Friday, 29 November 1985 Mr SPEAKER (Hon. Harry Jenkins) took the chair at 10 a.m., and read prayers. Mr SPEAKER —Yesterday I informed the House that the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's broadcast of proceedings would be relayed into members' rooms for two days by means of the House monitoring system. Some of the commercial broadcasting organisations which make use of the House monitoring system to enable the recording of excerpts of proceedings have advised that the procedure adopted yesterday has made this task difficult. Consequently, the House monitoring system will today carry a clean feed of proceedings. Mr SPEAKER —Yesterday the honourable member for Lyons (Mr Burr) raised a matter of privilege in connection with an article in the Sydney Morning Herald on 28 November relating to the report of the Select Committee on Aircraft Noise. The article in question purports to reveal a knowledge of recommendations of and argument by the Select Committee, the report of which has since been presented to the House. Standing order 340 provides: The evidence taken by any Select Committee of the House and documents presented to and proceedings and reports of such Committee, which have not been reported to the House, shall not, unless authorized by the House, be disclosed or published by any Member of such Committee, or by any other person. It has long been held that the publication or disclosure of reports prior to their presentation to the House constitutes a breach of privilege or contempt-I refer to House of Representatives Practice pages 660-1 and to May, 20th edition, pages 153-4. On its face, the report gives the impression that the author had prior knowledge of recommendations of the Committee. It is quite impossible, however, for me to reach any conclusion on whether or not this was the case, nor would it be proper for me to do so. I am required rather to decide whether, on the information available to me, there is prima facie evidence of a breach of privilege or contempt. Since the newspaper report was published and the matter raised by the honourable member, the report of the Committee has been tabled in the House. However, the fact of the tabling does not alter the gravamen of the complaint raised by the honourable member. Having considered the complaint and the newspaper report, I am prepared to allow precedence to a motion in respect of the matter if the House wishes to proceed further. Mr BURR(Lyons) —by leave-Mr Speaker, I do not intend to move a motion to have this matter referred to the Privileges Committee. However, I think I should take the opportunity to remind all members of the House that in fact it is a breach of privilege and it is also irresponsible of members of any committee, whether it be the Select Committee on Aircraft Noise or any other parliamentary committee, to disclose information that may be contained in a parliamentary report before it is tabled in this House. I think it is also opportune to remind members of the Press that it is also a breach of privilege on their part to publish any matter contained in a parliamentary report before it is tabled. In this case undue concern may well have been raised among residents living adjacent to Sydney Airport about relaxation of curfews in that area. A proper reading of the report may have dispelled concerns that may have been raised by those residents. I do not intend to pursue this matter any further, but all members of the House and all members of the Press Gallery should be reminded of the fact that early or premature disclosure before reports are tabled is a breach of privilege and also grossly irresponsible. Consideration resumed from 28 November, on motion by Mr West: That, in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Committee Act 1969 and by reason of the urgent nature of the work, it is expedient that the following proposed work be carried out without it having been referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works: Construction of National Maritime Museum, Sydney. Motion (by Mr West) put: That the question be now put. The House divided. (Mr Speaker-Hon. Harry Jenkins) Ayes . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Noes . . . . . . . . . . . 46 —— Majority . . . . . . . . . 27 —— Baldwin, P. J. Jones, BarryBeazley, K. C. Keating, P. J.Beddall, D. P. Kelly, R. J.Bilney, G. N. Kent, L.Blanchard, C. A. Keogh, L. J.Blewett, N. Kerin, J. C.Brown, John Klugman, R. E.Brown, Robert Lamb, A. H.Campbell, G. Langmore, J. V.Charles, D. E. Lee, M.Charlesworth, R. I. Lindsay, E. J.Child, J. McHugh, J.Chynoweth, R. L. McLeay, LeoCleeland, P. R. Maher, M. J.Cross, M. D. Martin, S. P.Cunningham, B. T. (Teller) Mayer, H.Darling, E. E. Mildren, J. B.Dawkins, J. S. Milton, P.Dubois, S. G. Morris, AllanDuffy, M. J. Morris, PeterEdwards, Ronald Mountford, J. G.Fatin, W. F. O'Keefe, N. P.Fitzgibbon, E. J. O'Neil, L. R. T.Free, R. V. Price, L. R. S.Gayler, J. Punch, G. F.Gear, G. Scholes, G. G. D.Gorman, R. N. J. Scott, J. L. (Teller)Grace, E. L. Simmons, D. W.Griffiths, A. G. Snow, J. H.Hand, G. L. Staples, P. R.Hayden, W. D. Tickner, R. E.Holding, A. C. Uren, T.Hollis, C. West, S. J.Howe, B. L. Willis, R.Hurford, C. J. Wright, K. W.Jacobi, R. Young, M. J.Jakobsen, C. A. Adermann, A. E. Lloyd, B.Andrew, J. N. (Teller) McArthur, F. S.Beale, J. H. McGauran, P. J.Brown, N. A. MacKellar, M. J. R.Burr, M. A. McVeigh, D. T.Cameron, Donald Macphee, I. M.Cameron, Ewen Miles, C. G.Carlton, J. J. Millar, P. C.Cobb, M. R. Moore, J. C.Connolly, D. M. Nehl, G. B.Conquest, B. J. Porter, J. R.Cowan, D. B. Reith, P. K.Downer, A. J. G. Robinson, IanEdwards, Harry Ruddock, P. M.Fischer, Tim Shipton, R. F.Goodluck, B. J. Sinclair, I. McC.Hall, Steele Smith, W.Halverson, R. G. Spender, J. M.Hawker, D. P. M. Tuckey, C. W.Hicks, N. J. (Teller) Watson, DavidHodges, J. C. Webster, A. P.Hodgman, W. M. White, P. N. D.Jull, D. F. Wilson, I. B. C. Humphreys, B. C. Aldred, K. J. Question so resolved in the affirmative. Original question resolved in the affirmative. Mr McGAURAN(Gippsland) —Mr Speaker, I wish to raise a matter of privilege. Mr SPEAKER —The honourable member may proceed. Mr McGAURAN —It is along the lines of that raised by the honourable member for Lyons (Mr Burr). In this morning's Press, specifically the Australian and the Age, articles deal with the forthcoming tabling of the report of the Joint Committee on the National Crime Authority. Mr Speaker, you will be aware that that report has not yet been tabled, yet those articles seek to deal with its purported recommendations. Both articles quote from Government sources. If, as the articles allege, the origin of tension between the parliamentary committee overseeing the National Crime Authority and that body is a lack of trust on the part of the National Crime Authority, any suggestion that a Government member has canvassed this matter with the media prior to the tabling of the report in this Parliament is of the utmost seriousness. The matter of privilege is that these newspaper articles have dealt at length with recommendations contained in the report and that the source of that information is quoted in both articles as being Government members. Mr SPEAKER —I have indeed read the article in the Age newspaper referred to by the honourable member for Gippsland (Mr McGauran). In the circumstances, having just given a ruling on a similar incident with regard to the Select Committee on Aircraft Noise, I do not think there is any need for me to go through the details of the various parts of our practices which apply to this matter. I do not think there is any point in my considering the matter further. I have to say that, having considered the complaint and having read the article, I am prepared to allow precedence to a motion in respect of the matter if the House wishes to proceed further. Mr McGAURAN —Mr Speaker, I understand that under the Standing Orders there is no need at this time for me to move a motion along those lines, but I certainly reserve my right to do so. Mr WEST(Cunningham-Minister for Housing and Construction)(10.19) —I move: That, in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, it is expedient to carry out the following proposed work which was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works and on which the Committee has duly reported to Parliament: Construction of Canberra Mail Centre, Fyshwick. Australia Post requires new accommodation for the Canberra Mail Centre to unite mail handling and vehicle operations on one site. The new buildings will be located at Canberra Avenue, Fyshwick, Australian Capital Territory. The proposal involves the construction of a single storey mail processing area, with a three-storey section accommodating administration, amenities and plant. A detached single storey building will be provided as a motor vehicle service centre. Hardstanding will be provided to cater for mail vehicles and parking for staff and visitors. The proposed work will cost $7.52m at August 1985 prices. I would like to thank the Public Works Committee for its prompt consideration of the proposal. If the House agrees to support this motion, planning can proceed in accordance with the recommendations of the Committee. I commend the motion to the House. Mr BEALE(Deakin)(10.20) —The Opposition is concerned about what it sees as mismanagement not only by the Government but also by the Department of Housing and Construction. As far as the Government is concerned, we have had in recent days the Bicentennial fiasco, yesterday the issue surrounding the Australian Institute of Sport and last night the extraordinary validation of fees discussion. Now we have in front of us the report of the Auditor-General on the efficiency audit- Mr SPEAKER —Order! I trust that the honourable member for Deakin will get to the motion before the Chair very quickly. The motion is with regard to the construction of the Canberra Mail Centre, Fyshwick, and is not an invitation for open debate. Mr BEALE —Mr Speaker, in discussing the whole question of the mail centre at Fyshwick we have to ascertain whether the Department is competent to carry out the organisation and management of the work. Mr SPEAKER —Of that particular work. Mr West —Mr Speaker, on a point of order: The honourable member is canvassing your ruling. Mr SPEAKER —I am well aware of that. I ask the Minister to be patient. I was going to point out to the honourable member that he may not debate in the generality. The motion concerns the Canberra Mail Centre at Fyshwick. I suggest that he proceed to deal with that and relate his remarks to it. Mr BEALE —We urge the Department to arrange the construction of the Canberra Mail Centre in such a way as to avoid repetition of the extraordinary events at the Redfern Mail Exchange. The audit report to which I referred says, amongst other things: Audit can find no authoritative material in the Department that could be used as a reference for officers making decisions in these cases. If the Department, in its construction of the Canberra Mail Centre, can do no better than that we are going to have trouble. We also ask the Minister for Housing and Construction (Mr West) to avoid another situation such as that which occurred at Rushcutters Bay with the infamous all-on overtime procedures. This audit report also says: . . . Audit suggested that a tighter accountability and more formalised controls over variations should be introduced in the interests of the Department. If the Department of Housing and Construction arranges the construction of the Canberra Mail Centre in that fashion it will be a disaster. The report also says: . . . a comprehensive set of instructions should be prepared for the guidance of project clerks . . . We enjoin the Minister to ensure that in the construction of the Canberra Mail Centre we do not have a repetition of the kinds of things to which this audit report refers. The report goes on: Audit . . . considers that improvement and rectification may have been effected more quickly if portion of progress payments had been earlier withheld. Mr Hand —Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. I refer to your earlier ruling on the relevance of the report that the honourable member is using. Mr SPEAKER —I do not know whether the honourable member for Melbourne has been listening to a different debate from the one to which I have been listening, but the honourable member for Deakin has been completely in order within that ruling. Mr BEALE —Thank you, Mr Speaker. For the benefit of the honourable member for Melbourne, I remind the House that we are talking about the construction of the Canberra Mail Centre and whether the Department is competent to organise and operate that construction project. The report continues: . . . Audit recommended that consideration be given to its application to all major contracts being administered by the Department. The Department accepted the recommendation, but it does not give high priority to the development work involved. In relation to the Canberra Mail Centre, it is clear that the Department has to give high priority to the development work involved. The report states: The Department agreed that there were problems. In the construction of the Canberra Mail Centre, the Department must ensure that its procedures do not allow repetition of the kinds of difficulties that arose, for example, at the Australian Defence Force Academy. In that regard, the financial statement to 30 June 1984- Motion (by Mr West) put: That the question be now put. The House divided. (Mr Speaker-Hon. Harry Jenkins) Ayes . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Noes . . . . . . . . . . . 46 —— Majority . . . . . . . . . 29 —— Baldwin, P. J. Jones, BarryBeazley, K. C. Keating, P. J.Beddall, D. P. Kelly, R. J.Bilney, G. N. Kent, L.Blanchard, C. A. Keogh, L. J.Blewett, N. Kerin, J. C.Brown, John Klugman, R. E.Brown, Robert Lamb, A. H.Brumby, J. M. Langmore, J. V.Campbell, G. Lee, MCharles, D. E. Lindsay, E. J.Charlesworth, R. I. McHugh, J.Child, J. McLeay, LeoChynoweth, R. L. Maher, M. J.Cleeland, P. R. Martin, S. P.Cross, M. D. Mayer, H.Cunningham, B. T. (Teller) Mildren, J. B.Darling, E. E. Milton, P.Dawkins, J. S. Morris, AllanDubois, S. G. Morris, PeterDuffy, M. J. Mountford, J. G.Edwards, Ronald O'Keefe, N. P.Fatin, W. F. O'Neil, L. R. T.Fitzgibbon, E. J. Price, L. R. S.Free, R. V. Punch, G. F.Gayler, J. Scholes, G. G. D.Gear, G. Scott, J. L. (Teller)Gorman, R. N. J. Simmons, D. W.Grace, E. L. Snow, J. H.Griffiths, A. G. Staples, P. R.Hand, G. L. Theophanous, A. C.Hayden, W. G. Tickner, R. E.Holding, A. C. Uren, T.Hollis, C. West, S. J.Howe, B. L. Willis, R.Hurford, C. J. Wright, K. W.Jacobi, R. Young, M. J.Jakobsen, C. A. Adermann, A. E. Lloyd, B.Andrew, J. N. (Teller) McArthur, F. S.Beale, J. H. McGauran, P. J.Brown, N. A. MacKellar, M. J. R.Burr, M. A. Macphee, I. M.Cameron, Donald Miles, C. G.Cameron, Ewen Millar, P. C.Carlton, J. J. Moore, J. C.Cobb, M. R. Nehl, G. B.Connolly, D. M. Peacock, A. S.Conquest, B. J. Porter, J. R.Cowan, D. B. Reith, P. K.Downer, A. J. G. Robinson, IanEdwards, Harry Rocher, A. C.Fischer, Tim Ruddock, P. M.Goodluck, B. J. Shipton, R. F.Hall, Steele Sinclair, I. McC.Halverson, R. G. Smith, W.Hawker, D. P. M. Spender, J. M.Hicks, N. J. (Teller) Tuckey, C. W.Hodges, J. C. Watson, DavidHodgman, W. M. White, P. N. D.Jull, D. F. Wilson, I. B. C. Humphreys, B. C. Aldred, K. J. Question so resolved in the affirmative. Original question resolved in the affirmative. Debate resumed from 27 November, on motion by Mr Barry Jones: That the Bill be now read a second time. Mr MOORE(Ryan)(10.32) —The Subsidy (Grain Harvesters and Equipment) Bill proposes assistance by way of subsidy on the manufacture of grain harvesters and parts which, if imported, would be classisfied to item 84.25.9 of the Customs tariff. The proposal is for a two-part subsidy scheme: Firstly, a subsidy at a rate of 12.5 per cent of ex-factory selling prices where the registered producers of complete machines whose value added in production is not less than 40 per cent of ex-factory selling prices and, secondly, a subsidy at 25 per cent of value added for another manufacturer of grain harvesters and parts classified to sub-item 84.25.9 of the Customs tariff. These arrangements, which arise out of the Industries Assistance Commission's findings, provide for assistance equivalent to a 15 per cent tariff. The two-part scheme is to ensure that no manufacturer will be disadvantaged under the scheme. The subsidy, which was originally to be effective from 1 January 1986, will now be payable from 21 August 1985. The alteration to the effective date arises as a result of the November selling season. Failure to implement the proposal prior to the selling season would have disadvantaged local manufacturers and grain growers. The alteration to the date has also necessitated a special subsidy on those goods cleared for home consumption before 21 August and sold on or after that date. This has particular application to the South Australian company, Horwood Bagshaw Ltd. In a telex that company stated: The proposed Subsidy (Grain Harvesters and Equipment) Bill 1985 in its present form substantially disadvantages Horwood Bagshaw's local manufacturing activities in this regard because the proposed bounty level for more than half its planned 1985-86 production will be substantially less than the assistance presently provided by way of tariff. That is in conflict with the statement. The telex continues: For example, Horwood Bagshaw is the sole local producer of self-propelled harvesters i.e. HB model 2140 SP. Under section 13 of the proposed Bill, Horwood Bagshaw's production of this machine, which represents approximately 50 per cent total production in 1985-86, would not qualify as it has insufficient value added as defined by section 7. A similar situation may exist in relation to our model HB 2141 PTO. Under the original terms of the IAC's recommendations, Horwood Bagshaw could have expected to receive $6,554 for the production of our SP2140 machine. The Bill now proposes that this should be only $4,946, based on 25 per cent of value added . . . because the machine does not incorporate a minimum of 40 per cent value added. Should Horwood Bagshaw's SP2140 machine be assisted by the provisions of section 13 . . . and not section 14, then it could have expected to receive $8,630 per machine. This would then have been in line with the average duty paid on imported machines during 1985. Complementary to this Bill is provision for duty free entry of goods classified to 84.25.9. Presumably, legislation will be introduced to implement this change in due course. Let me remind the House why this Bill is necessary. In 1983 the Government introduced a 15 per cent tariff on imported grain harvesters. These imports supply about 70 per cent of the market. The Australian Wheatgrowers Federation submitted to the Government that this duty would add costs to grain growers of about $14m per year. The Government requested the IAC to examine the Australian Wheatgrowers Federation's submission. The IAC reasserted its view that a 15 per cent tariff was the approriate form of assistance. The Government accepted this advice. However, following pressure from the Opposition and the rural community, the Government in its second Budget announced that it would remove this duty and replace it with a bounty. This Bill gives effect to that decision. Clearly, this is a cynical attempt to buy votes in the rural sector at the time of the South Australian State election. The Opposition supports the Bill because it believes that the subsidy will in part alleviate some of the cost pressures facing agriculture. We support the principle encompassed in this Bill. We do not support the other exercise of the Government. Mr SIMMONS(Calare)(10.38) —I do not want to take up much of the time of the House this morning but I do wish to support the initiative of the Government in this decision to replace the tariff on imported harvesters with an equivalent bounty on local production, effective from 21 August 1985. Of course, honourable members would be aware that the tariff on grain harvesters that applied previously had raised the costs of farmers, who now face, of course, declining returns on world markets. Over the period of the last couple of years honourable members would be only too well aware of the concerns on both sides of the House with regard to the policies of the European Community and, of course, in latter days the prospect of a trade war in regard to the United States export enhancement program. I certainly cannot let this opportunity go by without responding to the rather unfortunate comment by the honourable member for Ryan (Mr Moore). He suggested, to use his words, that this was some sort of cynical attempt to buy votes for the South Australian election. As you would be perfectly well aware, Mr Deputy Speaker, nothing could be further from the truth. Honourable members would recall that over the last few months there have been continuing discussions between members of the Government and peak bodies in the rural sector, principally the National Farmers Federation; so much so that following the concerns expressed outside this House on 1 July this year, the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) in conjunction with Australia's greatest Minister for Primary Industry, undertook to bring down a package to do something to assist the rising costs that people in the rural sector were facing. Of course, part of that response was this decision to replace tariffs on harvesters with a system of bounties. Of course, the measure was not in total isolation, but was in conjunction also with the decision to rebate full diesel excise. The other decision, of course, was that the Government should take steps to ensure that assistance arrangements for the production of agricultural chemicals do not also impose undue costs on agricultural users. I have spoken in the past on the whole question of whether we should have bounties or tariffs. My general view is-and I repeat it for the benefit of honourable members who are interested in this debate-that where possible we should proceed down this track. This legislation-the subsidy for grain harvesters and equipment-is an admirable step. It is a decision, of course, that has a revenue cost to the Government; but most significantly it has a great impact on primary producers. In recent days people who represent rural and provincial seats, I am sure, would have seen large scale advertisements in their local Press by people who are involved in the retailing of grain harvesters, bringing to the attention of their customers the benefits of this decision. I have seen advertisements in local newspapers suggesting that there has been a downward reduction in costs of up to $8,000 or $9,000 per harvester. So this decision is particularly welcome. It is also particularly welcome for another reason. Honourable members would recall that the initial decision was to apply this part of the Government's budgetary measures from 1 January 1986. As the Minister for Science and Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce (Mr Barry Jones), who is at the table, noted in his second reading speech, prior to 21 August 1985 a substantial number of grain harvesters were imported for sale in the current season. Most of those harvesters have yet to be sold, with the result that importers would therefore have been faced with the prospect of having to sell duty paid machines in the 1985 season in competition with other harvesters which would be duty free, or with locally produced machines on which the subsidy under the Subsidy (Grain Harvesters and Equipment) Bill would have become payable. Obviously, honourable members would appreciate that this would have seriously disadvantaged some suppliers because it is a fiercely competitive market, not only because of world factors but also because of the cost pressures that local rural producers are facing. I certainly support the initiatives of the Government that this measure represents. It represents a positive package for the rural sector. As I said at the outset, it should not be seen in total isolation, but as part of a package to do something about costs to the rural sector, something of which all honourable members should be conscious. If they are not conscious of it, they should be, because despite the decline in the percentage of export income earned from primary industry over the last few years, honourable members should not forget that agricultural exports from Australia still contribute about 40 per cent of our export wealth. So anything that we can do to encourage local farmers to be cost competitive, to enable them to compete-as my friend the honourable member for Bendigo (Mr Brumby) said yesterday in his comments on another Bill-in a world market that is unfortunately corrupted by subsidised pricing arrangements throughout the world, should be welcomed by the farming community and by this House. I commend the Bill to the House. Mr ANDREW(Wakefield)(10.45) —This is a bipartisan debate on the Subsidy (Grain Harvesters) and Equipment Bill this morning. I support the Bill, as the honourable member for Ryan (Mr Moore) has done. However, I remind the House that while we sit here in airconditioned comfort reflecting on what we think ought to happen to the grain harvest industry in Australia there are, right now, people in harvesters taking off the crop that will ensure Australia's economic future. It is too easy to forget that there are people in the middle of harvesting right now. This Bill is being brought into the House, this debate is occurring, in the middle of Australia's grain harvest. Those farmers who are listening to this debate and who are sitting in their tractors or their self-propelled headers making their way around paddocks might well be asking themselves quite reasonably how much of the grain which is rattling into the bin they are taking off for themselves and how much they are taking off to pay off inflated government. Mr Barry Jones —I hope they are not listening to us; they might lose concentration. Mr ANDREW —That is a fair comment from the Minister. Sometimes I am tempted to make the same observation. Nonetheless, I make the valid observation that every farmer might well ask himself how many bushels of what ever he is harvesting he is harvesting simply to discharge the increasing costs he faces as a result of being on the land. I make the plea to the House this morning to be aware of the fact that there are many farmers who are making their way around paddocks, not in those airconditioned shiny new monsters that so many honourable members opposite see in agricultural shows, but in headers which need replacement and which they cannot afford to replace either because of the cost of the header or the falling farm income which is the reality of agriculture today. The agricultural industry consumes something like 2,000 down to 1,500 new grain harvester units a year. These fall into two categories. The smaller harvesters are power take-off driven and tractor pulled; the larger of them are self-propelled headers, with their own capacity to move around the paddock independent of any other mobile unit. Most of the power take-off driven units used in Australia in fact are manufactured in Australia. By volume these power take-off units make up about 30 per cent of the market. The difficulty I have with the legislation before the House is that it has been conceived and has arrived in the House in such haste. The honourable member for Ryan has already referred to the fact that the legislation currently before the House allows grain harvesters, and the bounty to be applied to grain harvesters, to fall into two categories. The first is for those harvesters which are overseas produced and assembled here in Australia. It is considered that the value added category of these will be less than 40 per cent. Therefore, the bounty available under this legislation will be paid at 25 per cent of the cost of the assembly of these machines. The second category-the category I suspect most occupies the concern of both sides of the House-is the area of local manufacturing. People who are locally manufacturing harvesters are anticipated, as a result of the Industries Assistance Commission review, to have a proportion of that harvester which is over 40 per cent value added. These harvesters which fall into the over 40 per cent value added category will attract a bounty of 12 1/2 per cent ex-factory price. I make particular reference to these because one of the major manufacturers in Australia in fact has a large assembly plant in my electorate. I refer to Horwood Bagshaw Ltd which assembles harvesters, as the honourable member for Ryan said, at Mannum in my electorate. In fact, that company at its Mannum plant employs 257 people. Therefore, the Bill before the House does not affect only the farmers of Australia it does not affect only the equally important farm labourers of Australia, some of the few people left productively working in this nation; the Bill also affects 257 people who are employed at the Horwood Bagshaw factory in Mannum and the many other additional employees of Horwood Bagshaw in the city of Adelaide. Mr Downer —Twelve hundred. Mr ANDREW —The honourable member for Mayo has interjected to remind me that according to his statistics there are in fact 1,200 employees of Horwood Bagshaw involved in assembly and sales in the city of Adelaide. Some concerns felt by Horwood Bagshaw have been expressed by the honourable member for Ryan. I think it is fair to say that the Opposition trusts that negotiations currently in hand between the Government and the Opposition will, in the other House, result in an outcome that is even more satisfactory from the point of view of the assembler in my electorate. Honourable members might ask why I think further negotiations are necessary. I think it is fair to observe that among the local manufacturers some concern is being expressed that it will be increasingly difficult for them to maintain their 40 per cent content as the devaluation of the Australian dollar forces up the prices of the imports they use in assembling their local machines; hence the discussion that we are anticipating will occur between the Government and the Opposition when this Bill is introduced into the other House. It is to be hoped that the Government can come to some further sensible agreement. As has been made quite obvious this morning, the Opposition welcomes, as does the honour- able member for Calare (Mr Simmons), the move from tariff assistance to bounty assistance. This industry was protected by a 15 per cent tariff. That tariff cost the grain growers of Australia-the grain growers, if you please; no one else-$14m, as has been calculated by the National Farmers Federation. It is as a result of the move from the tariff to the bounty that this legislation is before the House today. The legislation has had a chequered passage which reflects the incapacity of the Government to understand what in fact happens down on the farm. The legislation was first proposed to be introduced effective as from 1 January 1986 when, to all intents and purposes, the harvest would be over. It is true that some people would still have crops to harvest but they would not be about to buy a header in order to complete the harvest. Therefore, having come to terms with that, I would have thought, conspicuously obvious fact, the Government then said: `We will make this legislation effective from 21 August 1985, Budget night'. Of course, this meant that no consideration was taken of the equally conspicuously obvious fact that header manufacturers in Australia and header importers in Australia had stocks in hand that would have been disadvantaged against anything produced or imported post 21 August 1985. So back we go again. It is the further changes, which in fact have been made to accommodate the stock in hand, that promoted the legislation before the House today. I have been concerned that it has taken so long for us to develop what ought to have been a conspicuously simple policy in the grain harvester area. Government members come into the House and berate the Opposition-they pour derision on the Opposition-for what they declare is the Opposition's absence of policies. The real pressure for policies exists in the Government. Honourable members opposite are the people who have the numbers; they make the decisions. However, after these seven years it took the agricultural policy of the Australian Labor Party to be first announced and three years after being in government we still find ourselves having to debate the legislation currently before the House within crude time restraints. The honourable member for Calare has commended the Government for its move from tariff protection to bounty protection. All members opposite join in and echo that commendation. However, we cannot sit down in this debate without drawing the Government's attention to the fact that farmers across Australia are currently disadvantaged. Farmers across Australia are currently the squeaky wheels of the Australian community. They are squeaky wheels not because they need more grease but because the burden they are asked to carry, the load that is on the cart, is all too heavy. The honourable member for Calare has said: `This Bill is part of reducing the burden that farmers carry'. In opposition we welcome that move. However, it is but a small part of reducing the total burden which right now the farmers around Australia are carrying and which, I am sorry to say, they are carrying as a result of the policies introduced by this Government. The Government simply cannot manage an economy in a manner which results in a falling Australian dollar and consequent rising interest rates and not recognise the enormous burden that those interest rates put on Australian farmers. We welcome this legislation but a great deal more needs to be done to relieve the load that is being carried by Australian farmers on behalf of the rest of the community. It is true that this package helps in some small way to reduce part of that load. However, a great deal more needs to be done to address the whole question of wage fixation and economic policy in this nation if we are in any way to assist the farmers of Australia. Mr COBB(Parkes)(10.55) —We are talking today about the Subsidy (Grain Harvesters and Equipment) Bill 1985. Like previous speakers on both sides of the House, I welcome the general thrust of this legislation. The Bill proposes that assistance by way of subsidy on grain harvesters and certain parts of grain harvesters produced in Australia replace the tariff which has been in existence since 1973. As the honourable member for Wakefield (Mr Andrew) said, no doubt the wheat growers of Australia will welcome this move because wheat has shown very low profitability in Australia in recent years. In round figures, the growers are getting of the order of $150 a tonne. When they take out their costs of carting by rail monopolies, et cetera, they are getting back only something in excess of $90 a tonne, and then they have to take out their own costs. They certainly need yields of six, eight or more bags per acre before they start to break even, let alone make a profit. The original tariff was introduced in 1973 following an Industries Assistance Commission review of assistance to the grain harvester industry. It automatically came in as a tariff and the coalition Government in power at the time said that it would revoke that and change it to a bounty. Unfortunately it made one grave mistake and called an election that year and did not have a chance to implement that legislation. We pointed out to the incoming Government, the present Government, that it should be switched to a bounty. It saw merit in the case and said that it would look at it. Unfortunately it has taken 2 1/2 years for it to bring in the legislation. In the meantime it has cost the grain growers of this nation of the order of $14m a year, so since 1983 it has cost in total in excess of $30m. Of course, this is not the only measure to which the Government has applied similar principles. The diesel levy rebate was removed. It has now been restored, I am pleased to say. But that cost the grain growers and farmers of this country in excess of $55m. Mr Andrew —That was not refunded. Mr COBB —No, it was not refunded or backdated. It was just put on in the Budget. In other words, the Government restored something that it had taken away and made a hero of itself. Nevertheless, the Treasurer (Mr Keating) announced in the Budget of 20 August that the tariff would be removed and replaced by a bounty. Even though this announcement was belated, we still welcome it. A 15 per cent tariff may not sound much to people who have not thought about it but, with the price of grain harvesters today, it is quite a substantial amount of money. A farmer may have to fork out in the order of $100,000 for a new harvester and a 15 per cent tariff means that he will have to pay another $15,000, which is probably more than he is making in a year. So it is a very substantial cost to the farming industry today. I see that the Government is bringing in the subsidy on grain harvesters produced in Australia in two stages. The explanatory notes say that the Government will pay: (i) 12.5 per cent of the sales value of the harvester if the value added to the harvester by the manufacturer is not less than 40 per cent . . . (ii) in any other case- in other words, less than 40 per cent- an amount equal to 25 per cent of the value added by the manufacturer. Unfortunately, we have not had sufficient notice that this Bill was to be introduced so that we could study it and comment more fully. I would be grateful if the Minister for Science and Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce (Mr Barry Jones) in summing up would elaborate on his reasons for that. Mr Andrew —And the short notice. Mr COBB —That is right, and the short notice. It is a pity that we did not have more time to fully debate the legislation here and consider it beforehand so that our contribution could be greater. I would like to qualify my statements endorsing switching tariff to bounty by saying that all protection is bad because it misallocates resources and moves resources in Australia from efficient industries to inefficient ones. If protection is put on by tariff, by quota or by a local content scheme or whatever, the user has to pay. This has been the case for the grain growers in Australia to date. One might ask: Why should the user of the protected goods pay? It is quite an illogical thing to do. If the Government wants to protect an industry, which is, of course, its right, I believe all should share equally. That is why particularly the coalition here today supports the protection being given by way of bounty. Protection, in whatever shape or form, is eventually a cost to the consumers of this country and it is interesting to note that projected costs for 1984-85 will run into a consumer tax equivalent of just under $13,000m, which is quite horrific. In the textile, clothing and footwear and motor vehicle industries alone the estimate for 1984-85 is just under $5,000m. The tariff is costing tens of thousands of dollars; the subsidy to the assemblers of the harvesters manufactured in Australia is running into tens of thousands of dollars. It has been one of the most inefficient industries as far as protection goes. The sooner we get it switched to bounty the better. I welcome, as I say, switching it to bounty because it reduces the cost to the grain growers and switches it to all Australians. I see that this present legislation will remain in force until 31 December 1990 and sometime before that it will be reviewed by the IAC. Hopefully it will not be switched back to tariff again and certainly I do not believe that it will if the coalition is in power. I also see that a special subsidy is to be paid on imported harvesters, and previous speakers have referred to this. Prior to the Treasurer's announcement on 21 August in the Budget, a number of grain harvesters would have been imported for sale and tariff would have been paid on them. These harvesters have been sitting on the lot and most of them have yet to be sold. Harvesters brought in after that date do not have that 15 per cent tariff penalty and, therefore, in a very cost competitive world for machinery salesmen there is probably no way that these machines can be sold. It has been causing a considerable amount of distress, I know, amongst machinery salesmen in my electorate. I am delighted to see that the Government has considered this and is going to waive the tariff on those. I note that the Minister says in his second reading speech: This would have seriously disadvantaged some suppliers in a fiercely competitive market, already depressed because of other domestic and world factors. We all know what those factors are and why machinery sales are depressed. Interest rates, of course, are at the highest level in real terms that we have seen in this country for over half a century and interest rates are very important for farmers who buy headers because none can afford to pay cash outright. Some have brought harvesters at rates of 12, 13 or 14 per cent and have had finance from banks, and every time they go down to their mail box they find that interest rates have leapt another half a per cent; and some are now paying 19, 20 or 21 per cent. Mr Nehl —Disgraceful! Mr COBB —It is disgraceful. They have also been hit by fuel costs-that is a factor in depressing sales-not to mention the other costs. For example, the grain handling authority in New South Wales has all but crippled the wheat industry in that State. Nevertheless, I see that subsidies will now be available in respect of domestic sales of imported grain harvesters cleared for home consumption before 21 August this year and sold on or after that date. I also welcome the fact that the subsidies will be extended to parts for grain harvesters that fall within the classification. The subsidy will be equivalent to the net duty paid on the subsidised harvesters or equivalent. One other factor I will mention which is depressing sales is the capital gains tax that will apply to people who purchase harvesters on lease and then buy out the lease at the end of, say, four years. When they trade in that harvester later they will find that they get a trade-in higher than the amount of the lease on the harvester and will have to pay capital gains tax on that paper capital gain. I think the Government would do well to look at that related matter also, to help reduce costs for the grain growers of this country. In conclusion, I would just like to comment that protection that farmers receive overall is only a fraction of what the manufacturing industry in this country receives. It is only about a quarter of it. We pay high tariffs on hay making equipment of something like 15 per cent, on tillage equipment at a similar level, on seeders and ploughs at a similar level, something equivalent to 30 per cent on fully formulated chemicals that are bought in Australia and on four-wheel drive vehicles, tariffs ranging from 25 per cent to 57 1/2 per cent. The small amount of assistance that farmers get is nothing like what the rest of the Australian community gets. I note that the subsidy arrangements in this Bill will involve costs of approximately $5.65m in the coming year and of the order of $3.75 per year thereafter during the life of the scheme. The total costs, including revenue forgone as a result of the related tariff change, will be approximately $9.75m this financial year and about $12m annually thereafter. Nevertheless, bearing in mind the qualifying statements that I have made on this Bill, I welcome the legislation that the Government has brought in, as belated as it is. Mr SNOW(Eden-Monaro)(11.06) —I wish to speak on the Subsidy (Grain Harvesters and Equipment) Bill 1985. A few moments ago the Minister for Science (Mr Barry Jones), who is handling this measure in the House, asked me whether I was going to give the House the benefit of my advice on this matter. I assure him that all the advice I can give really comes from him and his colleague in the Senate. It is very difficult to devise uniform and equitable arrangements for an industry which has patterns of production and cost structures which vary widely from producer to producer. Hence the adoption today of a two-part scheme which should reduce the cost of grain harvesters to farmers whilst maintaining assistance to local producers by means of a subsidy rather than a tariff. The Industries Assistance Commission considered the effect of the present tariff in its report `Grain Harvesters and Parts (Bounty Arrangements)' which was made on 28 October 1985. It stated: The direct effect of the present tariff arrangements is to raise the landed cost of imported grain harvesters and certain parts. . . . The indirect effect of these tariff arrangements is to allow local manufacturers of goods competing against dutiable imports to raise their prices. The extent of this increase is difficult to quantify, but a reasonable first approximation is that their output prices are increased by 13.5 per cent. . . . However, local manufacturers are also penalised in that the prices of many of the inputs which they use are raised as a result of tariff assistance. Consequently, the Commission generally uses an estimate of the effective rate of assistance when it discusses the effects of the assistance structure on production activities. This measure attempts to quantify the net effects of the tariff structure on the productive activity under reference, taking into account both the subsidy effect on output and the tax effect on inputs. The Commission went on to conclude: . . . that removal of the duty on grain harvesters and parts has the potential to result in significantly different effects for the three industry segments. . . . the extent of these differences will also be influenced by the form of the offsetting bounty to be introduced. It went on to indicate a preferred option after discussing a number of the options in relation to the introduction of a bounty. It said: A specific rate bounty would be administratively cumbersome. An ad valorem output bounty would favour assembly operations relative to major local production. A value added bounty would favour one local producer against another and reduce assistance to assembly operations. The Commission said further: . . . if the tariff is to be removed- as we are doing here- on both grain harvesters and parts falling within tariff item 84.25.9, the Commission's preferred option would be the provision of two different forms of bounty-one to major local producers of complete grain harvesters and another to other local producers of goods under reference as discussed above in section 3.3.4 The Treasurer (Mr Keating) announced in the 1985-86 Budget as one of the important initiatives to assist the rural sector that tariffs on grain harvesters were to be replaced by a subsidy on local production. It asked the Industries Assistance Commission to advise on the assistance level and conditions that should apply over the next five years, consistent with the level of assistance accorded producers by way of tariff. The Commission has come up with that report and I believe that the Government has correctly-and I am delighted to see bipartisan support for the Government's decision-come up with the Subsidy (Grain Harvesters and Equipment) Bill 1985, which I am pleased to support. Mr DOWNER(Mayo)(11.12) —I am going to take only five minutes to make a couple of points about the Subsidy (Grain Harvesters and Equipment) Bill 1985. I do not want to speak too repetitively on points that have been made by other members speaking in this debate. Like my colleagues and, indeed, honourable members opposite, I certainly do support this Bill and I am glad to see the Government moving once more away from dependence on tariffs to provide industry assistance through the method of bounty, although, of course, we do not want to get ourselves into the position where we are continually providing assistance of one form or another to industries which may not have any long term chance of survival. I do not think that is necessarily the case here. I do want to reiterate some of the points made by the honourable member for Ryan (Mr Moore) and the honourable member for Wakefield (Mr Andrew) in relation to Horwood Bagshaw Ltd whose manufacturing operations are based in the town of Mannum in the electorate of Wakefield. Many of its employees live in my electorate in the town of Murray Bridge. In a message that the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) sent to the Managing Director of Horwood Bagshaw on 3 September the Prime Minister pointed out: . . . the Government `gave an undertaking that local producers will receive level of assistance at least equivalent to that presently accorded by the 15 per cent tariff on imported machines'. That seemed a reasonable statement at the time, but as the honourable member for Wakefield has pointed out, the way this legislation has been drafted-I suspect it has been overhastily drafted and not really carefully enough considered-it does, in fact, discriminate against Horwood Bradshaw in a way that it does not discriminate against other manufacturers. The Bill provides that a bounty will be given if the value added in production is not less than 40 per cent of ex-factory selling prices. In the case of Horwood Bagshaw, 50 per cent of its production is of a product known as the PTO 1070. That does qualify for the bounty, but 50 per cent of its production is of a machine known as the SP 2140. Production of this particular machine has only approximately 30 per cent value added or perhaps slightly more. The effect of the Bill as it is currently drafted is that Horwood Bagshaw will not receive the bounty that it had anticipated and, indeed, which the South Australian Government had anticipated because it is paying the company an interim subsidy until this Bill finally comes into effect. That is clearly going to impose a very substantial burden on Horwood Bagshaw. I do not think the Government would want to place much a burden on that company bearing in mind the difficulties it would clearly create, not just for the profitability of the firm-it has struggled over a number of years to return to profitability from a loss of nearly $6m in 1982-83 to a profit this financial year announced today of $775,000-but for the employees, some of whom live in my electorate. The effect of this drafting error-I believe it is an error-on this company is going to be a 43 per cent reduction in the assistance accorded to it. I hope very much that the Government will reconsider this drafting error-I reiterate that I see it as a drafting error-in order to fulfil the commitment that the Prime Minister made to Horwood Bagshaw back in September and that it will not breach that commitment. In the last two minutes that are available to me, I should like to make a couple of other points about this Bill. Principally, this Bill was foreshadowed in the Budget as, if one likes, a sop to the rural sector in response to demonstrations by members of the National Farmers Federation and the strong pressure that the Federal Opposition has placed on the Government to try to do something to help a very hard hit rural sector. Although I support the Bill very strongly, I believe it represents far too little far too late. At the same time as introducing a minor change in assistance to help grain growers, the Government is being quite hypocritical in introducing two forms of pernicious taxation, namely, the capital gains tax and the quarantining of farm losses, which discriminate against the rural sector. It is also worth pointing out that the level of fuel excises has increased by some 56.5 per cent since the Hawke Government took office and that has seriously disadvantaged farmers, particularly as the diesel fuel rebate was reduced for two years. Also, of course, primary producers are being hit very hard by the record level of interest rates. So, in the face of these major problems-interest rates, fuel costs and the taxation burden-this legislation is nothing more than a sop to primary producers. However, in saying that, I believe it is a constructive measure. Should the Government amend the drafting error that it has made and which discriminates against Horwood Bagshaw, I will give this Bill my full support. Mr BARRY JONES(Lalor-Minister for Science and Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce)(11.17) —in reply-I want to reply very briskly to the points that have been made by the honourable member for Ryan (Mr Moore), although I would be just as happy to tell him over a cup of coffee. On the question of the complaints of Horwood Bagshaw Ltd, the Industries Assistance Commission suggested an eligibility threshold for the ad valorem output bounty of 30 per cent of 110 per cent of the manufacturer's cost to make. This is a reference point for the purpose of calculation or substitute for ex-factory selling price. This was in response to strong representations from the industry, including Horwood Bagshaw. It was decided that ex-factory selling price would be a more appropriate basis for all calculations, being somewhat higher generally than 110 per cent of cost to make. This required an upward adjustment in the minimum value added from 30 per cent to 40 per cent to maintain the relativities between the two parts of the composite scheme. The scheme, of course, is designed to cater for the industry as a whole and maintain the assistance structure as nearly as possible. The honourable member for Parkes (Mr Cobb) raised a number of points. The measure was announced in the Budget and the terms and conditions were referred to the IAC for advice on the details. That process took longer than expected, hence the reason for the delay in the introduction of the Bill. I am sure that no one would wish to argue against its speedy introduction and passage so that farmers can obtain the benefits quickly. Various speakers raised points about the operative date for this new subsidy scheme. As I said, the Bill honours the Government's Budget commitment to reduce farm costs and as a Budget measure the operative date was the day after the Budget was presented. Nevertheless, the Government has dealt in an equitable manner with the problem of unsold stocks of harvesters on hand at the date of transition. The honourable member for Wakefield (Mr Andrew) made a point about the effects on devaluation on local content. Clause 13 (1) provides for a minimum value addes rate of other than 40 per cent to be prescribed by regulation. This gives the Government the necessary flexibility to adjust the eligibility threshold for the ad valorem output subsidy. As the honourable member would recognise, it is not possible to apply a benefit that is specific to an area, even if an area is as highly disadvantaged as the electorate of Wakefield might be because of the- Mr Moore —Because of the member. Mr BARRY JONES —Not because of the member, of course, as the honourable member for Ryan rather ungenerously suggests, but because of the nature of the industry structure. I think this may also cover the remarks made by the honourable member for Mayo (Mr Downer). Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation announced. Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith. Bill (on motion by Mr Barry Jones) read a third time. Mr BARRY JONES(Lalor-Minister for Science and Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce)(11.21) —I move: Customs Tariff Proposals No. 14 1985. The Customs Tariff proposals that I have just tabled propose an alteration to the Customs Tariff Act 1982 to remove the Customs duty on grain harvesters. The operative date of the proposals is 21 August 1985. The change being introduced by the proposals is a complementary measure to the Subsidy (Grain Harvesters and Equipment) Bill 1985 that has just been agreed to by the House. It removes the 15 per cent general tariff rate on grain harvesters and will enable claims for the refund of the Customs duty paid on grain harvesters entered for home consumption on and from 21 August 1985 to be lodged with collectors of Customs. I commend the proposals to the House. Debate (on motion by Mr Moore) adjourned. Consideration resumed from 28 November. Mr HOWE(Batman-Minister for Social Security)(11.23) —I move: That the Bill be now read a second time. The Bill aims to achieve a fairer basis for funding child care centres. This Government has demonstrated a major commitment to the provision of child care in Australia. Since we were elected there has been significant growth in child care services. The number of places for full day care has increased from 37,580 in June 1982 to 63,535 in June 1985-an increase of about 70 per cent. Expenditure on children's services has increased from $65m in 1982-83 to an expected $143m in 1985-86. This rate of growth has been much faster than in other comparable programs and far in excess of economic growth. Notwithstanding our record of achievement, we were not satisfied with the level of community access to quality child care services. As a result, in December 1984 the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) announced this Government's commitment to the provision of a further 20,000 child care places over the next three years. It was a good time to reassess funding mechanisms. The Child Care Act had been operating for over 10 years. Service providers and children's services organisations had found inequities in parts of the Act, particularly in the complex formula governing operational subsidy. There was also concern about the costs associated with maintaining child care centres. There were few, if any, incentives for service providers to keep costs down. Higher costs were subsidised by higher government fee relief subsidies; and insufficient contribution was being made by families with higher incomes. Equity was a major concern in two senses. Firstly the Government was concerned that despite the large growth over the last two years the program still only reached about 7.5 per cent of pre-school age children. We believed that higher recurrent costs would make it difficult to continue to expand the program beyond the additional 20,000 places we were committed to. Secondly, we were concerned to ensure that child care centres received funding on a consistent basis. Under the current funding system this is not the case. The Government decided to review the subsidy arrangements for full day care services. This review was announced by the Treasurer (Mr Keating) in the context of the May economic statement. Any review likely to come up with valuable long term administrative and policy change had to get to the roots of the problem. So the Government set a target of $30m savings that it would like to achieve in a full year. But to be consistent with the Government's priorities, these savings had to be found responsibly and within basic principles that reflected the need to maintain standards and quality of care and to maintain affordable child care particularly for low and moderate income earners. We were not prepared to surrender these fundamental principles. A comprehensive examination of child care funding was carried out and it became clear that it was not possible to achieve savings of more than about $10m in a full year, without breaching the principles that had been set. I make no apology for that. The Government's purpose was to ensure that its commitment to the expansion of the child care places could be achieved, reaching as many people as possible, at a responsible cost. The changes to the subsidy arrangements provided by this Bill will ensure that the essential characteristics of quality services will be maintained and that services will be accessible to families, particularly those on low incomes and with special needs. These changes are aimed at the long term future of the program. The Government believes they established a sound base for the expansion of the program in the next three years and beyond. Overview of Children's Services Before describing these changes I want to take this opportunity to review achievement under the children's services program and to set the direction in which this Government will be taking the program. When the Child Care Act was introduced there were about 50 non-profit centres in this country. Today there are in excess of 800 and about 300 of these have been approved for funding by this Government since 1983. Under the children's services program, but outside the Child Care Act, other services were funded to meet the child care needs of parents, particularly of working parents. Some 260 family day care schemes have been established, over 50 by this Government. Last year the Government put the funding of family day care on a firmer basis by increasing the operational subsidy by 20 per cent and introducing an additional part time allowance of $3 a child. Expenditure on family day care has increased from $15m in 1982-83 to an expected $40m in 1985-86. There are 432 outside school hours care services, over 160 established by this Government. The Government regards out of school hours care as essential if child care provision is to respond to the needs of working parents. Last year the Government increased funding for these services by an average of 25 per cent. Other services have developed under the umbrella of the children's services program. These include special services to meet the needs of children who because of background, disability or where they live do not have ready access to standard child care. There are special services for Aboriginal and disabled children and children of ethnic origin and for those who live in remote and isolated areas. We are also intent on facilitating the access of Aboriginal, migrant and disabled children to centre-based care and family day care and special grants are available for this purpose. It is essential that child care is affordable for low and moderate income earners. The Government's commitment to making child care affordable is evidenced by the new fee relief system introduced in July 1984. This reform meant that families eligible under a national income test pay the same fees at the same income level. There are special provisions that ensure child care is affordable for families who have more than one child in care. Under the new arrangements fee relief will be extended and simplified to ensure that child care remains affordable. This means we are targeting a larger proportion of funds to meet income related need while continuing to subsidise all families through operational assistance. So that new services are distributed equitably and are located where they are most needed, the Government last year introduced a planning model and established consultative machinery in each State. For the first time there is a rational basis for the planning and establishment of new places. There is also for the first time a long term commitment by the Government. We will establish 20,000 new places over the next three years. This is currently estimated to cost $107m. Over the last 10 years a number of innovative programs developed under the children's services program. The family support services scheme began in 1978 to stimulate the provision of services for families with dependent children. The family support services scheme continues to be administered by the Office of Child Care, but it is now a separate program with its own budget allocation. Another important initiative was the youth services scheme, which is now part of the supported accommodation assistance program. The children's services program therefore had a broad focus at a time when there were no other suitable auspices to advance important policy initiatives. With the establishment of other more targeted services, it is no longer necessary for the children's services program to take initiatives across such a broad range. Accordingly we have been reassessing and focusing the objectives and direction of the program. The children's services program will continue to provide funding to non-profit services that advance the developmental, social, emotional and intellectual needs of children while their parents are working, training for work or actively seeking work. The provision of an additional 16,000 full day care places gives added emphasis to this objective, as does the provision of an additional 4,500 out of school hours care places. We will also be responding to the needs of women at home and the provision of an additional 3,000 occasional care places reinforces this commitment. We will continue to ensure that all services are available to Aboriginal, disabled and migrant children and that as appropriate, specific culturally relevant services are established for these groups. The Changes Since coming to office we have taken significant steps towards achieving rationality and equity in the program. The changes which are the subject of this Bill take this process further. They will mainly impact on centre based day care and will take effect from the beginning of April 1986. Operational Subsidy Currently operational subsidies average $30 a week and benefit all families irrespective of income. For example, families using child care centres who now pay the full price pay an average of $55 a week for full time care even though the actual cost of care is on average $85 a week. The current system is complex and leads to inequities, including market disparities in operational subsidies between centres. Another important concern is that small reductions in the number of children can lead to a big reduction in salary subsidies. Under the new operational subsidy arrangements set out in clause 3 of the Bill, centres will get a subsidy of $16 a week for each approved place for children under three and $11 a week for each approved place for children aged three or more. This recognises the special needs of younger children and the higher costs of caring for them. These subsidies will be for services that operate for at least 8 hours and up to 10 hours a day and for at least 48 weeks a year. Additional grants will be provided to centres that are approved to operate for more than 10 hours. Current levels of operational subsidy will be reduced by about half, resulting in an average increase of $15 in a centre's full time fee to a new average of $70 a week. This does not mean that most users will pay this much more as the fee relief changes will ensure that full increases in fees will only be met by those families with higher incomes. The subsidy will be adjusted from time to time to reflect cost of living and wage increases. It will also be paid in advance in order to alleviate cash flow problems. Impact on Families The impact of the changes in operational subsidy will be reduced by changes in the fee relief system. These changes, while not requiring legislation, are an integral part of the new funding package. Higher costs resulting from the overall reduction in operational subsidy will largely be offset by greater fee relief subsidies for low and moderate income earners and by moderately increased fees to be paid by high income earners. In other words the balance of the Commonwealth's overall contribution to care has been redesigned to give increasing emphasis to income related need. Under section 12A of the Child Care Act the Commonwealth provides funds to centres so that families on low to moderate incomes pay reduced fees. These arrangements will be extended and simplified to ensure that child care remains affordable. Under the new fee relief system: The minimum fee will be increased by 5c an hour or $2 a week for full time care, that is, 40 hours a week; families with one child in care, whose incomes mean they pay more than the minimum fee, will pay 15c extra in fees for each extra dollar they earn above an assessed family income of $225 a week, until they are liable to pay the full fee. Previously the 15c rate applied only to families with an assessed family income of less than $467 a week; above that they paid 30c extra for each dollar earned; special arrangements for large families are also improved. The rate will be a uniform 20c for families with two or more children in care. The previous rate was 40c when assessed family income exceeded $467 a week; fee relief will not be offered for that part of a centre's fee in excess of $80 a week. This measure is an incentive to contain costs as centres will have to consider the additional burden on families if they want to charge a higher fee; and additional assistance-special fee relief-will continue, at the discretion of the centre, to families in exceptional circumstances. Special transitional assistance will be available in the first year only, to ensure that no family has to pay more than $25 a week more and to encourage centres to charge no more than $85 a week. Impact on Child Care Centres The combination of the new operational subsidy and other changes ensures the viability of centres. They will still be expected and able to operate on break-even budgets. The measures are designed to make administration much more simple for both the management committees of centres and the Government. This will save costs and centres will have a better idea of how much subsidy they will get each year. Impact on Women The Government's child care policy including the proposed changes is consistent with the Government's equal opportunity and affirmative action initiatives. The continuation and improvement of the fee relief system limits work force disincentives and the 20,000 place commitment will result in increased access to child care. Impact on Quality The Government remains committed to providing quality care that promotes the developmental, social, emotional and intellectual needs of the child. It is for this reason that the Government has continued to provide a substantial operational subsidy irrespective of income and to provide higher subsidy for under three-year-olds in recognition of their need for a higher staff-child ratio. It is the responsibility of State governments to regulate child care and license child care centres, and services funded by the Commonwealth have to comply with State government regulations. However, the Government is actively committed to funding and promoting quality child care. It is important that the Government is well informed on trends in quality and that funded services have access to professional advice and assistance on matters pertaining to programming, play activities, developmental needs of children and so on. For this reason I have asked the Australian Early Childhood Association to advise me on quality issues and to strengthen and extend their current role in providing advice and assistance to funded services. Capital, equipment and establishment grants provided under the Child Care Act will be continued and are a further indication of this Government's commitment to quality care. Financial Impact The measures provided in this Bill are expected to reduce the Government's subsidies to the children's services program by $2.6m in 1985-86 and $10.2m in a full year. The additional administrative costs of implementing these measures are estimated to be $0.46m in both 1985-86 and 1986-87. Child Care Objectives I have set out today not only to explain the purpose of this Bill but also to provide honourable members with a broader understanding of the background to the children's services program and the reasons for the Government's decision to change the way in which subsidies for centres are provided. I have touched on some of the essential characteristics of the program to which the Government is committed. Finally, I intend to outline the objectives of the children's services program in order to ensure that there are advantages and understanding of the framework in which funding decisions are made. The Government's primary objective is to ensure that parents and children have access to quality children's services that are appropriate to their needs regardless of their income level, cultural background, disability or geographical location. Within this broad objective the Government's priorities are towards providing non-profit services that: Promote the developmental, social, emotional and intellectual needs of children without substituting for the care they receive from their parents; are consistent with the Government's policies of equal opportunity and affirmative action, and are predominantly directed towards meeting the needs of children of working parents or parents who are undertaking vocational training to enter the work force; encourage parent participation in management; are accessible for low and moderate income earners; focus on under school age children but also provide older children with care out of school hours and during school holidays; support parents at home with young children; assist those with special needs such as Aboriginal, migrant and disabled children and children in remote and isolated parts of Australia; and are accessible to the general community. Summary The measures in this Bill represent a fundamental redesign of child care funding arrangements. The new structure blends the objectives of equity, quality and affordability as well as simplifying the administration of the program. In addition sensible cost controls are now contained in the structure. The program is well placed to expand and respond to contemporary child care needs. I commend the Bill to the Senate. Mr PORTER(Barker)(11.41) —The Child Care Amendment Bill has been rushed into this House in the closing stages of this parliamentary session. Unfortunately even the normal courtesy of distributing a second reading speech was not undertaken by this Government. It is clearly in chaos. It has no control over the parliamentary program, as indeed it has no control over its own policy-making program. Mr Hand —If you got off your backsides in the other House we would be home by now. Mr PORTER —It is all very well for Government members to want to be running from the only public forum we have in this country. Democracy is a bit harsh for members of the Government; they want to run from the House. This Bill introduces new funding arrangements for Commonwealth subsidised long day child care centres. By way of background it is interesting to note that in November 1984 there were an estimated 2.9 million children under 12 years of age, 358,000 of whom were using formal child care, and 41 per cent of those were receiving from 10 to 19 hours of child care weekly. Around 864,000 received informal child care. Commonwealth funds provide assistance for some 63,129 equivalent full time places for children under five years of age in 832 child care centres and 262 family day care schemes. The main changes proposed by this legislation include, firstly, an alteration to the basis of subsidy. At present the subsidy is related to staff costs. The new subsidy will be determined on the number of approved child care places in an institution. The Bill will also enable the payment of a basic subsidy in respect of each approved place, with a slightly higher subsidy for children under three years of age. The Bill provides for an increase in the means tested minimum fee, which is paid by 58 per cent of users. That minimum fee will increase from $10 to $12 a week. The withdrawal of the income tested subsidy, called a fee relief subsidy, will have effect at a lower weekly income as a result of this legislation, but the rate of withdrawal will be halved. This legislation will also establish a top fee of $80 a week after the basic subsidy for centres with subsidised places. What, then, is the impact of the legislation? In the May statement this year it was promised that the savings arising from this legislation would be $30m. Now we are being told that the overall savings in a full year will be $10.2m. This dramatically highlights the confusion and lack of policy direction of this Government. Government decisions are announced on the run without proper consultation and planning. The Government has a total lack of long term goals or visions for Australia. As a result, it is constantly making decisions such as this one-decisions made under pressure, reacting to the latest crisis instead of being on a well planned path to a considered and publicly supported objective. It is little wonder that our dollar has been devalued and interest rates are going through the roof when the Government shows day after day a total lack of long term policy making. The result is stupid announcements- Mr Hand —What about talking about the Bill instead of the dollar? Don't you understand it? Mr PORTER —I can understand the concern of the honourable member for Melbourne. I understand that he is under a lot of pressure in his electorate in relation to this move and he will do anything to try to hide the facts relating to this Bill. The result of the Government's action- Mr Hand —Mr Deputy Speaker, on a point of order- Mr PORTER —Oh, he cannot take it. Mr Hand —I just want to point out that I can take anything that you dish out. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER(Mr Mountford) —I ask the honourable member for Melbourne to make his point of order. Mr PORTER —Mr Deputy Speaker, it is a frivolous point of order. Mr Hand —It is not; I have not made it yet. If you just sit down and stop behaving like a school prefect I will get on with it. My point of order is that the honourable member for Barker accused me of hiding the facts. I find that offensive. I have never tried to hide the facts on any issue. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER —There is no point of order. Mr PORTER —I think that point of order just shows the concern that the Government has in relation to this legislation. Initially a $30m cut was announced; we are now discussing a $10m cut. As a result of the Government's failure to establish long term policy goals stupid announcements are made without consideration of all the factors which should have been under consideration originally, and when those factors are brought to light by public reaction the Government backs and fills and tries to cover its tracks. Let me make it quite clear that the Opposition is firmly committed to reducing the size of government and reducing government expenditure, but we really wonder about the priorities of the Australian Labor Party when in this instance it is taking $10m out of the area of child care support, an area in which we would have expected the Labor Party, if it matched its promises and rhetoric with action, to provide more assistance. But talk is cheap for the Labor Party, as we found out from the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke). Promises before the last election that there would be no capital gains tax have not been met and legislation is now being introduced imposing a capital gains tax. He promised before the last election-and the Treasurer (Mr Keating) promised it this year-that interest rates would go down. People with commercial loans, housing loans and mortgages who now have to pay much higher interest rates will understand that the people in the Labor Party are not men of their word. The point I make in relation to this $10m cut in funding for child care centres and child care assistance is that, while we would like to reduce, and in power would reduce, government expenditure, we really wonder about this Government's priorities. For example, last year it was prepared to spend over $1m publicising Medicare. It spent $1m just before the last election telling the people what a great thing Medicare was. As I understand it, Medicare is compulsory. People in Australia do not have a choice whether or not to purchase Medicare; they are compulsorily part of Medicare and are required to pay a levy. But that did not stop the Government spending $1m of taxpayers' funds in saying what a terrific thing Medicare was, when it was something in which consumers had no choice. I just wonder whether that $1m would not have been better spent in the provision of child care assistance instead of in trying to convince the public that what it had to do was in fact a good thing. Only last night we heard in this place about extravagant and wasteful expenditure in the Australian Institute of Sport. How can the Government justify the Executive Director of that Institute spending $7,000 on a desk? Mr Howe —Mr Deputy Speaker, I raise a point of order. The honourable member for Barker referred to the shortage of time, yet he is directing his remarks to matters which have no relationship whatever to the Bill before the House. I ask you to confine him to the Bill. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER(Mr Mountford) —I draw the attention of the honourable member for Barker to the need to restrict his remarks to the parameters of the Bill. Mr PORTER —I make two points. The Minister is obviously concerned about the electoral impact of this Bill and feels that he is under pressure, quite rightly. Secondly, I did not at any stage express a concern about time limits; I talked about the Government's inability to administer the parliamentary program properly. We are not trying to rush out of this House and close the Parliament down, it is the Government. Mr Howe —Oh, come on. Mr PORTER —The Minister made the point, in error. He misrepresented what I said and I am entitled to correct the error. The Opposition's concern in relation to this legislation is that, while the Government is prepared to spend money on public relations campaigns to try to shore up its own credibility, it is not prepared to continue to fund child care centres at the existing rate. In other words, it is taking money from the child care centres to fund its own promotion programs, as it spent $1m on the Medicare promotion program. It is wasting taxpayers' money as, for example, in the expenditure of $7,000 on a desk for the Executive Director of the Australian Institute of Sport. Only last night we had a report from auditors regarding wasteful expenditure under this Government within the Australian Institute of Sport. Let me raise one question for the Government. It has announced an extra $280m for university funding. How did it set the priority between university funding and child care funding? What if the Government had spent $270m extra on university funding and maintained the existing expenditure on child care assistance? The point I make is that the priorities set by this Government are not consistent with the statements it has made and its professed concerns in the area of child care, families and equal opportunity for women. The result of the legislation is that the universal subsidy per child care place will be reduced from about $30 to $16 for children under three years of age, or $11 for children three years and over. The average increase in fee will be about $14 a week and the effective rate of Commonwealth subsidy will be halved. The viability of some centres established as a result of Commonwealth policy initiatives will be threatened as a result of this legislation and a particular concern-this is why the honourable member for Melbourne is squirming-is being expressed by the Municipal Association of Victoria, which is threatening not to open new centres because it considers the new arrangements to be a breach of the Commonwealth Government's previous offer. This is a classic and dramatic example of the Government's total failure to consult these organisations properly before rushing into such decisions. It is a matter of particular importance to Victoria. I am sure that the honourable member for Flinders (Mr Reith), who will follow me in speaking in this debate on behalf of the Opposition, will go into more detail in relation to that matter of real concern. Access to high quality child care is one critical factor in achieving equal employment opportunity for women, especially those who need to work because of economic pressure. Yet the Government's action will increase the cost, particularly for middle income families. It is worth bearing in mind that the cost of long day care exceeds that of attendance at the most expensive private day school. The hypocrisy of the ALP's actions in relation to child care and in this measure really highlights the inconsistency in its proclaimed espousal of equal employment opportunities. Our policy emphasises provision of quality child care. The Government has promised that some 20,000 new child care places will be established by 1987. These will still provide for only about 7 per cent of Australian children potentially able to use the services. More Australian children still will use commercial child care, more will use informal care, including backyard arrangements, and more will have no access to child care. It is for these reasons that our policy, which was presented before the last election, provided for tax relief for child care expenses. It is appropriate to assist low income families by way of child care subsidy. However, there are many income earning families who will be assisted by that proposal for tax deductibility. Our policy is to provide real assistance to the thousands of families who are disadvantaged under the current tax system. It is quite clear that the current tax system discriminates against single income families in particular. We will assist those families by introducing taxation relief through income splitting arrangements for such families. For that reason I move: That all words after `That' be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: `whilst not declining to give the Bill a second reading, the House: (a) expresses its concern that the Bill may place at risk the standards of provision of child care, and (b) is of the opinion that, in order to meet the child care needs of the community, complementary measures are necessary, including taxation relief for child care expenses and income splitting for families'. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER(Mr Mountford) —Is the amendment seconded? Mr McGauran —I second the amendment. Ms MAYER(Chisholm)(11.59) —I will not waste any time on the farrago of nonsense which we have just heard from the honourable member for Barker (Mr Porter) which had nothing what ever to do with the Child Care Amendment Bill. Simply because nobody had given him a copy of the second reading speech made by the Minister for Community Services (Senator Grimes) in the other place, the honourable member could not read the Bill and find out what it was about, so we had this mish-mash of total nonsense which is what we have come to expect from the honourable member. I will not waste any more time on that. I think that the interesting thing about the child care debate is that there has been considerable discussion about whether quality of care will be maintained under the new funding arrangements. The Government is absolutely firmly committed to quality of care and does provide the highest quality child care that is available. I have received a number of letters which have said that people want to send their children to government funded child care centres because they provide higher quality care than is provided in the private commercial area. I agree with that; that seems to be reasonable. However, there is a difficulty with the Municipal Association of Victoria. I think that this is the second time that the MAV has had a go at the Commonwealth Government in an endeavour to demonstrate that it is a powerful and an important organisation. Once again, the MAV has got it totally wrong. On the first occasion this year, it tried to get local government to ask for something which would have given it less rather than greater funding. On this occasion, the MAV is in the business of reducing accessibility to child care. That really is getting a bit beyond a joke. Headlines such as `Child care centre will not open' have appeared in a local newspaper. I ask the House: Who is being used as ammunition in this war between the MAV and the Commonwealth Government? It is the children and the parents who would be using and benefiting from those centres. What is it that the local councils say they want? They want a full time director-co-ordinator appointed for every centre, regardless of size, they want $18m worth of full time director-co-ordinators. Think about what that would do to child care funding. They want a 100 per cent coverage for 100 per cent of sick leave entitlements. Nobody budgets for that kind of coverage of sick leave entitlements because it is very unlikely that everybody on a staff will use the total of his or her accumulated sick leave entitlements in any given year. At the moment, 50 per cent of coverage for accumulated sick leave entitlements is part of the annual Budget and that has certainly been satisfactory. Making child care more expensive to support is another way of reducing accessibility to child care. The local councils want a guaranteed minimum level of support-straight into the maximum inefficiency area. The Commonwealth Government does not fund child care centres in low need areas. Every one of them is placed in a high need area giving a high rate of usage. They want coverage against possible fluctuation. It is my opinion that good and sensible planning will make sure that there is not a high level of fluctuation in attendance at any child care centre. That is something which the local councils can do something about, seeing they claim such a high level of local knowledge. It seems to me that, given that a centre is placed in a high use area and that good planning will provide a mix of places which will give steady usage, to provide a guaranteed minimum level of support is simply to provide guaranteed funding for inefficient and bad planning, and should a centre eventually be in an area in which the demography has changed it is probably sensible to shift the centre. Those three matters, out of a long list of nonsense which the MAV is claiming, are preventing people from using child care centres into which the Commonwealth Government has put a considerable amount of money, as did the local councils when they sponsored organisations. If we gave in to demands such as those we would have deficit funded centres, an open hole down which taxpayers' money would disappear, many fewer centres and instead of child care becoming more accessible it would become less accessible. I ask that the parents demand that their local councils open those centres, stop fiddling around with nonsense that would raise the cost of child care right over the country, and stop using children and their parents as ammunition in their foolish war. Mr REITH(Flinders)(12.04) —The Child Care Amendment Bill incorporates Labor's $10m worth of cuts to child care centres throughout Australia. The Bill has been rushed in here today following a big fight in Caucus. Presumably the Minister for Community Services (Senator Grimes) got rolled in the Cabinet. The legislation illustrates graphically what a mess this Government is in. I think that it also illustrates graphically how poorly it sets its priorities. The provision of child care facilities has become a growing responsibility of governments over the past few years. The Liberal Party supports government funding essentially to enable parents to have the opportunity to undertake paid employment. In most cases, it is a matter of need and necessity and not choice. For example, contrary to the Government's claims about rich and elitist non-government schools, many parents and particularly mothers, with children at non-government schools have to work to provide what they consider to be the best possible education for their children. The Liberal Party's approach to funding was one of its main election commitments in 1984 and remains a major plank in our policy. We will provide taxation relief by way of rebate for parents wishing to use child care facilities. Our view is that taxation relief places the spending power in the hands of the individuals. Allied to our policy for child care tax relief, it is important to point out that we have a policy to provide income splitting for families. We strongly support the institution of the family and upon our return to government this will be a major focus of our attention. Whilst we support the general concept of cuts in government expenditure, this measure really shows how wrong the Government's priorities are. This Government has been responsible for throwing money away-taxpayers' money, I might add-with gay abandon. Mr Deputy Speaker, the list of examples of government waste is as long as your arm. It has spent $8m on public funding for election expenses. It gave us extra politicians, as if we did not have enough of them in this place. That costs us $18m a year. Of course, the alterations on the hill to the new Parliament House cost about $40m. Jobs for the boys has been raised to a new art form. Do honourable members remember the Australian Bicentennial Authority? The Government paid out $500,000- Mr Milton —Mr Deputy Speaker, I raise a point of order. I came to listen to a debate on child care. Instead, we are hearing a litany of accusations which has nothing to do with child care. I ask you to ask the honourable member to keep to the subject of the debate. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER(Mr Ruddock) —I realise the honourable member is discussing matters that are perhaps part of the wider issues. I ask him to come to the points relating to the specific Bill. Mr REITH —The fact is-I know it is hard for the Government to face the facts-that its priorities are wrong. I am simply listing just a few-and there is a very long list-examples of government waste. If it had attacked the waste in the sort of areas that I have highlighted, this measure would not be before the House today. I turn to another aspect of this matter which particularly concerns me. The Shire of Cranbourne is a municipality in my electorate, on the outskirts of Melbourne, which has a rapidly growing population. To reflect this, it was one of the 42 communities in Victoria to attract government support for a new child care centre. The council received notification in August 1984 that it would receive $175,000 for capital works for a child care centre. It put in $25,000 of its ratepayers' money. It provided the land upon which the building is nearly completed, the land being worth $35,000 to $40,000. The council expects to be in a position to open the centre early next year. The draft operating costs, which square up with the costs of already existing centres, show a total expenditure of about $192,000, of which approximately $160,000 will be taken up by salaries. As a result of the measure that is before the House today, the council resolved last week that it will not open the centre until the Commonwealth reviews its latest decision and provides more significant financial support. Who can blame it? It undertook this project to provide a child care centre for its municipality under certain ground rules that had been set by the Government. Of course, mid-stream, just prior to the centre being opened, the Government has changed the ground rules. The financial effect for the ratepayers of the Shire of Cranbourne is that the subsidy has been cut by $38,000. That is a lot of money. To add insult to injury, the national wage case has increased its costs by $5,500. As I understand it, the situation is reflected in 31 of the 42 new centres which were announced in August 1984. I further understand that in Victoria about 1,000 child care centre places are now in jeopardy. The Government has changed the rules midstream and it really makes a mockery of the Government's concern to provide child care facilities. But it is worse than that, because it has led the council up the garden path. It gave firm commitments about recurrent funding and it has now left the council holding the baby. It has all been done without any consultation. It follows what is now a very common occurrence, which is that the Government passes responsibilities to local government, but refuses to come up with the goods for ongoing support. For councils, this will be no surprise. In the May economic statement the Government chopped into their funding yet again when it abandoned the principle that local governments should receive 2 per cent of personal income tax receipts. Following the usual pattern, there was no discussion. For many people in my electorate, this will be the last straw. It will obviously put in jeopardy the 20,000 child care places that the Government promised in the last election and will be yet another in a growing list of broken promises. Mr STAPLES(Jagajaga)(12.10) —While many people in society, often typified by those opposite, see non-parental, non-maternal child care as an attack on their rigid nuclear family model, the `keep them barefoot and pregnant' approach, the majority see high quality child care in the provision of family day care, full day or occasional day child care as an integral part of the needs of parents today. While the Opposition generally supports the Child Care Amendment Bill, there is no need whatsoever for this Government or the people of Australia to accept the rubbish that the Opposition has put today in regard to the quality of child care as outlined in this legislation. The record of the Hawke Labor Government on child care, as in many other areas, speaks for itself. The chicken could have done better than the contribution of the shadow Minister, the honourable member for Barker (Mr Porter). In fact, I would not be surprised to see him replaced by the chicken if he does not beef up his act a bit after his contribution to the debate. In the last year of the Liberal-National Party Government it spent $65m on child care. That amount came out of the biggest Budget in real terms and the biggest deficit in real terms that this country has ever seen. Let us compare that measly $65m with the record of the Hawke Labor Government. Today's Opposition will see-and those in the community who make a lot of noise will see-the Government's contribution to real, high quality, high quantity child care. Honourable members should remember that just $65m was spent in the last year of the Liberal-National Party Government, those members of the present Opposition who cry now. In the Hawke Labor Government's first Budget in 1983-84, $80m was spent. Last year $123m was spent-a 53 per cent increase in 12 months. This year, 1985-86, the figure is $133m. For those who can multiply by two-there might be one in the Opposition's ranks who can-that is effectively a doubling in 33 months, an average growth of 28 per cent per annum over that period. So much for the assertions made by the honourable member for Flinders (Mr Reith) and the honourable member for Barker that this Bill concerns a $10m cut. It does not concern a $10m cut; it concerns spending $133m this year. In regard to the figures for long day care places, in June 1982, when the previous Government was running the show, there were 37,580 places. In June 1985 the figure was 63,535, an increase of 70 per cent. That is the record. That is what we are talking about and that is what members of the Opposition cannot come to grips with. Furthermore, this Government has a commitment to provide 20,000 new, effective full time child care places by 1988. In 1982 only 4 per cent of the nought to four-year-old age cohort was covered. Now we are covering 7 1/2 per cent. That is the increase. By 1988 the figure will be up to 10 per cent. While not all parents need access to child care, whether it be occasional, short or long day care, the bare fact is that even with this record escalation in the provision of child care services under this Government, more than 90 per cent of children in Australia in that nought to four-year-old age cohort do not have access to high quality child care. The problem today is this: How do we get the best value for our money to maintain that quality and to increase rapidly the quantity of child care? In answer to that question, this Government has put this legislation before the Parliament today. The honourable member for Chisholm (Ms Mayer) quite capably, as usual, outlined some of the measures taken to ensure that quality keeps pace with quantity. Under the current system, with the Government providing most of its funding by way of operational subsidy for child care centres, there is virtually no incentive for centres realistically to restrain their operational costs. According to what the councils are putting forward, through the Municipal Association of Victoria, they would not accept open-ended funding in their budgets. But that is what they are trying to ram down the throat of this Government. The Opposition would not accept open-ended funding, but that is what it is trying to ram down the throat of this Government. We will not cop it. We want restraint in expenditure while at the same time putting more places on the ground and maintaining quality. The funding for child care comes in three parts: Operational subsidy, paid by the Government; fees paid by the parents, and fee relief, paid by this Government as well. Unfortunately since new guidelines were released earlier in the month most people have concentrated on the reduction in operational subsidy without doing the more difficult assessment of changes to the fee relief structure. I have not got much time in which to speak; so in the time I have left I want to make a point which has been raised by honourable members opposite. There has been a lot of consultation with the community over a very long period. The child care community knows-it should know and should respect-what this Government has done for child care. I would like to hear a bit more about it from the MAV, from the Opposition and from the community as well. Those people listening to the broadcast today and those people who read the Hansard should be aware of the way in which honourable members on this side are concerned about child care. I refer to the honourable member for Chisholm, who spoke before, the honourable member for Melbourne (Mr Hand), the honourable member for Isaacs (Mr Charles), the honourable member for Aston (Mr Saunderson), the honourable member for La Trobe (Mr Milton), the honourable member for Lowe (Mr Maher), the honourable member for Lindsay (Mr Free) and the honourable member for Maribyrnong (Mr Griffiths), they have fought to develop consultation in the community in order to bring that consultation to the Government. Those honourable members will not have the opportunity to speak here today because of the wasteful speeches of honourable members opposite such as the honourable member for Barker and the honourable member for Flinders. What a sham! They have not been out there working through the guidelines. We have been working through the community. We have consulted with people in the community. We consulted with the MAV and put its recommendations to the Government. The Government's record on child care speaks for itself. We have never backed down from child care. We will not back down in the future. This legislation proves that. Mr SHIPTON(Higgins)(12.17) —Mr Deputy Speaker- Motion (by Mr Howe) agreed to: That the question be now put. Amendment negatived. Original question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith. Motion (by Mr Howe) proposed: That the Bill be now read a third time. Mr SHIPTON(Higgins)(12.18) —Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to speak on the third reading stage of the Child Care Amendment Bill because I was gagged on the second reading. Motion (by Mr Howe) agreed to: That the question be now put. Original question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a third time. Mr GRIFFITHS(Maribyrnong) —On behalf of the Joint Committee on the National Crime Authority I present the first report of the Committee. Ordered that the report be printed. Mr GRIFFITHS —by leave-Before I go to the substantive part of my comments I wish to raise very briefly a couple of matters in relation to a matter of privilege referred to by the honourable member for Gippsland (Mr McGauran) this morning. He raised a matter of privilege in relation to some publicity surrounding this report. He indicated that a report in the Age newspaper had adverted to material which had been leaked from Government Committee members. I have had a look at that Age report and it suggests no such thing. Of course, it indicates only that the sources of the leak were Committee members. This report of the Joint Committee on the National Crime Authority is the Committee's first since it began effective operations in March this year. Regrettably, the Committee must report to the Parliament that it is unable to fulfil its statutory duty because it does not have-and has been unable to obtain from the National Crime Authority-sufficient information of substance to serve as a basis for the monitoring and review role vested in it by this Parliament. This situation has arisen because of a fundamental difference of view between the Authority and the Committee as to the Authority's obligation to provide information which the Committee believes necessary to carry out its statutory duty. I should emphasise that while the Committee has been active in a number of areas falling within its charter, the subject matter of this first report raises a threshold problem which is of such fundamental significance that it requires immediate attention. The Committee intends to report on its other activities in due course. However, it is unable to discharge its statutory duty effectively until this threshold problem has been resolved. The Committee was established under the National Crime Authority Act 1984 as a result of an amendment inserted in the Act during the Committee stage of the debate in the Senate. The original proposal for such a parliamentary committee was put by Mr Frank Costigan, QC, during evidence he gave before the Senate Standing Committee on Constitutional and Legal Affairs inquiring into the National Crime Authority Bill. I would like, at this point, to pay tribute to my fellow Committee members and in particular Senator Alan Missen, the Deputy Chairman, for the totally bipartisan way in which they have performed their duties. Given the politically sensitive nature of the Committee's responsibilities and the pecular difficulties which the Committee has faced in its first year of operation, the spirit of co-operation and good will which has prevailed is particularly noteworthy. Also I take this opportunity to thank the honourable member for North Sydney (Mr Spender) now, of course, shadow Attorney-General, for his significant contribution to the Committee's operations prior to his resignation. I might add that at least on the part of Government members of the Committee, we wish him a long and fruitful career as shadow Attorney-General. I also thank Mr Chris Fogarty, the Secretary to the Committee, and Miss Nanette Williams for the significant assistance which they have been able to provide to date. At the first meeting the Committee had with the Authority I suggested that the relationship between the two bodies was likely to be characterised by an element of `creative tension'. In using this term I was conscious of the potential difficulties inherent in the legislation and indeed in the very nature of the task assigned to this Committee. As with some other legislation, the section of this Act which sets out the duties of the Committee is open to different legal interpretations. As events quickly proved, I was not wrong about the likelihood of an element of tension between the Committee and the Authority. It has arisen precisely because the Authority and the Committee, as I predicted, have taken different views as to the nature of the Committtee's duties under the Act. It remains to be seen whether the role of creativity will be such as to resolve our problem. The Committee's role is unique, as it is the only instance of a parliamentary committee specifically established to act as a watchdog over one statutory authority. This is perhaps a recognition of the seriousness of the issues raised by the need to combat organised crime in this country. These issues require a balancing of the community interest in reducing the grave social and economic effects resulting from organised crime with all the resources it can muster and, of course, a balancing of the protection of individual civil liberties. The unique nature of the Committee's role-and the consequent lack of precedent-has made the Committee's task more than usually difficult. However, throughout what has been a difficult period of operations, the Committee has been fully conscious that it possesses the full range of powers available to a parliamentary committee. The most important of these-the power to send for persons, papers and records-is encompassed within the identical resolutions passed by both Houses at the time of the Committee's establishment. The Committee's role is consistent with the long-established tradition in our parliamentary system of requiring executive and bureaucratic accountability to the Parliament. Parliament has made a judgment that a joint parliamentary committee is the appropriate body, presumably with the necessary time and resources, to provide detailed oversight of the National Crime Authority. It can only be presumed that the traditional avenue of ministerial accountability was not, by itself, considered adequate to provide detailed supervision of the Authority's operations, particularly having regard to the complex and sensitive issues involved in those operations and the need to ensure that they are properly dealt with. As the Committee's report relates, evidence of a divergence of view between the Committee and the Authority as to the nature of our relationship and as to the extent of the Committee's powers to seek information was apparent from our first meeting, when the Authority resisted attempts by the Committee to obtain detailed information about the transition from the Costigan Royal Commission on the Activities of the Federated Ship Painters and Dockers Union to the Authority. This resistance foreshadowed a general reluctance on the part of the Authority, based upon its interpretation of section 55 and upon its view of its obligations under section 51-the secrecy provision-of the Act, to provide the sort of detailed information about its operations which the Committee regards as necessary if it is to monitor the Authority's operations effectively. When this clear difference of view emerged it was agreed that the Committee should prepare guidelines for the future conduct of proceedings between the Authority and the Committee. At about this time the Committee had concluded that, in the light of the disagreement about the Committee's right to seek detailed information on the transition from the Costigan Royal Commission, it should seek counsel's opinion on that issue and upon the broader question of the Committee's powers. This opinion, provided by Mr C. M. Maxwell and summarised in the Committee's report, served as the basis of the Committee's proposed guidelines. In summary form, counsel's view is that there is to be implied from the Act a duty or power to inquire vested in the Committee. This implication is reinforced by a study of the resolutions passed by both Houses relating to the powers and proceedings of the Committee. Among other things, these resolutions specifically empower the Committee to send for persons, papers and records, which is the traditional power of the Parliament to coerce the giving of information as part of its investigative functions. This interpretation is supplemented by paragraph (q) of the resolution, which directs the Committee in carrying out its duties to `ensure that the operational methods and results of investigation of law enforcement agencies as far as possible be protected from disclosure where that would be against the public interest'. This carries a clear implication that the Parliament contemplated that the Committee would be seeking and obtaining from the Authority information relating in some detail to the performance of its functions including any particular decisions made by the Authority in relation