exact figure cannot be provided because Federal Court records prior to 1984 are not in a form from which such information can be accurately and readily extracted. Due to the installation of computerised records in the Federal Court registry, it is now possible to provide such statistics in respect of matters commencing after 1 January 1984. However, having regard to the litigation process, it is not expected that any significant information would yet be available in relation to such proceedings. (2) Insofar as can be ascertained from the information readily available, 55 cases appear to come within category (a) and 6 cases appear to come within category (b), although the outcome of private legal actions is frequently not apparent from public records, as actions may be settled by the parties without being formally withdrawn. (3) In all cases where interlocutory or final relief has been granted or refused, the Court of first instance will have made a decision, at least of a preliminary nature, on the application before it. Of the 87 cases referred to in (1) above, it appears that the Court has reached such a decision in 42 instances . Of these, it appears that there were five cases which were not disposed of by the consent of the parties and where permanent relief was either granted or refused. (Question No. 1233) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Territories and Local Government, upon notice , on 2 April 1984: (1) Has his attention been drawn to the report on forward Estimates of Budget Outlays 1984-85, 1985-86, and 1986-87, paragraph 371, which states that his Department is seeking an increase of over 1000 additional staff in all forward Estimates periods, and that extra staffing for the Australian Capital Territory Fire Brigade, the National Capital Development Commission, and the Parliament House Construction Authority were not included in this total. (2) How does he reconcile table 1, forward Estimates of Staff, on page 171, and table 2, forward Estimates of other Staff, page 178, with the total figure of 1000 additional staff. (3) Does table 2, page 178, under the heading National Capital Development Commission, show no staff to be employed full time or part time from the year 1985-86; if so, why. (4) In what areas will the additional staff of 900, an increase of 50 per cent over 3 years, as indicated under the heading 'Trust Accounts', table 2, page 178 , be employed in the areas of responsibility of his Department. (5) What new and additional programs is it to be assumed will be in place as a result of the employment of this additional staff. Mr Uren —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. (2) The increases in salaried and wages staff are reconciled as follows: 1983-84 1984-85 1985-86 1986-87 Salary (p. 171) 1,905 2,120 2,120 2,120 Wages (p. 178) 1,580 1,726 2,074 2,461 Total 3,485 3,846 4,194 4,581 Increase . . 361 348 387 Total increase . . . . . . 1,096 (3) The absence of figures against the National Capital Development Commission' s (NCDC) staff estimates for 1985-86 onwards, results from an error during the compilation of the table. The figures for the NCDC for 1985-86-1986-87 should read as follows: 1985-86 1986-87 Full time Part time Other Full time Part time Other 340 35 3 340 35 3 (4) The areas of my Department in which additional staff paid through Trust Accounts will be employed are: Public Transit as bus drivers, mechanics, bus cleaners and administrative staff ; Australian Capital Territory Forests as gangers, forestry workers, rangers, drivers and administrative staff; City Parks Administration as gardeners, fencers, gangers, carpenters and drivers; Technical Services as street cleaners, dog patrolmen and drivers; Conservation and agriculture as rangers, gangers and drivers; Community relations and facilities as recreational attendants at Erindale Centre and the National Sports Centre; and Accounting and supply as clerical-administrative staff responsible for the administration of all trust accounts. (5) The increase sought in staff is to meet current workload requirements and will not involve new or additional programs. (Question No. 1237) Dr Everingham asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 2 April 1984: (1) Is he able to say on what occasions the International Red Cross has had access to (a) all parts of Indonesia and (b) all prisons and prisoners in (i) Indonesia and (ii) East Timor. (2) Is he also able to say to what extent the organisation has been able to carry out its traditional role of tracing missing persons in (a) Indonesia and ( b) East Timor. (3) What representations has Australia made to improve this situation. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) does not seek access to all prisons and prisoners in Indonesia including East Timor. The ICRC initiatives in Indonesia are aimed at securing access to prisoners who fit into the broad category of political detainees. Outside of East Timor the ICRC has concentrated its efforts on those still in detention following the events of 1965. The last ICRC visit to those detainees was from 20 January to 24 March 1983. The ICRC had access to political detainees in East Timor in early 1982 and in November 1982. The ICRC and Indonesian authorities have recently agreed on further access. As the first step in the implementation of this agreement an ICRC team visited prisoners in Comarca Prison in Dili in March this year. The ICRC hopes to make further visits to Comarca Prison and other places of detention in East Timor for protection purposes in the near future. (2) The Government understands the ICRC receives few inquiries about missing persons in Indonesia outside of East Timor. The ICRC is generally satisfied with the way it has been able to carry out its inquiries about missing persons in East Timor over the past year. (3) The Australian Government's position on human rights questions in general is well known. More specifically the Government has on several occasions publicly expressed support for the access of international organisations to East Timor. The Australian Government position on these questions is well known to the Indonesian Government as a result of the visits to Indonesia in 1983 by the Prime Minister and myself in June and April respectively. The Australian Embassy in Jakarta has also made formal representations about the importance of access of international agencies, including ICRC to East Timor and the Embassy continues to reinforce these approaches in the course of the regular contact it maintains with the relevant Indonesian authorities. (Question No. 1244) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 4 April 1984: (1) Has his attention been drawn to a report, in the Sydney Morning Herald of 12 March 1984, of an announcement of a $40m package of improvements to Sydney's bus and ferry services which stated that the money would be available from the Australian bicentennial roads program; if so, was the report a mistake; if not, has he approved the use of road funds for these buses and ferries. (2) Does the bicentennial roads program legislation permit funds levied for roads purposes to be diverted to the acquisition of 200 more Mercedes Benz buses with electronic destination boards, a second hydrofoil for 240 passengers, and 4 more ferries for inner-harbour services. Mr Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) The Australian Bicentennial Road Development Trust Fund Act 1982 provides that a State may direct urban arterial road funds to urban public transport (UPT) capital projects where the Federal Minister is satisfied that the project is accorded a priority by the State and would, if undertaken, result in the reduction of the traffic on, or the wear and tear affecting, urban arterial roads in the State. In accordance with these provisions of the Act, urban public transport projects have been approved for funding in all States except Tasmania. The first approvals for urban public transport projects were given by the then Minister for Transport and Construction on 8 February 1983, when he agreed to funding being directed to the Kingston-Beenleigh rail electrification projects ($9.087m) and six passenger interchanges ($1.259m) in Brisbane. The then Minister for Transport and Construction also approved on 2 March 1983 a contribution ($15. 125m) to the Petrie-Caboolture rail electrification project in Brisbane. The most recent approvals relate to a program submitted by the New South Wales Government which included the acquisition of a 235 passenger hydrofoil ($9.7m), 200 City-type buses ($22.0m), and four 25 metre ferries ($8.0m). These projects were proposed for assistance in a program submitted by the then New South Wales Minister for Transport on 16 September 1983. Following detailed examination and discussions with State officials, the projects were approved on 8 March 1984. (Question No. 1248) Mr Hodgman asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 5 April 1983 : (1) Has his attention been drawn to the case of Mr Jordan Georgiev of Homebush, New South Wales, concerning his continuing endeavours to have his wife and two children brought from Bulgaria to Australia; if so, can he confirm that in a cablegram, O.BG25986, dated 2 March 1983, from the Australian Embassy, Belgrade, to Canberra, it was suggested that the matter could be resolved in Mr Georgiev's favour if he was prepared to pay an amount of 20,000 lev (approximately $15,800) in settlement of his offence. (2) Was this information officially conveyed to Canberra by senior Australian diplomats working on the Georgiev case. (3) What is his reaction to the suggestion that Mr Georgiev will have to pay an amount of 20,000 lev in order to bring about the release of his wife and children from Bulgaria. (4) Is he prepared to say whether paragraph 2 of the cablegram (a) contains a comment as to the relationship between Australia and Bulgaria and the propriety of paying the amount of 20,000 lev to the Bulgarian Government and (b) was deleted from the copy given to Mr Georgiev. (5) Has he been able to obtain the precise details of any charges against Mr Georgiev, described as damage to social property; if so, is he able to advise when and where it is alleged that Mr Georgiev committed the offence. (6) Has he, with the assistance of Australian diplomats working on the Georgiev case, been able to form any assessment as to (a) the gravity of the alleged offence and (b) whether the sum of 20,000 lev is appropriate to the alleged offence. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. The Australian Government has made a number of strong representations to the Bulgarian authorities on behalf of Mr Georgiev's family. We have made it clear to the Bulgarian Government that, if left unresolved, such cases would inevitably have an adverse effect on Australian-Bulgarian relations. The Australian Government will of course continue to make representations on behalf of Mr Georgiev's family and other families in a similar position. I confirm that in cable-gram 0.BG25986 from the Australian Embassy, Belgrade, to Canberra, it was reported that the Bulgarian authorities had suggested that the matter could be resolved in Mr Goergiev's favour if he were prepared to pay an amount of 20, 000 lev in settlement to his offence. (2) Yes. (3) (5) and (6) I have no means of obtaining precise details of any charges against Mr Georgiev, nor of establishing whether any offence was in fact committed. I am therefore not able to comment on the gravity of the alleged offence, nor on the appropriateness of the fine. If, however, no offence was committed, I cannot but deplore the action of the Bulgarian authorities in demanding this payment. The Prime Minister's recent message to the Parliamentary Group of Amnesty International highlighted the Government's concern at the tragic separation of families in Eastern Europe who are not permitted to be reunited with relatives in Australia, and called on the respective East European Governments to show compassion for these families. (4) (a) Paragraph 2 of the cable in question contains comment relevant to the relationship between Australia and Bulgaria but none concerning the propriety of paying the amount demanded by the Bulgarian Government. (b) Paragraph 2 was deleted from the copy given to Mr Georgiev, in accordance with Section 33 of the Freedom of Information Act. (Question Nos. 1250-1277) Mr Peacock asked all Ministers, upon notice, on 5 April 1984: (1) How many regulations or amendments to existing regulations have been promulgated within the Minister's Department since March 1983. (2) What are these regulations and on what day was each introduced. (3) Does the Department have any officers specifically charged with the duty of monitoring the growth in regulation in his Department; if so, what are their names and salaries. (4) Is there any officer, group or committee currently examining or reviewing the growth or extent of regulations in the Department; if so, (a) what are the names of the officers and the groups and committees and their members, (b) how many times has each committee or group met, (c) have they produced any reports and, if so, what are the titles and the main conclusions of those reports and (d ) what actions have been taken subsequently by the Department. (5) Do any of the regulations, new and existing, carry a 'sunset' proviso; if so, what are the titles of the regulations and when does each regulation expire. (6) What is the proportion of regulations carrying a 'sunset' proviso to regulations which do not. (7) Has the Department issued any guidelines for the preparation and content of statutory rules which are intended to ensure that regulations are introduced only after consideration of alternative approaches. (8) On how many occasions has the Minister been personally involved in the review of existing regulations. (9) How many regulations or statutory rules have been abolished by the Department since March 1983. (10) Is it mandatory in the Department that, in the preparation of proposed regulations, they be accompanied by a cost-benefit analysis or regulatory impact statement. (11) What steps have been taken by the Department to make statutory rules available to the public and available for purchase. (12) Have any community, industry, business or union groups written to the Department in the last 12 months expressing concern about, or recommending review of, existing regulations; if so, (a) how many letters have been received and (b) how many individuals, or groups, has the Minister received, on an official basis, in relation to the question of over-regulation. Mr Hawke —The honourable member has asked identical questions of all Ministers, as indicated by the above question numbers. The following answer to the honourable member's question is provided on behalf of all Ministers, with their concurrence: The Government is concerned to ensure that there is not regulation for its own sake. The Cabinet Committee on Industry Restructuring, for example, has as part of its task the job of ensuring that industry restructuring is not hampered by unnecessary regulation of industry. The preparation of financial impact statements on legislation ensures that costs and benefits are kept fully in mind . In answer to the specific questions asked by the honourable member: (1) and (2) The total number of statutory rules (including regulations) made since March 1983 is 417. (excluding 8 repeals) as at 6 June 1984. Notice of the making of statutory rules is published in the Gazette. (3) and (4) The nature of subordinate legislation is such that its scope is determined by Parliament in the course of passing the Acts under which the subordinate legislation is made, the purpose of which is to give effect to the Acts. In addition the recent developments in administrative law act as an incentive for Departments to review the application and relevance of many regulations. It is not practical to provide the names and salaries of officials who might be involved in these reviews. (5) and (6) As has been the practice adopted by previous Governments I am not prepared to authorise the use of the considerable resources of time and money that would be involved in providing this information. (7) General guidance on what matters might be suitable for inclusion in subordinate legislation is contained in the Legislation Handbook. The Attorney- General's Department is available to advise Departments and authorities on the kinds of matters that should be dealt with by statutory rules. (8) As has been the practice adopted by previous Governments I am not prepared to authorise the use of the considerable resources of time and money that would be involved in providing the detailed information sought. However, all legislation, including subordinate legislation, is approved by the relevant Minister. (9) See answer to (1). (10) In proposing a legislative scheme which may include provision for the making of subordinate legislation departments are expected to provide justification in terms of costs and benefits to government and those who would be affected. (11) Copies of all Government publications, including statutory rules, can be purchased from the Australian Government Publishing Service which has offices in all capital cities. (12) There have been some expressions of concern from time to time but as has been the practice adopted by previous Governments, I am not prepared to authorise the use of the considerable resources of time and money that would be involved in providing the detailed information sought. (Question No. 1310) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice, on 5 April 1984: (1) What changes to existing equal opportunities programs have been made in the Minister's Department since the 1983 general election in regard to (a) aims, (b) assessment procedures, (c) methods of ensuring that the aims of the program have been met, (d) procedures for union involvement and/or consultation in the program, (e) the involvement of the Public Service Board Equal Opportunities Bureau and (f) the priority rating of the program within the Department. (2) What is the cost of the Department's programs. Mr Willis —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) I am pleased to advise that my Department has both expanded and intensified its Equal Employment Opportunities (EEO) Program since this Government came to office in 1983. A comprehensive EEO strategy has been endorsed by my Department's Corporate Management Group and is currently being implemented. As part of this strategy all departmental staff have received advice of the Department's policy commitment to EEO. The overall aim of the EEO program is to bring about full and continuing equality of opportunity for all departmental staff. In that regard, particular attention is being given to the procedures and processes associated with the selection and promotion of staff and with personnel policies generally. To facilitate the development and implementation of the EEO program the Department has established a joint management/union working party which has been functioning at a national level for some time. The work of this group is considered to be of high priority and therefore is receiving full administrative support from the Department and is convened by a senior Second Division officer. In addition, the National Council, which is the main consultative mechanism for the Department's management and unions, has responsibility for policy aspects of the program. The working party and officers in the Department responsible for EEO maintain regular contact with the Public Service Board EEO Bureau. (2) It is difficult to estimate precisely the cost of the Department's EEO program. Staff costs to date have been kept at a minimum through seconding appropriate officers to carry out the necessary development work. There have been some travel costs associated with the activities of the working party and some printing work has been necessary. (Question No. 1316) Mr Peacock asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 5 April 1984: (1) What changes to existing equal opportunities programs have been made in the Minister's Department since the 1983 general election in regard to (a) aims, (b) assessment procedures, (c) methods of ensuring that the aims of the program have been met, (d) procedures for union involvement and/or consultation in the program, (e) the involvement of the Public Service Board Equal Opportunities Bureau and (f) the priority rating of the program within the Department. (2) What is the cost of the Department's programs. Mr Lionel Bowen —The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) While no formal program exists in the Department at this stage, as a result of a recent review it is proposed to create a position which will have as one of its principal responsibilities the development and co-ordination of an equal employment opportunities program. The Department sees development of such a program as a priority task. As a precursor to this, in the area of women's employment, a Departmental Status of Women Committee was established in the latter half of 1983 to study particular aspects of the employment of women in the Department. All recruitment is conducted in the spirit of the Equal Employment Opportunity Bureau's programs and guidelines. Staff involved in recruitment activities have been made aware of their responsibilities in relation to equal employment opportunities. They attend courses conducted by the Bureau and literature from the Bureau is distributed widely throughout the Department. There is also contact with the Bureau on questions of special placement and a frequent exchange of legal and policy advice and information between the Bureau and the Department. In the further development of the Department's equal employment opportunity program, guidance will be sought from the Bureau and the Public Service Board and consideration given to the question of procedures for union involvement. (2) No separate costing is available. (Question No. 1329) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Home Affairs and Environment, upon notice, on 5 April 1984: (1) What changes to existing equal opportunities programs have been made in the Minister's Department since the 1983 general election in regard to (a) aims, (b) assessment procedures, (c) methods of ensuring that the aims of the program have been met, (d) procedures for union involvement and/or consultation in the program, (e) the involvement of the Public Service Board Equal Opportunities Bureau and (f) the priority rating of the program within the Department. (2) What is the cost of the Department's programs. Mr Cohen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) My Department has continued to encourage equal opportunity and has adopted principles for selection committees to ensure that staff are selected in accordance with equal employment opportunity practices. In accordance with the Government's policy of giving increased emphasis to equal employment opportunity , a departmental circular was issued on 11 November 1983 detailing the practices to be followed by the Department in pursuance of the policy; (b) (c) and (d) A senior officer of the Department has been given the responsibility for development and implementation of equal employment opportunity programs and a high level Personnel Development and Equal Opportunity Committee which includes representatives of appropriate staff associations, has recently been established to advise the Departmental Head. In particular it will be responsible for developing equal opportunity programs required by the recent Public Service Reform legislation and for identifying the developmental and training needs of staff; (e) The Public Service Board Equal Employment Opportunity Bureau was consulted during the development of the Department's approach and will continue to be consulted as programs are developed and reviewed; (f) My Department gives a high priority to the development of equal employment opportunity programs. (2) The costs of the Department's activity in this area are included in its general administrative expenses and are not separately identified. (Question No. 1334) Mr Peacock asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 5 April 1984: (1) How many conferences or meetings have taken place between Commonwealth and State Ministers and officials over the issue of compensation to Tasmania for the cessation of work on the Franklin River dam. (2) How many Commonwealth employees have, as part of their duties, been involved in the resolution of this matter. (3) Has the Government paid any consultancy fees to persons outside the Commonwealth Public Service for opinions, advice or services in relation to the Franklin River dam and the settlement of that issue. Mr Hawke —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) There have been 11 meetings between Commonwealth and State Ministers, including the Premier of Tasmania and myself, and 14 meetings between Commonwealth and State officials, on matters relating to the assistance being provided by the Commonwealth to Tasmania consequent on cessation of work on the Gordon-below-Franklin scheme. In the case of meetings between officials the number given represents meetings of the Commonwealth/State Gordon-below-Franklin Alternative Employment Committee , the Joint Study Group on Tasmania's Future Electricity Requirements, a committee comprising representatives of unions, the Hydro-Electric Commission and the Tasmania and Commonwealth Governments to deal with any problems of hardship to individual workers, and meetings to discuss long-term management arrangements for the World Heritage Area in South-West Tasmania (although this last issue might be regarded as separate from the others). The figure excludes numerous meetings of a sub-committee of contractors of the Commonwealth/State Committee, informal meetings between Commonwealth and State officials and meetings co-incident with the meetings between Ministers. (2) It is not practicable to provide a complete response to this question, bearing in mind that a substantial number of Commonwealth departments and authorities have had some involvement in the matter at various times, staff changes, and other factors. Over the period since the High Court's judgment on 1 July 1983, however, the principal Departments involved in the issue of assistance to the State have been the Departments of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Finance, Resources and Energy, Employment and Industrial Relations, and the Treasury. It has been estimated that, at the peak of activity on this matter , some 15 officers in these departments were involved in significant measure ( equivalent to at least one day a week) on matters relating to assistance to Tasmania following cessation of work on the Gordon-below-Franklin scheme. Other Departments involved from time to time included Attorney-General's, Home Affairs and Environment, Transport, Aviation, Sport, Recreation and Tourism, and Housing and Construction. (3) Australian Nationwide Opinion Polls Pty Ltd was commissioned to undertake surveys in Tasmania on the awareness and understanding of Commonwealth offers of assistance following the High Court decision. Initial research was conducted in March and follow up research in April 1984. A consultant to the Minister for Finance, Mr W. Butler, has also been engaged during the past couple of months as part of his duties on the development of Commonwealth proposals. (Question No. 1345) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Science and Technology, upon notice, on 5 April 1984: Is the Government considering a cut in real terms in expenditure on Antarctic research activities. Mr Barry Jones —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: No. The Government has yet to decide on the funding to be provided for the Antarctic program. It is hoped that there will be a significant increase in the amount available for research compared with recent years. (Question No. 1351) Mr Burr asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 1 May 1984: Is it a fact that, at the commencement of the working week on 2 April 1984, the Tasmanian Region of Australian National (AN) was 60 wagons short for outstanding orders from clients wishing to use rail for freight purposes; if so, (a) was this caused by actions, as outlined in the annual report for 1982-83 by AN, whereby only 20 wagons came to Tasmania from the mainland that financial year and, at the same time, 170 Tasmanian wagons were written off, (b) was this in keeping with the Federal Government's requirements under the Australian National Railways Commission Act 1983 wherein the Government expects railways to be looking for new traffic to expand its business and (c) was COND, which was understood to stand for 'condemned', painted on some of the wagons from South Australia. Mr Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: During the week commencing 2 April 1984, the Tasmanian Region of Australian National experienced a shortfall of 57 woodchip log wagons. Freight requirements for all other rail customers were met during this period. (a) The shortfall can be attributed largely to industrial bans placed on wagon repairs and not to the number of wagons written off or transferred from the mainland. (b) 170 wagons were written off during 1982-83 as they were of low carrying capacity and were fitted with unsuitable bogies for present day trains. The fact that these wagons were condemned in no way represents a contraction of railway business. (c) None of the wagons received from the mainland during 1982-83 were endorsed 'COND', denoting condemned. All wagons transferred to Tasmania from the mainland are of sound construction. (Question No. 1372) Mr Braithwaite asked the Minister for Territories and Local Government, upon notice, on 1 May 1984: (1) Is he in a position to announce the panel of inquiry into financing and operations of local government as promised in the 1983 Budget papers. (2) Will the inquiry panel include at least one elected representative from local government. (3) Has the Australian Council of Local Government Associations been consulted on the composition of the inquiry panel and its terms of reference. (4) Why is the Advisory Council for Inter-government Relations not considered the appropriate body to carry out the inquiry. Mr Uren —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The membership of the panel for the National Inquiry into Local Government Financing was announced on 10 May 1984. It was not possible to announce the panel's membership earlier due to the need to consult fully with the States. The panel comprises: Professor Peter Self (Chairman) Professor of Public Administration London School of Economics 1963-82, presently Visiting Senior Research Fellow, Urban Research Unit, Australian National University. Executive Member since 1954 of the Town and Country Planning Association, United Kingdom. Publications on public administration, urban and regional planning. Mr Michael Eyers, qualified in Law and Urban Economics with public administration experience, practising lawyer and consultant. Dr Judith Yates, Senior Lecturer in Economics, Sydney University. Mr Anthony Philbrick, Town Clerk and City Administrator Brisbane City. Mr Noel Dawkins, Chief Executive Officer, City of Canning, Western Australia. Mr Peter Emery, Deputy Under-Treasurer, South Australia. Dr Ian Manning, Research Fellow, Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, Melbourne University. (2) and (3) The aim in appointing the panel was to achieve an independent, balanced, cross-section of local government expertise and experience. In considering the membership of the panel, I took into