to investigation of particular matters. Dealing with sub-section 55 (2) of the Act, which seeks to prohibit the Committee from investigating a matter relating to relevant criminal activity or reconsidering the findings of the Authority in relation to a particular investigation, counsel suggests that its purpose was to ensure that the Committee did not usurp or duplicate the Authority's functions. The Authority's role is to investigate; the Committee's role is to monitor and review the way in which the Authority discharges the function of investigation. The purpose of the prohibition is to prevent the Committee from making its own judgments as to what the findings in relation to a particular investigation should be. However, this does not mean that the Committee cannot inquire of the Authority what its findings were in relation to a particular investigation and seek to discover the process whereby those findings were arrived at. Counsel suggests the Committee would step beyond its legitimate role if it called for the detailed evidence which served as the basis of the Authority's findings or if it reconsidered what findings it should have reached. Another point of difference which arose at the outset and which, I suggest, epitomises the Authority's view of the relationship between it and the Committee is the question of whether there should be a Hansard record of proceedings between the Authority and the Committee. At first, the Committee acquiesced in the Authority's resistance to the presence of Hansard on grounds of security. However, it soon became apparent to the Committee that a verbatim record was essential and, moreover, the Committee is firmly of the view that a Hansard record is a fundamental element of any parliamentary proceeding. I should point out, at this stage, that the Authority has subsequently agreed, albeit reluctantly, to the presence of Hansard during Committee proceedings. However, on the fundamental issue of interpretation of the Committee's right to seek additional information to fulfil its statutory duties there has been no meeting of minds. At a meeting on 15 August, where discussion of the issue came to a head, it became apparent that there is a clear delineation of view between the Committee and the Authority on two separate-although interconnected-issues. One is the legal question of the extent to which, as a matter of statutory interpretation, the Authority can be required to provide information to enable the Committee to carry out its statutory duty to monitor and review. The second is the perception of the nature of the relationship between a parliamentary committee, vested with all the traditional powers attaching to such committees, and a creature of the Parliament made subject by statute to the scrutiny of that committee. At those discussions Mr Justice Stewart, armed with an opinion from the Secretary to the Attorney-General's Department in support of the Authority's view, informed the Committee that the Authority believed that it could not properly reveal information to the Committee relating to any relevant criminal activity; that is, any information about any of its investigations. The secrecy provision in section 51 of the Act, which prevents members of the Authority from divulging information, except for the purposes of the Act, is seen by Mr Justice Stewart as conflicting with the right of the Committee to obtain information. Because of the Authority's view of the limits placed on the amount of information it may divulge to the Committee, it has formed the view that to go beyond those limits would place it in breach of section 51. The Committee does not doubt the genuine nature of the Authority's perception that to divulge information beyond the limits established by its interpretation of sub-section 55 (2) would put it in breach of the Act's secrecy provision. The Committee is also fully aware of the security implications which may arise from dissemination of information held by the Authority. Nevertheless it is apparent that this Committee cannot fulfil the duty which the Parliament intended without considerably more information than has been formally provided to date. The interpretation of the Committee's powers to which the Authority is committed effectively means that the Committee cannot discharge the duties vested in it by the Parliament. The Committee accordingly decided that it must report this impasse to the Parliament in order to seek an amendment to the legislation that will ensure that the Committee is properly equipped to undertake the task intended by Parliament. In the Committee's view-and the report contains a recommendation to this effect-the National Crime Authority Act should be amended to make it clear that the Committee has a right of access to the full range of information held by the Authority so as to enable the Committee to monitor and review the Authority's operations effectively. The purpose of the Committee's recommendation is to seek from the Parliament explicit statutory recognition of, or the removal of any statutory impediment to, the exercise of the full powers of inquiry vested in a parliamentary committee. The Committee is fully aware of the delicate nature of the issues involved and of the consequent need to ensure that the concerns of the Authority regarding security, personal reputations and safety are respected. However, I wish to stress the Committee's view that it must be the final arbiter of the extent to which information permissible within the terms of an amendment to the legislation along the lines proposed in the Committee's recommendation ought properly to be provided. In this context the Committee sees as its own responsibility the adoption of procedures consistent with these objectives. Moreover, the Committee wishes to emphasise that powers granted under an amendment of the type proposed would be seen by the Committee as reserve powers and would be used judiciously. The Committee's recommendation seeks an amendment to the Act specifically to provide that the Joint Committee on the National Crime Authority should have the power to do such things and make such inquiries as it thinks necessary for the proper performance of its duties. The amendment would further provide-this is a very important proposal-that where information sought by the Committee is of such a nature that its disclosure to members of the public would prejudice the safety or reputation of persons or the operation of law enforcement agencies it should be made the subject of a separate report to the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Committee. This latter proposal is modelled on the arrangements in sub-section 59 (3) of the Act dealing with the provision of information by the Authority to the Inter-Governmental Committee. The Committee does not make this recommendation lightly. It has given the issues discussed in the report long and serious consideration and has concluded that, unless a recommendation of the sort proposed is forthcoming, there is no point in retaining a parliamentary committee to act as a watchdog over the National Crime Authority. The issue at stake in this report is whether the Parliament is going to assert its right to monitor and review one of its creatures-that is, the National Crime Authority-or whether, for a range of reasons, including a degree of bureaucratic resistance, it will relinquish that role in favour of the traditional model of ministerial accountability alone. I know that there is much business before the House. I shall conclude by bringing to the attention of the Parliament one final matter of concern to the Committee. As part of this process, the Committee has been gratified by the ready co-operation it has received from all States and the Northern Territory, with one exception, that exception-this will come as no surprise to many honourable members-being the Premier of Queensland, who, for whatever obscure reason, refused to make the Queensland Police Commissioner available to discuss with the Committee the question of organised crime in his State and the broader issue of co-operation between States and the National Crime Authority. Having regard to the serious level of organised crime in this country and especially to the threat posed to young people by trafficking in narcotics, the Committee finds it inexplicable that any person in high office would refuse to co-operate in the fight against organised crime. I thank the House. Mr McGAURAN(Gippsland) —by leave-As a member of the National Crime Authority Committee I endorse the report tabled by the Chairman, the honourable member for Maribyrnong (Mr Griffiths). However, I very much regret his concluding remarks which sought in one way or another to leave this Parliament or anyone who might be listening to the broadcast with the impression that Queensland may not be as active in the fight against organised crime as other States. Indeed, I am advised that the Queensland Police Force has two full time officers with the National Crime Authority. It has extremely good relations with the National Crime Authority. Moreover, a recent conference held as late as Monday of this week conducted by the National Crime Authority in Brisbane resulted in Mr Willey, one of the executive officers, moving a public vote of thanks to Commissioner Lewis of the Queensland Police Force. In that vote of thanks he thanked him for his continued assistance. I understand that Police Commissioner Lewis has extended to members of the National Crime Authority a standing invitation to meet with him at their convenience whenever in Brisbane. I wish to correct those last remarks of the Chairman of the National Crime Authority Committee. The fact that Queensland has not made its Commissioner available to the National Crime Authority Committee for the purpose of background information on the trends and the state of organised crime in this country is a matter for a sovereign State. For the Chairman of the Committee in almost his final sentence to leave the issue hanging in the air was in my view quite improper. I simply conclude by saying that all of us well understand the concerns of the National Crime Authority when dealing with a parliamentary committee. After all, the 10 members on the Committee have at least three staff each, so that is 30 staff, and there are then the staff who assist the Committee. Therefore, we can understand its concern. It is necessary for the Committee to build up a trust with the National Crime Authority. This is an area of great interest because in the last few days the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the United States of America, for instance, has publicly proclaimed its concern about the Congress Committee overseeing its operations and it expressed the view that that Committee- Mr Griffiths —The CIA. Mr McGAURAN —And the Central Intelligence Agency. I thought the FBI also had expressed its concern. The CIA said that the Congress Committee had allowed a great deal of information to slip away. I agree with the report tabled by the Chairman. There is a formula which can be worked out, which is that on matters of great sensitivity, the Chairman and the Deputy Chairman ought to be briefed. We have to weigh the concerns of the Crime Authority against the need for parliamentary democracy to reign supreme. I accept the advice of one police commissioner to the Committee. He said that certainly there are some risks with giving information to the elected representatives but that the principle of the supremacy of the parliament is worth that risk. If information should leak from that Committee, political sanctions must apply and it is for the Parliament to take action. The leaking of that information, however tragic that may be, is nowhere near as tragic as the lessening of the supremacy of parliament. Bill received from the Senate, and read a first time. Mr YOUNG(Port Adelaide-Special Minister of State)(12.40) —I move: That the Bill be now read a second time. The Public Service and Statutory Authorities Amendment Bill 1985 has two principal objects. Firstly, it amends the Commonwealth Employees (Redeployment and Retirement) Act to include inefficiency and loss of essential qualifications as grounds upon which redeployment and retirement action can be taken in relation to staff covered by that Act. This amendment is the result of a review of the Commonwealth Employees (Redeployment and Retirement) Act in which the Australian Council of Trade Unions and the Council of Professional Associations have participated. Under the Commonwealth Employees (Redeployment and Retirement) Act staff can be redeployed or retired where their services cannot reasonably be used because they are surplus to the requirements of their department or authority or are incapable of performing their duties as a result of physical or mental incapacity. The Government believes it essential to have an effective but fair system for dealing with staff who are inefficient or who have lost essential qualifications. Equally, it believes that sub-paragraph 7 (1) (b) (iii) is too broad and imprecise and that a topic so fundamental as the grounds upon which Commonwealth employees can be redeployed or retired should be spelt out in legislation rather than being left to regulations. Accordingly, this legislation repeals sub-paragraph 7 (1) (b) (iii) and specifically inserts inefficiency and loss of essential qualifications into the Act as additional grounds for redeployment and retirement. The second principal object of the Bill is to introduce new employment provisions into the Public Service Act. The existing provisions in the Public Service Act have been used to engage staff for several quite different purposes including the engagement of short term and fixed term temporary assistants, the engagement of industrial staff on a continuing basis and the engagement of local staff by Australian missions overseas. The new scheme set out in the Bill will create four separate categories of employees-continuing employees, short term employees, fixed term employees and overseas employees. By separating out these categories, the Bill enables more appropriate engagement and tenure arrangements to apply to each. The provisions seek to balance the need to give departments greater flexibility in day to day operations while ensuring proper central co- ordination and control to protect the integrity of the new scheme. A special section is inserted into the Public Service Act to facilitate the engagement of staff under the Government's youth traineeship scheme, and other government schemes designed to enable persons to gain skills, qualifications, aptitudes and experience in order to equip them to participate in the Australian work force. As part of the Public Service reforms, the responsibility for human resources budgeting became the responsibility of the Department of Finance. Following this change, it is no longer appropriate for the Public Service Board's approval to be required in relation to consultants engaged by various statutory authorities. Accordingly, the Bill removes the requirement for the Board to approve consultancy arrangements under the various Acts set out in the Schedule to the Bill. The Bill also contains a number of minor technical amendments to the Public Service Act, the Long Service Leave Act and other legislation. Details of these are set out in the explanatory memorandum. There are no identifiable costs associated with the amendments made by the Bill. The revised employment provisions are designed to ensure that the tenure and other benefits obtained by employees are commensurate with the service they are engaged to provide. The amendments to the Commonwealth Employees (Redeployment and Retirement) Act are expected to improve long term efficiency of the Public Service. The Government proposes to move an amendment relating to departmental annual reports. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER(Mr Ruddock) —I understand that it is the wish of the House to debate this Bill forthwith. That being so, I will allow that course to be followed. Mr CONNOLLY(Bradfield)(12.43) —The Opposition has studied the proposals contained in the Public Service and Statutory Authorities Amendment Bill 1985. I am rather disappointed that the Special Minister of State (Mr Young) was not able to provide me with a copy of his second reading speech. Apparently there are no copies available in the chamber. Mr Young —I just got it myself. Mr CONNOLLY —That makes it slightly difficult. As the Minister is well aware, it is proposed that the Government will move an amendment to the legislation leading out of the decision in another place to incorporate significant changes to section 10 of the Commonwealth Employees (Redeployment and Retirement) Act relating to the provision of annual reports. I do not know whether the Minister referred to that in his remarks, but I have with me, if he would like it, a copy of the Government's proposed amendments to this legislation. As has been the practice since the introduction of the fairly major legislative reforms to the Public Service introduced by the Government in 1983, the Opposition has seen fit to support the thrust of those proposed amendments because we believe they are consistent with the overall improvement of the efficiency and effectiveness of the Public Service. We have taken every opportunity to emphasise our strong belief in the need to maintain an apolitical Public Service, one which people can enter with the objective of having a career, a Service which they can be proud of and in which they can give the very best service possible to the Australian people and above all a Service that can attract the best quality Australians available to government. I use the term `government' there in a generic sense. This legislation is introduced to remove a number of anomalies which resulted from the reforms of the Public Service introduced in 1984. Those reforms gave the Public Service Board a somewhat different status in terms of the responsibilities it previously had and they tended to put more emphasis on departmental management and departmental secretaries in particular having greater control over the administration of personnel matters. Again, as I have said, that is quite consistent with our approach that one should try to develop at all possible opportunities a philosophy based on letting the managers manage. The new legislation reduces further the Board's involvement in the appointment and termination of non-officer classifications who were not covered by the earlier reforms. These non-officer classifications would include, for example, consultants, technical and industrial personnel under various awards and so forth. But none of these people are defined as officers under the Act. An officer under the Public Service Act, of course, is effectively a career person in the various categories employed within departments. It is proposed that people who come under the new classifications which are included in this legislation will be appointed by secretaries to departments without reference to the Board. The legislation really has three principal objectives. First, the Commonwealth Employees (Redeployment and Retirement) Act contained a number of grounds upon which public servants could be redeployed or, on occasions, retired from the Public Service. This proposed amendment, which we support, contains additional grounds-namely, inefficiency and loss of essential qualifications. Under the CE(RR) Act, staff can be redeployed or retired where their services cannot reasonably be used because they are surplus to their department's or authority's requirements or are incapable of performing their duties as a result of physical or mental incapacity. As I have pointed out, the Bill extends the grounds for redeployment or retirement, to inefficiency, loss of essential qualifications or for any other reason. In other words, it is proposed that senior management be given substantially greater powers than it had previously over the allocation of personnel in terms of their efficiency and effectiveness. Where it is not possible to redeploy an employee, the secretary to a department will be required, under these provisions, to take account of factors such as the nature and duration of the employee's past service, the length of prospective service if he or she stayed in a department and the extent to which retraining or rehabilitation would enable duties to be performed as an alternative to compulsory retirement. I think those provisions are adequate. It means that a person just cannot be dismissed merely on the whim of senior management of a department which should take into account whether in fact that person still has some capacity to offer to either the Department or the Public Service as a whole. The second objective of the legislation is, as I said earlier, to revise the arrangements applying to the engagement of employees, not officers, under the Public Service Act by establishing four separate categories-that is, continuing, short term, fixed term and overseas employees. It was found necessary to redefine what had previously been known as exempt or temporary employees-mainly staff recruited for part time or temporary work or industrial categories. None of these were previously covered by the Public Service Act and their status under the CE(RR) Act was therefore ambiguous. This resulted in a successful High Court challenge against the Commonwealth in the case Iannou v. Fowell which involved the Special Broadcasting Service. As a result of that it was quite clear that the legislation had to be amended. There are currently some 21,000 personnel in the Commonwealth Public Service who are not covered by the full provisions of the Public Service Act and a further 7,000 temporary employees, some of whom in fact do have tenure. The Bill contains a range of definitions in respect of the four new employee categories. It also contains some significant changes in relation to equal opportunity and industrial democracy. Specifically, the objective is to extend to the Naval Defence Act and the Supply and Development Act provisions in earlier legislation which for technical reasons had not been applied to those categories. The Opposition is of the view that this matter should be subject to amendment and I am pleased to see that apparently the Government, on the basis of the amendments given to me by the Special Minister of State, is accepting that proposal. We have no objection to the extension of the equal opportunity and industrial democracy provisions to civilian personnel under the Naval Defence Act or the Supply and Development Act. However, we were concerned that the legislation was a little open-ended in its present form because in the event of war, civil emergency and so forth there seemed to be a potential limitation on the capacity of personnel under those Acts, and therefore working in a quasi defence role, in fact to come under a greater degree of discipline. However, our concern has been accepted by the Government in the other place and therefore that matter rests. I should also take the opportunity to emphasise the concern of the Opposition about allegations that the equal opportunity legislation has been used in such a way that females alone may now apply for positions as acting heads of schools in the Australian Capital Territory. Not unreasonably, the male teacher fraternity feels that it has been unfairly discriminated against. The Opposition has always taken a view that while on the one hand it certainly supports the concept of equal opportunities, whether it be for females, Aborigines, migrants or any other groups in the work force, and it certainly sees that there is a case for us to do what we can to ensure that management does its best to encourage females or other groups in the community to feel, as does the mainstream work force, that they have access to the full range of opportunities, on the other hand we do not solve our problems by creating what can be seen as discrimination against others. If the situation in the Australian Capital Territory is as reported, it is not unreasonable to make the point that male teachers have every reason to feel they are being discriminated against if they are prohibited from taking positions as acting heads of schools simply because they are males. Surely the issue must be that the best person available for the job should fill that position. One of the essential ingredients of the Public Service in recent years has been the application of the merit principle. If we are to have a merit principle based on sex, clearly we will have very major problems in a community such as Australia. I think the Government should be prepared to put its somewhat controversial views to one side and try to live with the reality that male teachers are just as entitled to promotion as are female teachers. While a case can be argued that very few female teachers have become heads of departments, the honourable member for Canberra (Mrs Kelly), who is in the chamber, knows as I do as a result of our involvement with the 202nd report of the Public Accounts Committee that the situation has improved quite significantly over the last three or four years. Hopefully we will see a continuing improvement. However, this objective will not be achieved if the work force is divided on the grounds of sex and people are made to perceive that they are not being given opportunities simply because they are males. The Minister has not noted that the Government intends to move the amendment. I take it that he proposes to do so at the Committee stage. I wish to finalise my observations by making two points. Proposed new section 82AD proposes that guidelines should be provided by the Public Service Board for the provision of opportunities for appointments under certain categories. The difficulty as I see it is that there is a weakness under these proposals in that positions will not be advertised. Therefore, I am concerned that the merit principle may not apply. I do not intend to move an amendment in this area because, as I said, there is a problem in giving flexibility to senior management. But I think it is equally important that people in the community should know that these part time jobs are available in the Public Service. Therefore, there is a need to develop a mechanism, whether it be through normal media advertising arrangements or otherwise, to ensure that at least once a year people are made aware that positions are available and that they can apply for them. The second observation I make is in relation to the employment of fixed term employees. In my opinion there is a contradiction in the legislation in the definition of fixed term employees who, as I stated, may be appointed by the secretary to a department with the approval of the Public Service Board to perform duties involving a project or task with a fixed duration. Such appointments may be made if the required skills are not present in the Public Service and the appointee will not be required on the completion of the project. In other words, the distinct impression from that definition is that it is for a specific period. Unfortunately, proposed section 82AE does not state that. What it says is that a departmental head may appoint a person for a period not exceeding five years. But there is also provision for a further extension of five years without reference to the Public Service Board. Frankly, it is absurd to suggest that a part time person can have a job for 10 years, especially in categories where they will not be available for promotion or in most cases for the fringe benefits, of which honourable members, including the Special Minister of State (Mr Young), are well aware. That area requires further examination. In the Committee stage in due course I may refer to other questions relating to equal opportunity and industrial democracy, but on that point I would emphasise that the Opposition is happy to support the legislation in its present form, but we will not support the Government's proposal to amend section 10 relating to secretaries and annual reports. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. The Bill. Mr YOUNG(Port Adelaide-Special Minister of State)(12.57) —by leave-I move: (1) Clause 9, page 3, line 27, omit paragraph (a). (2) Clause 10, page 4, lines 15 to 42, omit proposed sub-section 25 (7), insert the following sub-section: `(7) A report prepared under sub-section (6) shall be in accordance with guidelines from time to time approved by the Prime Minister and presented to the Parliament'. (3) Clause 10, page 4, add at the end of the clause the following proposed sub-section: `(9) In sub-clause (6). ``Department'' means a Department referred to in paragraph (a) of the definition of ``Department'' in sub-section 7 (1)'. I am pleased that the shadow Minister, the honourable member for Bradfield (Mr Connolly), had been circulated with the amendments. They have been redrafted in deference to the amendments put up by the Australian Democrats, as I understand, in the Senate. The Government is moving an amendment which accepts the general principles of the Australian Democrats amendment passed by the Senate, that is, that departments be required to report annually to the Parliament, but hopefully we have redrafted it in a more acceptable form. Our amendment retains proposed sub-clauses 25 (6) and (8) of the Democrats amendment, that is, the obligation of the secretary to a department to prepare an annual report and the obligation upon the Minister responsible for a department to table such a report in the Parliament within 15 sitting days. We are deleting the long list of detailed contents included in proposed sub-clause 25 (7) and replacing it by a requirement that such a report be in accordance with guidelines approved by the Prime Minister and tabled in the Parliament. This gives a statutory basis to present practice. It thus puts a statutory obligation on the Executive to report to the Parliament while at the same time allowing flexibility in developing the guidelines over time to meet the Parliament's information needs. We are inserting a new sub-clause 25 (9) to make it clear that the annual report requirement applies only to departments of state or ministerial departments, not those statutory authorities such as the Ombudsman which are deemed to be departments for the purpose of the Public Service Act and which already, in most if not all cases, are subject to annual reporting requirements in the Acts setting them up. I hope that the clarification contained in the redrafting of the Government's amendments will meet with the Opposition's support. Mr CONNOLLY(Bradfield)(12.59) —Unfortunately, the Opposition is not able to support the proposed reversal of the situation which the Special Minister of State (Mr Young) has emphasised. I would emphasise that in the Australian Labor Party's policy for the 1983 election there was a considerable section to the effect that it wanted to introduce in this House a Bill to establish an annual report procedure. I do not know why the Government is so coy about this matter because it is contained in Labor's policy statement. I put to the Minister two simple propositions. First, if the Government is prepared to support a private member's Bill which could have unanimous support within the chamber containing elements supported and agreed to by both sides, that would be an alternative worthy of serious consideration. All I am stating is that it happens to be the common policy of both the Government and the Opposition that there be in place an adequate mechanism by which departments will make annual reports to the Parliament. There are in place, now, through the Acts Interpretation Act provisions, arrangements by which statutory authorities must make annual reports to the Parliament, but for some odd reason they do not yet apply to departments. The provision, which both the amendment as well as the existing legislation as it has come to us from another place specifies without doubt, is that the secretary to a department shall as soon as practicable after 30 June in each year prepare and furnish to the Minister administering the department a report on the operation of the department during the year that ended 30 June. I am pleased that the Government has not seriously contemplated removing that provision because that would be gross and totally contrary to government policy. However, one goes to the substance of the amendment. I am now told the position-very late in the piece, I would add, having had absolutely no discussions with the appropriate Minister in another place because at no stage has he ever wanted to talk to me about these matters. Mr Young —He did. Mr CONNOLLY —I am sorry, but I have had no discussions with the Minister at any stage since I have taken over responsibility on these matters. The point is that the Government apparently has in place a number of reforms that we will have to examine in due course on their merits. I hope that they are satisfactory, though I doubt many of them will be. The point is that I am unaware of those reforms because nobody has ever bothered to discuss the matter with me. In light of that, and with the support of the Australian Democrats, we have gone ahead and put in place a set of amendments which are essentially based on the Carrick provisions contained in the existing guidelines. There are no regulations in this chamber relating to annual reports. There is only a set of guidelines which I understand are currently being reviewed. The proposal contained in our amendments, supported in another place by the Democrats as well as by the Opposition parties, simply requires that, among other things, revenue and expenditure of departments, including expenditure and revenue arising from trading activities or cost recovery activities during the year be reported upon in a form giving a true and fair impression of the activities of that department. In other words, it is just not good enough to say one prepares estimates of expenditure and puts forward supplementary documentation in terms of the Budget debate, but rather that in the annual report there should be a statement at the back-a comparative document which people could read and understand-as to where the funds which have been allocated by the Parliament to that department are going. It is not just a document for the Parliament. It is supposed to be a document for the community to be able to read and understand. In addition, we recommended the implementation and operation of industrial democracy plans in departments should be contained. That is not very profound. Again, it is Labor Party policy. I find difficulty in understanding why the Government is now asking for that to be removed. We went on to suggest that the number of officers in each classification employed in departments during the year should be noted. The argument is that there are too many classifications, and it is all too hard. One of the weaknesses in public administration in this country-and I am sure that the honourable member for Canberra (Mrs Kelly) will agree with me-is that for too long the Parliament has allowed itself to be confused by a bureaucratic tendency to give out as little information as possible. In view of the other amendments contained in this Bill relating to those new four or five categories of non-permanent officers, there is a very good reason why the Parliament should know whether departments are building up an unfair or unreasonable balance between career officers and non-career officers within the department. If one is to wait on the Public Service Board to come up with the evidence, one might wait for a long time. Under new arrangements introduced by this Government it is the Department of Finance that now controls personnel budgeting, not the Public Service Board. Essentially, it is up to departments which are supposed to have a degree of independence to be able to put in their annual reports this essential information which is relevant to the manner in which they have conducted their activities. In addition there is another provision that seeks to find out under what conditions people who were previously employed by departments have been dismissed. Again, that is not unreasonable because the record in recent years, if one accepts a Public Service Board report, is extraordinary. I think that last year three people were dismissed from the Public Service for either inefficiency or other somewhat gross activities. Mr Young —Three? Mr CONNOLLY —Yes, three. It is incredible. I think that we need to know on a departmental basis precisely how management handles its personnel structure. In addition, we have suggested that the number of persons engaged by secretaries as consultants during the year be reported upon, and that their qualifications and experience and the purpose for which they are engaged be mentioned. The only argument against that I have heard is that nobody can define what a consultant is. All I can say is that that is rather odd. I am sure that with the enormous amount of brainpower in the Public Service Board and elsewhere, it is possible to define what a consultant ought to be. If one cannot define what a consultant ought to be, why on earth are we arguing about these four categories which are now going into legislation in this Bill? One of those categories is meant to cover the question of consultants. Because of the time restraints I do not want to hold up the chamber, but if the chamber wishes to divide on this-it is our intention to do so-I want it to be quite clearly understood that we are prepared to discuss these issues if the Minister wishes to make the time available to me. But at this stage I see no case which has been adequately presented as to why the original provisions in this amendment should not be carried by the chamber as they were in the other place. After all, the objective is to give the electorate and the community at large more information as to the stewardship of departmental management. Amendments agreed to. Bill reported, with amendments; report-by leave-adopted. Bill (on motion by Mr Young)-by leave-read a third time. Sitting suspended from 1.06 to 2 p.m. Mr SPENDER —I direct my question to the Attorney-General. Mr Young —He is in Sydney. He is away. Mr SPENDER —In that event, I will ask the Prime Minister. I remind the Prime Minister that, in the words of the current edition of Halsbury's Laws of England: It is a contempt of court to publish comment on pending proceedings which prejudges the merits of the case or which imputes guilt to, or asserts the innocence of- I emphasise the words `or asserts the innocence of'- a particular accused. I ask the Prime Minister whether he will give the following instructions to the Attorney-General: First, to instruct the Director of Public Prosecutions to advise whether the public assertion by the Premier of New South Wales, which has been given wide coverage today, of Mr Justice Murphy's innocence of the charge on which the Court of Appeal has ordered that there be a retrial constitutes a criminal contempt warranting prosecution; and secondly, in the event that the Director of Public Prosecutions advises that there is a prima facie case of criminal contempt by the Premier, that the Director of Public Prosecutions be instructed by the Attorney-General to commence proceedings for criminal contempt against the Premier of New South Wales. Mr HAWKE —Having the total confidence that I do in my Attorney-General I will give him no such instructions. The Attorney-General, having the competence and the outstanding ability he has, will deal with this matter in the outstanding and proper fashion that he has to this point. Mr LINDSAY —My question is directed to the Prime Minister. Is it correct that a leading New York firm of analysts has upgraded its economic assessment of Australia? Mr HAWKE —I thank the honourable member for his perceptive and relevant question. As the leadership of the Opposition is involved in the analysis that has been undertaken by this overseas firm, it is appropriate that I should refer to the fact that this Leader of the Opposition has fast acquired a reputation for doing nothing more than trying to talk his country down. This is not new; it goes back to the time of the election campaign in February of 1983. I remind members of this House that on 10 February 1983, in invoking international judgments about this country, Mr Howard had this to say: I believe that if they- the Australian Labor Party's economic policies- are implemented in Australia our international economic reputation will be affected and, so far from instilling that private sector business confidence which in theory everybody agrees is necessary, I believe it would have the opposite effect. That is the bloke who is now the Leader of the Opposition, speaking in February of 1983. He was saying that there was going to be an international judgment about Australia if this great Party's economic policies were applied. Of course, he was wrong in February 1983 because with the implementation of our economic policies we gradually pulled this country out of the economic morass into which his mismanagement had placed it. But of course he was not satisfied with that. Having been wrong in February of 1983 he continued to try to talk down the economy of this country. At the beginning of 1984 he said: Economic growth will peter out by the end of 1984. Wrong again! We are now in 1985, and still he has done nothing but be the whingeing Johnny of the Australian political scene. He has got to the pathetic stage now where, in an interview with Steketee of the Sydney Morning Herald, assailed as he is on all sides by those who are seeking to dethrone him, he actually says: `Look, my leadership will be saved by an economic recession next year'. Whingeing Johnny Howard is trying to talk his country down. I am here to tell whingeing Johnny Howard that he will not get his hoped for recession. It is true that the New York risk analysis firm of Frost and Sullivan yesterday upgraded its investment rating of Australia. The firm gives Australia the highest possible rating when assessing the risk facing people transferring money into a country. Australia has been upgraded from B to A1 since the last report in December 1984, putting it alongside the United States, Hong Kong and Holland in the 85 countries surveyed. Australia's rating as a political risk for direct investors and as a reliable customer for United States exporters has also risen. It is interesting to note that the Leader of the Opposition gets a mention but, as one would imagine, not a very honourable mention. The report notes: The economy is growing at a modest rate and the Opposition lacks strong leadership. Right again! The firm's director of research, Dr Coplin, is quoted as saying-- Mr Sinclair —Why don't you make a statement? Standing Orders say you cannot read your speeches. You can't give an answer without reading. You shouldn't have to read it at all. Mr HAWKE —One can understand why honourable members opposite do not want to hear it. They do not like it at all, and it is not surprising. But this is what he had to say-- Mr SPEAKER —Order! I suggest that the Prime Minister wait for a moment. I realise that everybody is rather tired this afternoon. Mr HAWKE —We might as well wait, because they never use Question Time at any rate. He had this to say: There was a fear that the Labor Party would be inflationary, nationalistic and restrictive towards business. It is pretty clear now that Hawke and the Labor Government are fairly positive towards international business. I have to overcome my modesty to say that he went on: We also think he is a competent leader. The report concluded: We see Australia as a low risk country. The facts are simple, and they are clear: The international community is making the same judgment about this country as the Australian people are making about it, and that is that this is a good government faced by an Opposition which is without principles, without policies and without leadership and which increasingly is becoming a pathetic irrelevancy. Mr IAN CAMERON —I direct a question to the Attorney-General's assistant, whoever that may be. Is it a fact, as reported in the Press, that the Government intends to amend the Bill of Rights Bill in the Senate and infringe States' rights to attempt to enforce Federal laws on State redistributions? If so, will the Senate be included in the Government's desire for one vote one value, as a senator in New South Wales requires 281,000 votes, in Queensland 176,000 votes and in Tasmania only 20,000 votes? Mr HAWKE —I will refer this penetrating and very troubling question to my colleague the Attorney-General. Mr KENT —My question is directed to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Has the Minister's attention been drawn to the explosion of a 50-kiloton yield nuclear device on Mururoa Atoll yesterday? Is he aware that this is the largest but not the only explosion since May? Has the Minister seen the map in the latest French Embassy information bulletin which shows Mururoa Atoll as standing in the middle of nowhere, completely disregarding the existence of almost every South Pacific island and nation? Mr SPEAKER —Order! The honourable member should come to the point of his question. Mr KENT —Does the Minister agree with me that if nuclear tests are as safe as the French want us to believe, they should carry them out under the Eiffel Tower? Mr HAYDEN —I am aware that there have been two recent tests, the most recent of 50 kilotons. I am also aware that there has been an estimated aggregate yield of about 250 kilotons in the course of this year. What must be recognised is that it is reasonable to assume that there is a finite limit to the punishment Mururoa Atoll can absorb. For this reason alone, France should conduct its tests on its home territory and not ask others to assume this risk. This is particularly so if, as the French claim, the tests are conducted in absolutely safe conditions. Office of National Assessments technical assessments show that the geological strata in parts of France are such that the tests could be conducted there. It is wrong, as the French have claimed on some occasions, that a scientific assessment of Mururoa Atoll in 1983 established that the testing program was not damaging to the environment. In fact, the study did not give those tests a long term environmental bill of health. The Economist magazine, scarcely a radical publication, in October wrote that the French only bred distrust when they ignored the critical parts of the report of these scientists and claimed it vindicated them completely. In respect of the other part of the question the honourable member asked, I think it would be unfortunate if it were decided, if I can say so with good humour, to test a nuclear weapon under the Eiffel Tower. I believe 1989 is the centenary of the construction of the Eiffel Tower. While I am not aware of the purpose for which the map to which the honourable member referred was drafted, what is more important are the boundaries of the nuclear free zone of the South Pacific, the subject of a treaty which was concluded at the last meeting of the South Pacific Forum countries. The program was initiated, sustained and brought to a successful conclusion by the energies and the commitment of the Prime Minister, and we look forward to that treaty being signed and ratified by member countries of this region and hope that the nuclear powers become depositories to the treaty. Mr IAN ROBINSON —I direct a question to the Minister for Primary Industry. Do the Forward Estimates released by the Department of Finance show a cut in funding to the Primary Industry portfolio next financial year of 12.7 per cent? What functions of the Department of Primary Industry will be cut back to achieve this result? Has the Government already decided that fertiliser payments will be reduced or abolished during the 1986-87 financial year, despite the tabling only yesterday of the Industries Assistance Commission report on fertilisers? Mr KERIN —The publication of Forward Estimates by the Department of Finance and the general approach of this Government to Budget-making should not be confused by trying to make deductions such as the honourable member has made. The decision by the Government on the IAC report on fertilisers will be considered by the Government at the appropriate time. I point out that that item appears under the portfolio of the Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce. So even that conclusion is based on total factual error and a large degree of ignorance, and that part of the question is hardly worth an answer. Mr CHARLES —My question is directed to the Special Minister of State. It concerns the question of public funding. I ask: Are all gifts under the Act governing public funding liable to public disclosure? Mr YOUNG —No, not all gifts are to be made public. Section 304 (5) (a) (i) of the Commonwealth Electoral Act provides that a gift to a party made on the condition that it be used for a purpose other than a purpose related to a Commonwealth election is exempt from all the disclosure requirements provided the party `has used, or will use, the gift accordingly'. All parties have been advised by the Australian Electoral Commission via its handbook and other means, such as telephone calls and discussions, over the past 20 months or so that only those gifts specifically designated by the donor for a non-Commonwealth election purpose are exempt from the disclosure requirements. This matter has been raised with me. I have not had the document authenticated, but someone is purporting to use the name of the Leader of the Opposition in sending out a letter. It is headed `John Howard, Leader of the Opposition, House of Representatives, Parliament House'. I do not know whether it is from him but I want to refer to what is in it to see whether-- Mr Hodgman —If it is not authenticated you shouldn't. Mr YOUNG —I want to see whether it is not important to authenticate it. It is important to point out to the House whether the information given in this letter is accurate according to the Act, and I will do that for honourable members. It is an appeal letter which purports to go out from the Liberal Party in Melbourne to, I suppose, business people and others who might be interested in supporting the Party. Labor members of parliament have received it. The last page is headed `The Liberal Party of Australia, Victorian Division, Challenge Fund, Robert Menzies House, 104 Exhibition Street, Melbourne 3000'. It goes through a whole range of things. It says the Party needs some support because, according to the person who signed this letter, it is opposed to the capital gains tax and has a commitment, as soon as Mr Howard becomes Prime Minister, to repeal it. It should be well entrenched by then. I do not think the next generation of Australians will be that worried about it. The letter goes on to say: But there is one ingredient needed to avoid this-your support now and whenever appropriate, until the electors make their decision. The nation will suffer if the Liberal Party is ill prepared to mount a strong election challenge. That's why I've enclosed a Liberal Challenge Fund contribution slip, and that's why I'm now asking for an investment in the future in the form of a gift to this fund of $30, $100 or more if you can. I realise . . . the time may not be intirely suitable to ask for your contribution. I take it from the Leader of the Opposition that he knows something about it. I suggest to him that it might not be the most appropriate time. What I would do if I were he and sending out a letter like this would be to wait until July 1987, when those people who are paying 60c in the dollar now will get their massive tax cuts, bringing their payments down to 48c in the dollar, and those paying 46c in the dollar will have their payments reduced to 40c in the dollar. There will be a lot more money in the community for political donations. He goes on: But there's no other way the Liberal Party can mount a strong campaign, other than with your generous support. There is a bit of `mirror, mirror on the wall' on the back page: To help the Liberal Party gauge public attitude in the area of taxation and industrial relations could you please answer these two questions . . . (1) Should the Liberal Party toughen further its stance on militant trade unions? Mirror, mirror on the wall. The second question is: Will the introduction of the Labor Government's Capital Gains Tax affect you and your family? At least it explains why the coalition has no policies; it is waiting for an answer to its campaign letter. As soon as it gets in it will be able to say: `Well, 4,000 voted yes and 2,500 voted no'. The important feature of the answer is that alongside where people were to put their name, their company address and so forth and the amount of the donation, it says: Gifts to the Liberal Party Challenge Fund will not be subject to the disclosure requirements of either Federal or State legislation. According to information I have received from the Australian Electoral Commission: The appeal letter and the contribution slip in question do not, in the Commission's view, satisfy the requirements for exemption from disclosure under section- I referred to it earlier- The purpose of the Liberal Challenge Fund appears to be to mount an electoral challenge . . . at the Commonwealth and State levels. Therefore, any gifts forwarded to the party in response to this appeal are, in the Commission's view, disclosable contrary to the advice given to potential donors on the contribution slip. Mr N. A. BROWN —Talking about other people's correspondence, I ask the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations whether he has seen the telex from Mr Hodgson, the Federal Secretary of the Transport Workers Union of Australia, which says with respect to superannuation that the union will implement immediate action against those companies which do not finalise an agreement in writing to participate in the fund by 13 December 1985. Will the Minister give the clearest possible condemnation of that sort of industrial blackmail? Will he now concede that the prices and incomes accord was expressed to give an open invitation to any union, especially the Transport Workers Union, to bludgeon its way to a successful superannuation deal? Mr WILLIS —Yes, I have seen the correspondence to which the honourable member referred. The fact is that the Transport Workers Union has been made well aware of the Government's view of this matter. Some two weeks ago it was told quite clearly by me that the Government could not support industrial action in respect of a superannuation scheme and would not support any superannuation scheme coming into existence prior to the conclusion of the productivity case and not in accordance with that productivity case unless there were special and isolated circumstances, and any such circumstances would have to have regard to the national wage fixing principles, particularly principle 11 which refers to negligible cost. Those elements have been known by the Transport Workers Union for some time. The situation is that that union has been having some consultations with companies. Today I met with the Australian Road Transport Federation. I understand that the position of the companies is in line with that of the Government; that is, they will await the special and isolated circumstances clarification from the union. When they receive that they will be able to make some decision about how they view the claim. That is also the position of the Government at this stage. In regard to the latter part of the honourable member's question, let me say that the prices and incomes accord in no way opens the door for the kind of action which he put forward in his question. It most certainly does not give an invitation to industrial action. The Prime Minister and I made it quite clear yesterday that the Government does not support industrial action in regard to superannuation; there is no need for such industrial action. The fact is that a strategy has been agreed by the Government and the Australian Council of Trade Unions as to how superannuation should be extended in the community. That strategy involves a productivity case and arguing in that productivity case for a particular outcome and for that outcome to be taken in the way of superannuation-both extension and improvement. That is an agreed position to which we are committed and which we will pursue. It is a very responsible position. It is in no way economically irresponsible. It means that the distribution of productivity gains to employees, which has not occurred for some years, will occur in a way which will be taken by way of superannuation and extended over a two-year period. The implementation of that productivity case outcome over a two-year period would be absolutely unique in the annals of arbitration in this country. At the same time to rope in the superannuation area, which has always run quite free of wages policy in this country, is also a major achievement in terms of wages policy and economic control in this country. Those matters should be thoroughly understood by those people who are being critical at present. The Government is gaining control of a major on-cost which, under the previous Government, was in no way controlled and operated totally outside of wages policy. I should say to the House that during the period of the Fraser Government not only did we see an explosion of wages at various times, particularly in 1982 when there was a 17 per cent increase, but also we saw a continual expansion of superannuation with the proportion of the work force which received superannuation moving from 32 per cent to 45 per cent. An additional 800,000 employees received superannuation. That occurred totally outside any form of wages policy. That type of thing is coming to an end. Wages policy is going to encompass superannuation in a way which is totally economically responsible and which will mean that the distribution of productivity gains to employees occurs in that way instead of by way of a wage increase. That is a thoroughly commendable outcome and demonstrates, once again, the great importance to this nation of the prices and incomes accord. Mr PRICE —Can the Minister for Health advise the House whether a biosynthetic human growth hormone is being developed in Australia? Can he advise when it will be available and will it be significantly cheaper than the product currently being imported from Sweden? Dr BLEWETT —Since difficulties arose with natural human growth hormone at the beginning of this year, the Government has sought both a replacement from overseas and the development of a substitute here in Australia. As I informed the House some three weeks ago, the Government has achieved access to a biosynthetic substitute from Sweden which will be made available next month to those in the program. However, as I pointed out to the House, that biosynthetic substitute costs about 10 times as much as the natural growth hormone. Therefore, we are very interested in developing an Australian substitute. I am not able to be precise at this moment, but we hope that an Australian substitute will be available during 1986 at a considerably cheaper cost. Mr MILES —I direct my question to the Minister for Primary Industry. In view of the severe overseas competition experienced by the vegetable processors and farmers of northern Tasmania who produce approximately 70 per cent of Australia's processed vegetables, what steps are being taken to limit export advantages by New Zealand in line with the normal understanding of a free trade agreement? When will these steps be taken? Will these steps be taken in time to prevent an efficient industry being undermined by one heavily subsidised from another country? Mr KERIN —I did not quite hear part of the honourable gentlemen's question. I understand he was referring to the closer economic relations agreement which this Government negotiated. The differences between our two countries in terms of that agreement relate to getting a neutral position with respect to protection and subsidisation. The things that we cannot take into account are relative exchange rate variations. That was never in the agreement and it is impossible, of course, to put it into any movement to free trade. This Government takes the view that we cannot very well lecture the world, as did the previous Government, about the evils of protection and subsidisation and what that does to agricultural trade, yet at the same time not come to an accommodation with New Zealand on fair, unsubsidised trade between the two countries. We are trying to get between our two countries a basis whereby any subsidisation, any assistance for identical industries, is phased out on the same level, the same rate. In cases where real problems are growing up with respect to industries on both sides of the Tasman, this Government has found, as did the previous Government-it put in place the joint arrangement on dairy products-that industry consultations are a far better way to try to solve the problem. At present the exchange rate variation between our two countries is very favourable to us. One of the big problems, of course, is that there is identical ownership of firms on both sides of the Tasman, and this poses real problems. In respect of vegetables, particularly in regard to the firm of Watties and the amount of money that it is expending at present by way of export promotion, the Minister for Trade and I took up that matter with the New Zealand ministerial delegation when it was here recently. The Ministers said that they would give it attention, as they would the other element that is causing trouble-that is, export-import licensing, the so-called EALs, which are exclusive Australian licences. The Minister for Trade and I are giving both those matters the closest attention. But I think many of the problems are purely commercial and purely in terms of comparative advantage rather than subsidisation. Mr SCOTT —I address my question to the Minister for Health and refer to a statement by Mr John Olsen, the Leader of the Opposition in South Australia, that country doctors in South Australia should be paid a fee of 100 per cent for treating Medicare patients. I ask: Who would pick up the cost of this increase? Mr Tuckey —Is that statement verified? Dr BLEWETT —In answer to the question from the-- Mr Tuckey —Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. Mr Hawke —Here comes the bush lawyer. Mr Tuckey —You keep quiet. If you want a bush lawyer, I will give you some bush law, you little twerp! Mr SPEAKER —Order! I warn the honourable member for O'Connor. When he is called to make a point of order, he should make that point. Mr Tuckey —The Minister was not asked whether he was aware of the statement. The statement was not verified in any fashion. I think that before the Leader of the Opposition in South Australia is so quoted, there should be some evidence of verification. Mr SPEAKER —Does the honourable member for Hindmarsh authenticate the statement? Mr Scott —Yes, Mr Speaker. Mr SPEAKER —I call the Minister for Health. Opposition members interjecting- Dr BLEWETT —Mr Speaker, the Opposition is obviously sensitive about such a question. In answer to the honourable member, in the most unlikely event of Mr Olsen having to honour this promise-as is the case in regard to most of his other promises-the doctors would have to be paid from the South Australian public purse. If Mr Olsen wished to spend this money, he would be free to do so. If he wanted to give a windfall income gain to country doctors, he would have to pay for it out of the South Australian public purse. My own view would be that this amount of money could be spent much more wisely and sensibly on other South Australian health services. The responsibility for paying doctors for services delivered to public patients in public hospitals has always been a State responsibility. Varying States have paid varying fees for those services. However, for many years, all States have discounted the schedule fee for the obvious reason that all of the doctors' supporting services provided in the hospital are paid for already by the taxpayer. For example, the public hospital does the billing and accounting procedures. For all those reasons, every State has discounted the schedule fee in its payment to hospital doctors. I also point out that the offer made by Dr Cornwall, the present, and no doubt the continuing, Minister for Health in South Australia, to pay 90 per cent of the schedule fee, is the most generous offer made by any State government to hospital doctors in any State in Australia. Mr NEHL —My question is directed to the Treasurer. Mr Brumby —Get your hand out of your pocket! Mr NEHL —It is quite comfortable there, thank you. In view of the appalling experience which many elderly Australians have had with the curtilage provisions of the iniquitous assets test, will the Treasurer inform the House what is the area of curtilage which the Government defines as reasonable for the purpose of exempting a taxpayer's `principal residence and reasonable curtilage' from the application of the capital gains tax, as stated on page 10 of the Treasurer's statement on the reform of the Australian taxation system? If it has not yet been defined, when will the Treasurer advise the people of Australia on this important, indeed vital, detail of his tax package? Mr KEATING —The honourable member asked when these details will be announced. They will be announced in due time when the Government brings in the legislation for the capital gains tax, which will be next year. It may well suit the Government to provide some of the details earlier, but if not, they will be provided when the legislation is introduced. Dr KLUGMAN —Has the Minister for Health seen the alleged statement by Professor Penington that a government funded fee for service medical scheme is likely to lead to a huge and unacceptable transfer of money from taxpayers to medical practitioners? Does the work of the Public Accounts Committee suggest similar results? Will he expedite moves to increase the proportion of medical services paid for by alternative methods, such as health maintenance organisations, salaries and sessional fees? Dr BLEWETT —Professor Penington did me the courtesy of sending me a copy of his speech before he delivered it. I must say that I found his comments on acquired immune deficiency syndrome sensible, non-alarmist and cautionary. I have, of course, some disagreement with other parts of his speech. But the most important of those disagreements is with his suggestion that this Government may lack the strength to tackle overservicing by doctors. Mr JULL —The Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism will be aware that the Australian Tourist Commission's annual report shows that the biggest percentage increase in tourists coming to Australia is from Japan. While acknowledging the success of the Hogan campaign in the United States and the money involved, is it a fact that funds for tourism promotion in Japan have been reduced this year, despite this great potential? Has the Minister also stated that apart from funding problems, Australia does not have the accommodation to handle any more Japanese visitors, despite occupancy rates on the Gold Coast and in Cairns being at 60 per cent? Will the Minister assure the House that future tourism promotion in Japan will continue and, in fact, be upgraded? Mr JOHN BROWN —I thank the honourable member for his question. He is probably the only member on that side of the House, either in this Opposition or in the previous Government, who knows anything about tourism. The facts as outlined by the honourable member are to some extent correct. I will not accept his proposition that funds for- Mr Sinclair —I hope you have done better than you have done with the Australian Institute of Sport. Mr JOHN BROWN —Do you ever shut up and let anyone speak? Mr SPEAKER —Order! I suggest to the Leader of the National Party that it is inappropriate to be carrying on in this way. I call the Minister. Mr JOHN BROWN —This is quite an important question; I would like to be able to answer it. The increase in tourism from Japan is exactly as the honourable member described it. That increase is despite several difficulties. Firstly, I refer to the difficulty in getting more aeroplane seats between Australia and Japan. I guess it is fair to note that the Minister for Aviation has approved some charter flights into Cairns by All Nippon Airways. Of course, there are difficulties in getting the Japanese Government to agree to increase flights to and from Japan. There are other inherent difficulties in coping with Japanese tourism and the expectations of Japanese tourists. I think probably it is realistic to relate the instance of the increase in Japanese tourism to Europe 20 years ago. When the Japanese started to go to Europe in large numbers they were disappointed to find that the accommodation was not up to scratch, there were difficulties in obtaining Japanese-speaking guides; in fact, there were all sorts of inherent difficulties that made life difficult for non-English speaking tourists. We are very concerned that as this increase in tourism from Japan continues-it has increased by 50 per cent this year-we will be able to cope with the expectations of these tourists. It is pleasing to note the huge increase in investment in Australia by Japanese interests in the provision of hotels. Of course, in Queensland we now have two hotels financed on the Gold Coast by Japanese interests. We now have three hotels in Sydney being financed by Japanese interests. All around Australia there are hotels being set up especially to cater for Japanese visitors. As I understand the Iwasaki project on the Queensland coast at Yeppoon, it is to open in March. I had a visit from Mr Iwasaki this week. He has given me an unequivocal assurance that the first 100 rooms will open in March, and that the number will be increased as the year goes on. I would have liked to be able to tell the honourable member for Fadden that our proposed program of advertisements featuring Paul Hogan in Japan this year had gone ahead. However, we were advised not to advertise. It appears that although Hogan will be just as successful in Japan as he was in the United States the great increase in the number of Japanese who will want to come to Australia as a result of those advertisements will mean that those Japanese will have great difficulty in finding plane seats. This year there has been an increase of 83 per cent in the number of plane seats available on flights between Australia and Japan. However, it is still not enough to cope with the expectations of people who will want to come. I think it is a fairly healthy comment on tourism in Australia that we have a market in Japan ready to exploit but are not yet able to do so. I hope that we can exploit that within the progress of the next two years. To answer the honourable member's original question, there will be a large increase in the funds available for the promotion of tourism from Japan; secondly, there will be more plane seats available and, by that time, the infrastructure will be in place in Australia to cope with those Japanese tourists to make their stay very enjoyable. Finally, I must mention that the presidents of the 14 largest Japanese travel agencies have been in Australia in the last month as guests of the Australian Tourist Commission. They have had a tour from Perth to Cairns. I had a meeting with them in Sydney. I must say they were absolutely delighted, first of all with the attitude expressed to them-not on any official basis-by people working in hotels, restaurants and shops which they visited unofficially, in terms of welcoming Japanese visits. I think that is a manifestation of Australia's welcome towards Japanese. Fortunately, the xenophobia we had seems to have disappeared. They were welcomed with open arms. Those people went home very satisfied that in fact Australia is the coming destination for Japanese tourists. I can assure honourable members that we will be doing all we can to see that the huge market up there awaiting exploitation will in fact be treated in that way. Ms McHUGH —Can the Minister for Science inform the House on the progress that the vessel Icebird is making to free the Nella Dan? Mr BARRY JONES —The latest information we have is of 12.30 today. The Nella Dan has been entrapped since 23 October-now 37 days. The Nella Dan has 67 crew and expeditioners on board. One Danish crew member died as a result of an accident on 20 October. The situation now is that the Icebird which, of course, is a much bigger ship, with much superior ice breaking capacity than the Nella Dan, is steaming in the direction of the Nella Dan at about half speed-at about seven nautical miles an hour. The Nella Dan has been trying to chip its way out of the ice and at one stage was proceeding at a rate of 100 metres a day. This was at a very heavy fuel cost. The Nella Dan is now 30 tonnes of fuel light on what it needs to get back. Therefore, it will be necessary to transfer fuel in very difficult seas from the Icebird to the Nella Dan. The Icebird is due to reach the 10-kilometre wide iceflow where the Nella Dan is trapped in Amundsen Bay some time tomorrow morning eastern summer time. The Icebird is currently 120 nautical miles north of Nella Dan's position. It is currently moving through the pack ice at about half speed, that is, at about 7 knots. At present the Nella Dan is stationary with its engines off to conserve fuel. There has been a blizzard there for the last 48 hours, with easterly winds. The winds have closed up the pack ice and Dr Knowles Kerry, the leader of the expedition, cannot see open water or leads from the ship. It will be necessary to use helicopters from Icebird in order to direct the Nella Dan. The Nella Dan is an amazing ship. We have had the Nella Dan for over 25 seasons. There is no question that in all the history of polar exploration the Nella Dan has the most amazing record. It has been a very worrying period. I am sure that honourable members would want me to pass on our relief and good wishes to Captain Aarne Sorenson and Dr Knowles Kerry, the leader of the expedition. Mr WILLIS(Gellibrand-Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations) —For the information of honourable members I present the Department of Employment and Industrial Relations annual report for 1984-85. The report also incorporates the anual report of the National Director of the Commonwealth Employment Service. Mr WILLIS(Gellibrand-Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations) —For the information of honourable members I present the text of the following International Labour Organisation instruments, together with a text of a statement relating to these instruments: Convention 142, concerning vocational guidance and vocational training and the development of human resources; Convention 150, concerning labour administration, role functions and organisation; and recommendation 169, concerning employment policy. Motion (by Mr Young) proposed: That the House take note of the paper. Mr N. A. BROWN(Menzies)(2.49) — The Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations (Mr Willis) has tabled a statement in support of the ratification of the two International Labour Organisation conventions. The Minister spoke glowingly in his statement which he tabled today about Convention 150 which calls for what is referred to as a co-ordinated system of labour administration which is based on consultation, co-operation and negotiation between public authorities and the most representative organisations of employers and of workers. In the course of that he gives another hurrah for the prices and incomes accord. It is quite obvious from reading the statement and from looking at the history of the Government that so far as the prices and incomes accord is concerned both the Government and, in particular, the Minister know nothing about consultation, co-operation and negotiation on industrial matters. It is a complete sham to pretend that it is interested in any of this. What it is really interested in is not so much the consultation, co-operation and negotiation which the International Labour Organisation talks about, but what it is interested in really and what it actively promotes is to allow the trade union movement to manipulate events and bludgeon concessions out of employers to the long term detriment of this country. There can be no real negotiation-and it is negotiation that the ILO conventions talk about-when the Government gives the game away by entering into the accord in the first place. It was, we say, an abandonment of all national responsibility for the Government to give away the September national wage case in advance, to give away the April 1986 national wage case in advance, and to give away the productivity case as in fact it has done. So, it is not interested in negotiations. It is interested in fixes and it is interested in rigging to get concessions for the unions which, frankly, this country cannot afford. But we believe that its most shameful failure to live up to this lofty principle of negotiation, which is espoused by the International Labour Organisation and which is said to be promoted by the Minister today, is its disgraceful performance over superannuation which we have seen over the last few days. The Government, instead of setting up a framework for negotiation, which the ILO speaks of so far as superannuation is concerned, is setting up a framework for some new generation of Jimmy Hoffas who are going to get control over millions of dollars of assets in this country, millions of dollars of funds which workers themselves are entitled to and which will, of course, be used to advance the interests of the unions. In fact, the Government is allowing at least three things to happen. First, it is allowing and in fact encouraging some trade unions to get their hands on millions of dollars. Motion (by Mr Young) put: That the question be now put. The House divided. (Mr Speaker-Hon. Harry Jenkins) Ayes . . . . . . . . . . . 76 Noes . . . . . . . . . . . 46 —— Majority . . . . . . . . . 30 —— Baldwin, P. J. Jones, BarryBeazley, K. C. Keating, P. J.Beddall. D. P. Kelly, R. J.Bilney, G. N. Kent, L.Blanchard, C. A. Keogh, L. J.Blewett, N. Kerin, J. C.Brown, John Klugman, R. E.Brown, Robert Lamb, A. H.Brumby, J. M. Langmore, J. V.Campbell, G. Lee, M.Charles, D. E. Lindsay, E. J.Charlesworth, R. I. McHugh, J.Child, J. McLeay, LeoChynoweth, R. L. Maher, M. J.Cleeland, P. R. Martin, S. P.Cohen, B. Mayer, H.Cross, M. D. Mildren, J. B.Cunningham, B. T. (Teller) Milton, P.Darling, E. E. Morris, AllanDawkins, J. S. Morris, PeterDubois, S. G. Mountford, J. G.Duffy, M. J. O'Keefe, N. P.Fatin, W. F. O'Neil, L. R. T.Fitzgibbon, E. J. Price, L. R. S.Free, R. V. Punch, G. F.Gayler, J. Saunderson, J.Gear, G. Scholes, G. G. D.Gorman, R. N. J. Scott, J. L. (Teller)Grace, E. L. Simmons, D. W.Griffiths, A. G. Snow, J. H.Hand, G. L. Staples, P. R.Hayden, W. G. Theophanous, A. C.Holding, A. C. Tickner, R. E.Hollis, C. Uren, T.Howe, B. L. West, S. J.Hurford, C. J. Willis, R.Jacobi, R. Wright, K. W.Jakobsen, C. A. Young, M. J. Adermann, A. E. Lloyd, B.Andrew, J. N. (Teller) McArthur, F. S.Beale, J. H. McGauran, P. J.Brown, N. A. Macphee, I. M.Burr, M. A. Miles, C. G.Cameron, Donald Nehl, G. B.Cameron, Ian Peacock, A. S.Carlton, J. J. Porter, J. R.Cobb, M. R. Reith, P. K.Connolly, D. M. Robinson, IanCowan, D. B. Rocher, A. C.Downer, A. J. G. Ruddock, P. M.Drummond, P. H. Sharp, J.Edwards, Harry Shipton, R. F.Fife, W. C. Sinclair, I. McC.Goodluck, B. J. Slipper, P. N.Hall, Steele Smith, W.Halverson, R. G. Spender, J. M.Hawker, D. P. M. Tuckey, C. W.Hicks, N. J. (Teller) Watson, DavidHodges, J. C. Webster, A. P.Hodgman, W. M. White, P. N. D.Jull, D. F. Wilson, I. B. C. Humphreys, B. C. Aldred, K. J. Question so resolved in the affirmative. Original question resolved in the affirmative. Mr SPEAKER —I am aware that an arrangement has been made. Mr N. A. BROWN(Menzies) —I accept the invitation of the Special Minister of State (Mr Young) and I seek leave to table my statement. Leave granted. Mr Sinclair —On a point of order, I wish to clear up a matter of procedure. It is of concern that today there are five more statements about to be tabled in the House. We have asked the Leader of the House (Mr Young) that in respect of each of them there be a motion that the House take note of them. I draw the attention of the Leader of the House to page 533 of Pettifer's House of Representatives Practice where it refers to the practice that when statements are made by the Government there be an opportunity for a response by the Opposition. Some of the statements to be made certainly canvass procedures that will be before the House next year. I seek from the Minister an assurance that in those instances, where there are statements that relate to matters of concern to the Opposition-for example, there is one from the Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr Hayden) regarding the conduct of Australian companies with interests in the Republic of South Africa-there will be a debate. I understand the time constraints. However, given that the matters are to be adjourned for the time being, I ask that wherever possible there be an opportunity for some response in this Parliament because they are matters of fairly wide public concern. Mr SPEAKER —Order! The Leader of the National Party was raising not so much a point of order as asking leave to raise a question. The Leader of the House may wish to respond. Mr YOUNG(Port Adelaide-Leader of the House) —I find no difficulty with the request of the Manager of Opposition Business (Mr Sinclair). In fact, in the statements I was tabling, both on procedures and members' interests, honourable members will see that we are suggesting that both matters be debated very early in the autumn session. I do not think that the Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr Hayden) would have any difficulty with the question of a debate taking place on his statement. The undertaking requested by the Opposition- Mr Sinclair —There is a report on aged migrants and one on Medicare benefits. There are three of them. Mr YOUNG —I am not too sure about the Medicare Benefits Review Committee. The Minister for Health (Dr Blewett) does wish to make a short statement on that today. The main bulk of the statements will be debated when we come back. The Opposition has my assurance on that. The Minister for Health will be making a short statement and we are quite willing for the Opposition spokesman to have the same time. Mr YOUNG(Port Adelaide-Special Minister of State) —For the information of honourable members I present the text of a statement relating to the response to the first report of the Committee on Procedure. Mr YOUNG(Port Adelaide-Special Minister of State) —For the information of honourable members I present the text of a statement relating to the Government's response to the report of the Committee on Members' Interests. Mr YOUNG(Port Adelaide-Special Minister of State) —For the information of honour-able members I present a schedule of the Government responses to parliamentary committee reports. I seek leave to have the schedule incorporated in Hansard. Leave granted. The schedule read as follows- GOVERNMENT RESPONSES TO PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEE REPORTS House of Representatives Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs 1. ASBESTOS MINING EFFECTS ON THE BARYULGIL COMMUNITY-TABLED 9.10.84. There have been detailed consultation with the New South Wales Government on the proposals to implement many of the recommendations of the report. The government is shortly to consider the outcome of this consultation and will respond as quickly as possible after that. Joint Standing Committee on Australian Capital Territory 1. RETAIL TRADING HOURS IN THE ACT-TABLED 21.10.82; INTERIM RESPONSE 15.12.83; FINAL RESPONSE TABLED 21.11.85 2. PARLIAMENTARY ZONE DRAFT DEVELOPMENT PLAN-TABLED 1.3.84 The Joint Committee on the ACT in its report of March 1984 on the draft Parliamentary Zone Development Plan, prepared by the National Capital Development Commission, gave ``in-principle'' approval to the proposals contained in the draft Plan. I wish however to inform Honourable Members that in May 1984 the Government considered the Development Plan for the Parliamentary Zone and decided that it provided a suitable basis for submission to the relevant Parliamentary Committees for approval of proposals for the Mall, Watergate and lake foreshore, access roads and lighting under the Parliament Act 1974 and the Seat of Government (Administration) Act 1910. As appropriate opportunities arise the Mall area has been considered as a suitable location for buildings of national or governmental significance having appropriate architectural merit. The Development Plan has been refined and further developed by the NCDC to incorporate the proposed national Archive and Exposition, various Bicentennial commemoration proposals and associated roadworks. The NCDC will shortly be bringing forward a revised Development Plan for the Parliamentary Zone for the Government's consideration as a prelude to submission to the relevant Parliamentary Committees for their consideration and report to the Parliament. Arrangements will also be made to ensure that, as the Joint Committee on the ACT has requested, all Members and Senators have an opportunity to examine the proposals. A final response to the Committee's report will be made after the Government has considered the revised Development Plan. 3. THE MURRUMBIDGEE RIVER IN THE A.C.T. REGION-TABLED 11.9.84-RESPONSE TABLED 28.11.85 House of Representatives Standing Committee on Environment and Conservation 1. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION-ADEQUACY OF LEGISLATIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE ARRANGEMENTS-2ND REPORT TABLED 27.10.81 A response is nearing completion and is expected to be presented to the House in the near future. 2. HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL WASTE STORAGE, TRANSPORT AND DISPOSAL-1ST REPORT TABLED 29.4.82 The Commonwealth has initiated consultations with the wide range of interested parties concerned with disposal of hazardous wastes. Following a national conference on 19-20 November 1985 which the Commonwealth co-sponsored, it is proposed that a response to the first report will be finalised for presentation early in the Autumn 1986 Sittings of Parliament. 3. 2ND REPORT TABLED 9.12.82-The Government is currently considering proposals for a national chemicals notification and assessment scheme, a matter which was central to this Parliamentary Committee report. When this is finalised a response to the report will be provided. 4. BUSHFIRES AND THE AUSTRALIAN ENVIRONMENT-TABLED 4.10.84 A response to the Report has been finalised and, will be presented to the House in the near future. 5. PROTECTION OF THE GREATER DAINTREE-TABLED 24.8.84 Protection of the Greater Daintree area is being dealt with by the Government in the broader context of developing a rainforest conservation policy for Australia. The Minister for Arts, Heritage and Environment established a Working Group to advise him on the development of a Commonwealth Rainforest Conservation Policy. The Working Group reported to the Minister and recommended a comprehensive and flexible package to promote rainforest conservation. The Minister has sought the views of relevant Commonwealth and State Ministers and non-government organisations on the Report and has made it available for public comment. Based on the Report and comments received the Minister will shortly bring forward proposals for rainforest conservation for consideration by the Government. 6. PROTECTION OF BUNGLE BUNGLE-TABLED 28.3.85 The Western Australian Government carried out a separate inquiry into the conservation status of the Bungle Bungle area. A necessary first step in formulating the Commonwealth Government's response to the Standing committee Report is to seek the views of the Western Australian Government on the nature and timing of any decisions following from the State inquiry, and on the recommendations of the Standing Committee. The Prime Minister has written to the Premier of Western Australia concerning these matters. 7. THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION (IMPACT OF PROPOSALS) ACT 1974-TABLED 24.5.85 The Minister is expected to respond in the near future. 8. PROTECTION OF THE GREAT BARRIER REEF-TABLED 12.11.85 Response to be made in the 1986 Autumn Sittings. House of Representatives Standing Committee on Expenditure 1. ACCOMMODATION AND HOME CARE FOR THE AGED-TABLED 28.10.82-FOLLOW UP REPORT TABLED 10.10 84 The Government has responded to many of the key recommendations of the reports through its initiatives in the field of aged care. These include the extablishment of the Department of Community Services which brings together related functions concerning the aged which were previously located in other departments, the creation of the Office for the Aged and the introduction of the Home and Community Care Program. 2. REVIEW OF THE AUDITOR-GENERAL'S EFFICIENCY AUDIT REPORT ON NURSING HOMES-TABLED 25.2.82 No response necessary. 3. TELECOM'S ZONAL CHARGING POLICIES-TABLED 4.10.84-FINAL RESPONSE MADE 15.11.85 4. ABORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION (INTERIM REPORT)-TABLED 5.10.84-FINAL REPORT 22.5.85-FINAL RESPONSE MADE 9.10.85 5. CONTROL OF PROHIBITED IMMIGRATION BY THE DEPARTMENT OF IMMIGRATION AND ETHNIC AFFAIRS-TABLED 13.11.85 Response to be made in the 1986 Autumn Sittings. Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence 1. THE JACKSON REPORT ON AUSTRALIA'S OVERSEAS AID PROGRAM-TABLED 24.5.85-FINAL RESPONSE MADE 26.11.85 Joint Standing Committee on New Parliament House 1. FUTURE USE OF THE PROVISIONAL PARLIAMENT HOUSE-TABLED 7.6.84-INTERIM RESPONSE 21.3.85-FINAL RESPONSE MADE 28.11.85. House of Representatives Standing Committee on Procedures 1. ALTERNATIVE OPPORTUNITIES OF MEMBERS TO CONCISELY ADDRESS THE HOUSE-tabled 13.8.85-Response to be made 29.11.85. House of Representatives Standing Committee on Transport Safety 1. EDUCATION TRAINING AND LICENSING OF DRIVERS-TABLED 6.5.82. While it was envisaged that the Government's response to the Report and the statement would be tabled during the 1985 Budget Sittings, there are a number of initiatives currently in train which should be included in the statement. There is, however, a need for further development and consultation with other interested parties before these initiatives are finalised. The final response should be ready for tabling early in the 1986 Autumn Sittings. 2. ROAD SAFETY GENERALLY-TABLED 8.10.84-FINAL RESPONSE MADE 27.11.85. Joint Select Committee on Parliamentary Privilege 1. (MR SPENDER) FINAL REPORT-TABLED 3.10.84. The Report raises a number of complex and substantial issues relating to Parliamentary Privilege. The Government is considering the matter in conjuction with the Parliament (Powers Privileges and Immunities) Bill 1985 introduced by the Member for North Sydney. It is expected that a response to the report will be given shortly. Mr Adermann —I rise on a point of order. Is it necessary to have a motion to take note of those papers? Mr SPEAKER —If I might explain, the Leader of the National Party, by indulgence, raised the general question of these matters and whether they could be brought forward. The Leader of the House has given him an undertaking that they will be listed for discussion. Mr Adermann —I raise this question because I did not know whether it covered that eventuality. Mr SPEAKER —I understand that that agreement given openly in Parliament has apparently satisfied the Manager of Opposition Business. Mr Shipton —I rise on a point of order. Will the text of those statements be recorded in Hansard even though they are not spoken in the House? Mr SPEAKER —No. They will be available because they have been presented, but, no, I still have not been circumvented in my ruling that we do not incorporate speeches in Hansard. Mr N. A. Brown —I thought of trying that. Mr SPEAKER —I find some of it very trying, yes. Mr HAYDEN(Oxley-Minister for Foreign Affairs) —For the information of honourable members I present the text of an Australian Code of Conduct for Australian Companies with Interests in the Republic of South Africa and the text of a statement concerning that code. Motion (by Mr Young) proposed: That the House take note of the paper. Debate (on motion by Mr Sinclair) adjourned. Mr HURFORD(Adelaide-Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs) —For the information of honourable members I present a report by the Council of the Australian Institute of Multicultural Affairs entitled `Aging in a multicultural society-the situation of migrants from non-English speaking countries', and a supplementary report entitled `Age migrants to Australia-assurances of support under sponsorship for family migration', together with the text of the statement relating to the reports. Motion (by Mr Young) proposed: That the House take note of the paper. Debate adjourned. Mr HURFORD(Adelaide-Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs) —For the information of honourable members I present a statement on expenditure from the Advance to the Minister for Finance for October 1985. Mr PETER MORRIS(Shortland-Minister for Transport) —For the information of honourable members I present the Australian National Railways Commission annual report for 1984-85. Mr PETER MORRIS(Shortland-Minister for Transport) —Pursuant to section 35 of the Australian Shipping Commission Act 1956, I present the Australian Shipping Commission annual report for the year ended 30 June 1985. Mr SCHOLES(Corio-Minister for Territories) —For the information of honourable members I present the Australian Capital Territory Architects Board annual report for 1984-85. Mr SCHOLES(Corio-Minister for Territories) —Pursuant to section 63H of the Audit Act 1908, I present the National Exhibition Centre Trust annual report for 1984-85. Mr DUFFY(Holt-Minister for Communications) —Pursuant to section 37 of the Law Reform Commission Act 1973, I present the Law Reform Commission report No. 28 on Community Law Reform for the Australian Capital Territory. Pursuant to section 37 of the Law Reform Commission Act 1973 I present the Law Reform Commission report No. 27 entitled `Standing in Public Interest Litigation'. Dr BLEWETT(Bonython-Minister for Health) —For the information of honourable members I present the first report of the Medicare Benefits Review Committee. I seek leave of the House to make a brief statement. Leave granted. Dr BLEWETT —Honourable members will recall that on 13 July 1984 I announced the establishment of the Medicare Benefits Review Committee, chaired by Her Honour Judge Robyn Layton. The Committee also included Dr David Formby and Dr George Repin representing the Australian Medical Association, Dr Brian Shea representing the States and Territories and Dr Ron Wells and Dr John Donovan who shared representation from the Commonwealth Department of Health. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the members of the Committee for the considerable time spent and diligence displayed in preparing this comprehensive report. The first report of the Review Committee addresses item 2 of the terms of reference and deals with matters relating to the content, format, and structure of the medical benefits schedule. The report was submitted to me by the Chairperson of the Committee, Judge Layton, on November 7 this year, with a request that it be tabled and distributed as soon as possible. I have accepted this suggestion as many recommendations of the Committee are of importance to the general community and the medical profession. The full recommendations of the Medicare Benefits Review Committee will be considered by the Government following the receipt of the Committee's second report, which is expected to be finalised in the first half of 1986. Many of the 67 recommendations contained in this report have significant financial implications, which will require consideration in the 1986 Budget process. This will have to take account of the continuing need for reasonable restraint in government expenditures. To this end the implementation of some recommendations outlined in the report is likely to be dependent on other offsetting reductions in medical benefits expenditure. However, I can indicate to the House that those recommendations concerned with improving and streamlining administrative procedures will receive a high priority. For example, recommendations 14, 15, 16 and 17 deal with the system of referral of patients to medical specialists. The early implementation of these recommendations will benefit both patients and medical practitioners. Recommendation 26 concerning financial assistance to rural Australians for travel and accommodation costs incurred while seeking in-vitro fertilisation treatment at IVF centres in capital cities has already been implemented by my department. Financial assistance is currently provided to patients in these circumstances through the isolated patients travel and accommodation assistance scheme IPTAAS. I am also sympathic to the recommendations of the Committee on improving the format and structure of the medical benefits schedule book. My department is engaging a printing consultant to advise on these recommendations. The Medicare Benefits Review Committee is now proceeding with its second report which addresses item 1 of the terms of reference, that is, consideration of the extension of the Medicare arrangements to provide benefits for certain paramedical services. Following receipt of that report, the Government will be in a position to consider in detail the total package of recommendations. I commend the first report of the Medicare Benefits Review Committee to honourable members. Mr PORTER(Barker) —by leave-The Minister for Health (Dr Blewett) said that the Medicare Benefits Review Committee was set up in July 1984. The Minister had hoped that he would get a report from the Committee which would give him some justification to cut funding for medical benefits. The report in fact does not provide him with that support. Rather, it proposes a number of changes to the structure of the medical benefits schedule which, according to the Minister, will have significant financial implications. As a result of the Government's policy to encourage universal bulk billing, there has been an explosion in the cost of health care delivery in this country and, in particular, in medical benefits. The Budget indicates that this year medical benefits expenditure will increase by over 11 per cent and will involve an expenditure of some $2,250m. The forward estimates indicate that next year the rate of growth in expenditure will increase further to 14.8 per cent. The increase this September quarter compared with the previous September quarter was 16 per cent. So we can see that the rate of growth of expenditure on medical benefits has been very great under this Government's Medicare package. The very great degree of growth in medical benefits expenditure has meant that the Government has had to cut expenditure in other areas. It has had to cut public hospital funding to the great disadvantage of all of those who are now reliant on Medicare and have to join a queue to get into public hospitals. The Opposition is concerned about the way in which the Government will implement the propositions contained in the report. The Government is concerned about the significant financial implications of the report. The Minister said that the Government would have to take account of the continuing need for reasonable restraint in government expenditure. He went on to say that the Government will be looking at other offsetting reductions in medical benefits expenditure. Only this weekend members of the Press started to pick up the Government's concern, based on the forward estimates, about the growing expenditure on medical benefits. It was suggested at the weekend that the Government may well reconsider the option which was presented by Senator Walsh in the lead up to this year's Budget-that is, a reduction in the 85 per cent payment for items on the medical benefits schedule. In other words, it was suggested that there be a further reduction by the Government in payments for services rendered by doctors from 85 per cent to Senator Walsh's proposal of, I think, 75 per cent. It is quite clear that that is one of the issues that are now under consideration by the Minister for Health, and that is of real concern to us, the medical profession and Australians generally. At Question Time today we heard about the concern that is being expressed by South Australian country doctors who are very worried about the cuts they have suffered in their salaries as a result of Medicare. They now have to take 85 per cent of the cost of items on the medical benefits schedule instead of 100 per cent which they used to get. This has happened because people have given up private insurance as they were encouraged to do by the Minister for Health under his Medicare arrangements. Dr Blewett now comes into this place and says: `Why should they not take a 15 per cent cut in their salaries? We expect them to do so under Medicare and if John Olsen, the Leader of the Opposition in South Australia, is going to reimburse them for that cut in their salaries, he should not come to the Federal Government for the money to pay for that reimbursement.' This is a classical example of the Minister's socialist ideas. He believes that people such as doctors ought to take cuts in salaries for doing the work that they have always undertaken. He sees no reason why they should not have a cut in salary. In fact, he would prefer that they be employed by the Government on a salary. Obviously the continuing growth in medical benefits expenditure is of concern to the Government which is going to look at ways in which that expenditure can be reduced. The Opposition, the Australian public and especially, of course, the medical profession, believe that an 85 per cent cut in the reimbursement rate is totally unreasonable if the Government is going to maintain Medicare and not allow people to take out gap insurance. Such an arrangement will not be acceptable to the Australian community or the Opposition. The Government has to look at alternatives to the current Medicare arrangements. We will get a satisfactory health delivery system in this country only if a fundamental review of Medicare is undertaken. It is quite clear that the hospital system is on the verge of collapse. There is now more industrial strife in the hospital system and amongst the medical profession than there ever has been. Nurses are on strike and are resigning. Medical practitioners in New South Wales are threatening to once again withdraw their services. All of this has occurred as a result of Medicare; there is no other cause for the problems within the health profession at the moment. Those problems will continue and in fact will grow unless fundamental changes are made to Medicare. The people being disadvantaged by these problems are those seeking medical attention, especially welfare recipients, pensioners and others who cannot get into public hospital beds because of the queues that are being generated under Medicare. In view of time constraints, I will draw my speech to a conclusion. However, a number of very serious concerns have been raised by the report of a committee appointed by the Minister himself. Page 221 of the report points up the inconsistencies of the approach by the Government and the Minister to the medical benefits schedule. The report states: The committee considers that the Government leaves itself open to accusations that its policy on Medicare benefit payments lacks consistency. It certainly does lack consistency. The Minister has been totally inconsistent in the application of the medical benefits schedule and the extension of the schedule to a number of medical benefits items. However, I will not go into detail on that. I highlight the fact that the report criticises the Minister's carriage of his portfolio. It is a matter of real concern to the Opposition that this Government is not implementing a policy which ensures the provision of adequate health services to all Australians. We believe that there should be fundamental changes to Medicare. The Clerk —Petitions have been lodged for presentation as follows and copies will be referred to the appropriate Ministers: 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 sayeth: That we the undersigned are totally opposed to any taxation change which involves a tax on Health Fund contributions, health charges or benefits; That we are already required to pay a 1 percent levy to partly finance the Medicare scheme and that we would regard any further taxation of our health insurance arrangements as unfair and unreasonable; That therefore we urge the Government to ensure that there is no taxation on illness and no special taxation on those who seek to insure themselves against the cost of private health care. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Ewen Cameron,Mr Dobie,Mr Ruddock and Mr Shipton. 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 whereas: 1. They are completely satisfied with the design of the existing Australian National Flag. 2. They are aware it properly reflects the immutable characteristics of Australia, namely: (a) The Union Jack, itself the creation of three Christian Crosses, represents the Nationa's historical origin and the source of its language and law; (b) The Southern Cross on an azure blue background signifying its geographical location on this planet Earth; (c) The large star depicting the advent of Federation in 1901. 3. They know the Flag has been a source of inspiration to generations of Australians in peace and war. 4. They 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. They 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 be changed only with the approval of the Nation as expressed in a Referendum''. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Ewen Cameron,Mr Hawker and Mr Shipton. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of the undersigned 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 Fife. 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 the future; That the presence of the Union Jack on the flag represents not 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 Ruddock. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament. The petition of the undersigned respectfully showeth: Introduction of any additional capital gains taxes, wealth taxes or death duties is opposed on the grounds that: they adversely affect the small and medium size businesses in Australia, destroying incentive and discouraging investment in this important area of the economy; the Australian economy, and employment in particular, is heavily reliant on growth in small businesses; any capital gains that might result when owners of small businesses finally sell the business are not ``windfall gains'' but the result of many hard years of work and sacrifice, with very little being taken out of the business by way of salaries so that the maximum amount of money can be ploughed back into the business to create growth and jobs; the owners of small businesses often depend on a capital gain-which are simply deferred salaries-when they eventually sell their business to sustain them in retirement; Your Petitioners request that the House of Representatives, in Parliament assembled, will protect the rights of private enterprise and reject any inequitable additional taxes. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Cadman and Mr Ewen Cameron. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled: The Petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: That whereas the Commonwealth of Australia ratified the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women in 1983, the Government of Victoria is passing the Planning (Brothels) Act 1984 is in breach of Article 6 of the Convention which says that ``States Parties shall take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to suppress all forms of traffic in women and exploitation of prostitution of women''. That the Victorian Planning (Brothels) Act 1984 provides legal authority to brothel operators to traffic in and exploit the prostitution of women and to live off the earnings of prostitutes. That whereas the Federal Minister for Health has counselled citizens to shun promiscuity (The Australian 26.1.85) because of the serious and sometimes fatal health hazards, the operations of legalised brothels encourages promiscuity and the spread of diseases, including AIDS. Your petitioners therefore pray: That the Government of Australia having ratified the UN Convention on Women remain consistent in its obligations to uphold the Articles of the Convention and request the Victorian Government to immediately repeal the Planning (Brothels) Act 1984. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Halverson and Mr Hawker. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. This petition of concerned Australian citizens respectfully points out: That, for our survival, an effective Worldpeace Initiative needs to established which will work towards mutual understanding, world disarmament, economic well-being for all, fulfilling employment, a sustainable society conserving natural resources and revitalising soils essential for growing a plentiful and healthy food supply and tree cover. By achieving these objectives, Australia can set an example for the rest of the world to follow. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that your Honourable House will: 1. Create an Australian MINISTRY FOR PEACE specifically devoted to peace-building and the non-violent resolution of conflict; 2. Convene a national SUMMIT FOR SURVIVAL to discuss the issues of world disarmament, security and national and international co-operation; 3. Support the United Nations WORLD DISARMAMENT CAMPAIGN by allocating the equivalent of at least 10% of our military expenditure to fund peace activities; 4. Actively assist the INTERNATIONAL YEAR OF PEACE in 1986 by initiating programs for peace education, self help development and environmental repair; 5. Develop NATIONAL EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMS to give priority to the planting and growing of forests, food-producing trees and other crops to assist the greening of Australia. 6. Implement NATIONAL RECYCLING PROGRAMS to reuse water and to compost all presently wasted domestic sewage-sludge and organic garbage with mineral-rich gravel dust, a by-product from rock quarries and mines, into hygienic humus, a natural fertiliser, for use in revitalising impoverished soils. 7. Propose to the United Nations General Assembly that 1989 be declared INTERNATIONAL YEAR FOR REPAIRING THE EARTH. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Miles and Mr Tickner. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. This petition of concerned Australian citizens respectfully points out: That, for our survival, an effective Worldpeace Initiative needs to established which will work towards mutual understanding, world disarmament, economic well-being for all and full employment. This Initiative will help to ensure a sustainable society conserving natural resources, and revitalising soils essential for growing a plentiful and healthy food supply and tree cover. By achieving these objectives, Australia can set an example for the rest of the world to follow. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that your Honourable House will: 1. Propose to the United Nations General Assembly that 1989 be declared INTERNATIONAL YEAR FOR REPAIRING THE EARTH. 