account the suggestions of a number of organisations including the Australian Council of Local Government Associations. (4) The purpose in undertaking this inquiry is to obtain independently established recommendations on Local Government financing and the operations of the Local Government (Personal Income Tax Sharing) Act 1976. The Advisory Council for Inter-government Relations' charter is much broader than that and its membership of twenty-two was not considered appropriate for the type of specialist inquiry envisaged. (Question No. 1378) Mr Andrew asked the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice, on 2 May 1984: (1) Is it a fact that the wage explosion and consequent drop in profits in 1971 and 1972 created massive unemployment in 1973. (2) Did he state in a news release, dated 4 April 1984, that the 4.1 per cent wage increase announced that day would mean strong employment growth. (3) How does he explain the apparent contradiction between the situations referred to in parts (1) and (2). Mr Willis —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The following table shows that official figures do not support the assertion that there was a wage explosion and a drop in profits in 1971 and 1972 . Growth in Average Weekly Earnings (AWE) accelerated in 1971 but eased in 1972 while corporate profits continued to grow in both years. Further, the unemployment rate actually dropped in 1973 to 2.3 per cent. Growth in Unemployment AWE Corporate rate-annual (per cent) Profit share* profits average change) (per cent) (per cent) (per cent) (a) (b) (b) (c) 1971 12.4 16.9 5.8 1.9 1972 8.2 16.6 8.7 2.6 1973 12.5 16.9 21.3 2.3 (a) ABS Catalogue No. 6302 'Average Weekly Earnings, States and Australia' ( Quarterly). (b) Unpublished ABS Working Estimates from National Accounts. (c) ABS Catalogue No. 6203 'The Labour Force-Australia' (Monthly). * Share of Gross Operating Surplus of Trading Enterprise Companies in GDP at factor cost. (2) Yes. (3) There is no contradiction. Full indexation of wages and salaries will strengthen the centralised wage fixing system and the Prices and Incomes Accord. Given the 'no extra claims' commitment and the effect of Medicare on the CPI in the March and June quarter of 1984, there will be very little growth in wage costs for a period of almost a year following the latest 4.1 per cent increase. In the absence of an acceptable centralised wage fixing system, there would be the risk of a blow-out in wages, similar to that which occurred in 1981-82 which would 'choke off' recovery. Maintenance of the wage fixing system will however see the real unit labour cost index back to its 1966-67 to 1972-73 base level, or possibly even lower, by the end of 1984. Corporate profitability has already recovered strongly and the environment is now favourable for growth in business investment. Continued support of the Accord, and full wage indexation, which protects workers' real wages, provides the best means available for sustained economic recovery and a reduction in unemployment. (Question No. 1380) Mr Andrew asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 2 May 1984: Will he bring up to date information contained in the answer to question No. 5145 (Hansard, 5 and 6 March 1980, page 718). Mr Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Details of Commonwealth funds specifically made available to the States and Northern Territory for road purposes during the period 1980-81 to 1982-83 inclusive are set out in the tables below. The Bureau of Transport Economics Road Construction Price Index used in converting to constant (1971-72) prices the annual expenditure amounts set out in the answer to question No. 5145 has now been revised. The tables below provide a constant (1972-73) price comparison of Commonwealth grants to the States and Northern Territory for roads for the period 1972-73 to 1982-83, re- calculated on the basis of the revised index. COMMONWEALTH GRANTS TO THE STATES AND NORTHERN TERRITORY FOR ROADS 1980-81 (Current prices) ($'000) New South South Western Northern Category Wales Victoria Queensland Australia Australia Tasmania Territory Total Roads Grants Act 1980 National roads 94,948 48,469 54,909 24,973 29,126 12,820 12,284 277,529 Rural arterial roads 22,998 14,182 29,386 8,943 12,023 3,833 1,010 92,375 Urban arterial roads 36,138 34,040 14,594 6,330 14,338 3,535 954 109,929 Local roads 42,417 29,668 28,875 11,371 21,427 7,538 6,871 148,167 Total 196,501 126,359 127,764 51,617 76,914 27,726 21,119 628,000 COMMONWEALTH GRANTS TO THE STATES AND NORTHERN TERRITORY FOR ROADS 1981-82 (Current prices) ($'000) New South South Western Northern Category Wales Victoria Queensland Australia Australia Tasmania Territory Total Roads Grants Act 1981 National roads 103,566 52,868 59,893 27,240 31,769 13,984 13,399 302,719 Arterial roads 64,503 52,599 47,972 16,659 28,754 8,037 2,142 220,666 Local roads 46,267 32,361 31,496 12,403 23,372 8,222 7,494 161,615 Total 214,336 137,828 139,361 56,302 83,895 30,243 23,035 685,000 COMMONWEALTH GRANTS TO THE STATES AND NORTHERN TERRITORY FOR ROADS 1982-83 (Current prices) ($'000) New South South Western Northern Category Wales Victoria Queensland Australia Australia Tasmania Territory Total Roads Grants Act 1981 National roads 110,989 56,645 64,204 29,198 34,032 14,988 14,372 324,428 Arterial roads 69,110 56,362 51,397 17,849 30,805 8,605 2,293 236,421 Local roads 49,576 34,664 33,747 13,280 25,037 8,813 8,034 173,151 Sub-Total 229,675 147,671 149,348 60,327 89,874 32,406 24,699 734,000 ABRD Trust Fund Act National roads 24,000 9,529 13,180 3,362 6,443 1,712 3,280 61,506 Urban arterial roads 5,700 5,708 9,279 (a) 3,461 4,829 834 115 29,926 Rural arterial roads 4,000 3,710 5,612 992 2,421 130 950 17,815 Local roads . . 1,521 2,537 700 . . 1,030 1,896 7,684 Sub-Total 33,700 20,468 30,608 8,515 13,693 3,706 6,241 116,931 Total 263,375 168,139 179,956 68,842 103,567 36,112 30,940 850,931 (a) Includes $2.457m for Urban Public Transport Projects. COMMONWEALTH GRANTS TO THE STATES FOR ROADS 1972-73 (1972-73 prices) ($'000) New South South Western Category Wales Victoria Queensland Australia Australia Tasmania Total Principal Grants Urban arterial roads 46,520 36,170 23,040 13,940 14,830 5,290 139,790 Rural arterial roads 14,780 4,110 13,170 3,210 5,690 2,550 43,510 Rural roads other than arterial roads 23,010 16,100 15,120 9,450 14,850 4,130 82,660 Planning and research 1,280 860 780 400 540 180 4,040 Total of principal grants 85,590 57,240 52,110 27,000 35,910 12,150 270,000 Supplementary grant . . . . . . 1,000 8,000 . . 9,000 Total Commonwealth Aid Roads Act 1969 85,590 57,240 52,110 28,000 43,910 12, 150 279,000 Other assistance(a) . . . . 5,514 1,000 1,925 . . 8,439 Total 85,590 57,240 57,624 29,000 45,835 12,150 287,439 (a) Includes funds provided under beef roads assistance legislation, funds provided for sealing of Eyre Highway and maintenance of the Eyre and Barkly Highways. COMMONWEALTH GRANTS TO THE STATES FOR ROADS 1973-74 (1972-73 prices) ($'000) New South South Western Category Wales Victoria Queensland Australia Australia Tasmania Total Principal Grants Urban arterial roads 48,602 37,871 24,160 14,778 15,951 5,590 146,952 Rural arterial roads 15,448 4,294 13,799 3 395 6,111 2,698 45,745 Rural roads other than arterial roads 21,303 14,911 14,002 8,747 13,747 3,827 76,537 Planning and research 1,296 873 794 414 547 185 4,109 Total of Principal Grants 86,649 57,949 52,755 27,334 36,356 12,300 273,343 Supplementary grant . . . . . . . . 5,996 . . 5,996 Total Commonwealth Aid Roads Act 1969 86,649 57,949 52,755 27,334 42,352 12,300 279,339 Other assistance (a) 952 741 4,088 838 1,112 79 7,810 Total 87,601 58,690 56,843 28,172 43,464 12,379 287,149 (a) Includes funds provided under beef roads assistance legislation, funds provided for sealing of Eyre Highway and maintenance of the Eyre and Barkly Highways, and funds for Traffic Engineering for Road Safety Improvements ( TERSIPS) Program. COMMONWEALTH GRANTS TO THE STATES FOR ROADS 1974-75 (1972-73 prices) ($'000) New South South Western Category Wales Victoria Queensland Australia Australia Tasmania Total National Roads Act National Highways construction 19 433 11 860 12 018 10 239 5 051 3 656 62,257 National Highways maintenance 4,987 1 118 3 389 899 1 413 302 12 108 Export and major commercial roads . . . . 10 174 686 151 1 021 Sub-total 24,420 12,978 15,417 11,312 7,150 4,109 75,386 Roads Grants Act Rural arterial roads 8,362 2,847 10,111 823 8,259 2,017 32,419 Rural local roads 11,572 9,027 9,741 3,286 6,801 3,238 43,665 Urban arterial roads 31,959 24,619 11,037 5,152 12,612 2,840 88,219 Urban local roads 1,241 1,146 663 331 320 8 3,709 Miters 606 597 671 901 287 137 3,199 Beef roads . . . . 3,745 (a) . . . . . . 3,745 Sub-total 53,740 38,236 35,968 10,493 28,279 8,240 174,956 Total 78,160 51,214 51,385 21,805 35,429 12,349 250,342 (a) In addition to the above amount, an amount of $279,000 ($191,384 in 1972-73 prices) was paid in 1974-75 under States Grants (Beef Cattle Roads) Act 1968. COMMONWEALTH GRANTS TO THE STATES FOR ROADS 1975-76 (1972-73 prices) ($'000) New South South Western Category Wales Victoria Queensland Australia Australia Tasmania Total National Roads Act National Highways construction 22,748 9,965 13,109 11,136 6,395 4,142 67,495 National Highways maintenance 4,334 949 3,500 1,252 1,688 403 12,126 Export and major commercial roads 290 2,847 848 638 534 303 5,460 Sub-total 27,372 13,761 17,457 13,026 8,617 4,848 85,081 Roads Grants Act Rural arterial roads 9,152 3,357 6,940 1,050 5,445 1,542 27,486 Rural local roads 9,546 6,970 9,692 3,144 6,442 2,509 38,303 Urban arterial roads 26,253 25,262 9,676 4,917 13,156 2,384 81,648 Urban local roads 2,522 1,898 1,163 591 629 200 7,003 Miters 1,701 1,457 1,496 1,012 938 534 7,138 Beef roads . . . . 5,659 . . . . . . 5,659 Sub-total 49,174 38,944 34,626 10,714 26,610 7,169 167,237 Total 76,546 52,705 52,083 23,740 35,227 12,017 252,318 COMMONWEALTH GRANTS TO THE STATES FOR ROADS 1976-77 (1972-73 prices) ($'000) New South South Western Category Wales Victoria Queensland Australia Australia Tasmania Total National Roads Act National highways construction 25,620 12,272 13,921 9,054 5,691 4,578 71,136 National highways maintenance 4 501 1,125 3,768 733 1,117 304 11,548 Export and major commercial roads 2,250 2,721 1,453 680 675 366 8,145 Sub-total 32,371 16,118 19,142 10,467 7,483 5,248 90,829 Roads Grants Act Rural arterial roads 8,075 2,250 6,228 1,727 4,192 1,308 23,780 Rural local roads 9,711 5,600 7,379 2,774 6,347 2,146 33,957 Urban arterial roads 19,154 20,724 8,007 3,977 10,933 1,570 64,365 Urban local roads 2,407 1,622 1,151 576 750 162 6,668 Miters 2,502 1,505 1,413 785 837 314 7,356 Beef roads . . . . 4, 710 . . . . . . 4,710 -Sub-total 41,849 31,701 28,888 9,839 23,059 5,500 140,836 Total 74,220 47,819 48,030 20,306 30,542 10,748 231,665 COMMONWEALTH GRANTS TO THE STATES FOR ROADS 1977-78 (1972-73 prices) ($'000) New South South Western Category Wales Victoria Queensland Australia Australia Tasmania Total States Grants (Roads) Act National Roads National highways construction 26,829 12,407 14,220 7,158 7,268 3,751 71,633 National highways maintenance 3,854 1,432 3,961 907 2,004 429 12,587 National commerce roads 3,007 1,813 1,336 620 759 334 7,869 Sub-Total 33,690 15,652 19,517 8,685 10,031 4,514 92,089 Other Roads Rural arterial roads 8,589 5,297 10,975 3,340 4,490 1,451 34,142 Rural local roads 12,312 9,067 8,971 3,197 6,872 2,338 42,757 Urban arterial roads 13,695 13,791 5,201 2,195 5,345 1,288 41,515 Urban local roads 3,531 1,718 1,813 1,050 1,131 477 9,720 Miters 1,575 1,543 1,241 811 859 286 6,315 Sub-Total 39,702 31,416 28,201 10,593 18,697 5,840 134,449 Total 73,392 47,068 47,718 19,278 28,728 10,354 226,538 COMMONWEALTH GRANTS TO THE STATES FOR ROADS 1978-79 (1972-73 prices) ($'000) New South South Western Category Wales Victoria Queensland Australia Australia Tasmania Total States Grants (Roads) Act National Roads National highways construction 24,646 12,285 13,437 7,127 7,502 3,600 68,597 National highways maintenance 4,354 1,418 4,565 898 1,856 425 13,516 National commerce roads 4,357 1,476 1,323 309 574 331 8,370 Sub-Total 33,357 15,179 19,325 8,334 9,932 4,356 90,483 Other Roads Rural arterial roads 8,505 5,245 10,867 3,572 4,446 1,550 34,185 Rural local roads 12,190 8,978 8,883 3,165 6,804 2,315 42,335 Urban arterial roads 13,560 13,630 5,230 2,174 5,292 1,276 41,162 Urban local roads 3,496 1,757 1,795 1,040 1,120 472 9,680 Miters 1,559 1,772 1,149 803 850 284 6,417 Sub-Total 39,310 31,382 27,924 10,754 18,512 5,897 133,779 Total 72,667 46,561 47,249 19,088 28,444 10,253 224,262 COMMONWEALTH GRANTS TO THE STATES FOR ROADS 1979-80 (1972-73 prices) ($'000) New South South Western Category Wales Victoria Queensland Australia Australia Tasmania Total States Grants (Roads) Act National Roads National highways construction 24,602 11,389 12,703 6,608 6,943 3,423 65,668 National highways maintenance 3,758 1,314 3,986 832 1,840 432 12,162 National commerce roads 2,566 2,278 1,227 532 425 307 7,335 SUB-TOTAL 30,926 14,981 17,916 7,972 9,208 4,162 85,165 Other Roads Rural arterial roads 7,885 4,862 10,075 3,066 4,122 1,314 31,324 Rural local roads 11,301 8,323 8,235 2,935 6,308 2,147 39,249 Urban arterial roads 12,572 12,022 4,923 2,015 4,906 1,183 37,621 Urban local roads 3,241 1,849 1,665 964 1 ,038 438 9,195 Miters 1,445 1,533 991 745 788 263 5,765 SUB-TOTAL 36,444 28,589 25,889 9,725 17,162 5,345 123,154 TOTAL 67,370 43,570 43,805 17,697 26,370 9,507 (a)208,319 (a) Under the financial arrangements with the Northern Territory, which came into effect on 1 July 1979, an amount of $19m ($7.24m in 1972-73 prices) was made available in 1979-80 by way of a Commonwealth specific purpose payment for roads. A breakdown of expenditure by road category is not available. COMMONWEALTH GRANTS TO THE STATES AND NORTHERN TERRITORY FOR ROADS 1980-81 (1972-73 prices) ($'000) New South South Western Northern Category Wales Victoria Queensland Australia Australia Tasmania Territory Total Roads Grants Act 1980 National roads 31,323 15,990 18,114 8,238 9,608 4,229 4,052 91,554 Rural arterial roads 7,587 4,679 9,694 2,950 3,966 1,264 333 30,473 Urban arterial roads 11,922 11,230 4,814 2,088 4,730 1,166 315 36,265 Local roads 13,993 9, 787 9,526 3,751 7,069 2,487 2,267 48,880 TOTAL 64,825 41,686 42,148 17,027 25,373 9,146 6,967 207,172 COMMONWEALTH GRANTS TO THE STATES AND NORTHERN TERRITORY FOR ROADS 1981-82 (1972-73 prices) ($'000) New South South Western Northern Category Wales Victoria Queensland Australia Australia Tasmania Territory Total Roads Grants Act 1981 National roads 30,282 15,458 17,512 7,965 9,289 4,089 3,917 88,513 Arterial roads 18,860 15,379 14,026 4,871 8,407 2,350 626 64,519 Local roads 13,528 9, 462 9,209 3,627 6,834 2,404 2,191 47,255 Total 62,670 40,299 40,747 16,463 24,530 8,843 6,735 200,287 COMMONWEALTH GRANTS TO THE STATES AND NORTHERN TERRITORY FOR ROADS 1982-83 (1972-73 prices) ($'000) New South South Western Northern Category Wales Victoria Queensland Australia Australia Tasmania Territory Total Roads Grants Act 1981 National roads 28,758 14,677 16,636 7,565 8,818 3,884 3,724 84,062 Arterial roads 17,907 14,604 13,317 4,625 7,982 2,230 594 61,259 Local roads 12,845 8, 982 8,744 3,441 6,487 2,284 2,082 44,865 Sub-total 59,510 38,263 38,697 15,631 23,287 8,398 6,400 190,186 ABRD Trust Fund Act National roads 6,219 2,469 3,415 871 1,669 444 850 15,937 Urban arterial roads 1,477 1,479 2,404 (a) 897 1,251 216 30 7,754 Rural arterial roads 1,036 961 1, 454 257 627 34 246 4,615 Local roads . . 394 657 181 . . 267 491 1,990 Sub-total 8,732 5,303 7,930 2,206 3,547 961 1,617 30,296 Total 68,242 43,566 46,627 17,837 26,834 9,359 8,017 220,482 (a) Includes $2.457m ($636,000 in 1972-73 prices) expended on urban public transport projects. (Question No. 1390) Dr Everingham asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 2 May 1984: (1) Has his attention been drawn to the comment of United States Vice-President Bush on 18 April 1984 in Geneva, when responding to a journalist's question that the United States of America proposes international inspection of all chemical weapon facilities, that the U.S.A. was not trying to preclude any facility in some corner of the world that has a private industry that is dedicated to the destruction of mankind by chemical weapons unbeknown to a government; if so, does Australia support this proposal. (2) Does Australia (a) understand or (b) propose this to mean that (i) chemical warfare could rival nuclear warfare in capacity to eliminate humanity, (ii) chemical warfare being more universally objectionable than nuclear warfare justifies U.S. acceptance of the most detailed scrutiny by international inspection authorities and (iii) nuclear warfare potential is sufficiently inspected by existing detection measures. (3) Has his attention also been drawn to Mr Bush's initial remarks at the same press conference that one important reason that chemical weapons use continues is that neither the 1925 Geneva Protocol nor the 1972 Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention includes any form of effective verification or enforcement and further that the use of chemical weapons violates existing international agreements and so undermines the arms control process. (4) If so, does Australia (a) understand or (b) propose this to mean that military sovereignty in matters which violate international agreements should not be allowed to nations but should be conceded to an international enforcement authority agreed to by all the peoples of the world. (5) What is Australia (a) doing and (b) proposing to do to promote discussion of, and support for, such an authority. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. The Government sees the United States draft as an important step towards the Australian objective of a comprehensive convention against chemical weapons. The Government believes that verification of a very high standard, such as that indicated by the proposals in the United States draft, will be needed to generate the necessary confidence for such a convention. It is under no illusion , however, as to the difficulties that will be involved in reaching agreement on specific verification arrangements for the convention. For this reason it has deployed considerable diplomatic activity in urging all concerned to be prepared to negotiate with a view to resolving their differences. (2) (i) and (ii) The Government is opposed to the use of both nuclear and chemical weapons. The important point is not so much whether chemical weapons are more objectionable than nuclear weapons, or vice versa, but that all countries work seriously towards balanced and verifiable agreements ained at the eventual elimination of both types of weapons. The Government views very seriously the prospect of the spread of nuclear weapons. It is similarly concerned with the spread of chemical weapons. It is relevant in this regard that, compared with nuclear weapons chemical weapons are easy and cheap to acquire. The production of chemical weapons, which have been called 'the poor man's atom bomb', is within the reach of any country with a petroleum or pesticide industry. (iii) Nuclear warfare potential is indeed monitored by the national technical means of the nuclear weapon states. Essentially the nuclear weapon states watch each other (as is well known, the joint Australian/United States facilities in Australia contribute to the verification of arms control agreements). Theses national technical means of verification do not include on-site inspection and I have some difficulty with the idea of their being 'sufficient'. The Government does not see the existing agreements to limit and reduce nuclear weapons as 'sufficient' and it is clear that further agreements will necessarily involve appropriate verification arrangements. In some cases these are likely to be additional to arrangements already extant. Australia sees a necessity for far greater transparency as to the military capabilities and deployments of all countries. It is correct that there is a highly developed and effective international verification system against the diversion of nuclear materials from peaceful civilian uses to nuclear weapons; that is the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguard system which does provide for close inspection and other verification measures. It is an objective of Government policy that this system should be strengthened and extended to cover the small number of nuclear facilities which remain unsafeguarded in countries which are not yet parties to the nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty. Yes. (4 and 5). The establishment of an international enforcement authority implies some form of world government which is not an early prospect. The Government considers that progress on disarmament can and should be made through negotiation and through existing international institutions. The Government is working actively to this end in the Conference on Disarmament and in the United Nations. There is no reason to suppose that new institutions would function more effectively than these. The possibility is not, however, excluded of the Government supporting the establishment of an international verification agency in future, if this appears a practical and constructive move. The Government considers that verification is an important aspect of arms control and disarmament. It supports international efforts to develop proper verification arrangements as part of arms control and disarmament agreements. It is conceivable that an international agency might be a proper means to provide verification for one or more such agreements. This is one of the matters to be established in current and future negotiations. (Question No. 1391) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Territories and Local Government, upon notice , on 3 May 1984: (1) Did he, as part of a settlement of the Havelock House dispute in October 1983, announce an inquiry into homelessness in the Australian Capital Territory. (2) Did community groups and individuals make written and verbal submissions to the inquiry last year, and were they told findings would be released in February or March 1984. (3) Is the report of the inquiry complete. (4) Was the report provided to him; if so, when. (5) When will the report be (a) tabled in Parliament and (b) made available to the public. (6) What action will he take to ensure that any recommendations contained in the report are updated to take account of Canberra's worsening housing crisis. Mr Uren —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. (2) Community groups and individuals did make written and verbal submissions to the inquiry and they were advised that the inquiry committee's findings would be made available as soon as the report was completed. (3) Yes. (4) An interim report was provided on 9 January 1984. Following this, the committee finalised the report. It was received from the printer on 9 May 1984. (5) (a) and (b) The report was tabled in Parliament on 10 May 1984 and is now a public document. (6) The recommendations contained in the report are being considered and will be taken into account in dealing with Canberra's housing problem. (Question No. 1392) Dr Everingham asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 3 May 1984: (1) Has Australia been informed of a recent agreement between China and the United States of America for an intelligence gathering facility in north-west China to replace one removed by the present regime in Iran. (2) Is he able to say whether China has insisted on the full sharing of information gathered by the Joint facility. (3) Is it Australian Government policy to insist on similar full access to data gathered at joint facilities in Australia; if not why not. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) No. (3) Yes. The agreements in respect of the joint facilities at Pine Gap and Nurrungar provide that in each case information derived from their activities shall be available to both the Australian and the United States governments. (Question No. 1394) Mr Maher asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 3 May 1984: What steps have been taken since 1 September 1983 to ask the Government of Bulgaria to allow the family of Mr Jordan Georgiev of 50 The Crescent, Homebush, New South Wales, an Australian citizen, to join him in Australia. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Since 1 September 1983 strong representations to the Bulgarian authorities have been made by the Australian Government on behalf of Mr Georgiev's family, as well as other families in a similar position, as follows: (i) September 1983 in Sofia (ii) October 1983 in Sofia (iii) January 1984 in Canberra (iv) February 1984 in Sofia On these occasions the Australian Government has made it clear to the Bulgarian authorities that there is considerable public feeling in Australia about these family reunion cases, and that, if left unresolved, they would inevitably have an adverse effect on Australia-Bulgaria relations. (Question No. 1399) Mr Maher asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 4 May 1984: Is he able to say whether an Italian national, Yessie a Macchi Torre, a member of the National Liberation Movement, was sentenced to 45 years' gaol in 1972 by the Government of the Republic of Uruguay and was, on 15 May 1983, when examined by a medical team belonging to the international delegation of Red Cross inspecting political prisoners, reported to be in need of urgent medical attention; if so, will inquiries be made to find out if the medical attention was provided. Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: I understand that Jessie Macchi who has been imprisoned in Uruguay since 1972, was examined by a doctor in May 1983. The information available to me does not confirm that she was found to be in need of urgent medical attention. It is understood that Ms Macchi has received family visits. (Question No. 1401) Dr Everingham asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 4 May 1984: (1) Has his attention been drawn to a 2nd year undergraduate course, Education 254: Peace Studies, to be started in Semester II, 1984, at Macquarie University with (a) all volunteer staff and (b) no University funding despite official recognition of the subject as a pilot project for full time students. (2) Will he consult with the Minister for Education and Youth Affairs concerning the possibility of removing this uniquely unfunded aspect, to assist the School of Education at the University and (a) obtain relevant United Nations and Australian Government documents and related resources, (b) produce audio and video records of the course as an aid to development of similar courses at the Australian National University and elsewhere, and to extend the availability of the course to part time and external students, and (c) further the UN disarmament campaign in Australasia. (3) Will he call a conference of peace educators and interested organisations to co-ordinate this campaign in Australasia. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) I am advised that the peace studies course commencing in Semester II, 1984 at Macquarie University has been approved in the normal way by the University's Committee on Academic Development and that it is being funded by the University in the normal manner. Staff for the course are only 'voluntary' in the sense that the course is a multidisciplinary one drawing on staff from a variety of disciplines in the University who have volunteered to teach the course. They are not volunteers in the sense that they are unpaid. All staff receive their normal university salaries. (2) I am also advised that Macquarie University requires no particular additional assistance in running its Peace Studies course either in terms of funding, obtaining relevant UN and Australian documents or audio and video resources. As an autonomous educational institution it is the right of Macquarie University to determine its own needs and allocation of resources. The Peace Studies course will, incidentally, be receiving copies of the Department of Foreign Affairs' Disarmament Newsletter. Through the inter-library loan service it will also have access to other Australian Government documents and publications. With regard to the UN world Disarmament Campaign in Australasia, Australia has contributed $30,000 to the Campaign, some of which will be spent in furthering the Campaign's objectives in the Australasian region. The Government recently invited the UN Under-Secretary-General for Disarmament Affairs, Mr Jan Martenson whose Department runs the World Disarmament Campaign, to visit Australia under the Special Overseas Visitors Fund (SOVF) of the Department of Foreign Affairs, for discussions on the Campaign. Mr Martenson sought to promote the Campaign in Australia through an extensive series of meetings with academics, non-governmental organisations and the media. Mr Martenson also visited New Zealand and Fiji. While primary responsibility for dissemination of information on the World Disarmament Campaign lies with the UN Information Centre in Sydney, all of Australia's public activities in the disarmament and arms control field contribute to the success of the Campaign by increasing public awareness of these vital issues. (3) The Department of Foreign Affairs is currently canvassing the idea of a peace conference involving all interested groups or individuals as part of the celebrations for the International Year of Peace in 1986. A decision on whether to proceed with this idea will only be taken after the establishment of the IYP Secretariat and in consultation with non-governmental organisations, peace groups and other interested parties. (Question No. 1405) Mr Lloyd asked the Minister for Communications, upon notice, on 7 May 1984: (1) Has his attention been drawn to the widespread concern his Press statement (84/19) of 17 April 1984, entitled 'Mountain town a winner in self-help television', has created amongst regional television proprietors. (2) Does the statement state that signals could be picked up from the Intelsat satellite or from a terrestrial source depending on the community's proximity to an existing service; if so, does this comment, when read with the preceding one, indicate approval for direct broadcasting reception of either an Australian Broadcasting Corporation or commercial television signal from the satellite Intelsat, which is contrary to the restrictions on commercial television signals for direct broadcasting and from outside defined service areas. (3) If so, when was this new Government policy announced; if not, what is the true position. Mr Duffy —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1 and 2) I am not aware of any widespread concern by regional television operators to the statement, nor is there any reason for there to be concern. My press statement of 17 April 1984 restated the essential benefits of the Self- help Television Reception Scheme (STRS). My statement in no way indicated approval of direct broadcasting of commercial signals from satellite nor the importation of signals from outside the service area of an existing commercial television service. (3) See answer to (1 and 2). (Question No. 1407) Mr Staples asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 8 May 1984: (1) What is the current state of the litigation referred to (a) in the answer to question No. 2206 (Hansard, 5 June 1981, page 3306) and (b) in the Attorney- General's Press Release (20/83) of 23 February 1983. (2) Has the Government (a) taken and (b) any plans to take, any further step in any of these proceedings. Mr Lionel Bowen —The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) (a) The litigation referred to in the answer to question No. 2206 (Hansard, 5 June 1981, page 3306) involved civil proceedings initiated in the United States by the Ace Shipping Line alleging breaches of American antitrust laws by five defendant shipping lines. The Australian National Line was not a named defendant but was indirectly involved as a member of two consortia which were named defendants (Associated Container Transportation (Australia) Ltd and Pacific Australia Direct Line). The proceedings have been discontinued, the five defendants agreeing to pay damages in settlement. Although the terms of the compromise were not made public , press reports have indicated that the amount payable in full settlement was US dollars 1.5m. (b) The then Attorney-General's Press Release (20/83) of 23 February 1983 referred to two separate proceedings both related to an investigation commenced in 1980 by the United States Department of Justice into the United States- Australia/New Zealand ocean freight trade. Various shipping lines and conferences were served with Civil Investigative Demands (CIDs) to produce documents for the investigation. The shipping lines challenged the CIDs and later took the matter on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (Washington DC) and the United States Court of Appeals for the Southern District of New York. The New York court ruled against the shipping lines, allowing the Department of Justice to have access to the documents. Although the Washington court has not yet handed down its decision, it had earlier ruled that there would be no stay of proceedings and that the documents the subject of that appeal should be handed over to the Department of Justice pending the court's final decision. (2) (a) The Australian Government did not take any steps in relation to the Ace proceedings. However, the Government did intervene by way of amicus curiae brief in the shipping investigations in both the Washington and New York appeals. It stated that the investigation was an unwarranted inquiry by the United States into the acts and decision making processes in Australia of government instrumentalities carrying out statutory functions. In the Washington appeal it argued that communications between the shipping lines and Australian Government instrumentalities (Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation, Australian Meat Board) should be exempt from any antitrust liability pursuant to the Noerr-Pennington doctrine. This court has not yet handed down its decision. In the New York appeal, it argued that the 'act of state' doctrine barred judicial enforcement of CIDs relating to the shipping lines' communications in Australia with Australian Government officials. The court decided that it was premature to apply the 'act of state' doctrine at the investigative stage of the proceedings, although it left open the question whether it would apply it at a later stage. (2) (b) The Australian Government has no plans to take further steps in either the Ace case or the Shipping Investigation. Although the Shipping Investigation has not yet been completed, the United States Government informed the Australian Government in a Diplomatic Note of 22 April 1983 that the legality and validity of the actions of its official producer export boards are not in question. Although the Shipping Investigation pre-dates the Antitrust Cooperation Agreement (see question No. 1408) the US diplomatic note affirmed the willingness of the United States to treat the Investigation as if it came within the terms of the Agreement, and provided useful information, on a confidential basis, about the nature and scope of the Investigation. (Question No. 1408) Mr Staples asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 8 May 1984: (1) Has the Government given any notifications pursuant to (a) Article 1.1 and (b) Article 1.2 of the United States-Australia Antitrust Co-operation Agreement of June 1982; if so, (a) what are they and (b) what has been the outcome of each notification. (2) Has the Government of (a) Australia, and (b) the United States of America requested any consultations pursuant to article 2.1 of the agreement; if so, (a) what are they and (b) what has been the outcome of each request. (3) Have there been any consultations pursuant to article 2.3 of the agreement; if so, what are the details. (4) Has the Government requested any memorialisation pursuant to Article 4.1 of the agreement; if so, what are the details. (5) Has the Government made any request pursuant to article 6 of the agreement; if so, (a) what are the details and (b) what has been the outcome of each request. (6) Does the Government consider that the agreement is operating satisfactorily . Mr Lionel Bowen —The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) No (2) (a) No (b) No (3) No (4) No (5) No (6) Yes, the United States has notified the Government on a confidential basis, pursuant to the bilateral agreement, of three inquiries into possible breaches of American antitrust laws by or involving Australian owned companies. Two of the inquiries have now been discontinued, while the third has not been finalised . (Question No. 1415) Mr McVeigh asked the Minister for Home Affairs and Environment, upon notice, on 9 May 1984: 1. Is it a fact that the Belarus tractor model 7000 manufactured in Russia and purchased by Messrs G. K. and D. M. Robertson from the Australian distributors, Murray Goulburn, in December 1980, under a lease finance arrangement through CAGA, is at present parked at the new Parliament House site following a series of break downs; if so, is the reason for the tractor being parked there that Messrs Robertson have been unable to obtain any satisfaction under warranty or otherwise from the distributors, Belarus Australia, even though they have made repeated representations to the Soviet Embassy. 2. Is it also a fact that the reason the tractor has broken down, as many other tractors of the same make and model have broken down, is that it is, what is termed in the industry, 'a lemon'; if so, is there any information available to him which would indicate that this tractor is not only 'a lemon' but other Belarus tractor models are also 'lemons'. 3. Will he investigate the circumstances to (a) ascertain if Messrs Robertson can have their particular position satisfactorily resolved and (b) ensure that inferior tractors are not placed on the market and other people do not become victims of inferior models. Mr Cohen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: 1. I am informed that on 9 May 1984 a Belarus tractor 7000 belonging to Mr Graeme Robertson was parked at the new Parliament House site. I am unaware of whether the tractor is jointly owned with a D. M. Robertson, from whom the tractor was purchased or how its purchase was effected or where the tractor is now. I am aware from media reports that the tractor was parked at the site as a result of alleged defects with the tractor which have not been resolved with the tractor's Australian distributors to Mr Robertson's satisfaction. It also appears that approaches by Mr Robertson to the Soviet Embassy have not resolved the dispute. 2. I have no evidence which would allow me to conclude that Belarus tractors in general are what are known as 'a lemon'. This also applies to Mr Robertson's Belarus tractor. 3. (a) Contractual disputes such as Mr Robertson's involve private contractual rights which can and should be resolved through the courts system if they cannot be resolved satisfactorily between the parties. (b) The Trade Practices Act already contains provisions which prohibit corporations engaging in misleading or deceptive practices in relation to the supply of goods including tractors. Where such practices come to light, the matter is referred to the Trade Practices Commission for appropriate action. As regards the performance characteristics of particular models of tractors, this is primarily a matter for the farmer to inquire when he considers purchasing the new tractors. For example, information can, I understand, be acquired from The Kondinin and Districts Farm Improvement Group which conducts surveys and investigations of farm equipment and farm operations. In certain situations the rights conferred by Division 2 of the Trade Practices Act will also be available and the Government, in its Green Paper entitled 'The Trade Practices Act: Proposals for Change' contains a proposal to specifically include farmers in the definition of consumer in section 4B of the Act. This proposal would, if enacted , give farmers additional access to the warranties implied by Division 2 of Part V of the Act. (Question No. 1428) Mr Lloyd asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 10 May 1984: (1) What has been the cost of the supplementary minimising price (SMP) scheme for each of the commodities it has covered for (a) each of the years since introduction and (b) this financial year for which figures are available. (2) What are the regulations or understandings between the Australian and New Zealand Governments for industries concerning the use of SMP's in the Closer Economic Relations arrangement. (3) Has his attention been drawn to the psychological warfare being waged against Australian farmers by buyers threatening to import SMP discounted products from New Zealand unless they accept a lower price for their produce. Mr Kerin —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Supplementary minimum price payments are paid to New Zealand farmers. The following table sets out details of payments under the scheme since its introduction in 1978-79: PAYMENTS TO FARMERS UNDER SUPPLEMENTARY MINIMUM PRICES SCHEME ($NZm) 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984E Wool- (year ended 30 June) 1.4 0.0 0.0 184.2 176.7 60 Meat- (year ended 30 Sept) Lamb 0.0 0.0 0.0 93.9 145.8 185 Mutton 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.7 11.2 50 Beef 0.0 0.0 1.9 53.3 17.1 0.0 Dairy Products- (year ended 31 May) 17.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 E Agricultural Review Committee Estimate Source: New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries (2) Under the terms of the Closer Economic Relations Trade agreement, existing agricultural stabilisation support measures in both countries were permitted to continue. Article 10 of the agreement provides for consultations in the event that the effects of new or amended measures are considered to be inconsistent with the objectives of the agreement. (3) The CER Agreement provides for action to be taken against competition that is shown to be unfair. If instances are brought to my attention, they will be investigated. I also refer the honourable member to my answer to part (2) of his question No. 1429. (Questions No. 1429) Mr Lloyd asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 10 May 1984: (1) Is it a fact that a company with branches in New Zealand and Australia can transfer products such as mutton, beef, lamb, cheese and canned or frozen fruit or vegetables, from New Zealand to Australia without the knowledge of the respective Governments or statutory authorities. (2) Is he able to say whether it is possible to buy a product in New Zealand with the advantage of supplementary minimum price discounting, or other government assistance measures, and then transfer the product to Australia against the Closer Economic Relations (CER) arrangements. (3) Who is importing mutton, lamb, beef, and cheese from New Zealand and are they (a) registered with, or (b) monitored by, the (i) New Zealand and (ii) Australian statutory authorities, and are their procedures and quantities of imports all officially recorded; if so, are they in accord with the Closer Economic Relations Agreement. Mr Kerin —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) All imports into Australia from New Zealand are subject to the relevant Customs clearance procedures. In the case of meat, imports must also be accompanied by documentation endorsed by New Zealand Government officials which on arrival is subject to inspection by the Australian Department of Health. A company with branches in Australia and New Zealand would be subject to the relevant laws and regulations of the respective countries. (2) Products produced in New Zealand which benefit from a variety of government assistance measures are not subject to uniform marketing arrangements. For instance, export licences are involved in some cases. Existing agricultural stabilisation support measures are permitted to continue under the terms of the closer economic relations trade agreement. However, all imports of New Zealand origin are subject to Australian anti-dumping/counter- vailing legislation and the safeguard provisions in the agreement. (3) Details of quantities of imported products are collected and scrutinised by the Australian Customs Service from documents submitted by importers. They are then available for utilisation by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Commercial information and an individual company basis is treated as confidential. Australian importers are not required to register with either New Zealand or Australian statutory authorities. However, the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation is in close contact with its counterpart, the New Zealand Meat Producers' Board, over the quantities and types of meat being imported. Under a Memorandum of Understanding between the New Zealand and Australian dairy industries the Joint Australia/New Zealand Dairy Industries Consultative Committee meets twice a year and reviews developments in each other's markets and trans-Tasman trade. (Question No. 1436) Dr Everingham asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 10 May 1984: (1) Has his attention been drawn to a report in the Canberra Times of 9 May 1984, page 2, of a claim by New Zealand Chief of Defence Staff, Air Marshal D. E . Jamieson, that until war itself is eliminated the threat of nuclear weapons will hang over the world and that until an effective assurance was in place the world would be more dangerous without nuclear weapons. (2) Is he able to confirm that some 10 million people have died in wars which have existed continuously since the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic acquired atomic weapons, and a similar number have died because of allocation of scarce resources towards an escalating arms race. (3) What steps has Australia taken to request sections of Departments and peace studies centres to produce long-range goals and short-term moves towards the abolition of war. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. (2) I doubt that entirely reliable estimates are available as to the number of people who have died in wars since 1949 or have died as a result of the allocation of resources to the arms race. Nevertheless, I agree entirely with the implication that nuclear deterrence, while it is a formidable barrier to war between the major nuclear powers, has not prevented other conflicts. I also agree that the economic burden of arms is tragic in its human consequences. (3) Australia's foreign policy has as its goal the maintenance of peace and the prevention of war. To an important extent all of the activities of the Government relevant to international relations are governed by this basic concern. To list the actions the Government has taken in support of these objectives would be to rehearse almost everything that it has done in the international field since coming to power, including, for example, the Prime Minister's and my own activities at the South Pacific Forum, CHOGM, in the United Nations and in our meetings with foreign leaders, and the activities of my Department and other Departments involved in international relations. (Question No. 1437) Dr Everingham asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 10 May 1984: Will he propose to countries reviewing the Vienna Convention that (a) diplomats enjoying immunities from national laws should undertake to abide by international conventions including respect for individual rights and renunciation of violence before alternative, peaceful means of dispute settlement are exhausted, including appeals to the International Court of Justice or the European Court, where appropriate, and (b) in case of investigation or punitive action by governments against diplomats who breach such undertakings, the national officials concerned should work closely with internationally recognised impartial experts by arrangement with Interpol, United Nations organs or other international authorities such as the European Parliament; if not, why not. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) No formal review of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations has been instituted. The International Law Commission, however, has under study the question of international law relating to the diplomatic bag. East European states which initiated the study envisage that it might lead to a protocol to the Convention. Aspects of the operation of the 1961 Convention are understood to be under discussion within the European Community. The trend of discussion may be more towards stricter interpretation and enforcement of existing provisions, in the light of the Libyan People's Bureau crisis in London, than towards amendment of the Convention. Under the Convention and existing customary law, diplomats have no licence to ignore national laws or international law. They are under a duty to respect the laws and regulations of the host State by virtue of Article 41 (1) of the Convention. Diplomatic immunity entails immunity from enforcement of the local law, not immunity from the law itself. If immunity is waived, legal action may proceed. Nor is resort to violence countenanced by the Convention. A diplomat who commits an offence against the laws of the receiving state may be sanctioned by expulsion, is not immune from prosecution in his home state, and may be subject to extradition to the original receiving state for prosecution if found in a private capacity in a third state. The Government therefore regards existing provisions as generally adequate. Amendment of the Convention would give no better guarantee that maverick incidents would not again occur. (b) Governments investigating and taking action against diplomats who have offended against their laws may at their discretion make use of the valuable assistance of Interpol and other international bodies. Little purpose would be served by making the involvement of such bodies mandatory. (Question No. 1444) Mr Maher asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 29 May 1984: What actions have been taken by the Government in relation to the civil unrest in Sri Lanka. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Australian Government has registered our concern over civil unrest in Sri Lanka on many occasions. In August 1983, following the major outbreak of communal rioting in July of that year, I personally spoke frankly with the Sri Lankan Deputy Foreign Minister, expressing our concern over the violence and our hope that a solution might soon be reached. Our High Commissioner in Colombo has expressed similar concerns on a number of occasions at the highest levels of the Sri Lankan Government. In April 1984 the Acting High Commissioner to Sri Lanka expressed the Government's concern over the then current situation to the Sri Lankan authorities. The Government has also continued to make known its views in other ways. For example, in answer to a question in this House on 3 April this year I condemned the continuing violence; and in representations and public statements on this issue the Government has consistently condemned the use of violence, and has urged all groups in Sri Lanka to show restraint, in order to avoid a repetition of the widespread violence which occurred in July 1983. While recognising that the intercommunal problem is largely an internal matter for the Government and people of Sri Lanka, the Australian Government believes that the best hope for a lasting solution to Sri Lanka's inter- communal difficulties rests with a negotiated settlement based on full recognition of the rights of all communities in Sri Lanka and on internationally accepted standards of human rights. In this connection, the Government has noted and welcomed the All Party Conference which is meeting in Colombo to discuss the intercommunal problem. The Government hopes that all parties and groups in Sri Lanka will contribute positively to the conference in a spirit of constructive co-operation with the aim of reaching an acceptable and just solution. (Question No. 1451) Mr Tuckey asked the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 29 May 1984: (1) Who are the members of the National Aboriginal Conference (NAC) and what are (a) their addresses, (b) the areas they represent, (c) the names of their personal staff and, (d) their individual (i) salaries, (ii) allowances, including travel, (iii) travel entitlements, and (iv) arrangements for office accommodation and equipment supplies. (2) Who are the executive members of the NAC. (3) Who are the paid secretariat staff, and what are their addresses. Mr Holding —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1), (1) (a) and (1) (b). The members of the National Aboriginal Conference are indicated below, together with their official (office) addresses, and the NAC electoral areas which they represent: NSA-Mr W. E. Smith, Shop 3, 11 Main Road, Boolaroo, New South Wales 2284. NSB-Pastor O. Cruse, M.B.E., 44-46 Bass Street, Eden, New South Wales 2551. NSC-Mrs V. Mackay, 164 Larmar Street, Narrandera, New South Wales 2700. NSD-Mr E. G. Simpson, 86 Fox Street, Walgett, New South Wales 2832. NSE-Mr J. Stanley, Cottage 7, Nanima, Wellington, New South Wales 2820. NSF-Mr L. J. Munro (Snr.), 191 Balo Street, Moree, New South Wales 2400. NSG-Mr F. Roberts, 1st Floor, BML Building, Lismore, New South Wales 2480. VCA-Mrs M. Jackamos, 412-6 Johnston Street, Abbotsford, Victoria 3067. VCB-Mrs N. Skuta, 218A Main Street, Bairnsdale, Victoria 3875. TSA-Mr Roy Nichols, 1st Floor, Prudential Building, 147 Macquarie Street, Glenorchy, Tasmania 7010. QEA-Mr S. Mam, Suite 205, 333 Queen Street, Brisbane, Queensland 4000. QEB-Mr R. Robinson, 39 Wills Street, Charleville, Queensland 4470. QEC-Mr P. Malone, 225 Bolsover Street, Rockhampton, Queensland 4700. QED-Mrs E. Geia, 159 Flinders Street, Hermit Park, Queensland 4812. QEE-Mr P. Yanner, 4 Bowen Street, Burketown, Queensland 4830. QEF-Mr W. Hollingsworth, Australia House, 32 Alpin Street, Cairns, Queensland 4870. QEG-Mr H. Daphney, 18 Mathew Street, Kowanyama North, Queensland 4871. QEH-Mr B. Nona, 245 Alpin Road, Tamwoy, Thursday Island, Queensland 4875. QEI-Mr G. Mye, M.B.E., Darnley Island via Thursday Island, Queensland 4875. SAA-Mr G. I. Wilson, Suite 101 MLC Tower, Adelaide, South Australia 5000. SAB-Mr D. J. Colson, 52 Commercial Road, Port Augusta, South Australia 5700. SAC-Mr P. Thompson, Indulkana via Alice Springs, Northern Territory 5751. WAA-Mr R. Riley, 9/85 Stirling Street, Perth, Western Australia 6000. WAB-Mr G. Colbung, 3 Albany Highway, Albany, Western Australia 6330. WAC-Mr A. Lynch, 104 Addis Street, Kalgoorlie, Western Australia 6430. WAD-Mr M. Mallard, Cnr Francis and Fraser Streets, Beachlands, Western Australia 6530. WAE-Mr H. Parker, 314 Second Avenue, Onslow, Western Australia 6710. WAF-Mr P. Yu, Lot 5 12/3 Napier Crescent, Broome, Western Australia 6725. WAG-Mr F. Chulung, 1372 Konkonberry Drive, Kununurra, Western Australia 6743. NTA-Mr B. Clayton, Ground Floor, NML Building, 43 Cavanagh Street, Darwin, Northern Territory 5700. NTB-Mr D. Weibenanga, Maningrida via Darwin, Northern Territory 5791 NTC-Mr Minyipirriwuy Dhamarrandji, c/o Galiwinku, Elcho Island via Darwin, Northern Territory 5791. NTD-Mr W. J. Martin, Randazzo Building, Katherine Terrace, Katherine, Northern Territory 5780. NTE-Mr R. Williams, 167 Patterson Street, Tennant Creek, Northern Territory 5760. NTF-Mr W. Jambajimba, Willowra Station via Alice Springs, Northern Territory 5750. NTG-Mr V. Forrester, 3 Fan Arcade, Alice Springs, Northern Territory 5750. I will provide the honourable member (and other members who require one) with a map showing each NAC area. 1 (c) The research necessary to provide the names of the personal staff of members of the NAC would involve an unreasonable diversion of the resources of the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and the NAC. The provision of this information would also be an unnecessary infringement of the privacy of those staff members. 1 (d) (i) The remuneration and allowances which are paid to NAC members are determined by the Remuneration Tribunal, and were varied most recently as a consequence of determination number 10 of April 1984. The basic salary for members is at present $27,144 per annum. The Chairman receives an additional salary of $16,656 per annum and the Deputy Chairman $8,328. In addition, the following office-holders receive a Special Allowance of Office as follows: Chairman $2,225 Deputy Chairman $1,525 Executive Member $1,525 State Chairman who is not also an Executive $1,175 1 (d) (ii) Each NAC member is paid an electorate allowance of $12,000. 1 (d) (iii) Each NAC member is entitled to travelling allowance for travel associated with attendance at properly constituted meetings (National, State Branch, Executive and Committee) and activities other than electoral work authorised by the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs. This allowance is currently being paid at the capital city rate of $96 or the other than capital city rate of $66 for each overnight stay at a place other than his home base. This is the rate of allowance determined by the Remuneration Tribunal in November 1983. 1 (d) (iv) NAC members are entitled to office accommodation of up to a maximum of 122 square metres as well as appropriate furniture, office equipment and supplies at public expense. (2) Mr R. Riley was elected National Chairman of 4 June 1984. The following NAC members are members of the National Executive of the NAC: Mr R. Robinson. Mr L. J. Munro (Snr.). Pastor O. Cruse, M.B.E. Mr R. Nichols. Mr P. Yanner. Mr G. Mye, M.B.E. Mr D. Colson. Mr G. Colbung. Mr A. Lynch. Mr B. Clayton. Mr D. Weibenanga. Mr J. Stanley. (3) I am not prepared to provide this information for the reason outlined in response to 1 (c). (Question No. 1452) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Trade, upon notice, on 30 May 1984: (1) What national, state and regional non-government organisations exist in Australia principally for the promotion and development of trade between Australia and the Middle East region or individual nations in that region. (2) For what period has each of these organisations been in existence. (3) What are the main goals and focus of each of the organisations. (4) What are the (a) names, (b) addresses and (c) telephone numbers of the principal officers in each organisation. Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The only national, state and regional non-government organisation which exists in Australia principally for the promotion and development of trade between Australia and the Middle East region is the Australia Arab Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc., based in Sydney with chapters operating in Melbourne , Adelaide, Perth, and Brisbane. (2) The Australia Arab Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Inc. was formed in Sydney on 13 April 1976 as the Australia Middle East Chamber of Commerce and Industry. (3) The main purpose of the Australia Arab Chamber of Commerce and Industry Inc ., is 'to promote the export of Australian goods, professional services and industrial property rights and know-how to the countries of Bahrain, Kuwait, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, Yemen, Southern Yemen, and other countries as approved by the Chamber from time to time'. (4) The Executive Director of the Chamber is Mr A. T. W. Clout, and the registered address is 318/40 Miller Street, North Sydney, New South Wales, 2060, telephone (02) 969 6846. (Question No. 1453) Mr Hunt asked the Minister for Home Affairs and Environment, upon notice, on 30 May 1984: 1. Has he received complaints from 'Belarus' owners, particularly in the light of a report on the Sixty Minutes television program broadcast on 13 May 1984; if so, is the Minister advising owners to take any specific action. 2. Can he say whether the Government is prepared to take action to introduce new laws, or strengthen existing laws, to protect consumers facing service difficulties; if so, would this require liaison between the Commonwealth and the States. Mr Cohen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: 1. Personal representations on behalf of a farmer in the Gwydir region have recently been made to me by the Honourable R. J. Hunt, MHR. The representation concerns problems with service in the warranty period in relation to a Belarus tractor. Reference was also made to similar problems being encountered by other farmers in the area. My response to representations of this type is as follows: (a) The matter should be first taken up with the distributor and manufacturer; (b) If (a) has already been unsuccessfully undertaken, or proves unsuccessful, it is suggested that, where one exists, they contact their State Agricultural Equipment Liaison Committee; and (c) Where there is any Commonwealth legislation, such as Division 2 of the Trade Practices Act 1974, which provides private legal rights to buyers, the existence of these rights is indicated and the suggestion made that the person contact his private legal advisers as to their applicability and use. Like any other Minister of the Crown I am not in a position where I can give people advice on their private legal rights. Where appropriate an information brochure on Commonwealth legal aid is provided. 2. The Government continuously monitors the operation of the consumer protection provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974 to ensure that they operate efficiently. Where deficiencies come to light the Government will take appropriate action. This is illustrated by the Government's Green Paper entitled 'The Trade Practices Act: Proposals for Change' which was released for public comment in February 1984. The Government was concerned that the definition of consumer in section 4B was uncertain in its applicability to farmers and has proposed the inclusion of an amendment to section 4B which would, inter alia, if enacted, have the effect of including farmers in the definition of consumer in relation to all goods acquired which are within the monetary limit in section 4B . The current monetary limit in section 4B is $15,000 but the Green Paper also contains a proposal to lift the monetary limit to $200,000 which would cover the price of nearly all farm machinery. The inclusion of farmers within the definition of consumer would enable them to have the benefits of Division 2 of Part V of the Act in a wider range of circumstances than is currently the case. It should be mentioned that if a farmer comes within the present terms of section 4B of the Act rights are conferred on him by Division 2 of the Act. Division 2 of the Trade Practices Act implies conditions and warranties in consumer transactions. Those provisions which are the particular relevance to farmers are: section 70 (1)-the implied condition that goods will correspond to description; section 71 (1)-the implied condition that goods supplied under a contract for the supply of goods are of a merchantable quality; section 71 (2)-the implied conditions that goods are reasonably fit for the particular purpose for which they were acquired; section 74-warranties in relation to the supply of services. In relation to the sale of goods, distributors are only able to limit their liability in accordance with the provisions of section 68A. Distributors would only be able to limit their liability to one or more of the following: (i) the replacement of the goods or the supply of equivalent goods; (ii) the repair of the goods; (iii) the payment of the cost of replacing the goods or of acquiring equivalent goods; (iv) the payment of the cost of having the goods repaired; and this would be subject to an overriding fair and reasonable test. The rights which are conferred by Division 2 of Part V are private contractual rights which are enforceable through the State and Territory court systems. The rights of action conferred by Division 2A of Part V against manufacturers and importers of goods are not available to farmers for machinery, as that division is restricted to goods of a kind ordinarily acquired for personal, domestic or household use. The proposal for strengthening the legal position of farmers has not been welcomed by the National Farmers Federation but I am aware that not all farming groups share their views. The exercising of one's legal rights immediately is not often the most prudent course of action and, as already indicated, some States have Agricultural Equipment Committees which have as their aim the resolution of disputes arising between a manufacturer, distributor, dealer or purchaser of agricultural equipment, particularly in relation to: quality of product; ability of product to perform its functions; distributor/dealer service, including obligations under warranty; and spare parts availability. I am advised that the committees only look at complaints over a certain amount. For example, the Victorian Agricultural Equipment Liaison Committee only deals with complaints about agricultural machinery and equipment with a retail value of greater than $2,000. Where one of the parties initiates legal action, the committees suspend further action. The basis of the committees' dispute resolution procedure is the law. The Commonwealth has been liaising with the States and Territories in relation to its proposed amendments to Part V and related provisions of the Trade Practices Act 1974. (Question No. 1454) Mr O'Keefe asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 30 May 1984: What compensation is being paid by the Department of Defence to the consulting firm named Dames and Moore. Mr Scholes —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: $792,400 (see Gazette No. G 48, 6 December 1983, page 4120). (Question No. 1458) Mr Fry asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 30 May 1984: (1) Has his attention been drawn to the recent criticism of the Central Intelligence Agency's mining of Nicaraguan ports; if so, does the Government condone United States support for the military attacks against Nicaragua by counter-revolutionaries (contras) based in Honduras. (2) Has the Government expressed to the United States administration its concern about United States support for contra attacks across the border; if so, what was the United States response to this expression of concern. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: I am aware of the criticism which has been expressed of the mining of Nicaraguan ports. The Australian Government is also concerned about the activity of counter-revolutionaries (contras) against Nicaragua and that concern has been made known to the United States. On 21 May, I announced that Australia would make a contribution to an international humanitarian relief program to assist civilians displaced by the fighting in Nicaragua. The matter was raised with the United States in the above terms on more than one occasion. Although the expression of concern was noted, it was made clear that the pressures exerted on the Nicaraguan regime were considered to be justifiable actions by its opponents. (Question No. 1462) Mr Adermann asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 30 May 1984: (1) What are the anticipated dates for the completion of the (a) Bribie Island turnoff to Beerburrum, (b) re-routed Beerburrum to Caloundra turnoff, and (c) Nambour bypass sections of the Bruce Highway. (2) What is the proposed timetable for the new highway between the Caloundra turnoff and the southern end of the planned Nambour bypass. (3) Which of the sections will be constructed to 4 lane standard. (4) What funds have been expended on these sections in 1983-84, and what allocations have been planned (a) for 1984-85, (b) for 1985-86, and (c) beyond 1985-86 to completion. Mr Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: I am advised by the Queensland Main Roads Department that: (1) The anticipated completion dates for the road projects in question are as follows: (1) Bribie Island turnoff to Beerburrum Creek-July 1984 (b) Re-routed Beerburrum Creek to Caloundra turnoff-December 1985 (c) Nambour bypass section of the Bruce Highway-late 1988, early 1989. (2) The target for the completion of the new highway from Caloundra turnoff to Nambour is late 1988. (3) At the completion of these works the Bruce Highway will be 4 lanes from Brisbane to the southern end of the Nambour bypass. (4) Funds expended on these sections in 1983-84 total $6.3m. Expenditure planned to complete the works in following years is as follows: (a) for 1984-85-$8m (b) for 1985-86-$8m (c) beyond 1985-86 to completion $25.5m. (Question No. 1465) Mr Maher asked the Minister representing the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, upon notice, on 30 May 1984: (1) Has the New South Wales Fire Brigade submitted a request to inspect fire- fighting facilities in the multi-building at Concord Repatriation General Hospital; if so, when was this request made to hospital authorities. (2) Is the Greens patent fire hydrant system in the multi-building at the hospital considered to be in good working order; if so, on what date was it last tested. Mr Holding —The Minister for Veterans' Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) There is no record of a request from the New South Wales Fire Brigade to inspect fire-fighting facilities in the multi-storey building at Repatriation General Hospital, Concord. (2) In September 1983 the Department of Housing and Construction tested the fire hydrant system in the Multi-storey building. The test concluded that 25 metres of the main vertical water-line should be replaced. Work will commence on this project within the next month and, on completion, the Greens pump and water -lines will be tested under full pumping pressure. (Question No. 1482) Dr Everingham asked the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 31 May 1984: (1) Has his attention been drawn to an operations review from Apex Oil's Annual Report 1983 which (a) states that in 1980 Apex Oil NL acquired Gordon Downs on Queensland coalfields, mainly because it carried subsurface coal ownership rights and (b) shows areas surrounding the pastoral freehold where Apex has royalty rights. (2) Is he able to say whether the Queensland Premier stated that (a) Aborigines in Queensland have, and should have the same rights as whites, (b) no Aboriginal group will be allowed to acquire mining royalty equivalents or pastoral or other leases in perpetuity in Queensland because that is sought only by minorities, funded and encouraged by white and black communists, well known in Australia and overseas, who want to set up pagan practices in black sovereign states to take over Queensland, (c) there was a need to exempt Iwasaki Sangyo from State and local government statutes by special legislation to help develop Queensland, (d) it is against Queensland's interests to keep a record of foreign land freehold and (e) secession of Queensland from the federation would be good. (3) Will the Government ensure fair distribution of land rights and avoid redevelopment of traditional Aboriginal practices which could breach universal human rights. Mr Holding —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) I have not seen the report referred to, but I am informed that ownership by non-Aborigines and companies, of mineral rights and royalties is not unknown in Queensland. For example, those holding land title acquired from the Crown in the State of Queensland before 1910 are entitled to royalties from coal extracted from their land, and those holding land under 1860, 1868 and 1872 Queensland land legislation have ownership of all minerals in their land except coal and gold. The honourable member's point is well made, however, for it serves to illustrate further the double standards observed by the Queensland Government. The Government purports to deny its Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander citizens any influence over mining activities on their land on the basis that to do so would confer 'special' rights on Aboriginal or Islander people not enjoyed by other Queenslanders. The information above puts the lie to this argument. I have seen no statements on behalf of the Queensland Government suggesting that all land holders are to be treated equally by the removal from those now enjoying them of the mineral rights referred to above. The Queensland Government's rationale also sits oddly with the fact that, under the recently repealed Aborigines Act and Torres Strait Islanders Act, the then Director of the former Queensland Department of Aboriginal and Islander's Advancement could broker mining agreements on behalf of reserve residents. It seems that it is reasonable for an official to enter mining agreements on Aborigines' behalf, but unreasonable for the elected representatives of Aboriginal people to do so. (2) I am aware of press reports over recent months of statements by the Premier of Queensland along the lines indicated by the honourable member. (3) In my speech to this House on 8 December 1983, I set out this Government's resolution and guiding principles with respect to Aboriginal Australians. This Government is working towards the development of model land rights legislation that will facilitate some justice for Aboriginal people throughout Australia. This legislation is being developed in consultation with the people concerned. The Government places great importance on the preservation of Aboriginal culture and supports cultural revitalisation. At the same time, this Government continues to honour its international commitments and treaties to which it is a party, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination. (Question No. 1489) Mr Scott asked the Minister for Resources and Energy, upon notice, on 31 May 1984: (1) Has the Minister's attention been drawn to the concerns of the British and Australian people about their civil rights with regard to the divulgence of information relating to nuclear testing at Maralinga, Emu and Monte Bello and support and backup services to the United Kingdom atomic tests. (2) Can the Minister give assurances that those people who wish to give information to the Government or government sources regarding the atomic tests in Australia, will be exempt from legal action by both the British and Australian Governments; if not, can the Minister say under what (a) conditions and (b) circumstances divulgence of information by both military personnel and civilian personnel can be given to the Government or government sources without fear of legal reprisal by either the British or Australian governments. Mr Barry Jones —The Minister for Resources and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) Yes. (2) I have recently invited anyone who has information which they believe may be relevant to the Government's investigations to write to me or my Department. Although provisions of the Crimes Act, 1914, the Atomic Energy Act 1953, the Public Service Act 1922 and Regulations, and the respective Service Acts and Regulations control the disclosure of official information by Commonwealth officers, service personnel and other persons, clearly no legal action will be taken against people responding to my invitation to provide information of assistance to the Government's investigations. In relation to the policy of the British Government the British High Commission issued a press release on 29 May 1984 the text of which follows: 'Since the return of the Maralinga test site to Australian control in 1968, the strict security which applied to the U.K. atomic test programme in Australia has been relaxed considerably. Any persons, particularly British exservicemen resident in Australia, who took part in any of these tests and who have information concerning their individual health, are entirely free to make such information available to the Australian authorities. If they have other information about which they may have doubts as to whether it remains classified , they should contact the British High Commission in Canberra.' (Question No. 1493) Mr Hunt asked the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 31 May 1984: (1) Are financial statements by incorporated Aboriginal organisations operating under the auspices of, and funded by, the Aboriginal Development Commission, available for inspection by the Auditor-General; if so, does the Auditor-General undertake an examination of these statements. (2) In what other manner are full details of specific expenditures by these organisations made available for examination by the Parliament. Mr Holding —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Aboriginal organisations receiving funds from the Aboriginal Development Commission are required to submit to the Commission audited financial statements confirming that the funds have been used for the purpose for which they were provided. These statements are available for inspection by the Auditor-General. I am told that officers of the Auditor-General's Office do, from time to time, inspect the statements. (2) Information concerning the financial assistance programs administered by the Commission is shown in the Commission's annual reports presented to the Parliament. It is the policy of the Commission to make available to committees of the Parliament details of financial assistance provided to individual organisations if requested to do so by those committees. The Commission does not publish full details of specific expenditure by Aboriginal organisations. (Question No. 1494) Mr Maher asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 31 May 1984: (1) When was the rate of funeral benefit set at $20 in respect of the funeral of a deceased destitute pensioner. (2) Is it proposed to index this payment. Dr Blewett —The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) A funeral benefit of up to $20 is payable to a person liable for the funeral costs of an eligible age or invalid pensioner or recipient of sheltered employment allowance or tuberculosis allowance. This rate was set in 1943. A higher benefit of up to $40 is payable to an age, invalid, wife or widow pensioner, a supporting parent beneficiary, or a person in receipt of sheltered employment allowance or tuberculosis allowance who is liable for the funeral costs of a spouse, a child or another pensioner. This rate was set in 1965. For funeral benefit purposes a 'pensioner' means a pensioner who satisfies the fringe benefits income test, that is, whose income apart from pension is currently less than $60 a week if single or $98 a week combined if married. (2) There are no proposals currently before the Government to index either of these payments. (Question No. 1499) Mr Ruddock asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 31 May 1984: How many (a) males and (b) females have been engaged in (i) the Minister's Department and (ii) any statutory authorities reporting to the Minister, as temporary employees under the community employment program, in (A) March, (B) April and (C) May 1984. Mr Hawke —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The numbers of staff who commenced temporary employment under the community employment program in my Department and in the Public Service Board in each of the months shown are set out below. All of those employed were females. Public Depart- Service Month ment Board March 1984 1 5 April 1984 4 2 May 1984 2 1 Other statutory authorities within my portfolio did not engage staff under the community employment program during the months of March to May 1984. (Question No. 1501) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister representing the Minister for Industry and Commerce, upon notice, on 31 May 1984: How many (a) males and (b) females have been engaged in (i) the Minister's Department and (ii) any statutory authorities reporting to the Minister, as temporary employees under the community employment program, in (A) March, (B) April and (C) May 1984. Mr John Brown —The Minister for Industry and Commerce has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: Temporary staff employed under the community employment program are as follows: (i) Department of Industry and Commerce Nil (ii) Statutory Authorities Albury-Wodonga Development Corporation Males Females March 1984 Nil 2 April 1984 Nil 15 May 1984 Nil 2 (Question No. 1502) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 31 May 1984: How many (a) males and (b) females have been engaged in (i) the Minister's Department and (ii) any statutory authorities reporting to the Minister, as temporary employees under the community employment program, in (A) March, (B) April and (C) May 1984. Dr Blewett —The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: No temporary employees have been engaged under the community employment program in the Department of Social Security. (Question No. 1504) Mr Ruddock asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 31 May 1984: How many (a) males and (b) females have been engaged in (i) the Minister's Department and (ii) any statutory authorities reporting to the Minister, as temporary employees under the community employment program, in (A) March, (B) April and (C) May 1984. Mr Keating —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: No person has been engaged under the community employment program by my Department or any statutory authority within my portfolio in March, April or May 1984. (Question No. 1506) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister representing the Minister for Resources and Energy, upon notice, on 31 May 1984: How many (a) males and (b) females have been engaged in (i) the Minister's Department and (ii) any statutory authorities reporting to the Minister, as temporary employees under the community employment program, in (A) March, (B) April and (C) May 1984. Mr Barry Jones —The Minister for Resources and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: In (A) March, (B) April and (C) May, there were no (a) males or (b) females engaged as temporary employees under the community employment program in (i) the Minister's Department. In (ii) any statutory authorities reporting to the Minister the figures are as follows: A (a) 22 (b) 5; B (a) 22 (b) 5; and C (a) 25 (b) 6. All were engaged by the Australian Atomic Energy Commission. (Question No. 1510) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 31 May 1984: (1) How many (a) males and (b) females have been engaged in (i) the Minister's Department and (ii) any statutory authorities reporting to the Minister, as temporary employees under the community employment program, in (A) March, (B) April and (C) May 1984. Mr Scholes —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) CEP Staff Commenced Employment in Defence Men Women Total Pre-March 76 32 108 March 1984 21 6 27 April 1984 -1 2 1 May 1984 . . . . . . 96 40 136 (Question No. 1513) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 31 May 1984: (1) How many (a) males and (b) females have been engaged in (i) the Minister's Department and (ii) any statutory authorities reporting to the Minister, as temporary employees under the community employment program, in (A) March, (B) April and (C) May 1984. Mr Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) (1) Nil. (a) (ii) 14 males have been employed by Australian National Railways Commission under the community employment program in each of the months of March and April; 116 males were employed during the month of May. (b) (i) Nil. (b) (ii) Nil. (Question No. 1516) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, upon notice, on 31 May 1984: (1) How many (a) males and (b) females have been engaged in (i) the Minister's Department and (ii) any statutory authorities reporting to the Minister, as temporary employees under the community employment program, in (A) March, (B) April and (C) May 1984. Mr Hurford —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (i) The following numbers of (a) males and (b) females were engaged in the Department of Housing and Construction as temporary employees under the community employment program at the end of each of the months mentioned: (A) March 1984-(a) 1,361 males; (b) 325 females. (B) April 1984-1,273 males; (b) 309 females. (C) May 1984-(a) 907 males; (b) 257 females. (ii) No temporary employees under the community employment program have been engaged by statutory authorities reporting to the Minister for Housing and Construction. (Question No. 1518) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Administrative Services, upon notice, on 31 May 1984: How many (a) males and (b) females have been engaged in (i) the Minister's Department and (ii) any statutory authorities reporting to the Minister, as temporary employees under the community employment program, in (A) March, (B) April and (C) May 1984. Mr John Brown —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: There have been no temporary employees engaged in my Department or in statutory authorities reporting to me under the community employment program during the period March 1984 to May 1984. My Department has developed a number of proposals to provide for temporary employment opportunities under the program which are currently being considered by the Department of Employment and Industrial Relations. (Question No. 1520) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Science and Technology, upon notice, on 31 May 1984: How many (a) males and (b) females have been engaged in (i) the Minister's Department and (ii) any statutory authorities reporting to the Minister, as temporary employees under the community employment program, in (A) March, (B) April and (C) May 1984. Mr Barry Jones —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: COMMUNITY EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Employment Statistics: 1 March 1984 to 31 May 1984 Department Statutory Authorities Men Women Total Men Women Total Already employed at end February 1984 24 9 33 60 61 121 March 1984 3 . . 3 11 19 30 April 1984 . . . . . . 1 2 3 May 1984 . . . . . . 3 5 8 27 9 36 75 87 162 (Question No. 1522) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Home Affairs and Environment, upon notice, on 31 May 1984: How many (a) males and (b) females have been engaged in (i) the Minister's Department and (ii) any statutory authorities reporting to the Minister, as temporary employees under the community employment program, in (A) March, (B) April and (C) May 1984. Mr Cohen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: MarchAprilMay m f m f m f Department of Home Affairs and Environment 1 2 1 2 1 2 Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service 41 26 42 29 50 28 National Library of Australia 1 2 1 2 1 2 Australian Film Commission . . 40 . . 40 . . 40 Australian National Gallery 12 9 12 9 12 9 Australia Council . . 1 . . 1 . . 1 (Question No. 1523) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 31 May 1984: How many (a) males and (b) females have been engaged in (i) the Minister's Department and (ii) any statutory authorities reporting to the Minister, as temporary employees under the community employment program, in (A) March, (B) April and (C) May 1984. Mr Holding —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: In the Department of Aboriginal Affairs the number of persons temporarily employed under the community employment program were: (A) in March-38 females (B) in April-42 females (C) in May 1984-43 females. Of the statutory authorities reporting to the Minister, Aboriginal Hostels Limited temporarily employed, under the community employment program: (A) in March-16 males (B) in April-21 males and 4 females (C) in May 1984-13 males and 1 female. (Question No. 1529) Mr Hunt asked the Minister for Trade, upon notice, on 1 June 1984: (1) Is he able to say whether Australia will maintain its $18m per annum beef market in Singapore. (2) Has the Government put any proposals to the Singapore Government regarding our beef export trade; if so, what are these proposals and what has been the response. (3) If not, when will he do so. Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Australia's export trade in beef to the small but valuable Singapore market is likely to come under new competitive pressures following the recent decision by the Singapore Government to allow imports of beef from South American countries. Hitherto, supplies from these countries had been excluded by restrictions to safeguard against the risk of introduction of certain exotic diseases, notably foot and mouth disease, into Singapore. (2) No. (3) The Government does not consider that there is any basis for representations to the Singapore authorities on this particular issue. What the Singapore Government has done is to relax its veterinary health requirements in respect of certain types of meat imported from some countries. It has not restricted market access for Australian meat or otherwise discriminated against Australia as a supplier. That is a matter for it to decide in the same way as it is for the Australian Government to decide what restrictions are necessary on health grounds in relation to imports of agricultural produce into Australia. (Question No. 1532) Mr Lloyd asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 6 June 1984: (1) Further to the answer to question No. 997 (Hansard, 28 February 1984, pages 144-5) concerning New Zealand lamb exports to Australia, what are the available monthly import figures for (a) mutton and (b) lamb from New Zealand since January 1983. (2) What is the present situation concerning allegations of dumping of sheepmeat in Australia from New Zealand. Mr Kerin —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Statistics were not collected by the Australian Bureau of Statistics in the period 1 January 1983 to 31 December 1983 which would enable a breakdown of imports between lamb and mutton. Total monthly sheepmeat imports in this period were: January-nil; February-nil; March-3.6 tonnes; April-131.5 tonnes; May-48.7 tonnes; June-261.4 tonnes; July-551.8 tonnes; August-181.7 tonnes; September-95. 7 tonnes; October-108.9 tonnes; November-16.5 tonnes; December-nil. For the period January to April 1984, preliminary data supplied by the Australian Bureau of Statistics shows imports of: January-0.2 tonnes of lamb, nil imports of other sheepmeat; February-23 tonnes of lamb, 263 tonnes of other sheepmeat; March-7 tonnes of lamb, 492 tonnes of other sheepmeat; April-nil imports of lamb, 459 tonnes of other sheepmeat. (2) The Sheepmeat Council of Australia and the Australian Meat Exporters Federal Council have sought countervailing action against sheepmeat imports from New Zealand. I am advised that the Department of Industry and Commerce is at present carrying out preliminary investigations of the complaint. (Question No. 1537) Mr Blanchard asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 4 June 1984: (1) How many Defence Force apprenticeship vacancies were (a) available, and (b) filled, during 1982-83. (2) How many vacancies were available for 1983-84. Mr Scholes —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) During 1982-83 there were available 710 Defence Force apprenticeship vacancies, and of these, 708 vacancies were filled. (2) During 1983-84 there were available 618 Defence Force apprenticeship vacancies. (Question No. 1540) Mr Hunt asked the Minister for Trade, upon notice, on 5 June 1984: (1) What action has been taken to overcome the threat of European Economic Community beef supplies being sold at below market level prices on traditional Australian markets in the Asian/Pacific Basin. (2) Does the recent doubling of EEC beef sales in Canada, at prices 5c to 6c below ruling market levels, indicate that the threat to our Asian/Pacific Basin markets is immediate. (3) What action will he take at the first sign of dumping on our traditional markets in this region. Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) This issue was raised in March 1984 with EEC Vice-President, Haferkamp, at the Ministerial Consultations held in Canberra between Australia and the EEC. Official representations were subsequently made to the EEC Commission and to governments of EEC member states. In late May 1984, I wrote to EEC Commissioners expressing Australian concern about the growth in EEC subsidised exports, and opposing any expansion of such subsidies to the Pacific Basin region. In all these representations, Australia's serious concern at unfair competition from subsidised EEC beef exports in traditional Australian markets has been made clear to the EEC, and Australia has called on the EEC to solve its beef surplus problems without recourse to measures that could adversely affect the legitimate trade interests of Australia. The matter was also taken up in discussions in Brussels on 7 and 8 June 1984 between senior Australian and EEC agricultural trade and marketing representatives, and will be raised in a meeting of the GATT International Meat Council scheduled for 18 and 19 June 1984 in Geneva. With respect to Canada, where EEC export subsidisation is already occurring, we have held consultations with the Canadian authorities as provided for under the Australia/Canada MTN beef arrangement. The purpose of these consultations was to emphasise the importance Australia attaches to preserving our access to the Canadian market and to ascertain how Canada intends to deal with the incursion of subsidised EEC products onto their market. (2) The steep increase this year in subsidised EEC beef exports to Canada at prices well below ruling market levels represents a serious threat to our beef trade with Canada, and is yet a further indication of the potential for EEC export subsidy practices in agricultural trade to disrupt the development of world markets on a sound economic basis. Any extension of this practice into other markets in the Asia/Pacific area would make it extremely difficult for Australian beef exporters to retain their trade. (3) As indicated in (1) above, steps have already been taken to request the EEC to seek ways of solving its beef surplus problems without recourse to unfair competitive practices in export markets of interest to Australia. (Question No. 1543) Mr Lloyd asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 5 June 1984: If a retired farmer purchases a retirement house in a nearby town to allow the farmer's son, farm manager, sharefarmer, or lessee to more efficiently work the property, is the farm home still exempt from the proposed assets test. Dr Blewett —The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: It is proposed to treat as an exempt asset the value of the principal residence owned and occupied by a pensioner. Where a pensioner purchases a new home the value of that home will become exempt and the value of the former home will be taken into account as an asset while it is retained by the pensioner.