2. IMPLEMENT ACTION PROGRAMS LEADING UP TO 1989 WHICH WILL INCLUDE: (a) Actively supporting the INTERNATIONAL YEAR OF PEACE in 1986 by reallocating at least 10 percent of our military expenditure to fund environmental repair programs; (b) Implementing NATIONAL RECYCLING PROGRAMS to reuse water, and to compost into hygienic humus all presently wasted organic garbage and sewage-sludge mixed with fine ground powder from mineral-rich gravels and rocks, to use as a natural fertiliser in revitalising impoverished soils; (c) Developing NATIONAL EMPLOYMENT PROGRAMS to give priority to irrigation systems and the planting and growing of healthy forests, food-producing trees and other crops and vegetation to assist the greening of Australia. 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 Petition of the undersigned shows: That the proposed introduction of compulsory identification (ID) cards should be reconsidered and rejected because the system: (a) is not a cost-effective method of reducing tax evasion and social security fraud and, to the contrary, in the form proposed will facilitate such evasion and fraud; (b) will constitute an unwarranted infringement of individual privacy by the aggregation of a wide variety of personal information of a private nature; (c) will cause a further large and costly growth in the bureaucracy and burden on the taxpayer; and (d) cannot be guaranteed against misuse for purposes other than for which their introduction is stated to be intended and in fact provide the opportunity for blackmail and other forms of misuse. And your petitioners humbly pray that the problems which identification cards are intended to reduce should be attacked by other, more effective and less obnoxious methods. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Burr. 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 the Technical and Further Education Participation and Equity Programme established as the centre-piece for national youth policy, addresses the educational, social and employment needs of twenty-two thousand unemployed Australian youth. The intended 50% funding cuts will directly affect at least ten thousand already disadvantaged young people, denying them access to further education and potential employment. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray: (1) That the decision to cut the Participation and Equity Programme funding be reversed. (2) That the Participation and Equity Programme be guaranteed funding for 1987, and beyond. 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 the undersigned citizens respectfully showeth: 1. That we are completely dissatisfied with the pricing of petrol in this country; 2. That under a Labor Government petrol prices have continued to rise excessively, with recent Government decisions adding over 8c. per litre to the price of petrol in some country areas; 3. The proposed consumption tax could lead to a further rise of 6c. per litre; and 4. The high cost of petrol discriminates against country residents who rely on their cars for essential communication and transport. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that the Australian Government honour the commitment given by the Prime Minister during the 1983 election campaign to reduce petrol prices by 3c. per litre. Further we strongly urge the Government to adopt a petrol pricing policy which does not cause unnecessary rises in the cost of petrol. 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 humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: That in the light of the Labor Government's failure to act to correct the many anomalies in the Assets Test on pensions brought to its notice, the Labor Government's legislation should be repealed before it has an unduly unfair impact on pensioners. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled should immediately seek the repeal of the Labor Government's iniquitous and unfair Assets Test. 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 humble Petition of undersigned citizens of Australia respectfully showeth: That we believe reference to God should be made in the Australian National Anthem, as Australian life is based on faith in God, and therefore we believe inclusion of His name is appropriate and desirable. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that the last line of each verse of the Australian National Anthem be altered to read, ``In joyful strains then let us sing God Bless Australia Fair''. 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 humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Australia, respectfully showeth: That the proposed Australian Bill of Rights Bill 1985 will endanger the Federal system in Australia, the State and Federal criminal justice systems, the State and Federal Police Force, the State and Federal education systems, the independence of the churches and religious associations, marriage and the family, children, the unborn, the handicapped, the aged and the infirm, employer and employee relationships and Australian society generally. Your petitioners therefore humbly pray: That your Honourable House defer debate on the Bill for twelve months and circulate the Bill for twelve months for the widest possible debate, scrutiny and discussion, and your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Sinclair. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Richmond Electorate respectfully showeth that: The proposed capital gains tax penalises small business, discourages long-term investment, hinders capital formation and will freeze existing investment patterns and limits the investors' ability to adjust to changed market conditions. Your petitioners humbly pray that the House of Representatives, in Parliament assembled, urge the Government to: Immediately abandon its ill-considered capital gains tax proposal. 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 the Federal Division of Fisher respectfully showeth that: The proposed capital gains tax penalises small business, discourages long-term investment, hinders capital formation and will freeze existing investment patterns and limits the investors' ability to adjust to changed market conditions. Your petitioners humbly pray that the House of Representatives, in Parliament assembled, urge the Government to: Immediately abandon its ill-considered capital gains tax proposal. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Slipper. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of Richmond electorate respectfully showeth that: Whereas the present Government of the Commonwealth of Australia has announced its intention to present the Title Deeds to Ayers Rock in Central Australia, currently the joint property of the people of the Commonwealth to an Aboriginal Land Council on 26 October 1985. Whereas opinion polls and statements of representative groups, Members of Parliament and respected individuals show clearly that the Commonwealth Government has no mandate from the citizens of the Commonwealth to act in this manner. Whereas the present Government claims to be totally opposed to apartheid (separate development) in South Africa but is handing over Ayers Rock to an Aboriginal Council in support of a policy of apartheid (separate development) which has been shown to be detrimental to the Aboriginal people of Australia. Whereas it is pursuing this policy making it a crime for most white and many Aboriginals to enter, without permit, large areas of the Commonwealth designated apartheid (i.e., set aside for separate development), contrary to our democratic traditions and experience of freedom of movement for citizens of all racial origins within Australia. Whereas Australian citizens have no present means available to them to prevent this violation of their natural rights to unfettered common ownership of, and access to, a treasured natural asset. Your petitioners humbly pray that the House of Representatives, in Parliament assembled, urge the Government to: Seek means available for the protection of the people's interests to prevent this outrage and preserve the democratic traditions of Australia. 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 the electorate of Fisher respectfully showeth that: Whereas the present Government of the Commonwealth of Australia has purported to present the Title Deeds to Ayers Rock in Central Australia, in reality the joint property of the people of the Commonwealth to an Aboriginal Land Council on 26 October 1985. Whereas opinion polls and statements of representative groups, Members of Parliament and respected individuals show clearly that the Commonwealth Government had no mandate from the citizens of the Commonwealth to act in such a disgraceful manner. Whereas the present Government claims to be totally opposed to apartheid (separate development) in South Africa but purported to hand over Ayers Rock to an Aboriginal Council in support of a policy of apartheid (separate development) which has been shown to be detrimental to the Aboriginal people of Australia. Whereas it is pursuing this policy making it a crime for most white and many Aboriginals to enter, without permit, large areas of the Commonwealth designated apartheid (i.e., set aside for separate development), contrary to our democratic traditions and experience of freedom of movement for citizens of all racial origins within Australia. Whereas Australian citizens have no present means available to them to prevent this violation of their natural rights to unfettered common ownership of, and access to, a treasured natural asset. Your petitioners humbly pray that the House of Representatives, in Parliament assembled, urge the Government to: Seek means available for the protection of the people's interests to reverse this outrage and preserve the democratic traditions of Australia. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Slipper. Petition to the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: the humble petition of the undersigned citizens of South Australia showeth that: Your petitioners pray that Your Honourable House will reject the proposed Australian Bill of Rights Bill 1985 for the following reasons: 1. We believe as a matter of faith and judgment that the proposed legislation is anti-God and its implementation will result in attacks on the Christian church and the promotion of a State religion based on secular humanism; 2. That there is no need for legislation of this kind since the principles of freedom are already enshrined in Common Law and that it will cause more problems than it seeks to solve; 3. That there is a potential threat to our national security through making treaties of this kind with foreign nations, many of which do not share common heritage and do not practice many of the principles that they have covenanted to uphold; 4. The methods being used to introduce this legislation are secretive and a blatant misuse of the external affairs powers under Section 51 of the Australian Constitution and that furthermore are contrary to the spirit of the Constitution; 5. That the implementation of the legislation through a process of new educational initiatives will result in the centralised control of education and this will inevitably lead to the destruction of the States' rights. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Downer. Petition to the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled: the humble petition of the undersigned citizens of South Australia showeth that: Your petitioners pray that Your Honourable House will reject the proposed Australian Bill of Rights Bill 1985 for the following reasons: 1. We believe as a matter of faith and judgment that the proposed legislation is anti-God and its implementation will result in attacks on the Christian church and the promotion of a State religion based on secular humanism; 2. That there is no need for legislation of this kind since the principles of freedom are already enshrined in Common Law and that it will cause more problems than it seeks to solve; 3. That there is a potential threat to our national security through making treaties of this kind with foreign nations, many of which do not share common heritage and do not practice many of the principles that they have covenanted to uphold; 4. The methods being used to introduce this legislation are secretive and a blatant misuse of the external affairs powers under Section 51 of the Australian Constitution and that furthermore are contrary to the spirit of the Constitution; 5. That the implementation of the legislation through a process of new educational initiatives will result in the centralised control of education and this will inevitably lead to the destruction of States' rights. And your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray. by Mr Steele Hall. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled the humble petition of the undersigned citizens of the Australian Capital Territory and New South Wales respectfully showeth that we strongly support the immediate establishment of an FM public radio station devoted to music and the arts in Canberra and Queanbeyan and protest against the recent decision of the Australian Broadcasting Tribunal to grant an FM public licence to a racing and sporting group and your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Langmore. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of certain citizens of the Federal Division of Fisher in Queensland respectfully showeth: That the actions of trade unions have gone beyond their traditional goals of protecting workers conditions and rates of pay and have reached the point where they are seriously affecting the economic health of the nation and the people. Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray: 1. That all Governments throughout Australia acknowledge and protect the Right to Work on behalf of all Australians. 2. That the total sovereignty of individual governments be recognised as a fundamental requirement of a workable, balanced Federal system of government. 3. That all necessary steps be taken to protect the citizens of Australia from any inducement, compulsion, threat or intimidation to join any trade union. 4. That there should be no preference in employment for people who are members of trade unions. 5. That the supremacy of elected governments over the sectional interests of trade unions be recognised, and 6. That the provision of essential services be maintained, free from industrial disruption. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Slipper. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of the Shire of Caboolture respectfully showeth that: The proposed capital gains tax penalises small business, discourages long-term investment, hinders capital formation and will freeze existing investment patterns and limits the investors' ability to adjust to changed market conditions. Your petitioners humbly pray that the House of Representatives, in Parliament assembled, urge the Government to: Immediately abandon its ill-considered capital gains tax proposal. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Slipper. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of the Federal Division of Fisher respectfully showeth that: The ban by the Hawke Socialist Government on negative gearing and restrictions on property depreciation will adversely affect thousands of disadvantaged people who rent their homes. Your petitioners humbly pray that the House of Representatives, in Parliament assembled, urge the Government to: End its ill-considered and discriminatory policy on rented property and allow depreciation on all buildings used to produce rental income. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Slipper. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of certain citizens of the Federal Division of Fisher in Queensland respectfully showeth: That the Hawke Socialist Government be called upon to remove the unjust and cruel Assets Test; That the Assets Test discriminates grossly against those people living on acreage blocks or in rural areas; That the introduction of the Government's grab for the assets of senior citizens is condemned as un-Australian; That the Government is requested to reconsider the Assets Test. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Slipper. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of the Federal Division of Fisher respectfully showeth that: The total disallowance by the Hawke Labor Government of tax deductability for entertainment and hospitality expenses will unfairly penalise Australian business and cost thousands of jobs for young and unskilled people. Your petitioners humbly pray that the House of Representatives, in Parliament assembled, urge the Government to: Abandon its total ban on entertainment expenses and allow tax deductability for legitimate and necessary expenses. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Slipper. To the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled. The petition of certain citizens of the Federal Division of Fisher in Queensland respectfully showeth: 1. They are completely satisfied with the design of the existing Australian National Flag. 2. They are aware it properly reflects the immutable characteristics of Australia, namely: (a) The Union Jack, itself the creation of three Christian Crosses, represents the Nation's historical origin and the source of its language and law; (b) The Southern Cross on an azure blue background signifying its geographical location on this planet Earth; (c) The large star depicting the advent of Federation in 1901. 3. They know the Flag has been a source of inspiration to generations of Australians in peace and war. 4. They 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. They 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 sacrosant from change''. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Slipper. To the Right Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives of the Commonwealth in Parliament assembled. The humble petition of the undersigned citizens of New South Wales respectfully showeth: That they oppose the construction of any additional nuclear reactor at the Australian Atomic Energy Establishment at Lucas Heights in N.S.W. Your petitioners therefore pray that the Government of Australia will not construct an additional Nuclear Reactor at Lucas Heights. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. by Mr Tickner. Petitions received. Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER(Mr Mountford) —Mr Speaker has received a letter from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the honourable member for Menzies (Mr N. A. Brown), proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely: The escalation of industrial action in breach of the wages/prices accord and in pursuit of union claims for superannuation. I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places. More than the number of members required by the Standing Orders having risen in their places- Motion (by Mr Young) put: That the business of the day be called on. Mr N. A. Brown-A division is not required in the interests of time, and only in the interests of time. Mr Holding-Ha, ha! Mr N. A. Brown-There is no need to cackle in that half-stupid way. It was the result of a discussion I had with the Leader of the House (Mr Young). Get back in your box! Simply in the interests of time, we are not calling for a division, but we must register our strong disapproval of the Government's preventing this important matter coming on for debate. Question resolved in the affirmative. Mr BRUMBY(Bendigo) —I present the sixth report from the Publications Committee sitting in conference with the Publications Committee of the Senate. Copies of the report have been circulated to honourable members in the chamber. Report-by leave-adopted. Bill presented by Mr Hurford, and read a first time. Mr HURFORD(Adelaide-Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs and Minister Assisting the Treasurer)(3.25) —I move: That the Bill be now read a second time. This Bill will modify amendments of the water conservation and conveyance provisions of the income tax law proposed by the Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No. 4) 1985. The Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No. 4) 1985 was passed by this House last week and has been transmitted to another place. That Bill contains measures to put in place some of the proposals announced in the 19 September 1985 statement on reform of the Australian taxation system, one of which was to replace, with write-off over five years, the immediate income tax deductibility of capital expenditure incurred by primary producers on conserving or conveying water. After further consideration, and as a result of consultations with the Australian Democrats, the Government has decided that such expenditure, where incurred under a contract entered into after 19 September 1985, should instead be deductible in three equal annual instalments, the first in the year in which the expenditure is incurred and a further instalment in each of the next two years. The revenue forgone as a consequence of this change is estimated at $5m in 1986-87 and $7m in 1987-88. I commend the Bill to the House. Debate (on motion by Mr Carlton) adjourned. Bill returned from the Senate with amendments. Ordered that the amendments be taken into consideration in Committee of the Whole House forthwith. Consideration of Senate's amendments. Senate's amendments- (1) Page 1, clause 2, line 13, leave out `Section', insert `Sections 2A and'. (2) Page 2, before clause 3, insert the following new clause: `2A. After section 6AA of the principal Act the following section is inserted: Goods incorporating solar panels, &. ``6AB. Notwithstanding anything contained in any Sales Tax Assessment Act, sales tax is not payable upon so much of the sale value under any Sales Tax Assessment Act of goods in which are incorporated goods covered by sub-item (1) of item 153 in the First Schedule as is equal to the amount which would have been the sale value of the first-mentioned goods under that Act if the transaction, act or operation in relation to which the first-mentioned sale value arose had been a transaction, act or operation in relation to the second-mentioned goods only''.'. (3) Page 8, Schedule 2, leave out clause 35. (4) Page 9, Schedule 2, clause 44, add at the end of proposed sub-item 3(3) ', but not including books marketed exclusively or principally for use in schools, colleges or universities'. (5) Page 9, Schedule 2, clause 47, leave out proposed sub-item 12(1), insert the following sub-item: `12(1) Water heating and hot water storage equipment, being goods of a kind installed as fixtures in domestic premises, but not including goods covered by sub-item (1) of item 153 in the First Schedule;'. Mr HURFORD(Adelaide-Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs and Minister Assisting the Treasurer)(3.27) —I move: That the amendments be agreed to. These amendments were moved on behalf of the Government in another place. Following further consideration of the tax reform package, including consultations with the Australian Democrats, the Government has agreed to make two changes to the sales tax measures contained in this Bill. Under those changes, solar panels for domestic hot water systems and school atlases are to continue to be exempt from sales tax. The most important of the other amendments will provide a sales tax exemption in respect of satellite earth stations designed to receive the homestead and community broadcasting satellite service that is to be transmitted by the Aussat satellite. This service will enable many Australians living in country areas to enjoy, for the first time, television and radio services long taken for granted by city dwellers. The Government's intention in introducing this exemption is to make earth stations available at affordable prices to individuals and communities. The exemption will not however be available to persons acquiring earth stations for business use. A possible unintended effect of the Bill will be corrected by an amendment that clarifies that raw nuts and seeds of a kind used as food ingredients will not be subject to sales tax as savoury snacks. The Treasurer (Mr Keating) foreshadowed this amendment in a Press release on 21 October 1985. Other amendments will make minor drafting changes to the Bill. Under the sales tax law manufacturers are generally not liable to pay tax on their aids to manufacture. This exemption will be extended under the amendments to retailers who manufacture taxable savoury snacks on their retail premises. The Bill as introduced would have had the unintended effect of exempting bicarbonate of soda marketed for non-culinary uses. A further amendment will ensure that bicarbonate of soda marketed for such uses, mainly as a swimming pool chemical, will continue to be subject to sales tax. A supplementary explanatory memorandum containing detailed explanations of technical aspects of the amendments, other than those relating to solar panels and school atlases, is being circulated to honourable members. I commend the amendments to the Committee. Mr CARLTON(Mackellar)(3.31) —On behalf of the Opposition I put forward the strongest possible objection to the way in which the Government is dealing with these amendments. There has been plenty of time since 19 September for the Government to make the necessary alterations to carry out its grubby talks with the Australian Democrats. Backroom deals have been made hurriedly in this last week and now, on the very last afternoon of the Parliament, there is simply no time for the Opposition to consider these matters. I have only just this minute seen these provisions. We have had no chance to look at them properly. The whole thing is an absolute disgrace. We have had plenty of time since 19 September for the legislation to be considered and for any negotiations that the Government wanted to enter into with anybody, be it the Australian Democrats or whoever, to be finalised. As far as we can see, these amendments are not the ones which we would seek to oppose. They do not acknowledge certain nonsenses in the original provisions but, frankly, we are not in a position to consider these in detail or adequately. We believe that it is an absolute disgrace that they were brought in in this way without adequate notice and are being rammed through Parliament in a most unseemly way. These matters have been gone through in the Senate but, as I say, as a result of this backroom dealing with the Democrats, and as it is part of an overall deal, there are many aspects about which we have the greatest concern. We do not in this chamber oppose the provisions changing the sales tax laws. We understand, insofar as we have been able to examine these measures, that the ameliorations that are made may well be satisfactory, but at the same time we make the strongest protest at the way in which the whole matter has been handled by the Government. Question resolved in the affirmative. Resolution reported; report adopted. Bill returned from the Senate with amendments. Ordered that the amendments be taken into consideration in Committee of the Whole House forthwith. Consideration of Senate's amendments. Senate's amendments- No. 1-Page 5, before paragraph 19 (a), insert the following new paragraphs: ``(aa) by inserting in paragraph (f) of the definition of `aids to manufacture' in sub-regulation (1) `a manufacturer of savoury snacks or' after `goods for use by'; (ab) by inserting in that paragraph `savoury snacks,' before `confectionery';''. No. 2-Page 6, paragraph 19(b), line 11, after ``goods for use by'', insert ``a manufacturer of savoury snacks or''. Mr HURFORD(Adelaide-Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs and Minister Assisting the Treasurer)(3.35) —I move: That the amendments be agreed to. I regret that copies of the sales tax laws documents were not delivered a little earlier to the shadow Minister's office but, unfortunately, believing that he would have been apprised of it all because the matters had arisen in the Senate, the matter was overlooked. It will not be on future occasions. I presume that he is a little miffed because he did not get a copy of what I am about to say. I hope it will not happen again. These amendments which were moved on behalf of the Government in another place are related to the amendment of the Sales Tax (Exemptions and Classifications) Amendment Bill 1985 that was agreed to in relation to aids to manufacture used by manufacturers of savoury snacks on retail premises. They will ensure that retailers who manufacture savoury snacks on retail premises will be able to obtain aids to manufacture free of sales tax by quoting their sales tax certificate numbers. I commend the amendments to the Committee. Mr CARLTON(Mackellar)(3.36) —The Opposition makes the same protest in regard to the Sales Tax Laws Amendment Bill (No. 2) as it did to the previous sales tax laws Bill. I might say that there was not a delay in these documents coming to my office; we sought them from the office of the Treasurer (Mr Keating), who said that they were in the office of the Minister Assisting the Treasurer (Mr Hurford), and eventually we managed to seek them out. I do not think that is any way to run a government. We do not object to the provisions of these amendments; on their merits they should be supported. Question resolved in the affirmative. Resolution reported; report adopted. Debate resumed. Mr CARLTON(Mackellar)(3.38) —The Income Tax Assessment Amendment Bill (No. 2) modifies amendments of the conservation and conveyance provisions of the income tax law proposed in Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No. 4). The Bill was passed last week by the House and transmitted to the Senate. This particular provision was to replace with write-offs over five years the immediate income tax deductibility of capital expenditure incurred by primary producers in conserving or conveying water. The Opposition opposed the clause in the Bill giving effect to this provision because we believed that it was totally counter-productive to remove the complete write-off of water conservation or conveyance measures implemented by private enterprise, in effect on behalf of the nation. In a number of cases throughout the country works which would otherwise be required at public expense could be carried out by private enterprise with a suitable tax deduction. My colleague the honourable member for Dawson (Mr Braithwaite) made this clear, as did other speakers. The honourable member for Wakefield (Mr Andrew) in particular had an interest in this in relation to the River Murray, where the public costs of carrying out the necessary works are substantially increased without these taxation deductions being available to landowners. What the Government has done as part of its grubby little deal with the Australian Democrats is modify its proposals and replace its proposed five-year write-off with a three-year write-off. Of course, the Opposition is not going to object to that amelioration of circumstances but I would like to make it absolutely clear- Mr Lloyd —It is a poor second best. Mr CARLTON —It is a very poor second best, as my friend the honourable member for Murray has pointed out, to our proposal to leave the existing provisions in place. That would have been the best way of dealing with it. We will not oppose this measure but we certainly make it quite clear that we opposed the original measure. I point out that the total concessions given as a result of the tax deal done with the Australian Democrats, of which so much has been made by the Democrats and the Treasurer (Mr Keating), amounted to a miserable $7m out of the $800m additional income or revenue expected next year from the proposals. In the year beyond that, when $1.4 billion extra revenue is to be gained by the measures, the total concessions allowed will be less than $50m. One of the concessions that have been quantified is the concession on water conservation. The revenue forgone as a result of this change is estimated at $5m in 1986-87 and $7m in 1987-88. But the total concessions got by the Democrats in their much vaunted humbling, they thought, of the Government, amounted to less than $50m out of $1.4 billion. Mr Lloyd —They are not very good bargainers. Mr CARLTON —They are not very good bargainers. The areas left untouched by their grubby deal are the major areas of the fringe benefit tax, the business expense tax and most areas of the capital gains tax where they said they would make substantial differences. In particular, they have failed utterly in their attempts to modify the capital gains tax in a way that would be helpful to primary producers. Mr Lloyd —They were going to exempt the family farm. Mr CARLTON —They were going to exempt the family farm, as my friend the honourable member for Murray points out, and failed utterly to do so. We point out that not only is this an unsatisfactory amendment which does not go far enough but it also forms part of the utter failure of the Democrats to amend the Government's packages in a way which the Opposition would find satisfactory. Mr ANDREW(Wakefield)(3.43) —I am very conscious of the time and will speak only briefly, but I must rise to highlight the absurdity of the amendments before the House and to support the comments made by the honourable member for Mackellar (Mr Carlton). Clearly, the Opposition has no objection to this minor improvement in the situation, but the truth is that the original proposal brought in by the Fraser Government ought still to be in place. As the honourable member for Mackellar has said, the original proposal encouraged people to be water conservationists. This surely ought to be the fundamental thrust of what any government is about. Mr Lloyd —They should have supported our retention, shouldn't they? Mr ANDREW —Precisely. What we have before us today is a mere sop to the Australian Democrats and not even a mere sop to the very people who will be affected by the amendments that the Government originally proposed. We have here a proposal whereby, in order to placate the Democrats and some of the affected fruit growers, the Government has said: `We were going to break your arm but we are feeling benevolent, so we will break your wrist instead'. Frankly, Australia's water conveyances and the quality of Australia's water would be far better if, instead of breaking anything, we left everything intact and allowed growers to make their own provision for better water conveyancing and water distribution in the irrigation areas of this nation. Mr HURFORD(Adelaide-Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs and Minister Assisting the Treasurer)(3.44) —in reply-I thank everybody who has taken part in the debate. There is really nothing to answer. As I said in my second reading speech, a change has been decided by the Government in its dealings with the Australian Democrats and now the Income Tax Assessment Amendment Bill (No. 2) can go to the Senate as part of a package of reform to the taxation system which is about 20 years overdue. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith. Bill (on motion by Mr Hurford) read a third time. Bill received from the Senate, read a first time. Mr HOLDING(Melbourne Ports-Minister for Aboriginal Affairs)(3.45) —I move: That the Bill be now read a second time. The purpose of this Bill is to extend the period of operation of the amendments to the standard of proof which were passed by the Parliament in May this year. The Bill will extend the period of operation for a further six months from 6 December 1985. The need for the introduction of this legislation arises from the obstruction and intransigence of the Opposition and the Australian Democrats in the Senate in relation to the Veterans' Entitlements Bill. The Government greatly regrets that it is being placed in the position where it is necessary to introduce this legislation. Without it, the previous standard of proof which applied to determining pension claims would again apply. This could have the effect of requiring that nearly all pensions claims must be accepted. This is a situation which the Government, the Opposition and the veteran community have regarded as unacceptable. I commend the Bill to the House. Mr SINCLAIR(New England-Leader of the National Party of Australia)(3.47) —by leave-Unfortunately, the shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs has not been able to get back to the House at this hour and therefore I rise on his behalf. The Opposition does not accept the proposal of the Government. As we understand the position, the Government has accepted the amendments relating to the definition of allied veterans and the matter relating to acquired immune deficiency syndrome and therefore only one narrow part of the proposal is outstanding. In those circumstances the Opposition does not accept that it is proper for there to be a six-month extension to the Repatriation Legislation Amendment Act. We believe that it would be preferable for these matters to be resolved. The nature of the hiatus in veterans' entitlements is not one that can be happily condoned. Many people are uncertain in many areas relating to Government changes. Uncertainty is as bad as the consequences of adverse legislation and in this area we think it would be far preferable if the matter could be resolved. We therefore oppose the extension of six months and it is our intention that the matters be further discussed in the Senate between the Minister for Veterans' Affairs (Mr Gietzelt) and the shadow representatives. I hope it is possible to reconcile the differences between them. Mr HOLDING(Melbourne Ports-Minister for Aboriginal Affairs)(3.49) —in reply-I have heard the comments of the Leader of the National Party (Mr Sinclair). The fact is that problems have arisen in the Senate as a result of the Opposition's position and the amendments that were passed. Discussions are continuing but the Government cannot leave in the Senate legislation which confers rights and benefits on people when there is no guarantee that that legislation will be passed. In those circumstances, the Government has adopted the only course available to it. I commend the Bill to the House. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith. Bill (on motion by Mr Holding) read a third time. Assent to the following Bills reported: Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 1985-86. Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 1985-86. Bill returned from the Senate with amendments. Ordered that the amendments be taken into consideration in Committee of the Whole House forthwith. Consideration of Senate's amendments- Senate's amendments- No. 1-Page 2, paragraph 4 (b), proposed new paragraph 6 (2) (a), line 7, after ``in relation to'', insert ``the enrolment of the student in that course for''. No. 2-Page 2, paragraph 4 (b), proposed new sub-section 6 (3), line 11, after ``in relation to'', insert ``the enrolment of a student in that course for''. No. 3-Page 2, paragraph 4 (b), proposed new paragraph 6 (3) (b), lines 14 to 19, leave out the paragraph, insert the following paragraph: ``(b) in the case of a subsequent year-the amount prescribed for the purpose of this sub-section, being an amount not exceeding the amount calculated by multiplying by 1.15 the amount of the charge imposed by this Act that would have been applicable to that enrolment if that enrolment had been an enrolment in that course for the immediately preceding year.'' Motion (by Mr Holding) proposed: That the amendments be agreed to. Mr SINCLAIR(New England-Leader of the National Party of Australia)(3.53) —The Opposition does not oppose the proposal by the Government. The Opposition believes the changes now being made will be beneficial. It is on that basis that they were first moved. We endorse the action being taken by the Government. Question resolved in the affirmative. Resolution reported; report adopted. Bill received from the Senate, and read a first time. Mr BARRY JONES(Lalor-Minister for Science and Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce)(3.54) —I move: That the Bill be now read a second time. This Bill amends the Pipeline Authority Act 1973 in accordance with heads of agreement negotiated recently by the Commonwealth with the Australian Gas Light Co.-AGL-in relation to haulage of gas on the Moomba-Sydney pipeline, construction of a northern lateral pipeline to Bathurst, Orange and Lithgow and related matters. For some years the Commonwealth has been attempting to renegotiate the principal contract between the Pipeline Authority-TPA-and AGL-the 1974 haulage agreement-to overcome its lack of provision for recovery by the Pipeline Authority of unanticipated losses. These losses result from the Australian Gas Light Co.'s past and continuing inability to market gas at the levels it had nominated in the schedules to the agreement. At the end of 1984, the losses stood at $59m. Because of the structure of the agreement, this is an unserviced debt which by the end of the contract period, 31 December 2006, would exceed $1,000m and, depending on what assumptions are made about inflation, interest rates and volumes taken, could reach $2,000m in dollars of the day. Despite extensive negotiations and exchanges between the Commonwealth, AGL and the New South Wales Government for over seven years, and especially since April 1983, no real progress was made until late last year. But a settlement has now been reached between the three parties under which AGL and the New South Wales Government can receive the benefits they seek, while the Commonwealth will achieve full recovery by 2006 of all past and future costs of construction and operation of the Moomba-Sydney trunk pipeline, the existing lateral pipelines to Wagga Wagga and Canberra, and the proposed lateral to Bathurst, Orange and Lithgow. A revised formula for haulage tariffs over the next 20 years will-without increasing the real costs to New South Wales consumers-enable the Commonwealth to recover all of its past and future costs, provide compressors required along the trunk pipeline and extend a lateral pipeline to Bathurst, Orange and Lithgow. After 2006, haulage tariffs will cover costs of service, which costs will include a profit component. Extension of natural gas supplies to Bathurst, Orange and Lithgow will be a most important outcome of the new arrangements. Construction of the $35m pipeline from Young to the three cities will employ a substantial work force, both directly and indirectly, and should result in a major industrial expansion in this important area of Australia. Natural gas supply will offer security to existing industries and opportunities for establishment of new undertakings. As part of the new agreement, AGL will assume control of existing gas undertakings in the three cities and embark on a $20m expansion and refurbishing program of supply facilities. Rights and conditions of employees of existing undertakings will be fully protected. The retail price of gas to households in each centre will be no more than 10 per cent above that in Sydney and will be uniform throughout the supply area. When these arrangements come into force on 1 January 1988, it is expected that future increases in the haulage tariff will never exceed increases in the consumer price index and will most probably be considerably lower. It is necessary that in future TPA and AGL work together co-operatively on the task of carrying gas to New South Wales and Australian Capital Territory consumers. Both parties need to use their best endeavours to ensure that gas is carried safely, economically and without supply failure, and that a viable natural gas market is maintained. To assist towards this objective, the Commonwealth has agreed to AGL's participation in the decision making of the Pipeline Authority by having a representative on the Authority. The amendments to section 6 of the Act will permit this to be done. The appointment of an AGL nominee will permit closer co-operation and mutual support in the planning and operational activities of the two bodies, each of which has much to offer by way of experience and expertise, not only in pipeline operations but also in other aspects of the natural gas industry. TPA and AGL already have a close commercial relationship through what is virtually a sole supplier-sole purchaser situation. Like other part time members of the Authority, the AGL nominee will of course be bound by all of the provisions of the Act affecting such members including the conflict of interest provisions of section 9. The proposed amendment to section 15 removes the present requirement for the passage of specific legislation before construction of any new pipeline can be undertaken by the Authority. This amendment is sought for the following reasons: (a) Section 15 appears to require prior legislative approval for such essential elements of pipeline construction as route surveys, plan preparation and property and easement surveys, but also calls for inclusion in the enabling Bill of a detailed description of the pipeline route-which cannot be adequately prepared without some survey having been undertaken. The present provisions inhibit preparatory works of the kinds mentioned, and also such necessary preliminaries as stockpile site preparation and site office establishment. (b) This difficulty will be enhanced when there is a heavy legislative program. (c) All of the requirements of section 15 are applicable when any new pipeline, no matter how short, is proposed. (d) Separately from the provisions of this Act, there are adequate financial controls over the Authority through the need for ministerial approval for contracts involving expenditure exceeding $500,000-section 29-as well as Treasurer's approval for larger off-budget borrowings. (e) The Authority's accounts are subject to the Auditor-General's and Senate Estimates committee scrutiny, which, as honourable members know, can be acute. (f) Technical matters are properly the responsibility of the Authority which Parliament has established for that very purpose, and which possesses the necessary expertise. It is considered unnecessary and inappropriate for the Parliament to consider such matters as detailed descriptions of proposed pipeline routes and the limits of deviation, as is required by section 15 at present. Passage of the amendment to section 15 will permit the Authority to initiate preliminary work on the lateral pipeline project, including the ordering of pipe, valves and associated equipment to ensure timely commencement of construction, and so meet the construction target date of late 1987 for supply of natural gas to Bathurst, Orange and Lithgow. Industrial and domestic consumers and local government authorities throughout the central west area-as well as the State Government-are all anxious to ensure that this target date is met. Legislative provision for nomination of an AGL representative on the Pipeline Authority, and early commencement of the lateral pipeline to Bathurst, Orange and Lithgow, are essential Commonwealth contributions towards a renegotiation of the 1974 haulage agreement from which the Commonwealth stands to gain substantial financial benefits. I commend the Bill to honourable members. Mr LLOYD(Murray)(3.59) —by leave-The Pipeline Authority Amendment Bill represents the clear difference between the philosophies of this Labor Government and the coalition parties. On the one hand, the Government, through the Minister for Resources and Energy, Senator Gareth Evans, seeks to implement the old Rex Connor line of the 1970s in having the Government control and own the farm. The Bill itself is a project of the Rex Connor era. It was following this Connor experience that the previous coalition Government amended the Pipeline Authority Act to require legislative approval of pipeline construction proposals. On the other hand, the Opposition believes that the Pipeline Authority would be better operated through private enterprise. We also believe that the Authority should be subject to full parliamentary review. The statutory requirement to report to Parliament should remain. The amending Bill removes pipeline construction proposals from prior legislative approval. The Authority's accounts scrutiny, by the Auditor-General and Senate Estimates committee, does not provide any safeguard against ministerial approval, and divorcement from that legislative approval. This amendment to remove pipeline construction proposals from parliamentary authorisation would remove potentially significant financial outlays from prior parliamentary scrutiny and veto. The accumulated losses of $59m at the end of 1984, due to the Australian Gas Light Company's past and continuing inability to market gas at the levels it had nominated in the schedules, should be concern enough of the Authority's inability to perform. The fact that under the agreement, this loss by the year ended 31 December, 2006, would exceed $1,000m is frightening in itself and evidence of the failure of government enterprise to perform. The Opposition is concerned by the Government's refusal to recognise the potential benefits from the privatisation of the Pipeline Authority. The Minister claims the revised pricing formula will allow the Commonwealth to recover past and future costs by the year 2006, and future price increases will never exceed increases in the consumer price index and will most probably be considerably lower. However, he qualifies this claim with the words, `it is expected'. On the performance of this Government, the Opposition has considerable doubt that the expectation will be realised. Consumers may rightly claim compensation if this commitment cannot be fulfilled. The end result may well be a considerable drain on government revenue. The success of the agreement depends on factors that are absolutely critical, such as the inflation rate, interest rates, costs, sales and currency valuation. The Australian Gas Light Co. is given a security of supply at a low price for 20-odd years in advance and, in fact, could have its expectation of greater profits realised under the agreement. It is disquieting to understand that the Minister, Senator Evans, is renewing the Whitlam years philosophy of Federal Government's ownership and control of resources. More recent decisions of the Government on cash bonus bidding, resource rental royalties, sanctions against uranium mining, further regulation, export controls and increased taxes, are all evidence of a Minister who wants to control all resource development, including gas pipelines and electricity generation. Consumers or taxpayers, or both, invariably pay the cost of Government interference in an area where it has no responsibility. Such is the case in regard to TPA. Recovery of the past losses of $59m is evidence of higher tariffs to customers or a recovery from the tax purse in the future. The Opposition feels that this will be the inevitable result of the new arrangement. Future governments could well look into this arrangement, with opportunities to allow private ownership, restricted through the participation by the AGL representative. Unfortunately, it may limit the choice in private ownership to AGL alone. Madam Deputy Speaker, the Opposition's decision to oppose this Bill was fully outlined in the Senate by Senator Durack and it is not intended to repeat all those reasons here. I am sure honourable members will be pleased to hear that. We have no confidence in the claims made by the Minister. Honourable members opposite will be equally pleased to hear that. Only the passage of time will confirm that lack of confidence. The Opposition opposes the amendments and the Bill. Question resolved in the affirmative. Bill read a second time. Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith. Bill (on motion by Mr Barry Jones) read a third time. Mr YOUNG(Port Adelaide-Leader of the House)(4.04) —by leave-I move: That this House authorises the broadcasting and rebroadcasting on Australian radio and television stations of a sound record of excerpts of its proceedings during 1986, subject to the conditions determined for this purpose by the Joint Committee on the Broadcasting of Parliamentary Proceedings. Honourable members might not have heard as much of the broadcasting as have people outside this place. But those of us who have had the occasion to hear it, think it is a successful way of communicating with the public. By the broadcasting of direct excerpts of parliamentary proceedings people are able to hear outstanding speeches by members such as the honourable member for Herbert (Mr Lindsay). Townsville has never had such a great member as the member who now represents it. Some of his contributions this year have been nothing short of outstanding. It is a pleasure to visit his electorate in Townsville and to see what he has done. I was there recently for the opening of the massive new Commonwealth Centre. I must say that I am looking forward to going back there. I commend the motion to the House. Mr SINCLAIR(New England-Leader of the National Party of Australia)(4.06) —I think it is most regrettable that the Leader of the House (Mr Young) has introduced sordid politics into this discussion this afternoon. He referred to one of the lesser lights from Queensland who is rarely heard in this place. There are other members of this Parliament-I find it hard to reflect on all of those-from the Liberal and National parties who have made an outstanding contribution. The Opposition does not oppose the passage of this motion. We think that the use of parliamentary debate by way of excerpts on the media has been beneficial. Most of us see some anomalies in the degree to which, in regard to the presentation of television images, we see and hear words used which supposedly relate to a film taken on another occasion. The film may have been taken when the member was talking about an entirely different event. But I think things are improving. The process of using excerpts has worked out well. I commend the practice that you, Mr Speaker, introduced of monitoring the degree to which there is some balance in the use of those excerpts. It is a practice which enables people at least to hear some extracts of proceedings of this place instead of listening only to the proceedings of the House of Commons in London. Frankly, that seemed to me to be an anomalous process. It is for that reason that I think this is a very worthwhile development. However, Mr Speaker, as I mentioned to you the other night, I trust that the Joint Committee on the Broadcasting of Parliamentary Proceedings will consider the matter to which you referred and allow the adjournment debate to be similarly broadcast, as are other parts of this Parliament's proceedings. When that happens it will be to the benefit of most of the electorate. Often those adjournment debates are very relevant to the concerns of individual Australians. I think it would be far better if an opportunity were provided for those excerpts to be similarly broadcast, as is the case in regard to other parts of the day's proceedings. Of course, they can be used as excerpts. But I think it would be better if they were broadcast in the normal way. The Opposition does not oppose this measure. Question resolved in the affirmative. Motion (by Mr Young)-by leave-agreed to: That the honourable member for Dundas (Mr Ruddock) be appointed a member of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts in place of the honourable member for Mitchell (Mr Cadman). The following Bills were returned from the Senate with amendment or requests: Sales Tax (Nos 1 to 4) Amendment Bills 1985 Sales Tax (No. 5) Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1985 Sales Tax (Nos 6 to 9) Amendment Bills 1985 Motion (by Mr Young) agreed to: That leave of absence be given to every member of the House of Representatives from the determination of this sitting of the House to the date of its next sitting. Motion (by Mr Young) proposed: That this House, at its rising, adjourn until Tuesday, 11 February 1986, unless otherwise called together by Mr Speaker or, in the event of Mr Speaker being unavailable, by the Chairman of Committees. Mr HAWKE(Wills-Prime Minister) —I take this opportunity to thank all those who have served this House during the year. Although I had the opportunity to thank many of them at a function in the courtyard last night there are perhaps a couple of special references which should be made here, and which I would like to make, at this point. I give special thanks to Alan Browning in his first session as Clerk of the House. He has, as we all expected and knew he would, performed his duties with great distinction. I thank Lyn Symons who has completed her first session as the first female Sergeant-at-Arms of this House. Again, to you, Lyn, go our congratulations and our thanks. Mr Speaker, I mention also Miss Phoebe Stoney, a Hansard reporter, who has just set a new Australian shorthand speed record. Our congratulations go to her. Finally, in mentioning particular people, our thanks go to our friend Mr Greg Rule, who is retiring after 21 years as an attendant to members of the House. Also I would like to give special thanks to the Press Gallery, the members of which I believe have had a rich and fertile year; although not always an easy one. For example, I know they suffered considerable privation and, in some cases, severe sunburn to cover the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in the Bahamas. However, with the fortitude we have come to associate with this intrepid band, they soldiered on through the rigours of the Bahamas. As some of those members of the Press Gallery go off to prepare their end of term reports on Ministers I would like to get in first and say that although their reporting has been up and down during the year they seem to have got on to the right track in the last few days. Mr Speaker, may I conclude by extending to you, to all honourable members and to all those who serve and who are associated with this House and to all their families our best wishes for Christmas and for what will certainly be a prosperous New Year. Mr HOWARD(Bennelong-Leader of the Opposition) —I join with the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) in extending thanks to those many people who make the Parliament work-Mr Speaker, to you, and to the Clerks and to the various attendants and officers of the House who are unfailingly polite and courteous, often under severely strained conditions. I take the opportunity, as the Prime Minister did, of wishing all of them and all members of the House a very relaxing Christmas holiday and an opportunity, as one does at Christmas time, to spend a little more time with one's family than the rigours of parliamentary life normally enable many of us to do. I hope that all members of the House have that opportunity and as a consequence their enthusiasm for the life is renewed over that holiday period. I also would like to say something about the contribution of the Press Gallery. I think the Prime Minister is right when he says that members of the Press Gallery have had their ups and downs. They have not always got it right; they were wrong on one or two very celebrated occasions during the year. However, I will not be uncharitable about that. They do contribute to the working of the system and however much on occasions we might individually take issue with their respective judgments they do contribute. I am looking forward to the opportunity that a team drawn from members and affiliates of the Opposition-with some appropriate ring-in to match the Prime Minister's ring-in-will provide to join the Press Gallery in a game of cricket early in the New Year. Very warmly and sincerely, Mr Speaker, to you and to all your colleagues and to my friends on both sides of the House, I hope all of you have a very happy and enjoyable Christmas and that it is a time-whatever one's views are on religious beliefs-of reflection, a time to spend with family and a time to renew associations with old friends. Mr SINCLAIR(New England-Leader of the National Party of Australia)(4.15) —I join in the remarks made by the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke) and the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Howard). There are many who serve this place whose faces we see but whose names are not necessarily recorded. Because they have not all been mentioned, I mention a few of them in addition to extending, on behalf of myself and my Party, best wishes to all the members of this place. Alan Browning, Lyn Barlin and those who sit at this table have been mentioned. I pay particular tribute to Alan. It has been an interesting year for him. Assuming the mantle of Clerk of the House is a very senior responsibility within the Westminster system. I congratulate you, Alan, on the way in which you have exercised your functions. To you, Lyn, and to all the others of the team at the table, we are all indebted. Without you, I am afraid this place could really develop into mayhem-which view I do not doubt you, Mr Speaker, on occasions would more than endorse. There are, however, outside this place a number of people to whom I want to refer. There is, of course, the Principal Parliamentary Reporter, Mr J. M. Campbell. We have in both Mr Campbell and his staff quite outstanding talents. The Prime Minister mentioned Miss Phoebe Stoney. I do not know whether many people in Australia realise that she set an Australian shorthand record at a speed of an incredible 280 words per minute. It is a pace which few people, I think, would set in their normal speech. It is a record which I think is to be commended, and not just because she was able to achieve it. The fact that she was able to do so must make one apprehensive in case any of the words that are said by mistake in this place are thought not to have been recorded. Quite obviously, with standards of that speed there is little chance of any word being mistaken. I turn to the head librarian and members of the staff of the Department of the Parliamentary Library. I think all of us have been indebted to Mr MacLean and those who work in the various sections of the Library. In opposition, I have found particularly notable the way in which those in the different sections of the Library can provide an enormously worthwhile input into areas where in government one is able to turn to departments. I know that I have found staff working in the defence section of tremendous value. They have an ability both to aggregate material and to pursue inquiries in a way which is beneficial to the working of the Parliament. Therefore, I commend Mr MacLean and each of those in the Library. I pay tribute to the Principal Attendant, Mr Neville Gathercole, and to all attendants. The Prime Minister referred to Mr Greg Rule, who is retiring after 21 years as a parliamentary attendant. To Greg we wish a long life and, for him and his family, good health as he goes about his task away from the occasional mayhem that is this place. To all the attendants, we thank you for the role you play. I extend my thanks also to the police who sit up in the gallery, who move around the Parliament, and who are an enormously important part of the security of the establishment. I extend thanks to the Bills and Papers Office, to the Dining Room, to Carol and Jan and all those who play an important role there, to the Members Bar and to Bob and his other colleagues whom we all know so well. My thanks go to the drivers, to those outside this place who service our respective parties, to our respective secretariats and, of course to our staff, who render an enormous contribution to our cause and without whom we would be in a hopeless state. There have been some observations made about members of the Press Gallery. I do not know whether all of us necessarily see the media in the same light at times. We do depend on them however, and much as this particular forum is seen by them as a fishbowl, I assure them that we, on occasions, look at them in not a dissimilar light. We look at their movements and their actions and interactions and wonder whether they are for real. Many in the community contribute to the well-being of the Parliament. I say thanks from all of us and wish them well for the Christmas season. In thinking of one person to whom the Prime Minister made reference, Lyn Symons, I think it worth while to mention a story that was told to me; it might appeal to Mick in his Irish way. It is the story of two lunatics who came into this place and sat up in the gallery- Mr Young —Only two? Mr SINCLAIR —Only two; the rest of them sit here. They watched happily as members booed and shouted and carried on. They felt more and more at home, particularly in the rather raucous ways that prevail, Mr Speaker, on occasions during Question Time. They felt even more at home when Ms Symons led one of the members away after you decided you would give in to your ire, Mr Speaker, and to expel him from service of the House. Suddenly the bells began to ring and members began to mill around, as we are apt to in the course of divisions, and one lunatic turned to the other and said: `Ah, one of them has escaped'. I thought this might be an alternative: We are all about to escape, and in that vein we all look forward to a rather relaxed Christmas and New Year period. I wish all members of this place, and all those who have made this Parliament such a worthwhile venue in its way, all the best. For all that we are appalled at some aspects of the Government's management of the economy, there is nonetheless a bonhomie that exists that is worth while. We all know each other to a degree as individuals and in that respect I believe the Westminster system has much to commend it and that it is certainly something that deserves to endure. I wish all members a happy family Christmas and a change of government in the New Year. Mr YOUNG(Port Adelaide-Special Minister of State)(4.21) —I conclude the remarks by joining with the earlier speakers in wishing the best to you, Mr Speaker, the Clerks, Hansard, the staff of the parliamentary dining room, the people down at the post office and everyone who works in the House to assist us so greatly. As some people would know, Leader of the House is not the most popular of jobs from time to time during the year. But someone has to do it because, if someone was not doing this job, we would get only one Bill a year through the place; people would keep speaking. It has been an interesting year. For the first time in 35 years we have had an increase in the number of members of parliament. I think that the members on the Procedure Committee would agree that we have not really come to grips with the use of the House after the increase in the number of members. Those who were elected at the last election certainly brought some characters with them. I think we have had a very good year. The Government has finished on top, as we expected, and looks like having a long reign in office. Mr Speaker, I take the opportunity of extending to you, to all the members of the staff around Parliament House, to the people in Canberra who put up with us from one year's end to the other and to all those who give us great assistance in this place all the best for Christmas and the New Year. Mr SPEAKER —Order! This is one of the few occasions when the Speaker gets a chance to say a few words more than `Order'. I thank the honourable members who have spoken for the good wishes they have conveyed. Of course, I reciprocate them. I will convey the good wishes of all members to the staff of all the parliamentary departments. I will do as I have done for the past two years at the end of the year and perambulate the departments and see all the employees and convey the good wishes to them. I would like to convey my thanks to the Clerks and their staff, particularly Alan Browning, who has taken over from Doug Blake and has settled in. We are fast getting a very good rapport. I also must mention that there has been the change with our first female Sergeant-at-Arms. I thought that the Leader of the National Party of Australia was going to tell a different story about one Opposition member who was suspended and who threatened to struggle when the Sergeant-at-Arms was going to remove him from the House. We have also had the first female attendants in the chamber this year. So, we believe that there is some affirmative action going on. I would like to thank Mrs Child, the Chairman of Committees and Deputy Speaker, and the temporary chairmen. I do not think the House realises how well served members are. People forget that this chair has to be occupied by someone to allow the proceedings to go on. I think you would all agree that that process has been smoothly carried out. I thank Mrs Child for having taken that under control. I would like to thank my personal staff-and I will not mention them by name-who serve the members well in the contact they have with them. They certainly give me a loyalty, devotion and service that I appreciate very much, as do those in my electorate office. Some honourable members might like to know that my senior private secretary, Mr Morrie Adamson, is retiring on 6 January. Morrie has been around this Parliament for a very long time. Some of the older members who have served on committees will well remember the contact they have had with him in the committee system. I first struck him on the Wildlife Conservation Committee. He has been a good friend and servant to honourable members and he has done a mighty job for this Parliament. I am sorry to lose him, and I wish him well in his retirement. Mention has been made of the media. So far, I have no complaint except for the occasional matters of privilege that I have to rule on, but they are outside my control. Some advances have been made. We have allowed filming which backs the news services, and the televising of the Budget speeches. We now allow excerpts of proceedings to be broadcast, and I believe that the media have shown a great degree of responsibility in using these tools that we have given them to give better exposure of the Parliament. I guess that it is no secret that I am not particularly satisfied with behaviour in the House. I hope that the Standing Committee on Procedure will give us some assistance in the recommendations that it will bring forth and that there will be more guidance to honourable members, and even more guidance to the Speaker, who often has to decide whether in applying the sanction the very business of the day may not go on. That is one of the difficult decisions that I have to face. I thank members of the House for the trust they have shown in me in the number of them who come into my office to ask for advice on parliamentary matters and respect the fact that I preserve their confidences. I also thank honourable members on both sides of the House for the friendship that they show to my wife and me. We appreciate that very much. Since I am talking about families, may I convey to all honourable members and their families and to all members of staff and their families the seasonal greetings. Question resolved in the affirmative. Message received from the Senate acquainting the House that the Senate presses its requests for amendments to the Bill. Ordered that the consideration of the message be made an order of the day for the next sitting. House adjourned at 4.29 p.m., until Tuesday, 11 February 1986, at 2 p.m., in accordance with the resolution agreed to this day. The following papers were deemed to have been presented on 29 November 1985: Acts Interpretation Act-Statements relating to extension of specified period for presentation of periodic report-Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, report for 1984-85. The following answers to questions were circulated: (Question No. 1691) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Has his attention been drawn to a report in the National Times of 30 March 1984, where it is claimed that a strategic basis paper endorsed by Cabinet states that Australia, along with the United States of America and the Philippines, has a commitment to Thailand under the Manila Treaty and that in the event of a major attack by Vietnam, Thailand would, as well as looking to China to exert counter-pressure on Vietnam, call on the United States of America and other Manila Treaty nations, including Australia for assistance. (2) What is the attitude of the Australian Government to its commitments to Thailand under the Manila treaty and does the Government endorse the reported view in the strategic basis paper that Australia should avoid creating an expectation by Thailand of an Australian military commitment. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. (2) The Manila Treaty remains in legal force. As a party to the Treaty Australia, along with the other Treaty members including Thailand, has certain commitments under Article IV of the Treaty. However, since the dissolution of South-East Asia Treaty Organisation in 1977, there have been no joint consultative or any other activities carried out under the aegis of the Treaty. The Government is keeping Australia's continuing adherence to the Treaty under review. (Question No. 1692) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Has his attention been drawn to reports that, with technological improvements in air defence systems, the distinctions between air defence and anti-ballistic missile systems will be so blurred as to be meaningless; if so, is there any substance in the claims. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Government is aware of such reports. The Government cannot foresee future technological developments. It is the Government's impression that at the present time the distinction between even the most advanced air defence missile systems and anti-ballistic missile systems-particularly for defence against strategic ballistic missiles-remains valid. (Question No. 1693) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to say whether the buildup of Soviet nuclear weapons in the Asia-Pacific region has reached the stage where the nuclear balance in the region has shifted in favour of the Soviet Union, as reported by the 1983 Annual Report of United States Defence Secretary Casper Weinberger. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Neither in Soviet Military Power 1983 nor Secretary Weinberger's Annual Report to Congress for Fiscal Year 1984 dated 1 February 1983, have the precise words attributed to him in the question been identified. The qualitative and quantitative buildup in Soviet forces, nuclear and conventional, in the Asian Pacific region over the past decade has resulted in a greatly increased Soviet capability in the region. The Government has not however formed the view that this process has reached the point where the balance of forces in the region has shifted in favour of the Soviet Union. (Question No. 1694) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether (a) Khmer Rouge members who still follow Pol Pot are welcomed back by the Heng Samrin puppet regime and (b) this regime publicly stated that Khmer Rouge members are free to resume their lives after a brief period of political indoctrination. (2) Is he also able to say whether non communists or non Khmer Rouge followers do not receive such a welcome in Vietnamese controlled Kampuchea. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) Various recent public statements issued by the Heng Samrin administration have stated that, under the so-called six point clemency policy, supporters of Pol Pot (and the other Cambodian resistance groups) can return to Cambodia where they will be granted full citizenship rights of the People's Republic of Kampuchea. Under this policy it is claimed that those who wish to take part in agricultural production will have their own plots of land as do other peasants. It is also stated that suitable jobs will be provided to those returnees who wish to do their share in national defence and construction activities. (b) Yes. In a public statement on 16 August 1985, Hun Sen, Prime Minister of the Heng Samrin administration, stated that rank and file supporters of Pol Pot `should be re-educated to become good citizens useful to society' in Cambodia. (2) According to statements issued by the Heng Samrin administration, the six point clemency policy applies to the followers of non-Khmer Rouge and Khmer Rouge resistance groups. (Question No. 1695) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether the Heng Samrin puppet regime documents instruct officials to assist Vietnamese, both former residents and new immigrants, in any way possible and to consult with the Vietnamese settlers. (2) Is he also able to say whether (a) Vietnamese soldiers serving in Kampuchea are encouraged to settle in the country and marry Khmer women and that those who do so are to receive Kampuchean citizenship and (b) Vietnamese immigrants are also given extraterritorial status. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) In a document issued in October 1982 by the Council of Ministers of the People's Republic of Kampuchea, local authorities are called on to give assistance to former residents who have returned, and to create conditions for them to settle down to a normal life. The local authorities are also asked to create conditions allowing Vietnamese who have come to Cambodia since December 1978 to stay in the country and work, providing they are engaged in occupations which contribute to the rehabilitation and development of the economy, and maintain good relations with the local people. The Thai press reported in March 1983 that a directive from the Kampuchean Revolutionary People's Party called on authorities to co-ordinate with Vietnamese advisers on matters concerning Vietnamese residents. (2) (a) There has been no confirmation of the claim that Vietnamese soldiers serving in Cambodia are encouraged to settle there and marry Khmer women. (b) There is no evidence to support claims that Vietnamese in Cambodia receive extraterritorial status. (Question No. 1696) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Did he state in March 1985 that the Heng Samrin administration is improving its administration and acceptability all the time; if so, does he currently hold this view and what evidence is there to justify it. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: I did state on 9 March 1985, in a press conference in Bangkok-and again in slightly different terms on 13 March following my return to Australia from a visit to several South East Asian countries-that the Heng Samrin administration is improving its administration and acceptability all the time. In my statement of 9 March, I also noted that the question of the improvememt in the administration and acceptability of the Heng Samrin administration was one of relativity, that is, it was `fairly dreadful by the standards we prefer but it's much superior to what it was'. The Department of Foreign Affairs continues to monitor closely conditions inside Cambodia. At present there is no major evidence available to us which would alter the general assessment contained in my statement of 9 March concerning the improvement in the administration and acceptability of the Heng Samrin administration. This assessment is based on evidence from a number of sources, including media reports and the accounts of people who go into Cambodia on behalf of non-governmental agencies and multilateral agencies, and others, including some members of a Joint Australian Parliamentary Delegation which visited Cambodia in 1984. (Question No. 1698) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether Vietnamese citizens settling throughout Kampuchea are abetted and encouraged by Hanoi; if so, what is the estimated number of Vietnamese nationals who have settled in Kampuchea in the last four years. (2) Has his attention been drawn to a statement by Willibald Pahr, the former Austrian Foreign Minister and Chairman of the International Conference on Kampuchea, which estimated the minimum number of Vietnamese immigrants as 500,000. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Claims that Vietnam is attempting to colonise Cambodia date at least from Vietnam's intervention in the overthrow of the Pol Pot regime in December 1978. There has historically been considerable settlement from southern Vietnam in Cambodia. The Australian Government has been unable to find sufficient evidence to support the proposition that Vietnam is pursuing a deliberate policy of migration to Cambodia or of changing the ethnic balance there. The Government accepts that some movement of ethnic Vietnamese into Cambodia has taken place in recent years. Many would appear to be Vietnamese who had been resident in Cambodia prior to the Pol Pot years. Cambodia had a Vietnamese minority which numbered about 500,000 before the exoduses of the 1970s. Our current assessment is that there are about 300,000 Vietnamese residents in Cambodia. (2) Yes, it was one of a number of estimates. (Question No. 1699) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Does Vietnam's invasion and occupation of Kampuchea violate the United Nations Charter? (2) Has Vietnam signed the Charter? (3) Does Vietnam's occupation threaten the system of collective security embodied in the United Nations Charter? (4) What action has the Government taken through its membership of the United Nations Security Council to seek Vietnam's withdrawal from Kampuchea? Mr Hayden — The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Ever since the invasion of Kampuchea by Vietnam in 1979 Australia has repeatedly condemned Vietnam's invasion and occupation of Kampuchea. Australia has consistently stated that Vietnam's continued occupation constitutes a breach of internationally accepted principles and poses dangers to the peace and stability of the region. (2) No, Vietnam is not an original signatory of the United Nations Charter. Vietnam acceded to the Charter in 1977 when it joined the United Nations. (3) Although the United Nations Charter embodies a system of collective security, these provisions have never been implemented. (4) During Australia's current term on the United Nations Security Council, the issue of Kampuchea has not come before the Council. (Question No. 1700) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: How many officers of his Department, in Canberra, are working in (a) the disarmament and nuclear division and (b) in (i) the South-east Asian/Pacific Division, (ii) Europe, (iii) the Americas and (iv) the North Asia Divisions. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) The Department's functions relating to disarmament and nuclear policy are carried out within the Executive, Policy Planning, Defence and Nuclear Division. There are 77 staff, including policy advising, clerical and keyboard staff in this Division, of whom 28 work on disarmament and nuclear policy matters. These staff include the Special Disarmament Adviser, the Disarmament and Arms Control Branch, Peace and Disarmament Branch (including the International Year of Peace Secretariat) and Nuclear Policy Branch. (b) (i) In the South East Asia and Pacific Division there are 35 staff, including policy advising, clerical and keyboard. (b) (ii), (iii) and (iv). The Europe, Americas and North Asia Division has 29 staff, including 7 in Americas Branch, 9 in Europe Branch and 11 in North Asia Branch. (Question No. 1701) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: What has been the cost to the Government of maintaining the Ambassador for Disarmament and his staff since his appointment? Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Ambassador for Disarmament is supported directly in his Disarmament and Arms Control related duties by one Foreign Affairs Officer Class 4, one Foreign Affairs Officer Class 1 and a Steno-Secretary. All are normally based in Geneva but move annually between Geneva and New York to attend meetings of the General Assembly. The Ambassador also has a locally engaged driver based permanently in Geneva. It is not possible to provide a precise total of the costs of maintaining the Ambassador for Disarmament and his direct support staff since expenditure on items such as repairs and maintenance, communications, pool transport and office requisites used by them is a charge against the common services of the Australian Missions in Geneva and New York. There is no separate budget as such for the Ambassador for Disarmament and his staff and the total cost of their maintenance is therefore greater than the total of readily identifiable costs, detailed below. 1983-84 1984-85 1985-86 $ $ $Salaries and Allowances for Ambassador and Geneva based support staff (including locally engaged and Ambassador's domestic staff)... 222,427 355,895 386,222 Other overseas costs, from the Appropriations of the Overseas Property Office-Rentals, Utilities, Motor Vehicles, Furniture and Fittings... 322,813 260,366 271,723 Travel costs... 41,784 50,000 545,240 658,045 707,945 (Question No. 1702) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) What sum has been budgeted for expenditure related to the International Year of Peace. (2) How is this sum to be allocated. (3) How many people employed by his Department are involved in servicing, even in part, activities related to the International Year of Peace. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) For the 1985-86 financial year the sum of $2,007,000 has been budgeted for expenditure related to the International Year of Peace. (2) This sum is to be allocated as follows: (a) Advertising and publicity $700,000, (b) Government programs $600,000; (c) Non-government programs $500,000; (d) Administration $207,000 (3) In addition to Mrs Stella Cornelius, the Director of IYP programs who is employed on a consultancy basis, five people are engaged fulltime in activities related to the International Year of Peace in the Department of Foreign Affairs. This includes two officers seconded from other Government departments, so that the number of officers of the Department of Foreign Affairs working fulltime on the International Year of Peace is three. Five other officers of the Department are partly engaged in International Year of Peace activities. A number of other Departmental officers, including communications and other support staff, the Senior Foreign Affairs representatives in each State capital and certain officers in diplomatic missions abroad also have some involvement in International Year of Peace activities among their other duties. It is not possible to be precise about the number of officers involved in this degree since this varies from time to time. (Question No. 1703) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is it the position of the Government that there is nothing inconsistent between making proper provisions for defence and the United Nations International Year of Peace. (2) What is the Government's attitude towards the Australian Defence Exhibition scheduled for 1986. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The Secretary-General of the United Nations has described the main objectives of the International Year of Peace as: To stimulate concerted and effective action by the United Nations, its member States, intergovernmental organisations, non-government organisations, educational, cultural, academic institutions and the mass media in promoting peace, international security and co-operation on the basis of the Charter of the United Nations, and the resolution of conflict by peaceful means; to strengthen the United Nations as the principal international system devoted to the promotion and maintenance of peace: to urge member States to renew their commitment to the principles of the Charter and to implement these principles effectively; to enhance the effectiveness of the Security Council in fulfilling its primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, and the peaceful settlement of disputes; to increase public awareness and support for United Nations activities; to focus attention and encourage reflection on the basic requirements of peace in the contemporary world, in particular: (i) the inter-relationship of peace and development and social progress, security, national independence and justice; (ii) disarmament and the prevention of nuclear catastrophe as essential elements of peace; (iii) the exercise of human rights and freedom as an essential element of peace; (iv) the role of international co-operation, dialogue, mutual understanding and trust in the maintenance of peace with involvement of governments, parliaments and non-government organisations; (v) preparation for life in peace, a process in which education, science, culture, religion and the mass media play important roles, and which requires effective participation of various social groups, especially women, youth, elderly, war veterans and professionals. (vi) peace as a requirement for the satisfaction of such human needs as food, shelter, health, education, labour and the enviroment. The Government sees no inconsistency between these objectives and the making of proper provisions for the defence of Australia. Such provisions are entirely in accord with the Charter of the United Nations. (2) This part of the honourable member's question is taken to refer to the proposed Pacific Area Defence Exhibition (PADEX) planned for next year. PADEX is a private venture designed to promote international trade in military weapons and material and such does not require the approval of the Australian Government to be held. The Government has not assisted or endorsed PADEX in any way in line with its policy of not supporting privately sponsored defence exhibitions. Decisions on a number of specific matters relating to the exhibition will be announced shortly by the Minister for Defence. (Question No. 1704) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) What new diplomatic missions has Australia opened since March 1983? (2) What was the cost of running each post? (3) What are the current staff numbers maintained in each post? (4) What is the justification for their opening in each case? Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Diplomatic missions the Australian Government has opened since March 1983 are: Addis Ababa-opened December 1984; Budapest-opened October 1984; Brunei-opened March 1983; Geneva Disarmament-Ambassador appointed May 1983; Kathmandu-opened April 1984; Port Louis-opened March 1984; Riyadh-opened September 1984; Shanghai-opened July 1984. (2) The costs for running each of these new posts is set out, by year, below: Salaries and overtime Adminis- trative costs Total $ $ $ 1982-83 Brunei... 61,010 42,144 103,154 1983-84 Brunei... 210,185 48,515 258,700 Geneva Disarmament... 26,019 23,390 49,409 Kathmandu... 16,323 57,682 74,005 Port Louis... 46,315 15,558 61,873 1984-85 Addis Ababa... 87,294 25,951 113,245 Brunei... 262,928 130,513 393,441 Budapest... 87,372 20,705 108,077 Geneva... 96,580 45,696 142,276 Kathmandu... 111,341 70,570 181,911 Port Louis... 197,422 127,073 324,495 Riyadh... 137,124 101,472 238,596 Shanghai... 132,780 114,608 247,388 These figures do not includes overseas property and capital works expenditure. Funds for these categories are allocated to the Overseas Property Office, under the portfolio of Local Government and Administrative Services. (3) Current numbers maintained at each post, at 30 June 1985 are as follows: AUSTRALIAN BASED DFA ADAB Attached Locally engaged Addis Ababa... 2 . . . . 4 Brunei... 3 . . . . 3 Budapest... 2 . . . . 3 Geneva Disarmament... 2 . . . . - Kathmandu... 2 . . . 3 Port Louis... 3 . . 1 (imm)...5 Shanghai... 3 . . 3 (trade)...7 (4) The jusification for the opening of these Australian missions overseas is set out below. (a) Addis Ababa-The Australian Embassy at Addis Ababa is our first resident mission in the Horn of Africa region. Its establishment is in keeping with Australia's increasing focus on the Indian Ocean and East Africa region. The headquarters for the Organisation for African Unity (OAU) and the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa are located at Addis Ababa. Thus, Addis Ababa became the preferred location in the region as a mission there provides an opportunity for close contact between Australia and both these important organisations. Ethiopia's worsening drought and food distribution problems have given added importance to an Australian presence in the country. This presence has allowed us to monitor events there closely since the mission opened in December 1984. Australia's increasing aid commitment in humanitarian and development areas in the Horn of Africa and in East Africa has required the upgrading of our representation in Addis Ababa. A Third Secretary (Development Assistance) has been appointed and will begin work in November this year. (b) Brunei- The Australian High Commission was established in Brunei in anticipation of its membership of Association of South East Asian Nations, and its independence, declared in January 1984. Our ASEAN neighbours are of great importance in determining Australia's foreign policy. As well, we accord high priority to regional Commonwealth countries, such as Brunei. These were the primary reasons for the establishment of an Australian mission in Brunei. (c) Budapest-Hungary is a significant country in East Europe. For many years, we have had a fruitful exchange on issues such as disarmament, East-West relations, non-proliferation and Comecon. As well, Hungary is a model of national self management in the Warsaw Pact. Its attempts at economic and social reform, which have brought about greater emphasis on the importance of market forces, deserve greater diplomatic support. The potential for boosting and diversifying Australian trade with Hungary had existed for a long time. Prior to the establishment of our Embassy in Budapest, Hungary's foreign trade exceeded one-third of its gross domestic product, and more than half of that was trade with Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development nations. The early 1980's saw a closer relationship developing between Australia and Hungary. This created a heavy administrative burden on our diplomatic mission in Vienna, which was then accredited to Hungary. In the three years to February 1984, the Australian Ambassador made some twenty five trips to Hungary. As well, we were receiving constant complaints from Hungarian officials in Australia about the lengthy delays in issuing Australian visas to Hungarians on official business. Both these examples indicate a workload which required the establishment of a resident Australian mission in Hungary. The Hungarian Government had maintained an Embassy in Canberra for many years prior to 1984. This factor and the large Hungarian community in Australia provided further impetus for the establishment of an Australian mission in Hungary. (d) Geneva Disarmament-Strictly speaking, the appointment of an Ambassador for Disarmament in May 1983 did not require establishment of a new mission. It simply led to an increase of two in the staffing level at the Australian Embassy in Geneva, with the post providing common services. Australia's increasingly active participation in disarmament and arms control efforts reflects the Government's strong commitment to balanced and verifiable arms control and disarmament measures both nuclear and conventional. Our Government's contribution to disarmament has been enhanced significantly by the appointment of an Ambassador for Disarmament. (e) Kathmandu-There were two main reasons for the establishment of a resident Australian diplomatic mission in Nepal. Firstly, there was a need to improve the efficiency of consular services for the very large number of Australians visiting Nepal which, prior to the opening of the embassy in Kathmandu, the British were conducting on our behalf. The volume of work put British consular services in Nepal under strain and there were frequent requests by the British that we rectify the situation. A second reason for the establishment of a resident Australian mission in Nepal was that it would facilitate the administration of the Australian aid program to Nepal. (f) Port Louis-The reasons which led us to establish an Australian mission in Port Louis are strategic, political and economic. The Australian Government recognises the strategic importance of peace and stability in the Indian Ocean, and it recognises the need for Australia to strengthen its relations and promote its views amongst the Indian Ocean Island States. The newly established mission in Port Louis is therefore dually accredited in the Comores and the Seychelles. Accreditation in Madagascar has been sought. The mission provides a central focus for the conduct of the broad range of Australian interests in the Indian Ocean. Of all the Indian Ocean states, it is Mauritius that has established a close economic relationship with Australia. In 1983-4 Australian exports to Mauritius equalled total Australian exports to black African nations. As well, the Government of Mauritius established a diplomatic mission in Australia in 1977, and was becoming increasingly concerned that we had not reciprocated and established a resident mission in Port Louis. Prior to its establishment, the High Commissioner in Dar Es Salaam was accredited to Mauritius pending agreement from the Madagascar Government for the transfer of accreditation to Port Louis. Our High Commission in Tanzania remains responsible for Australia's relations with Madagascar. As well, a large Mauritian community in Australia made the establishment of an Australian diplomatic presence in Port Louis even more important. (g) Riyadh-The Australian Embassy in Riyadh was relocated from Jeddah due to Saudi Government policy which required all missions in the country to relocate in the diplomatic quarter of Riyadh. Saudi Arabia is of great importance to Australia, by virtue of its geographical location between two important sea routes, and as an important source of oil for Australia. Since the establishment of the Australian Embassy in Jeddah, Australia has become recognised by Saudi Arabia as a reliable trading partner and is increasingly looked upon as a source of advice and training in a number of fields of economic and social development. The Embassy is primarily concerned with maintaining a healthy bilateral relationship with Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states and the Yemens, to which our Ambassador in Saudi Arabia is accredited. This means advancing our politicial and economic interests, particularly in relation to our access to future oil supplies and trade. With the transfer of our Embassy to Riyadh, the post in Jeddah became a Consulate-General, staffed solely by Department of Trade personnel. (h) Shanghai-In 1978 the Australian Government indicated its intention to open a Consulate-General in Shanghai in an Exchange of Notes. Since that time, the United States, the Federal Republic of Germany, Japan and Britian, and various non-Western nations have recognised the importance of establishing Consulates-General in Shanghai. The need to expand our representation was seen as essential for effectively representing our interests in China. The establishment of a Consulate-General in Shanghai was an ideal location for both political and economic reasons. Trade opportunities between Australia and China should be maximised through the establishment of a mission in the industrial heartland. As well, Shanghai has an important political role in China. During this century political movements in Shanghai have been a major determinant of the direction of Chinese politics. (Question No. 1705) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) What has been the level of increase in all categories of staff in his Department (a) overseas and (b) in Australia between 1979-1980 and 1984-1985. (2) What has been the justification for these increases. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) and (b) The figures for 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982, 1983-4 are taken from the Department of Foreign Affairs Annual Reports, and the figures for 1984-85 will be included in the next Annual Report due for release early next year. Heads of Mission Foreign Affairs Officers Consular & Admin Staff Keyboard & Technical Staff Australian Development Assistance Bureau Locally Engaged Staff Total 1979 Australia... . . 216 672 258 430 . . 1,576 Overseas... 68 187 229 285 28 2,128 2,925 68 403 901 543 458 2,128 4,501 1980 Australia... . . 218 684 197 452 . . 1,551 Overseas... 72 186 219 283 30 2,158 2,948 72 404 903 480 482 2,158 4,499 1981 Australia... . . 208 686 261 429 . . 1,584 Overseas... 71 189 218 278 29 2,063 2,848 71 397 904 539 458 2,063 4,432 1982 Australia... . . 219 696 288 383 . . 1,586 Overseas... 74 192 221 270 27 1,975 2,759 74 411 917 558 410 1,975 4,345 1983-4 Australia... . . 259 674 326 349 . . 1,608 Overseas... 74 195 222 294 27 1,960 2,772 74 454 896 620 376 1,960 4,380 1984-5 Australia... . . 272 795 330 378 . . 1,775 Overseas... 77 195 214 294 30 1,975 2,785 77 467 1,009 624 408 1,975 4,560 Footnote: The 1983-4 figures do not include officers on Secondment elsewhere (32) and those on maternity leave, extended sick leave or long service leave (42). In 1984-5 a new system of collecting data on staff numbers, Human Resource Budgeting, was introduced for all Commonwealth Departments. The 1984-5 figures do not include inoperatives, nor part time staff (71). Experts (120 in 1985) and Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (23 in 1985) staff, employed by Australian Development Assistance Bureau are not included. (2). Overall, the total increase of staff employed by my Department over the period 1979 to 1985 is 1.3 per cent (59). This figure is distorted somewhat by the drastic drop in ADAB's staffing figures, especially during the 1979-1983/84 period. With ADAB figures removed, the increase still comes to the modest figure of 2.6 per cent (109). The increases in Foreign Affairs staff levels can be largely attributed to three factors: changing Government priorities in the formulation of foreign policy, new policy initiatives on the domestic front and large increases in workload for particular important functions of the Department. Changing government priorities in formulating foreign policy has led to the establishment of 15 new missions overseas, and closure of 7 in the period 1979 to 1985. This results in a net increase of 9 in Australia's overseas missions. Of the fifteen newly established missions, twelve required Executive Council appointments for the head of mission position. Three, (Bali, Shanghai and Houston) were Consulates-General requiring appointment of the head of mission at official level, by the Secretary of the Department. This led to a direct increase in Executive Council appointments of eight. One further appointment at Executive Council level was required when our consulate at Nicosia, Cyprus was upgraded to a diplomatic mission in January 1982. This increase of 11% in the Executive Council appointments reflects a reasonably constant level of increase across all streams of the Department. The FAO stream recorded an increase of 15 per cent (64) with the Consular and Administrative stream, and the Keyboards and Technical stream increasing by 11.9 per cent (108) and 14.9 per cent (81) respectively. The increase in Australia-based staff is to be expected when there is such an increase in the number of missions. The impact of these increases has been largely offset by a decrease of 7 per cent (153) in locally engaged staff in the period. The location of these new missions is a reflection of the changing priorities of Australian foreign policy in the 1980's. Of the fifteen new posts opened, six are in the Pacific and Asian regions, four are in Africa. Only one post, Geneva Disarmament, has been established in West Europe. This special mission concentrates on pursuing Australia's arms control and disarmament policies particularly, but not exclusively in the multilateral field. It is indicative of a new high priority in Australia's foreign policy set by this Government. The changed priorities of the Government has led to the creation of two new branches and four new sections in the Department. A Disarmament and Arms Control Branch and a Treaties Branch was established in 1983. As well, an International Year of Peace (IYP) Secretariat and three new Sections dealing with chemical weapons, nuclear non-proliferation and human rights, have been established. The Governments' domestic policy initiatives, EEO, industrial democracy, and FOI have all contributed to an increasing workload for the Department. The third factor which has led to some staff increases is the increased activity for certain Departmental functions. This is especially so of the communications network, which experienced a 23 per cent increase in the 1983-4 period alone, and the passports function. One of the most important, and public functions of the Department is the issue of Australian passports. As a result of the Stewart Royal Commission, forty extra positions were created, by Mr Street, when he was Minister for Foreign Affairs in December 1982 to upgrade security arrangements. Since 1982, passport applications have increased by 24 per cent. Without a further increase in staff of 24 positions (12.5 per cent) the Department's passports processing time and workload would have been intolerable. Levels of staff employed by the Australian Development Assistance Bureau have declined since 1979 by 10.9 per cent. As the figures revealed, the decline is the result of the previous Government's policy which gave extremely low priority to aid administration. In the period 1979 to 1983-4 the number of ADAB staff declined by 17.9 per cent. The present government has attempted to redress this decline, with an increase of 7.8 per cent in 1985. In the future, as the Jackson Committee recommendations for upgrading ADAB functions and administration are implemented, ADAB will be better equipped to administer our aid program. (Question No. 1706) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 16 September 1985: Has he taken action to ensure that Australia's rapidly growing foreign debt, and the predicted further growth in that debt, will not destablise Australia's broader relations with its major trading partners, and particularly those countries in Australia's immediate region. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Australia's external indebtedness is the responsibility of my colleague the Treasurer. There is no question of Australia's external debt destabilising broader relations with our major trading partners or with countries in Australia's immediate region. (Question No. 1707) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Does the Government refuse to endorse any particular weapons in the United States strategic modernisation program; if so (a) which ones, and (b) why, in each case. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Government has not had occasion to endorse or refuse to endorse any particular weapons of the United States' Strategic Modernisation Program or indeed of the comparable programs of other countries. (Question No. 1708) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to confirm that the Soviet Union is preparing to deploy the SS-X-24 inter-continental ballistic missile in silos in 1986 and on rail mobile launchers in 1987. (2) Is he able to say whether these SS-X-24 ICBMs will be equipped with 10 MIRVs and replace the MIRVed SS-17 and SS-19 silo based ICBMs which carry fewer warheads. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Soviet Union does not provide such information about its forces. The Government has seen unclassified testimony to this effect by two senior United States officials-Robert M. Gates, Chairman, National Intelligence Council, and Deputy Director for Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency and Lawrence K. Gershwin, National Intelligence Officer for Strategic Programs, National Intelligence Council-to a joint session of the Sub-Committee on Strategic and Theater Nuclear Forces of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Defense Sub-Committee of the Senate Committee on Appropriations of the United States Senate on 26 June 1985. The Government has no reason to question this assessment. (Question No. 1709) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to confirm that the Soviet Union has started to retire older silo-based single-RV SS-11s as they prepare to deploy the single-RV road-mobile SS-X-25. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: To the Government's knowledge, the Soviet Union has not made such information public. The Government has however noted press reports to this effect from usually well sourced journalists-see for example `Russia Planning to Replace Missiles' by Walter Pincus which appeared in the International Herald Tribune on 10 May 1985. It has also seen a statement to this effect in unclassified testimony by two senior United States officials-Robert M. Gates, Chairman, National Intelligence Council and Deputy Director for Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency, and Lawrence K. Gershwin, National Intelligence Officer for Strategic Programs, National Intelligence Council-to a joint session of the Sub Committee on Strategic and Theater Nuclear Forces of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Defense Sub-Committee of the Senate Committee on Appropriations of the United States Senate on 26 June 1985. It has no reason to question this assessment. I draw the honourable member's attention to the recent statement by the United States Secretary for Defense, Mr Weinberger, on 22 October 1985 that deployment of the SS25 is now under way. (Question No. 1710) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to confirm that the Soviet Union will flight-test the following three new inter-continental ballistic missiles in the 1986-1990 time period (a) a new silo based heavy ICBM, to replace the SS-18, (b) a new version of the SS-X-24, and (c) a new version of the mobile SS-X-25. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Soviet Union does not provide such information about its forces. The Government has noted unclassified testimony to this effect by two senior United States officials-Robert M. Gates, Chairman, National Intelligence Council, and Deputy Director for Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency and Lawrence K. Gershwin, National Intelligence Officer for Strategic Programs, National Intelligence Council-to a joint session of the Sub-Committee on Strategic and Theater Nuclear Forces of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Defense Sub-Committee of the Senate Committee on Appropriations of the United States Senate on 26 June 1985-and has no reason to question this assessment. (Question No. 1711) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to confirm that the Soviet Union is proceeding with an extensive modernisation program which will result in the replacement of the entire MIRVed Soviet SLBM force and the deployment of a much more sophisticated nuclear powered ballistic missile submarine. (2) Will these changes include the deployment of (a) Delta-IV and additional Typhoon SSBNs and (b) the new SS-NX-23 SLBM beginning in late 1985 or early 1986 on Delta-IVs and Delta-IIIs. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Soviet Union does not provide such information about its forces. The Government has noted unclassified testimony to this effect by two senior United States officials-Robert M. Gates, Chairman, National Intelligence Council, and Deputy Director for Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency, and Lawrence K. Gershwin, National Intelligence Officer for Strategic Programs, National Intelligence Council-to a joint session of the Sub-Committee on Strategic and Theater Nuclear Forces of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Defense Sub-Committee of the Senate Committee on Appropriations of the United States Senate on 26 June 1985. (1) This testimony and other unclassified United States Government material, for example the U.S. Defense Department publication `Soviet Military Power 1985,' indicate that the Soviet Union is modernising its SLBM force. (2) According to Soviet Military Power 1985, pp 31-32: (a) Three Typhoon Class, and two Delta IV-class submarines have been launched. (b) The SS-NX-23 SLBM is to be deployed on Delta III and IV submarines. I am not able to confirm the deployment dates. (Question No. 1712) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to confirm that the air-launched cruise missile, first in a series of deployments of long-range, land attack missiles and that over the next 10 years the Soviet Union is expected to deploy 2,000 to 3,000 nuclear armed ALCMs, sea launched cruise missiles and ground launched cruise missiles. (2) Is he able to confirm that the deployment of cruise missiles provides the Soviets with new multidirectional capabilities against U.S. targets. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: I assume that the question relates to the deployment of Soviet ALCMs. The Soviet Union does not provide such information about its forces. (1) The Government has noted unclassified testimony to this effect by two senior United States officials-Robert M. Gates, Chairman, National Intelligence Council, and Deputy Director for Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency, and Lawrence K. Gershwin, National Intelligence Officer for Strategic Programs, National Intelligence Council-to a joint session of the Sub-Committee on Strategic and Theater Nuclear Forces of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Defense Sub-Committee of the Senate Committee on Appropriations of the United States Senate on 26 June 1985. It has no reason to question this assessment but would caution that such long term assessments may be revised in the light of future developments. (2) The deployment of cruise missiles provides both sides with enhanced capability to launch attacks from a variety of directions. (Question No. 1713) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to confirm that the Soviet Union's heavy bomber force is undergoing its first major modernisation since the 1960s and that by the mid 1990s most of the older bombers will have been replaced. (2) Is he able to say (a) when Blackjack will be operational and (b) whether it will be carrying both air-launched cruise missiles and bombs. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Soviet Union does not provide such information about its forces. (1) The Government has noted unclassified testimony to this effect by two senior United States officials-Robert M. Gates, Chairman, National Intelligence Council, and Deputy Director for Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency, and Lawrence K. Gershwin, National Intelligence Officer for Strategic Programs, National Intelligence Council-to a joint Session of the Sub-Committee on Strategic and Theater Nuclear Forces of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Defense Sub-Committee of the Senate Committee on Appropriations of the United States Senate on 26 June 1985-and has no reason to question this testimony. In relation to the assesment that most of the older bombers will have been replaced by the mid-1990s the Government would caution that such assessments are based on data available at the time and may need to be revised in the light of future developments. (2) (a) For the reasons indicated above the Government is not able to say with certainty when the Blackjack will be operational. It has noted unclassified US documents-including the testimony cited above-which suggest that it is likely to enter service in 1988 or 1989. (b) Not with certainty. It seems reasonable to assume that it will be capable of carrying both. (Question No. 1714) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: What overseas development assistance was provided by the Government to each country in the South Pacific region both in real and nominal terms for (a) 1979-80, (b) 1980-81, (c) 1982-83, (d) 1983-84 and (e) 1984-85. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Real and normal bilateral development assistance provided to each country in the South Pacific region, including Papua New Guinea, is given in the attached table. AUSTRALIA'S OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE TO SOUTH PACIFIC COUNTRIES Bilateral Aid by Country ($'000) In Current Prices 1979-80 1980-81 1981-82 1982-83 1983-84 1984-85 In Real (Constant 1979/80) Prices 1979-80 1980-81 1981-82 1982-83 1983-84 1984-85 Cook Islands... 306 217 859 688 371 995 306 197 706 511 256 647 Fiji... 9,760 9,657 11,590 12,474 10,039 16,384 9,760 8,747 9,531 9,267 6,933 10,660 Kiribati... 2,383 2,482 2,502 2,289 2,283 3,459 2,383 2,248 2,058 1,701 1,577 2,250 Nauru... 21 - 1 6 48 58 21 0 1 4 33 38 New Caledonia... 2 2 2 3 5 54 2 2 2 2 3 35 Niue... 109 243 252 251 132 105 109 220 207 186 91 68 Polynesia, French... - - 1 103 12 96 - 0 1 77 8 62 Solomon Islands... 3,901 5,530 5,937 8,830 7,270 8,629 3,901 5,009 4,882 6,560 5,021 5,614 Tokelau... - 1 - 1 5 - - 1 0 1 3 0 Tonga... 3,702 4,591 5,541 4,146 4,986 6,789 3,702 4,159 4,557 3,080 3,443 4,417 Tuvalu... 1,312 644 690 1,148 1,187 1,385 1,312 583 567 853 820 901 Vanuatu... 2,755 3,547 3,409 5,881 5,134 5,584 2,755 3,213 2,803 4,369 3,546 3,633 Western Samoa... 3,902 2,816 4,005 7,207 5,301 5,271 3,902 2,551 3,294 5,354 3,661 3,429 Total (excl. PNG)... 28,153 29,730 34,789 43,027 36,773 48,809 28,153 26,930 28,609 31,965 25,395 31,754 Papua New Guinea... 235,624 245,113 252,897 274,947 302,280 320,199 235,624 222,023 207,975 204,270 208,757 208,327 Total... 263,777 274,843 287,686 317,974 339,053 369,008 263,777 248,952 236,584 236,236 234,153 240,083 Note: The costs involved in educating students from developing coutries in Australian secondary and tertiary institutions have been included as O.D.A. from 1 July 1984. The following Implicit Price Deflators (Expenditure on Gross Domestic Product) were used to derive real prices: 1979/80 100.0; 1980/81 110.4; 1981/82 121.6; 1982/83 134.6; 1983/84 144.8; 1984/85 153.7 (Source: ABS). (Question No. 1715) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) What representations has the Government made to the New Zealand Government requesting it not to proceed with its anti-nuclear legislation. (2) At what level have these representations been made; by whom, and when. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1 and 2) None. As I stated in a press conference on 10 October following my talks in Washington with the United States Secretary of State, Mr Schultz, we do not know in specific terms what the proposed New Zealand legislation will provide for, nor is it clear when the draft legislation will be ready for introduction into the New Zealand Parliament. Such legislation is of course a matter for the New Zealand Government and the New Zealand Parliament. At the appropriate time the Australian Government will consider the extent that such legislation may have implications for Australia and act appropriately. (Question No. 1716) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to confirm that there are more than 120 Soviet Union submarines in their Pacific fleet, 31 of which are classed as `strategic', that is, meaning they can fire nuclear weapons. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Several authoritative Western public sources give figures for the number of submarines in the Soviet Pacific Fleet which agree closely with those quoted in the question: (a) Jane's Fighting Ships 1984-1985 lists 24 SSBN, 7 SSB and 96 other submarines; (b) Soviet Military Power 1985 lists 31 SSBN/SSB and 103 other submarines; (c) The Military Balance 1984-1985 lists 25 SSBN, 6 SSB and 102 other submarines. The Government has no reason to question the broad accuracy of these assessments: see, for example, the answer to question on notice No. 803. The terms SSBN and SSB refer to nuclear powered ballistic missile submarines and conventionally powered ballistic missile submarines respectively. The term `strategic', in this context, has traditionally been taken as referring to submarines capable of launching ballistic missiles and accountable under the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks I Interim Agreement. This category of submarines comprises all modern ballistic missile submarines operational or under construction on the date of signature of the SALT I Interim Agreement (26 May 1972) and any older submarines converted to carry new missiles after the date of signature of the Interim Agreement. For the Soviet Union (and for the United States) only SSBNs are `strategic' submarines in the sense of being SALT-accountable: 13 older Soviet submarines carrying a total of 39 shorter-range ballistic missiles and including the SSBS assigned to the Pacific Fleet are considered to be assigned to theatre roles (Soviet Military Power, page 31). I might add that the ability to fire nuclear weapons is not limited to ballistic missile submarines alone. Other classes of submarines are also nuclear-capable: see e.g. pp 95-97 of Soviet Military Power 1985. (Question No. 1717) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: What effect will the signing of the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty have on the operations of the Australian Atomic Energy Commission and its activities at Lucas Heights, NSW and, in particular, on its storage of waste and its stock of highly enriched uranium. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The signature by Australia on 6 August 1985 of the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty will not affect the operations of the Australian Atomic Energy Commission. These operations are fully consistent with the objectives and provisions of the Treaty. Parties to the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty undertake not to manufacture nuclear explosive devices and not to permit them to be tested or stationed on their territory. Peaceful nuclear activities are not proscribed by the Treaty providing these are subject to safeguards administered by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to verify the non-diversion of nuclear material from peaceful activities to nuclear explosive devices. These safeguards already apply in Australia. The provision of the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty covering the dumping of radioactive wastes and other radioactive matter (Article 7) applies only to dumping at sea. It does not relate to the storage of nuclear materials (which includes highly enriched uranium) nor the disposal of radioactive wastes on land. (Question No. 1718) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say what are the terms of the Soviet Fishing agreement with the Government of Kiribati. (2) What action, if any, did the Government take to persuade the Government of Kiribati not to proceed with the agreement. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The fisheries agreement between Kiribati and the Soviet Union has not been made public. On 10 October 1985, Radio Kiribati carried a press release from the Kiribati Ministry for Natural Resources stating that the Soviet Union had paid the first instalment of $A672,000 under the agreement and that licences were issued on 4 October for eight Soviet fishing vessels for the period 15 October 1984 to 14 October 1986. Other information made public about the agreement is that licence fee for one year's fishing by Soviet vessels is some $A2.4m; that the agreement allows Soviet vessels to fish in Kiribati's exclusive economic zone for 12 months; and that Kiribati has not granted the Soviet Union access to shore based facilities on Kiribati. The Government has on various occasions made known to the Government of Kiribati that it has some concerns over the implications of such an agreement. At the same time the Australian Government fully recognises that Kiribati is a sovereign independent country and that decisions on such matters are the responsibility of its Government. (Question No. 1719) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to confirm that the Soviet Union is involved in a high degree of encryption (scrambling) of its telemetry (radio signals from missile tests). (2) Does this encryption of missile telemetry portend the increasing concealment and deception of all Soviet strategic programs. (3) Is this encryption in violation of existing arms control undertakings. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The Government does not dispute United States reports that the Soviet Union encrypts telemetry from its missile tests. (2) No judgment is possible on available information. (3) The Strategic Arms Limitation Talks II Treaty prohibits encryption of telemetry where such encryption `impedes verification of compliance' with the Treaty. The Government is not in a position to make an independent judgment but it notes the United States view that Soviet encryption practices constitute a violation of an obligation under SALT II prior to 1981 and a violation of their political commitment since 1982. The Government is not in a position to make an independent judgment but it notes the United States view that Soviet encryption practices constitute a violation of an obligation under Strategic Arms Limitation Talks II prior to 1981 and a violation of their political commitment since 1982. (Question No. 1720) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to confirm that the current Soviet strategic defence approach is to rely essentially on nuclear tipped anti-missiles whilst the United States strategic defence initiative is substantially based around exploring non-nuclear defence systems. (2) Is he able to say how the Soviet system is expected to work. (3) What steps has the Government taken to single out for criticism the Soviet strategic defence approach. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The Government understands that the operational anti-ballistic missile complex centred on Moscow employs interceptor missiles with nuclear warheads. The United States Administration has stated that the strategic defence initiative will concentrate on exploring non-nuclear defensive systems. The Government also accepts that the Soviet Union is engaged in a research effort comparable in scope to the SDI. (2) No, but a broad description is provided in Soviet Military Power 1985, pp 46-48. (3) The Government is deeply concerned about the probable consequences of the pursuit of strategic defences for strategic stability and the prospects for reductions in the nuclear arsenals. It is more concerned to see the full integrity of the ABM Treaty preserved than to support its demise through non-nuclear rather than nuclear means. The Government has stated that it endorses neither the SDI nor what it accepts to be-despite Soviet denials-a comparable Soviet program. The Government is also sharply critical of the excessive secrecy that surrounds Soviet military activities, including in the area of strategic defences. (Question No. 1721) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say (a) when the Soviet Union commenced its high energy laser program, (b) how many major research and development facilities and test ranges in the Soviet Union do traditional anti-ballistic missile work, (c) how many scientists and engineers associated with the development of lasers for weapons are employed by the Soviet Government, and (d) what types of lasers is the Soviet Union conducting research into and whether these are important to the Soviet strategic defence effort. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The most recent source of information available on these matters is the official United States publication, Soviet Strategic Defence Programs (October 1985). According to this source the answers are: (a) in the late 1960s (p.12) (b) one, at Sary Shagan (p.12) (c) over 10,000 scientists and engineers are involved in the USSR's laser program (p.12). It is not specified how many of these may be employed in developing lasers for weapons. (d) the following types of lasers are thought to be considered by the Soviet Union to be promising or potentially promising for weapons applications: gas-dynamic; electric discharge; chemical; excimer; free-electron; and X-ray (p.13). (Question No. 1722) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to state whether the Vietnamese Government, while tolerating the existence of religious groups, has consistently attempted to divide, control and reduce the Catholic, Buddhist, and Cao Dai churches, the Muslim community and other religious groups. (2) Is he also able to state how many priests and other members of religious orders are currently in `re-education camps' in Vietnam. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) There is a report which claims that the Vietnamese Government tolerates the existence of religious groups and allows religious services but that it has consistently attempted to divide, control and reduce the Catholic, Buddhist, and Cao Dai churches, the Muslim community, and other religious groups. This report has not been confirmed. (2) There are reportedly over 100 priests detained in `re-education camps'. (Question No. 1723) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 16 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether reports that the Vietnamese Ministry of the Interior inspects and sometimes confiscates international mail sent to Vietnam, particularly to politically suspect individuals or those of Chinese origin, are accurate. (2) What action has the Government taken to ensure that mail sent by the Vietnamese community in Australia to Vietnam is protected. (3) If no action has been taken, why not. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Australia Post has advised that it is not aware of any evidence that the reports are accurate. (2) Australia Post has also advised that it has not received any enquiries or complaints concerning the interception or confiscation of mail for delivery in Vietnam. It has advised that Vietnam is a member of the Universal Postal Union and as such is bound by the provisions of the Acts, but that there is no explicit provision in the Acts of the UPU which guarantees the privacy of the mails. (3) Australia Post has advised that any claims that mail is being intercepted and confiscated would, following the normal procedures in such cases, be examined by it on a case-by-case basis. (Question No. 1724) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 16 September 1985: (1) Can he indicate whether Vietnam is (a) not a member of any international human rights organisation and (b) not active in attempting to ameliorate the human rights situation in other countries. (2) Does the Vietnamese Government not permit the existence in Vietnam of private groups concerned with human rights. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) Vietnam is not a member of any international human rights organisation. However, it has signed: (i) The International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights; (ii) The International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination, and (iii) The Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women. (b) It is not active in attempting to ameliorate the human rights situation in other countries. (2) According to a report, the Vietnamese Government does not permit the existence in Vietnam of private groups concerned with human rights. (Question No. 1725) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: To be able to state whether, despite the Orderly Departure Scheme, during 1984, refugees continued to leave Vietnam clandestinely and that Hanoi and provincial radio stations broadcast reports of executions or of lengthy jail sentences for organisers of failed escape attempts, as well as punishment dealt to others implicated. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: During 1984, refugees continued to leave Vietnam clandestinely, although at a lower rate than past years. Hanoi and provincial radio stations have broadcast reports of executions or of lengthy jail sentences for organisers of failed escape attempts, as well as punishments dealt to others implicated. (Question No. 1727) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Is it a fact that on 2 May 1985 he said: (a) he regretted the United States decision to impose an economic boycott against Nicaragua and (b) that the action was severe and unlikely to bring the Sandinistas to heel, but rather increase their resolve to withstand United States pressures. (2) If so, would sanctions have a similarly counter-productive effect on the South African Government; if not, why not. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) Yes. (b) The United States economic embargo against Nicaragua was a unilateral action which did not receive significant international support and was not joined by any other country. As also pointed out in my statement of 2 May, the embargo was also unhelpful to the Contadora process. It was the Government's assessment that in these circumstances, the embargo was a severe step which would not succeed in bringing about changes in the attitude of the Nicaraguan Government desired by the United States. The Government's belief that the action was likely to increase the resolve of the Nicaraguan Government to resist United States pressure has in fact proved to be the case. (2) The situation in South Africa and the international community's response to it is not analogous to that of Nicaragua. The Government takes the view that concerted international economic and other measures are important and effective means of exerting pressure on South Africa to encourage peaceful change. This approach is in keeping with the recent Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Nassau where the Government committed itself to encourage an effective process of change and reform in South Africa. The main elements of the Government's approach is the implementation of a range of measures to be introduced in a graduated way and the establishment of mechanisms for dialogue through a group of eminent persons. The Government does not seek to impose sanctions measures for their own sake. We seek rather to play a constructive role in developing proposals to assist the peaceful transition of South Africa to a non-racial society based on universal adult suffrage. (Question No. 1728) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: What are the dates of the visit to Australia of the Foreign Minister of Nicaragua, Fr Miguel D'Escoto Brockmann. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: A visit to Australia by the Nicaraguan Foreign Minister was earlier scheduled for late August this year. The visit was postponed at the request of the Nicaraguan Government and dates in November are currently under consideration. (Question No. 1729) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Has his attention been drawn to a statement by United States National Security Affairs Advisor, Robert McFarlane, that the link between Nicaragua and the murder of six Americans in San Salvador is very clear. (2) If so, is he also able to state whether there is any substance to this comment. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. (2) The Government is unaware of the evidence upon which Mr McFarlane based his comment. (Question No. 1730) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether in Nicaragua there are 16,000 armed insurgents in a nation of 3.2 million, and another 3,000 to 5,000 rebels without arms or equipment. (2) If so, do their ranks include poor peasants, small farmers, Indians, devout christians, draft resisters, and deserters from the Sandinista army. (3) Is he able to indicate whether the political leadership of the Democratic Resistance is made up of committed democrats, such as Arturo Cruz, Alfonso Robelo and Adolfo Calero. (4) Will the Government call on the Nicaraguan Government to establish democratic freedoms and respect for human rights. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The figures available on the number of anti-Government Nicaraguan Contras in Nicaragua, and in neighbouring countries, vary according to source. The Contras themselves have claimed that they have more than 16,000 men under arms. The Nicaraguan Government, on the other hand, puts their numbers at about 12,000. (2) The vast majority of Contra troops are believed to be peasants, but there are also numbers of Miskito Indians and members of other indigenous groups, and officers and men of the National Guard of former dictator Anastasio Somoza Debayle. There have been reports that young men fleeing the draft in Nicaragua and deserters from the Sandinist Popular Army have joined the Contras. Other reports allege forcible recruitment of peasants and draft evaders by Contras both in Nicaragua and among displaced Nicaraguans in neighbouring countries. Most of the Contra senior command are former members of the National Guard of Somoza. (3) `Democratic Resistance' is a term used by the United States Government to describe the external opposition and in particular the armed insurgent groups who are collectively known as Contras. The political arm of the major Contra groups is the recently formed Unified Nicaraguan Opposition (UNO). UNO's political program includes calls for: national reconciliation based on amnesty and total pardon for political and related crimes applicable to all Nicaraguans without exception; development of a democratic political and judicial system. Arturo Cruz, Alfonso Robelo and Adolfo Calero are members of the 12-man Council of UNO. All three are businessmen who participated to varying degrees in opposition to the regime of Anastasio Somza. Before breaking with the Sandinistas in 1981, Arturo Cruz served as Director of Nicaragua's Central Bank, a member of the Governing Junta for National Reconstruction, and then as Nicaraguan Ambassador to the United States. Cruz was a presidential candidate for the Nicaraguan opposition grouping, the Coordinadora Democratica, before the group withdrew from the November 1984 elections. Alfonso Robelo founded the Nicaraguan Democratic Movement (MDN) in 1978. The MDN later joined the Broad Opposition Front (FAO), which unsuccessfully sought to negotiate a settlement with the Somoza regime in 1978-79. Robelo served briefly on the governing Junta which initially replaced Somoza. He was leader of the political wing of the Revolutionary Democratic Alliance (ARDE), a Contra group operating from Cost Rica which split in 1984. Robelo's faction then joined the main Contra group, the Nicaraguan Democratic Force (FDN). Adolfo Calero is political head of the FDN. He was leader of the Conservative Democratic Party in Nicaragua and later became a member of the FAO. Calero left Nicaragua in 1982. The three persons mentioned all espouse democratic principles but their influence (particularly that of Cruz and Robelo) over the military arm of the UNO, which is essentially the FDN, is believed to be minimal. The military commanders of the FDN are mainly former Somoza National Guardsmen, who could not be regarded as `committed democrats'. It is a common assessment that the formation of UNO and the presence within it of persons such as Cruz and Robelo is intended to provide some international respectability to the Contras. (4) The Government has expressed concern at the erosion of pluralism and civil liberties in Nicaragua on a number of occasions and will continue to do so where appropriate. Most recently, I said in a speech delivered to the Australian Human Rights Congress on Central America on 21 July 1985, that the human rights record of the Sandinistas' since the revolution has not been immaculate and that it would be a tragedy, after what the Nicaraguans have been through, if they trampled human rights in the rush to the barricades. At the same time, the Government has made clear that it believes the human rights record of the Nicaraguan Government to be considerably better than those of some other Central American Governments. The human rights record of the Contras is atrocious. (Question No. 1731) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to state whether there are some 3,000 Cuban military or security personnel in Nicaragua attached to the armed forces, internal security, and intelligence organisations. (2) Is he also able to state whether there are substantial numbers of Soviet, East German and Libyan military and security advisors to the Sandinista Government. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Publicly available reports on the number of Cuban personnel acting as advisers to the Nicaraguan Armed forces and to the Nicaraguan security authorities have consistently estimated their number in the range of 2,000 to 3,000. (2) There are also reports of the presence in Nicaragua of military and security advisers from Eastern bloc countries and Libya. The Nicaraguan armed forces, which have been engaged in conflict with United States- assisted Contra insurgents, are mainly supplied by Eastern bloc countries. There has been evidence that Libya has in the past delivered arms and equipment to Nicaragua. It is highly likely that personnel from the supplying countries are engaged in installation and maintenance of this equipment and in training in its use. (Question No. 1732) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to state whether (a) Soviet bloc investment in Nicaragua for the construction of nearly 40 new military facilities runs to approximately $US70m and (b) the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Bulgaria, East Germany and Cuba are building critical infrastructure facilities, at great expense, which will have important military uses. (2) Is he also able to state whether (a) the 10,000 foot runway at the Punta Huete Airfield, when completed, will be the longest military runway in Central America and (b) the Sandinista Air Force Commander has admitted that it would be a military air base, (c) when Punta Huete becomes operational it will be able to accommodate any aircraft in the Soviet bloc inventory and (d) Sandinista acquisition of jet aircraft would destabilise the regional military balance. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: 1 (a) and (b) various reports on Eastern bloc military assistance to Nicaragua are available to the Government, including the United States State Department/Defense Department booklet on which these questions are based. While trends are clear, it is often difficult to be certain about details. Some earlier reports which made categorical claims about Soviet assistance were later shown to be in error. Eastern bloc assistance has been applied to a variety of purposes, the total value of which would be in excess of $US70m. The assistance includes provision of military equipment and training, civil aid and provision of civilian technical advisers. Nicaragua also receives aid from Western countries (though no longer from the United States). However, its parlous econonic situation and the ongoing conflict with the Contras has resulted in increasing reliance on the Eastern bloc. As the Nicaraguan Government considers that its national sovereignty is under threat, it is to be expected that much of the aid is channelled into military areas. Nicaragua's infrastructural needs are great. Facilities constructed with Eastern bloc assistance could presumably be used for military purposes if necessary. 2 (a) There are other runways of this length at Goloson International Airport, Honduras, El Salvador International Airport, General Torrijos Herrera Airport, Panama, and Santa Elena Peten Airport in Guatemala, which could be used for military purposes if required. (b) It is the Government's understanding that Punta Huete will be a military airfied. The Government has not seen a text of the reported admission by the Nicaraguan Air Force Commander to this effect. (c) Yes. (d) There is considerable debate over what constitutes the `regional military balance'. This issue is one of the sticking points in the present Contadora negotiations. The Nicaraguan army is larger and better equipped than those of any of its Central American neighbours. However, the Nicaraguan air force inventory of fixed-wing aircraft is obsolete and inferior to that of each of Honduras and El Salvador. In addition, Nicaraguan public statements express fears of US invasion. Nicaragua's armed forces expansion is undoubtedly based partly on these fears. The Nicaraguan concept of `balance' then is quite different to that of other Central American countries, which are unwilling to accept a situation of Nicaraguan superiority over them, individually or collectively. There could also be debate over the term `jet aircraft', which might refer to anything from a trainer to a sophisticated high performance fighter. Any judgement about the significance of acquiring jet aircraft would obviously depend on the type and quantity of aircraft involved. The United States has indicated that it would regard the acquisition of `sophisticated fighter aircraft' as a provocative development. The Australian Government has consistently taken the view that military action will not solve the problems of Central America. Irrespective of the various concepts of `balance', a Central American arms race would be a wasteful diversion of resources, likely only to exacerbate tensions and to hinder the search for a peaceful, negotiated settlement. (Question No. 1733) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to state whether the Soviet Union has provided the Nicaraguan Government with (a) tanks, (b) armoured vehicles, (c) howitzers, (d) rocket launchers, (e) helicopters, (f) anti-tank missiles, (g) trucks, (h) artillery and (i) armoured personnel vehicles. (2) If so, in what quantities, in each case. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) Various reports on these matters are available to the Government. Two from which I can quote are United States State Department/Defense Department papers of July 1984 and March 1985, which draw in part on intelligence sources. They provide the following details of Eastern bloc (mostly Soviet) supplied equipment: (a) Tanks: Nearly 110 medium tanks (T-54/T-55), over 20 light amphibious tanks (PT-76). (b) Armoured Vehicles: approximately 200 (in addition to the above). (c) Howitzers: almost 50 152mm and 122mm. (d) Rocket Launchers: 24x122mm. (e) Helicopters: 30, including 5-8 Mi-24/HIND-D attack helicopters. (f) Anti-tank missiles: no figures available. (The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute Yearbook 1984 notes that Nicaragua has acquired unknown quantities of Soviet-made A7-1 Snapper and AT-3 Sagger surface-to-surface guided anti-tank missiles.) (g) Trucks: at least 1,000. (h) Artillery: No reference to artillery as such. The earlier paper refers to 120 anti-aircraft guns and 700 SA-7 surface-to air missiles. (i) Armoured personnel carriers: included in (b), above. Different reports give somewhat varying figures, due to the difficulties in assessing information and the varying times at which information was collected. The Government has not seen any Soviet or Nicaraguan objection to the information reported above. (Question No. 1734) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to state whether: (a) the Sandinista army has grown from a force of about 5,000 in 1979 to a 62,000 active duty force, with an additional 57,000 in the reserves and the militia; (b) in late 1983 the Sandinistas instituted the first draft in Nicaragua's history; and (c) Nicaragua's armed force is the largest in Central America. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) The number of Sandinista insurgents active in Nicaragua in 1979, the year of the overthrow of the Somoza regime, is not known accurately. The political membership of the Sandinista Front for National Liberation (FSLN) at the time of Somoza's overthrow is estimated to have been about 5,000. At the time of its maximum strength in 1979, Somoza's National Guard numbered approximately 10,000. According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies publication The Military Balance for 1984-85, the Nicaraguan Army stood at 60,000 (48,000 regular soldiers plus 12,000 reservists on active duty). There were 48,000 (all services) in the reserves. Other reports give slightly varying figures. (b) The draft was introduced in Nicaragua on 1 October 1983. This was the second time in Nicaragua's history such action had been taken; the Somoza regime introduced a draft in 1973 for a two-year period. (c) According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, Nicaragua's Army and reserves were larger than those of any of the other four Central American countries. However, the air forces of El Salvador and Honduras are widely held to be superior to that of Nicaragua. (Question No. 1735) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to state whether: (a) since 1979, the Sandinista Government has placed under direct State control nearly half of Nicaragua's industry and 40 per cent of its agriculture. (b) the Sandinistas control all media outlets through censorship and that La Prensa, the only major opposition newspaper, is censored every day and its writers and editors, harassed; and (c) neighbourhood watch committees, informant networks, rationing of many basic necessities and enforced participation in Sandinista organisations are all used to control and intimidate the people. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) In early 1985, an economic adviser to the Nicaraguan Government estimated that Government's participation in various sectors of the economy as follows: Agriculture...25 per cent Mining...100 per cent Construction and Energy...Majority participation (Other) industry...30 per cent Expropriation has been selective. Confiscation of the property of the family of the deposed dictator, Anastasio Somoza, itself had a marked impact on the public/private sector profile. Most estimates suggest that properties and businesses owned by the Somoza family and close associates accounted for approximately 40% of the country's economic resources. (b) Media censorship has been in force in Nicaragua continuously since March 1982, when a State of Emergency was declared in response to an intensification of anti-Government Contra activity. All media outlets are subject to prior censorship, including the independent daily newspaper La Prensa. Press items on military matters are specifically prohibited, and in the case of La Prensa, articles critical of the Government have often, but not always, been censored. (c) Sandinista Defence Committees originated as neighbourhood self-defence groups during the campaign to overthrow the Somoza regime. They function as municipal authorities and their responsibilities include the distribution of ration cards, organising neighbourhood groups to attend rallies, issuing of letters of recommendation for the issue of licences, loans, business permits, etc., involvement in mass vaccination campaigns, and patrolling of neighbourhoods at night. These functions entail a degree of social control and there exists the potential for abuse of such powers by individuals and by the Nicaraguan Government. At a recent National Congress of Sandinista Defence Committees, participants acknowledged that many abuses had occurred and adopted measures aimed at eliminating them. (Question No. 1736) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) What was the level of development assistance to the Philippines for (a) 1979-80, (b) 1980-81, (c) 1981-82, (d) 1982-83, (e) 1983-84, (f) 1984-85? (2) What is the proposed level of assistance for 1985-86 and how is this to be allocated? Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) $'000 (a) 1979/80... 7,873 (b) 1980/81... 11,479 (c) 1981/82... 13,319 (d) 1982/83... 16,707 (e) 1983/84... 17,762 (f) 1984/85... 21,076 NOTE: Values for private students subsidies are included only from 1984/85. (2) The proposed level of assistance for 1985-86 is $16.516m. Its proposed allocation is as follows: Projects: $'000 Northern Samar Integrated Rural Development Project... 6,500 Zamboanga del Sur Development Planning Project... 1,500 Metro Manila Urban Transport Planning Project... 360 Coal Logistics Project... 480 Other... 1,960 10,800 Training... 1,649 Student Subsidy... 641 International Development Program of Australian Universities and Colleges (IDP)... 484 Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR)... 1,247 ASEAN-Australia Economic Co-operation Program (AAECP)... 1,625 Head of Mission Discretionary Fund (HOMDAF)... 70 (Question No. 1737) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: What representations has he made to the Government of Indonesia regarding requests made by Australian media organisations for permanent representation in Indonesia. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Government's support for increased Australian press representation in Jakarta has been made well known to the Indonesian Government. I have personally conveyed the Government's support for greater access to Indonesia being given to Australian journalists, including permanent representation, on a number of the occasions on which I have met with senior members of the Indonesian Government. The current Ambassador in Jakarta, Mr Bill Morrison, has also made high level representations in this respect. The honourable member will have noted that permanent representation in Jakarta was recently granted to the Australian Financial Review by the Indonesian Government. He will also know that a representative of the Australian Associated Press has been accredited in Jakarta since mid-1983. (Question No. 1738) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) At what official level have representations been made to the Malaysian Government over its attempt to pursue Antarctica as part of the common heritage of mankind at the United Nations. (2) What was the outcome of these representations and what further action does the Government propose. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The matter has been raised with the Malaysian Government at Prime Ministerial level. I have discussed it on various occasions with my Malaysian counterpart. There have also been regular exchanges at senior official level, particularly between our respective Permanent Representatives at the United Nations. (2) The Malaysian Government continues to pursue its Antarctic initiative. Australia and other Antarctic Treaty Parties are in close contact on this matter. They are unanimous in their opposition to the Malaysian approach and in their support for the maintenance of the existing Antarctic Treaty system. This has been made clear to a range of other governments through our diplomatic missions. The matter will be considered again at the current session of the United Nations General Assembly. The Government will continue to support the Antarctic Treaty system, which fosters peaceful international cooperation in the Antarctic and is the best means of furthering Australian interests there. (Question No. 1739) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Did both the Israeli Government and the Egyptian Government make separate and formal approaches to the Australian Government to reverse its decision to withdraw the Australian multinational peace-keeping force in the Sinai. (2) Will the Australian withdrawal be the first from the 10 nation force in the Sinai. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. They were advised of the Government's position and that the decision was firm. (2) Yes. The Australian Government does not see its participation in any peace-keeping operation as being open-ended and believes that contribution to such forces should be shared equitably by the international community. The Government welcomes the decision of Canada to provide a replacement unit for the Australian contingent. (Question No. 1740) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Did he state in 1984 that in the past he had been an articulate and active opponent of Australia's involvement in the Sinai but that he had seen both sides were committed to a settlement and the presence of a peace-keeping force would make that settlement possible. (2) If so, why has he changed his mind regarding the retention of a peace-keeping force in the Sinai; if not, why did he proceed with the withdrawal of the Australian contingent. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) In my statement to the Parliament of 7 May 1984, in which I announced the Government's decision to agree to a limited extension of the participation of the Australian contingent on the Multinational Force and Observers, I noted that the Australian Labor Party had expressed major reservations about Australian involvement at the time it was initially mooted in 1981. My visit to the Middle East in January 1984 was particularly intended to assess the role and effectiveness of the MFO and Australian participation in it. I found that the MFO was performing its task effectively and had contributed to stability in the region; and that both Egypt and Israel appeared to be committed to peace. While there had been a settlement of one element of the Middle East problem, other aspects, in particular the Palestinian issue, remain unresolved. (2) The reasons for the Government's decision regarding Australia's contribution to the MFO were outlined in my statement of 7 May 1984. (Question No. 1741) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 25 November 1985: (1) Did the Government accept recommendation 5 of the Australian Science and Technology Council inquiry into Australia's role in the nuclear fuel cycle. (2) If so, did the Government undertake to convince nuclear suppliers, particularly the emerging suppliers, of the importance of acceptance of the recommendation. (3) Did the Government also undertake to contact the countries bilaterally. (4) If so, on what dates were the relevant countries approached. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1 and 2) Yes. The Government's response to recommendation 5 of the ASTEC inquiry, tabled in Parliament on 24 May 1985, was as follows: `The Government accepts the recommendation. Australia will participate in international activities on supplier guidelines as a proponent of stricter controls and procedures, particularly in relation to supply to non-NPT countries. Bilaterally it will seek to convince nuclear suppliers, particularly the emerging suppliers, of the importance of acceptance of these controls for the non-proliferation regime. It will encourage broader participation in relevant international groups considering these matters where this will enhance the groups' effectiveness.' (3) Yes. See above. (4) The Government has approached a wide range of countries in the context of the Third Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference, and in particular in pursuing at the Conference the objective of acceptance of full-scope safeguards as a condition of supply. In addition, the Government has acted in accordance with its response to the recommendation in the NPT suppliers committee, known as the Zangger Committee, and in other nuclear supplier consultations. Bilateral contacts were made with a wide range of countries in the pursuit of Australia's full-scope safeguards initiative at the NPT Review Conference (see reply to question no. 1742). Pending the outcome of current international consideration of how more broadly bases supplier controls might be implemented, Australia has continued to encourage emerging nuclear supplier countries to adhere to the NPT. Specific approaches have been made by Australia during 1985 to India, Pakistan, Israel, South Africa, Argentina and Brazil. (Question No. 1742) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Did the Government accept recommendation 3 of the Australian Science and Technology Council inquiry into Australia's role into the nuclear fuel cycle. (2) If so, did the Government undertake to seek the agreement of other supplier countries to the approach recommended. (3) What other supplier countries have been contacted in execution of this undertaking and when were these countries approached. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) Yes. In its nuclear policy statement tabled in the House on 23 May 1985 in response to the Australian Science and Technology Council Report on Australia's Role in the Nuclear Fuel Cycle, the Government stated the following in respect of recommendation 3: `The Government accepts this recommendation and will seek the agreement of other supplier countries to this approach. Australia's supply policies require non-nuclear weapon state customers to be members of the NPT and to have IAEA safeguards applied to all their nuclear facilities at all times. Several major suppliers, by subscribing to the Nuclear Suppliers Guidelines, require IAEA safeguards and other controls and conditions on supplied nuclear items, but do not require recipient States to be members of the NPT or to accept IAEA safeguards on all their nuclear facilities at all times. Australia does not consider this approach satisfactory. Permitting non-nuclear weapon States which have not made binding non-proliferation commitments to acquire nuclear items on less stringent conditions than countries which have made such commitments lessens the incentive to join the NPT. Australia has pressed its position in multilateral forums and in bilateral contacts with relevant countries. In addition the matter will be pursued by Australia in the run-up to and at the 1985 NPT Review Conference.' (3) The objective set out in ASTEC recommendation 3 has been pursued over a long period, including at international meetings held prior to the tabling of the Government's response to the ASTEC Report, such as the Western suppliers' meeting held in Luxembourg in July 1984 and all three Preparatory Committee meetings (April and October 1984 and April/May 1985) held in advance of the Third NPT Review Conference (27 August-21 September 1985). At Preparatory Committee Meetings for the Review Conference, Australia also held bilateral meetings with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Yugoslavia, Egypt and Sweden. At the Review Conference itself, Australia obtained further support for its approach and this is recorded in the final document of the Conference. In addition the following bilateral consultations have been held on or including this matter during 1985: January/February-Canada, United States February/March-Japan, FRG, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands March (in Canberra)-United Kingdom and USSR May (in Canberra)-United States June-FRG, United Kingdom, Switzerland, Belgium and Spain October-Brazil (Question No. 1743) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is it a fact that the Australian Government official representative to United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation was involved in a fund raising activity for the Australian Labor Party. (2) Did he sanction this activity; if so, why. (3) If not, what action has he taken to discipline the representative concerned. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) I understand that Mr E. G. Whitlam, Australia's Ambassador to UNESCO, did sign a fund raising letter for the ALP recently. I also understand that this letter was not signed under any government or embassy letterhead. (2) Mr Whitlam signed the letter in his capacity as a well known, much respected former leader of the party, not in his capacity as Australia's Ambassador to UNESCO. (3) I gave my prior approval to Mr Whitlam with the stipulation that the letter should only go the party members, since Mr Whitlam was acting in his capacity as a party member and former leader. I understand that through error some letters in fact went to non party members. I do not intend to reprimand Mr Whitlam for this error by the Secretariat. (Question No. 1744) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Has the Australian Ambassador to United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation in his public pronouncements on that organisation and before that organisation always reflected the views of the Australian Government; if not, (a) on what occasions and (b) what statements does the Australian Government disagree with. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: It is expected of Australia's representatives abroad that they will act in accordance with the policies of the Government in performing their official functions. (Question No. 1745) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Will the Consul-General designate to Vancouver be granted full access to all classified information. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: In accordance with routine procedures, Mr Combe has been granted a security clearance appropriate to his duties as Consul-General Vancouver. (Question No. 1746) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Has the Government announced its attitude to the proposal by the New Zealand Government for a co-ordinated South Pacific regional security arrangement; if so, what was its attitude. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Australia's attitude to the New Zealand Government's recent proposal was expressed by the Prime Minister when it was considered at the South Pacific Forum meeting in Rarotonga in August this year. As indicated in his press conference following the Forum meeting, Mr Hawke stated that existing arrangements for regional defence cooperation were already working effectively and, through current Australian and New Zealand defence cooperation programs, the security concerns of the countries in the South Pacific region were already being met. Thus, rather than create new arrangements, the Australian Government felt that any additional resources that may become available would probably be better spent in adding to these existing programs. The Forum took no decision on the proposal presented by the New Zealand Prime Minister. (Question No. 1747) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say when the Soviet Union commenced its research program into the technical feasibilities of particle beam weapons in space. (2) Is he also able to say whether it is expected that, in the foreseeable future, the Soviet Union will be able to test a prototype space based particle weapon intended to disrupt satellite electronic equipment and/or destroy satellites. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: According to Soviet Strategic Defence Programs: (1) In the late 1960's (p. 14). (2) It is estimated that the Soviet Union may be able to test a prototype particle beam weapon intended to disrupt the electronics of satellites in the 1990's. A weapon designed to destroy satellites could follow later (p. 14). (Question No. 1748) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to (a) confirm that the Soviet Union is undertaking the world's most active military space program, (b) indicate how many space launches the (i) Soviet Union and (ii) the United States conducted in 1984 and what percentage of these were purely military in nature and (c) say what proportion of Soviet Space systems dedicated to military missions are believed to include satellites that perform reconnaissance, missile launch protection and attack warning, commander control and ASAT functions. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) According to Soviet Military Power 1985 p. 56, in terms of the number of launches per year the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics has the world's most active military space program. (b) (i) USSR-97 successful launches, 65 per cent presumed military. (ii) US-22 successful launches, 55 per cent presumed military. (Both based on a report prepared by the Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress for the Sub-committee on Space Science and Applications on `Space Activities of the United States, Soviet Union, and Other Launching Countries/Organizations, 1957-84' of April 1985. United States Government Printing Office, Washington.) (c) According to the report cited in (b) above, while no direct information is available on dedicated military missions, 85 per cent of Soviet space systems dedicated to military missions are believed to include satellites that perform reconnaissance, missile launch detection, attack warning, command and control, and ASAT functions. (Question No. 1749-1759) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: In view of the importance of the South Pacific region to Australia, when did he visit New Caledonia, Vanuatu, Fiji, Nauru, the Solomon Islands, Tonga, Kiribati, Tuvalu, the Cook Islands, Western Samoa and Niue. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Arrangements are being put in place for a visit to take place in 1986. I have found it instructive to consider the visits to the South Pacific area by my two predecessors as advised by my Department and as set out below: Minister Visit Dates Country Main Purpose(s) Mr Street 4.8.81-6.8.81 Solomon Is. South Pacific Heads of Mission meeting. 7.8.81-13.8.81 Vanuatu South Pacific Forum Meeting 8.10.82-11.10.82 Western Samoa Bilateral discussions 12.10.82-19.10.82 Fiji Commonwealth Heads of Government Regional Meeting Mr Peacock 12.10.76-16.10.76 Fiji South Pacific Forum Law of the Sea Meeting 28.3.77-30.3.77 Fiji Transit 1.7.77-3.7.77 Fiji Transit 6.10.77-9.10.77 Fiji Transit 7.7.78-9.7.78 Solomon Islands Independence Celebrations 27.9.78-29.9.78 Fiji Transit 30.9.78-1.10.78 Tuvalu Independence Celebrations 2.10.78 Fiji Transit 20.6.79-21.6.79 Fiji Transit 4.3.80 Fiji Transit 14.7.80-15.7.80 Kiribati South Pacific Forum Meeting 27.7.80-31.7.80 Vanuatu Independence Celebrations (Question No. 1760) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to say whether the Soviet Union is in possession of the only operational, dedicated anti-satellite interceptor, whilst the United States is only in the early phases of testing such an interceptor. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: According to Soviet Military Power 1985 and a variety of other public sources, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics has the only dedicated, operational co-orbital anti-satellite interceptor. The United States has, to date, conducted three development tests (out of 12 planned) of an aircraft-launched, direct intercept anti-satellite weapon. The United States system is schedule to be operational in 1988. (Question No. 1761) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to state whether the Soviet Union is pursuing the latest laser weapon technologies, such as efficient electrical power sources and high quality optical components. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: According to Soviet Strategic Defence Programs (p. 13) the Soviet Union is researching advanced technologies related to lasers and other directed-energy weapons such as efficient electrical power sources and high quality optical components. (Question No. 1762) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to say whether the Soviet Union has progressed beyond technology research in strategic defence matters to the development of prototype laser weapons. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: According to Soviet Strategic Defence Programs (pp 13-14) the Soviet Union has ground-based lasers that could be used to interfere with United States satellites although the report does not describe these lasers as prototype laser weapons. (Question No. 1763) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say when the Soviet Union commenced research into sources of high powered radio frequency, or RF signals, and the necessary antennae which have the potential to interfere with or destroy components of missile, satellite and re-entry vehicles. (2) Is he also able to say how far advanced Soviet research is in these areas and when it is likely the Soviet Union will be able to test a ground based or space based RF anti-satellite weapon. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) No. (2) According to Soviet Strategic Defence Programs (p. 15) the Soviet Union could test a ground-based radio frequency weapon capable of damaging satellites in the 1990s. (Question No. 1764) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to say (a) when the Soviet Union commenced research in the area of kinetic energy weapons, (b) whether current Soviet efforts include research into the development of electro-magnetic rail guns similar to that conducted under a joint American-Australian research program and (c) whether it is possible that these programs may result in the near term in a short range, space based system useful for satellite or space station defence or close in attack by a manoeuvring satellite. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) No. (b) No. (c) According to Soviet Strategic Defence Programs (p. 16) the Soviet Union could deploy in the near term a short-range, space-based system useful for satellite or space station defence or for close-in attack by a manoeuvring satellite. (Question No. 1765) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to say what efforts the Soviet Union has put into (a) an in-depth national air defence force and (b) nationwide civil defence forces and programs. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Soviet Strategic Defence Program provides the information requested on (a) at pp. 16-21 and on (b) at p. 21. (Question No. 1766) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for ForeignAffairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Can he indicate what proportion of the Soviet military budget is spent on strategic defence. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: No. (Question No. 1767) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is the construction by the Soviet Union of radar facilities at Krasnoyarsk in violation of the Anti-ballistic Missile Treaty. (2) Does the new radar foreshadow a significant step towards a nationwide anti-ballistic missile capability. (3) Is he able to say whether the construction of a new radar was planned in the early 1970s which was the heyday of detente and of high rising expectations for arms control. (4) What representations has the Government made to the Soviet Union expressing their concern over the development of the radar. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The Government is aware of United States allegations that the large phased array radar currently under construction near the Soviet city of Krasnoyarsk is a violation of the ABM Treaty. There appears to be a case to answer and the Government urges the Soviet Union to take appropriate steps to respond to Western concerns and demonstrate it's compliance with this important Treaty. (2) The Government is aware of United States concerns to this effect. (3) It is not known when the radar near Krasnoyarsk was planned. The United States first detected it in 1983. (4) Representations have been made to the Soviet Union on this issue. It would not be appropriate to give details of confidential exchanges between Governments. (Question No. 1768) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Has the United States given assurances that it will honour all treaty obligations including the Anti-ballistic Missile Treaty. (2) Has the Soviet Union given any such assurance that it will honour all treaty obligations and what steps has the Australian Government taken to seek such assurances. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. To elaborate, President Reagan said on 10 June 1985 that the United States would continue to not undercut the expired Strategic Arms Limitations Talks I agreement or the unratified SALT II agreement as long as the Soviet Union exercised equal restraint. He also said that where Soviet violations are irreversible the United States reserved the right to respond in a proportionate manner at the appropriate time. With regard to the ABM Treaty, Secretary of State Shultz said in a speech on 24 October 1985 that `our research program is and will continue to be consistent with the ABM Treaty' and `our SDI research program has been structured and, as the President reaffirmed last Friday, will continue to be conducted in accordance with a restrictive interpretation of the Treaty's obligations'. (2) Yes. Since the expiry of the SALT I interim agreement on offensive weapons in 1977 and since 1981 when the Reagan Administration made clear its intention not to ratify the SALT II agreement the Soviet Union has joined the United States in a series of political commitments to refrain from actions that would undercut these agreements. In an authorative booklet, Star Wars: Dangers and Delusions (1985) it was stated that `the USSR abides rigidly by the provisions of the permanent ABM Treaty signed in 1972'. In bilateral discussions with the Soviet Union on arms control and disarmament issues the Government has urged full compliance with the provisions of existing treaties. (Question No. 1769) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Has he taken any action to ensure that any additional costs of maintaining representation overseas, as a result of the devaluation of the Australian dollar, have been kept to a minimum; if so, what are the details. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: All estimates, including increased costs as a result of the devaluation of the Australian dollar, are subjected to the most rigorous examination during the formulation of the Budget. Funding for departmental administrative expenses (Division 316/2) for 1985-86 was increased by $6,074,323 (18.7 per cent) over 1984-85 expenditure. Of this amount $5,509,391 (17.0 per cent) represented unavoidable increased funding to compensate for the devaluation of the Australian dollar. Thus the increase in funding to meet other unavoidable cost increases has been limited to $564,932 (1.7 per cent). This small increase is insufficient to cover inflationary costs and has led to an overall reduction of activity in real terms. Expenditure is continually monitored by the Central office of the Department and Heads of Mission have been reminded of their responsibility to also monitor closely all expenditure. In addition overseas posts have been advised by Departmental Circular that additional funding can only be provided in exceptional circumstances. (Question No. 1770) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: What increases in the cost of maintaining Australia's representation overseas has occurred in each country since January 1985 because of the devaluation of the Australian dollar. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: It is not practicable to provide, on a per country basis, the increased operational costs stemming from devaluation since January 1985. The Department of Finance has agreed to provide supplementary funding to meet increased costs of the Department of Foreign Affairs' overseas representation resulting from the devaluation of the Australian dollar. The amounts provided in 1984-85 and 1985-86 are as follows: 1984-85 Actual 1985-86 Budget $ $ Overseas Salaries and Allowances-Division 316/1... 1,481,644 5,346,944 Overseas Administrative Expenses-Division 316/2... 801,100 5,509,391 2,282,744 10,856,335 (Question No. 1771) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: How often has he visited (a) Washington and (b) Hanoi in his Ministerial capacity. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) I visited Washington from 15 to 22 July 1983 for the ANZUS Council meeting and from 9 to 11 October this year for bilateral consultations. (b) I visited Hanoi on 29 to 30 June 1983 for bilateral consultations and from 6 to 8 March this year for bilateral consultations and discussions on Cambodia. (Question No. 1772) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: What proportion of humanitarian aid provided (a) directly or (b) indirectly by the Government goes to (i) Kampucheans inside Vietnam-controlled Kampuchea and (ii) Kampuchean refugees living in Thailand or resistance controlled areas. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (i) In 1984/85, $3.993m was provided in humanitarian aid through Australian non-government organisations, and through the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and United Nations Children's Emergency Fund (UNICEF) for Cambodians living inside Cambodia. This included $1.429m as emergency relief following floods. In addition, $100,000 was provided to the Quaker Service Council of Australia for English language training for Cambodians. (ii) A total of $1.569m in humanitarian aid was provided through the United Nations Border Relief Organisation, the International Committee of the Red Cross and UNHCR for Cambodian refugees in holding camps inside Thailand and for displaced Cambodians in the Thai/Cambodia border region. The latter included emergency relief of $200,000 following forced relocation of border camps. All aid was provided indirectly through international or non-government organisations. (Question No. 1773) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to say whether: (a) the United States has stated that (i) its purpose is to enhance deterrence and (ii) that it has pledged that it would not deploy any anti-ballistic missile defensive system before negotiations with the Soviet Union and (b) the Soviet Union has given a similar undertaking or indication of intentions; if not, what action has the Government taken to seek such an undertaking. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) (i) Yes. (a) (ii) Yes. The United States has also stated that this commitment, which is pursuant to ABM Treaty obligations, does not mean that the Soviet Union will have a veto over the outcome. (b) Yes, (see answer to question No. 1768). The USSR is strongly opposed to any renegotiation of the ABM Treaty. The authoritative Soviet booklet Star Wars: Dangers and Delusions, stated (p. 39): `The USSR is not developing any space strike weapons. And it has no intention of building a `nation-wide' missile defence system'. (Question No. 1774) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to indicate: (a) what the extent of Cuban representation in Vanuatu is, (b) which (i) Cuban officials have visited Vanuatu since the establishment of diplomatic relations, (ii) the status of these officials, and (iii) the length of the visits, and (c) whether any Eastern Bloc aid has been provided to the Vanuatu Government, if so, what are the details. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) Cuba and Vanuatu established diplomatic relations on 25 July 1983. Since that time Cuba has been represented by Ambassadors accredited on a non-resident basis, at first from Tokyo and more recently from Manila; (b) (i) to (iii) The non-resident Cuban Ambassador in Tokyo visited Vanuatu for 8 days in July 1983 to present credentials and in July 1984 for 8 days to make farewell calls. The non-resident Ambassador in Manila visited Vanuatu in April 1985 for 8 days to present credentials. On that occasion she was accompanied by the Cuban Consul-General from Sydney. The Ambassador visited Vanuatu again in July/August 1985 for 4 days for Independence celebrations; (c) The Government is not aware of any Eastern Bloc aid having been provided to the Vanuatu Government. (Question No. 1775) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to indicate whether the Soviet Union has deployed the world's only operational anti-ballistic missile system around Moscow and whether this system is currently being upgraded. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Soviet Union deploys around Moscow the world's only operational anti-ballistic missile system. Soviet Strategic Defence Programs (pp. 7-12) describes the system and the current modernisation/upgrading of the system. This deployment is in accordance with the provisions of the ABM Treaty. (Question No. 1776) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to indicate (a) how many major deployments of new fourth generation inter-continental ballistic missiles the Soviet Union has made since the signing of the 1972 Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty I Interim Agreement, (b) how many new Soviet ICBMs are being flight tested, (c) how many missiles and new war heads have been deployed by the Soviet Union, (d) what are the comparative figures for the United States in the same period, (e) whether the number of war heads on Soviet ballistic missiles have increased by more than 50 per cent since 1979 and (f) whether, by taking advantage of their throw-weight, the Soviet capability to destroy hard targets has increased by an even greater amount. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) The Soviet Union has not made such information publicly available, but United States Government publications and statements indicate that the Soviet Union has deployed a total of 818 `fourth generation' (a US term) ICBMs since the signing of the SALT I Interim Agreement in 1972, as follows: SS17 (US designation) 150 SS18 (US designation) 308 SS19 (US designation) 360 At the same time the Soviet Union has also retired a large number of older ICBMs since the signing of the SALT I Interim Agreement. (b) The United States believes the Soviet Union has flight tested two new ICBMs, which it designated the SS-X-24 and the SS-X-25 (now redesignated the SS25). The Soviet Union denies that the SS25 is a new ICBM and has said that it is a modernisation of an existing ICBM, the SS13. (c) It is assumed that the question relates to deployment of ballistic missiles over the period since the signing of the SALT I Interim Agreement in May 1972, when the United States estimated that the Soviet Union had a total of 1618 ICBM and 740 SLBM launchers either operational or under construction. The Statement of Data on the Numbers of Strategic Offensive Arms as of the Date of Signature of the Treaty made by the Soviet Union when signing the Salt II Treaty on 18 June 1979 indicates that the Soviet Union possessed 1398 ICBM launchers at that time, a reduction of 230 on the number of ICBM launchers either under construction or operational at the signing of Salt I, and 950 launchers of SLBMs (as permitted under the SALT I Interim Agreement), an increase of 210. The figure for ICBM launchers remains the same today. The number of SLBM launchers fluctuates from time to time as new systems are introduced and older ones retired, but remains in the vicinity of the 950 limit specified in the SALT I Interim Agreement. The number of `fourth generation' Soviet ICBMs deployed since the signing of SALT I is given in (a) above. In addition the Government has noted recent Statements by the United States Secretary of Defense, Mr Weinberger, that the Soviet Union recently commenced deployment of the first of its `fifth generation' ICBMs, the SS25. As the Soviet Union does not make such information available, it is not possible to be precise as to the number of new Soviet ballistic missile warheads deployed since 1972. Most authoritative Western public sources estimate that the numbers of Soviet ICBM warheads rose from around 1500 in 1972 to around 6300 today and that Soviet SLBM warheads increased over the same period from around 450 to around 2150 today. (d) In 1972 the United States had 1054 ICBMs and 656 SLBMs, compared with around 1025 ICBMs and 648 SLBMs today. In the same period United States ICBM warheads rose from around 1500 to around 2125, and SLBM warheads from around 2400 to around 5750. (e) Public sources of such information differ on this point. For example the SIPRI Yearbooks for 1980 and 1984 indicate this to be the case: but graphs which appear on pages 30 and 33 of the United States Defense Department publication `Soviet Military Power 1985' appear to give a contrary indication. (f) Calculations of the quantity known as `hard target kill potential' depend on a number of factors and assumptions relating to the number of attacking warheads and their estimated accuracy and explosive power. The trend since 1979 towards deployment by the Soviet Union of more accurate missiles with multiple warheads has significantly increased Soviet hard target kill potential: but in view of the uncertainties associated with information in the public record on the increase in the number of Soviet ballistic missile warheads since 1979 (see (e) above), it is not possible to state with certainty by how much. (Question No. 1777) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to indicate whether (a) the Soviet Union's SS20 force of intermediate range missiles is expected to expand to over 450 deployed launches by 1987 as a result of an extensive program of constructing new bases, (b) more such new bases were started in 1984 than in any previous year and (c) the follow on to the SS20 which carries three warheads and is designed to improve lethality, began flight testing in 1984. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a), (b) and (c). The Soviet Union does not provide such information about its forces. The Government has noted unclassified testimony to this effect by two senior United States officials-Robert M. Gates, Chairman, National Intelligence Council, and Deputy Director for Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency and Lawrence K. Gershwin, National Intelligence Officer for Strategic Programs, National Intelligence Council-to a joint session of the Sub-Committee on Strategic and Theater Nuclear Forces of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Defense Sub-Committee of the Senate Committee on Appropriations of the United States Senate on 26 June 1985-and has no reason to question (b) and (c). In relation to (a) it would caution that this assessment was based on data available as at late June 1985. Consequently it may need to be revised in the light of developments subsequent to June 1985. (Question No. 1778) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to indicate whether the Soviet Union's Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile force will have been almost entirely replaced with new systems by the mid 1990's. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Soviet Union does not provide such information about its forces. The Government has noted unclassified testimony to this effect by two senior United States officials-Robert M. Gates, Chairman, National Intelligence Council and Deputy Director for Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency, and Lawrence K. Gershwin, National Intelligence Officer for Strategic Programs, National Intelligence Council-to a joint session of the Sub-Committee on Strategic and Theater Nuclear Forces of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Defense Sub-Committee of the Senate Committee on Appropriations of the United States Senate on 26 June 1985. It has no reason to question this assessment, but would point out that such long term assessments may need to be revised in the light of future developments. (Question No. 1779) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to say whether individuals in Vietnam are prohibited from meeting either publicly or privately to criticises or protest against Government actions or policies. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: In the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 1984 submitted to the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs, United States House of Representatives by the Department of State it is stated that individuals are prohibited from meeting either publicly or privately to criticise or protest against Government actions or policies. Article 67 of the Vietnamese Constitution states: `Citizens enjoy freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of association, and freedom to demonstrate in accordance with the interests of socialism and of the people . . .' In common with other communist states there are limitations on the extent to which private citizens either individually or in groups may express their political views. As the Constitution implies, while some criticism of aspects of government policies and administration may be expressed, criticism of the fundamental economic and political principles of the State cannot be freely made. (Question No. 1780) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to say whether (a) the right of freedom of speech and the press exists in Vietnam and (b) independent criticism of the party and the Government is not permitted. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is contained in my answer to question No. 1779. (Question No. 1781) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether the system of population surveillance by Party appointed Block Wardens, who use informants to keep track of each individual's political and economic activities, has been extended from northern Vietnam to Ho Chi Minh City and other southern cities and rural areas. (2) Is evidence available which could confirm the accuracy of reports that officials and even unofficial security wardens conduct midnight searches of houses for draft-age males in order to fulfill draft quotas. (3) What representations has the Government made to the Vietnamese Government on this matter. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) In the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 1984 submitted to the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs, United States House of Representatives by the Department of State it is stated that there is a system of population surveillance by Party-appointed Block Wardens, who use informants to keep track of each individual's political and economic activities. The State Department reported that their system has been extended from northern Vietnam to Ho Chi Minh City and other southern cities and rural areas. (2) The same report states that officials and even unofficial security wardens conduct midnight searches of houses for draft-age males in order to fulfil draft quotas. The Department of Foreign Affairs has no further information to corroborate information in (1) and (2). (3) The Government has not made specific representations on these matters but it has made a number of representations to the Vietnamese Government on the issue of human rights. They were raised with the Vietnamese Foreign Minister Nguyen Co Thach during his visit to Australia in March, 1984, and again during my visit to Hanoi in March this year. The Australian Ambassador in Hanoi has also been engaging in an exchange on the issue of human rights with Vietnamese Justice Ministry and Foreign Affairs Ministry officials. The Government believes that its representations over the past two years to the Vietnamese authorities have left the Vietnamese Government in no doubt as to the strength of concern within Australia about the human rights situation in Vietnam. We shall continue these efforts, and we welcome the indications that Vietnam is prepared to discuss human rights issues in a constructive spirit. (Question No. 1782) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is evidence available which could confirm the accuracy of reports from refugees concerning the severity of the conditions for prisoners in the re-education camps in Vietnam. (2) Is it a fact that these reports claim that the provision of food rations is below subsistence level, that medical care is denied, that hard labour has been assigned to political prisoners and prisoners of conscience, and solitary confinement is regularly practiced. (3) How many people are believed to be held in re-education camps. (4) Is he able to say whether these camps contain former officials and military officers of the Republic of Vietnam, political prisoners, chaplains and clergy and intellectuals. (5) What action has the Government taken to ascertain the accuracy of these reports. (6) What representations has the Government made to the Vietnamese Government on this matter. Mr Hayden —The answers to the honourable member's questions are as follows: (1) It is difficult to obtain evidence which could confirm the accuracy of reports from refugees concerning the the severity of conditions for prisoners in the re-education camps in Vietnam, as the Vietnamese authorities are yet to allow access by foreigners to these camps. (2) Yes. (3) Vietnamese authorities stated in January 1985 that there were 7,000 people in re-education camps, while estimates of over 100,000 have been made by Western diplomats. (4) There are claims that such people are held in the camps. (5) We have raised the matter of access to inmates of re-education camps for resettlement processing with the Vietnamese authorities. They have replied that this might be permissible, and we are following this up with the Vietnamese authorities. The ICRC has made similar requests, but is also yet to be given access. (6) During my visit to Hanoi in March, 1985, I met Vietnamese Prime Minister Pham Van Dong, and put forward certain proposals about the release of people in re-education camps and about these people being allowed to go to other countries, including the United States of America. Although the representations received no substantive response, I have stated that the Government will raise the matter again with the Vietnamese authorities. (Question No. 1783) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether (a) the Vietnamese Government has acknowledged that some individuals whom it considered war criminals were executed in the wake of the 1975 takeover and (b) there are reports that many more persons were detained in rural areas of Vietnam in mid-1975 and never heard from again. (2) Is he able to say whether former inmates of re-education camps have reported summary executions for escape attempts and resistance to camp authorities. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) The Vietnamese Government acknowledges that some individuals whom it considered `war criminals' were executed in the wake of the 1975 takeover. (b) Yes. (2) Yes. (Question No. 1784) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether in Vietnam, for crimes of a political nature, public security officials may apprehend and search suspects without a warrant and that such suspects may be held an indefinite period without any judicial process. (2) Is he able to say whether those suspected of political crimes may be sent to re-education camps without trial or charge. (3) What public statements has the Government made on this matter. (4) What representations has the Government made to the Vietnamese Government on the matter. Mr Hayden —The answers to the honourable member's questions are as follows: (1) I understand the situation is broadly as described in the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 1984 submitted to the Committee on Human Relations, United States Senate and Committee on Foreign Affairs, United States House of Representatives by the Department of State. The report states that for crimes of a political nature, public security officials may apprehend and search suspects without a warrant and that such suspects may be held for an indefinite period without any judicial process. (2) I understand that those suspected of political crimes may be sent to `re-education camps' without trial or charge. (3) The Government has made public statements on this matter, most recently in response to a question by Mr Ruddock on 20 March 1985 (Hansard page 576). (4) Information on the Government's representations is also contained in that reply. (Question No. 1785) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether, in Vietnam, arbitary detention without charge, trial or any form of legal proceedings under the guise of re-education has subverted the rudimentary legal system which exists. (2) Is he also able to say whether, in general, the entire legal system operates as an agency for the enforcement of regime directives and that it has no independence from political intervention. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Detention in re-education camps has taken place without the processes of charge, trial or other legal proceedings. (2) On 27 June 1985 the winter session of the Seventh National Assembly adopted the final draft of the new penal code. It is planned that the code will take effect from 1 January 1986. In keeping with its interest in human rights matters and specifically in human rights matters in Vietnam the Government will monitor the application of the new penal code with respect to human rights criteria. (Question No. 1786) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether refugees arriving in Thailand in 1984 have reported incidents in Vietnam in which people dressed in civilian clothing have abducted people from their houses in the night and that the fate of those who disappeared was unknown. (2) What action has the Government taken to ascertain the accuracy of these reports. (3) What representation has the Government made to the Vietnamese Government of this matter. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Refugees arriving in Thailand in 1984 have reported incidents in which people dressed in civilian clothing have abducted people from their houses in the night. The fate of those who disappeared is unknown. (2) The Government is concerned about the human rights situation in Vietnam. Vietnam's accession to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights on 24 December 1982 is a useful basis for our contacts with Vietnam on human rights questions. The Australian Ambassador in Hanoi has been engaging in an exchange on the issue of human rights in Vietnamese Justice and Foreign Affairs Ministry officials, including attempts to ascertain the accuracy of reports on human rights violations. (3) The Government has made a number of representations to the Vietnamese Government on matters of human rights violations. Human rights issues were raised with the Vietnamese Foreign Minister Nguyen Co Thach during his visits to Australia in March 1984, and agains during my visit to Hanoi in March this year. The Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs also raised specific human rights cases with Foreign Minister Thach during his visit in May 1985. (Question No. 1787) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Has he advised the National Secretary of the Australian Labor Party that on no future occasion will the Australian Ambassador to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation be allowed to solicit funds in Australia for party political purposes whilst holding that office; if not, why not. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: I have nothing to add to my reply to question No. 1743. (Question No. 1788) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Has his attention been drawn to a report in the National Times of 30 March 1984, where it is claimed that a strategic basis paper endorsed by Cabinet states that in the broadest sense, it is in Australia's interests to encourage a sense of strategic community between the independent states in the area (the South Pacific) and the Australian, New Zealand and the United States allies and to support this by practical programs of co-operation in defence and security related matters. (2) How is Australia's advocacy of a South Pacific nuclear free zone of practical assistance to this goal. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. In his Parliamentary Statement of 10 May 1984 about the publication in the National Times of purported extracts from a Defence Department Document entitled: `The Strategic Basis of Australian Defence Policy 1983', Senator Gareth Evans made clear that such documents represent the outcome of periodic reviews designed to advise Government on how threats to Australia may arise and on the implications for our security. As the name implies the documents offer advice on the basis for defence policy and do not purport to provide a specific plan for future defence actions. (2) The South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty contributes to regional security through its objective of preventing the proliferation of nuclear weapons. In particular, the provisions of the Treaty prohibiting the acquisition of nuclear explosive devices and their stationing or testing on the territory of Parties are in the security interests of the region and help to preserve the South West Pacific as a region free of superpower rivalry. These objectives are further reinforced by the draft Protocols to the Treaty which invite France, the United Kingdom and the United States to apply key provisions of the Treaty to their territories within the Zone and which invite the five nuclear weapon States to undertake not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against Parties to the Treaty and not to test nuclear explosive devices anywhere within the Zone. At the same time the Treaty and its draft Protocols in no way cut across Australia's obligations under the ANZUS Treaty and the broader defence relationship between Australia and the United States which, in the Government's view, continues to be fundamental to Australian security and to contribute to the stability of the region as a whole. (Question No. 1789) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Has his attention been drawn to a report in the National Times of 30 March 1984 where it is claimed that a strategic basis paper endorsed by Cabinet states that the Soviet Union by its own sustained efforts and aided by the relative United States neglect of the United States nuclear forces has achieved superiority in the critical area of inter-continental ballistic missiles and INF which is not fully compensated by United States maritime and air forces and that the ability and resolve of the United States to maintain effective strategic competition with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is of fundamental importance to Australia's security. (2) Is the report correct; if so, does he agree with the assessment, and if so, will he endorse the United States Strategic Modernisation Program; if not, why not. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. In his Parliamentary Statement of 10 May 1984 on the publication in the National Times of purported extracts from a Defence Department document entitled `The Strategic Basis of Australian Defence Policy 1983', Senator Evans made clear that such documents represent the outcome of periodic reviews designed to advise the Government on how threats to Australia may arise and on the implications of such threats for Australia's security. As the name implies the documents offer advice on the basis for defence policy and do not purport to provide a specific plan for future defence actions. (2) As to the general thesis of the question, the Government is of the view there is broad parity between the military power of the superpowers, although it acknowledges that significant asymmetries exist at particular levels in the forces of both sides: and ICBMs, though important, are not the sole indices of strategic nuclear power. The Government is also of the view that the need to maintain broad parity between the superpowers is of fundamental importance to all countries, including Australia. It would greatly prefer that this were done by a mutual and verifiable freeze on nuclear weapons testing production and development followed by negotiations which aim for deep cuts in the high stockpiles of nuclear weapons through equitable and verifiable arms control agreements. The immediate goal must be the most stable possible balance at the lowest possible level of nuclear weapons: the ultimate goal must remain their complete elimination. For this reason it has not endorsed the strategic modernisation programs of either superpower. (Question No. 1790) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Has his attention been drawn to a report in the Sydney Morning Herald of 20 April 1984, in which he is reported as stating that it was not unreasonable for Vietnamese forces in Kampuchea to retaliate against attack by guerillas of the ousted Khmer Rouge regime and non-communist resistance groups. (2) Is the report correct; if so, does he still hold that view and if he does how does he justify it. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. (2) The honourable member is referred to the answer given by the Prime Minister to a question without notice from him on the same subject on 2 May 1984. The Government remains concerned by the destabilising effects on the South East Asia region caused by the Cambodia problem, and particularly by its toll of human suffering. We continue to believe there is an urgent need for a political rather than military solution. (Question No. 1791) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Has his attention been drawn to a report in the National Times of 30 March 1984, where it is claimed that a strategic basis paper endorsed by Cabinet states that access by the USSR, especially the establishment in the Pacific of a presence ashore, would be cause for concern and that the fragility of political development in fledgling states in the area would make them susceptible to further encroachment. (2) In view of the fishing agreement between Kiribati and the Soviet Union and the likelihood of another being reached with Vanuatu, does the government regard these achievements as detrimental to Australia's security. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. In his Parliamentary statement of 10 May 1984 about the publication in the National Times of purported extracts from a Defence Department document entitled ``The Strategic Basis of Australian Defence Policy 1983'', Senator Evans made clear that such documents represent the outcome of periodic reviews designed to advise Government on how threats to Australia may arise and on the implications for our security. As the name implies the documents offer advice on the basis for defence policy and do not purport to provide a specific plan for future defence actions. (2) The Australian Government has closely followed developments in the South Pacific relating to fisheries licensing negotiations between Pacific island countries and distant water fishing nations. It understands the desire of the island countries to receive a financial return from a major renewable economic resource. Where it has deemed it appropriate, the Government has made known to the relevant parties its views on the possible implications of such developments. It cannot be said, however, that Australia's security is directly threatened by any such recent developments. (Question No. 1792) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Has his attention been drawn to the financial communique of 25 July 1985 of the second party leaders conference of the International Democrat Union where the importance of dependability within the western alliance is emphasised and grave disquiet expressed over the reneging on security obligations by regional members of ANZUS in particular by the New Zealand Government's decision to refuse entry to vessels with nuclear capabilities. (2) Can he confirm that this communique was endorsed by the leaders of the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom, the Republican Party of the United States, the Liberal Democratic Party in Japan and the Christian Democratic Party in the Federal Republic of Germany, amongst many others. (3) What is the Government's attitude to this statement. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) No, and my Department has been unable to locate this document in material available to it. (2) No. (3) See answer to (1) above. (Question No. 1958) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Has the Government met with the Governments of (a) Vanuatu and (b) Kiribati on the subject of fishing agreements with the Soviet Union. (2) When did these meetings take place and who attended. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Representatives of the Australian Government have met with representatives of the Governments of Vanuatu and Kiribati and held discussions on the subject of fishing agreements with the Soviet Union. (2) The meetings have taken place at various times and at various levels over the past year. Australian High Commissioners in Vila and Tarawa have had discussions with Ministers of the Governments of Vanuatu and Kiribati on this subject. (Question No. 1959) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) What amount had the Australian Development Assistance Bureau spent on the Northern Samar project up until the decision to withdraw Australian aid workers from the project? (2) What are the consequences of the project on the Australian withdrawal and is it likely that the work already done will fall into disrepair? (3) Will the sums saved by discontinuing the project be allocated to other aid projects in the Philippines? Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) $24.182m (2) Consequences of the withdrawal include the following: Assistance to the project will continue under the guidance and supervision of a small team of Australians based in Manila; The work of the project will be carried out by Philippine agencies, governmental and non-governmental; Every effort will be made to complete critical elements of the project before its planned completion date in December 1988; Project performance under these arrangements will be reviewed in early 1986 and decisions made about which elements of the continuing project have demonstrated that they are worthy of further support. In an effort to prevent work already done falling into disrepair, assistance is being provided, as originally planned, to the Provincial Engineer's office in Northern Samar in the form of training, equipment and spare parts to establish a maintenance capability in the Province. (3) The project is not being discontinued, but any savings resulting from the restructuring outlined in the foregoing could be allocated to other projects in the Philippines subject to those proposals meeting normal aid criteria. (Question No. 1960) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) What was the amount of official development assistance provided to the Philippines in (a) 1983-84 and (b) 1984-85. (2) What is the proposed allocation for 1985-86, and on what projects is it proposed to be spent. (3) What amount of Australian military aid was provided to the Philippines in (a) 1983-84 and (b) 1984-85. (4) What is the proposed allocation for 1985-86 and on what projects is it proposed to be spent. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1)...$ million (a) 1983-84... 17.534 (b) 1984-85... 20.826 (2) The allocation of official development assistance (ODA) for 1985-86 is estimated to total $16.516 million, comprising the following: $ million Project Aid... 10.800 Training... 1.649 Share of Regional Aid to ASEAN... 1.625 Agricultural Research... 1.247 Student Subsidy (education in Australia)... 0.641 Tertiary Education (in Philippines)... 0.484 Head of Mission Discretionary Fund... 0.070 Major projects to which ODA funds have been allocated for 1985-86 include: the Zamboanga del Sur development project, the Northern Samar integrated rural development project, a national coal logistics project, the Metro Manila Urban Transportation System and research projects on schistosomiasis and acute respiratory infections. Australia will also be supporting an environmental adviser to the National Irrigation Administration and assisting the National Council for Integrated Area Development. The Minister for Defence, to whom the questions in parts (3) and (4) should have been addressed, has supplied the following replies: (3) Under the Defence Cooperation Program (DCP) with the Philippines, expenditure during (a) 1983-84 and (b) 1984-85, totalled $1.660 million and $1.356 million respectively. (4) The proposed allocation for the program under the DCP in the Philippines for 1985-86 is $1.493 million. This amount has been allocated for the continuation of the Nomad Maintenance Project and the proposed Mobile Light Field Hospital project. The 1985-86 program also includes the ongoing training and study visits program comprising attendance at Joint and Single Service Staff Colleges by Filipino personnel; Army officer training in journalism, logistics and malaria research; and the visit to Australia by four officers to attend the 1985 Annual DCP Regional Seminar. (Question No. 1962) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: What period of time would have to elapse before a visiting nuclear-armed vessel, in an Australian port, would be considered as being stationed in Australia in violation of Article 5 of the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The question of whether the definition of stationing contained in Article 1(d) of the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty should include a time element to cover, for example, the duration or pattern of port visits was considered by the South Pacific Forum's Working Group which drafted the Treaty. It was noted that the principles on a South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone adopted by Forum Heads of Government at their meeting in Tuvalu in August 1984 had explicitly stated that the sovereign right of a country to decide on port access was unqualified. Moreover, the utility of such a time frame was questioned since circumstances of port visits varied considerably. It was also noted that should any Party to the Treaty have doubts or questions concerning the duration or pattern of port visits it would be open to it to invoke the consultation provisions of the Treaty (Article 10) in order to seek clarification. (Question No. 1963) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: Does the Government intend to introduce a strict code of conduct for Australian transnational corporations and financial institutions investing in developing countries to ensure that the operations respect the independence of the host country and enhance the prospect of equitable self-reliant development; if so, when. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Not at present. Australia was, however, a party to the Declaration made on 21 June 1976 by the member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development on International Investment and Multinational Enterprises. The Declaration contains voluntary guidelines addressed by OECD countries to multinational enterprises operating in their territories intended to encourage the contributions of these enterprises to economic and social progress, especially in developing countries, and to minimise any difficulties which arise from their operations. Also, the United Nations Commission on Trans- national Corporations is considering a draft Code of Conduct for Transnational Corporations (TNCs) which, in effect, is designed to ensure that the operations of TNCs in developing countries `respect the independence of the host country and enhance the prospect of self-reliant development.' In common with other western industrialised countries Australia supports the adoption of a voluntary code, with comprehensive application to private, mixed and state-owned enterprises and which provides for fair, equitable and non-discriminatory treatment of TNCs by states in accordance with national and international law. (Question No. 1964) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) What is the proposed level of aid to Ethiopia in 1985-86? (2) How is this to be allocated? (3) What provisions for emergency food aid have been made for Africa in 1985-86? Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Estimated bilateral aid to Ethiopia for 1985-86 is $14.068m, but this excludes unprogrammed emergency aid which will be determined later in the financial year. (2) The estimated allocation of this 1985-86 assistance is as follows ($'000): Projects Training Food Other 100 272 12,446 1,250 It is not possible to estimate amounts reaching individual provinces, but over $3m has been granted so far to non-government agencies' food and other relief programs for use in contested areas of Eritrea and Tigray. A significant part of the balance of other food aid is expected to be used in Government-held areas of Eritrea and Tigray and other northern provinces. Although most food aid is provided for emergency feeding programs, over $4m will be used to provide food in support of a food-for-work development project in the south-western province of Gamo Gofa. (3) The estimate in the 1985-86 aid budget for emergency food aid for Africa is $29m, which is almost 80 per cent of the estimated total for all emergency food aid. (Question No. 1965) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: Has the Government investigated the death of the Irian Jayan anthropologist, Mr Arnold Ap; if so, what conclusions has it reached regarding the circumstances of Mr Ap's death. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: While the Government is not in a position to conduct a formal investigation of events which occurred in another country, it has nonetheless carefully followed developments in the case of the death of Mr Ap. The precise circumstances of Mr Ap's death remain unclear. The Indonesian Foreign Minister, Dr Mochtar, has said that Mr Ap was discovered while attempting to escape by sea and was shot and killed in an exchange of fire with police. I am aware of claims by the Australian Section of the International Commission of Jurists to have evidence that conflicts with that account. The Government is naturally concerned at the death of Arnold Ap and has made its concern known to the Indonesian authorities at the highest levels. (Question No. 1966) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) What percentage of Australia's development assistance program was allocated to (a) bilateral and (b) multilateral assistance in (i) 1980-81, (ii) 1981-82, (iii) 1982-83, (iv) 1983-84 and (v) 1984-85. (2) What percentage is allocated for paragraphs (1) (a) and (b) in 1985-86. (3) How is the present level of allocation of multilateral aid justified. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) The following table shows the proportions of expenditures counted as official development assistance (ODA) in the years mentioned: Proportions of ODA 1980-86 Multilateral Bilateral Admini- stration % % % 1980/81... 20.3 78.0 1.7 1981/82... 22.4 75.9 1.7 1982/83... 24.6 73.4 2.0 1983/84... 25.9 72.3 1.8 1984/85... 23.3 75.0 1.7 1985/86... 24.3 73.6 2.1 (Estimated) (3) The level of expenditure on each multilateral program is established either as an obligation (e.g. drawdowns agreed with the multilateral development banks; multi-year pledges to certain organisations; assessed shares in a few specialised agencies and regional organisations); or as a voluntary contribution (other programs). In 1985/86 provision has been made for all obligations. In setting levels of voluntary contributions the Government has had regard to expenditure levels in previous years and the purposes of the various programs. (Question No. 1967) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Has the Government included, as part of Australia's 1985-86 official development assistance budget, funding for the education of overseas students in Australia. (2) What proportion of Australia's GDP constitutes aid payments excluding funding for overseas students. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The Government has allocated in the 1985-86 official development assistance budget $140.283m in support of education and training programs, most of which will be conducted in Australia. A major component is the contribution by the Commonwealth towards the education in Australia of sponsored and private students from developing countries at the post-secondary level. This is estimated at $97.398m for 1985-86: (a) The estimated educational contribution for sponsored students is $8.984m. The Government also meets the overseas student charge, fares and living expenses for all sponsored students. (b) The estimated support for the education of private overseas students is $88.414m. For private students from Papua New Guinea and other South Pacific countries the Australian Government also meets the overseas student charge. (2) Official development assistance (ODA) in 1985-86 is estimated at 0.45 per cent of the Gross National Product (GNP). If the cost of the educational support for private overseas students (estimated at $88.414m in 1985-86) is excluded from the calculation, the ODA/GNP ratio is estimated at 0.41 per cent. (Question No. 1968) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Does the Government intend to achieve the United Nations target of 0.7 per cent of gross national product for official development assistance with an immediate target of 0.5 per cent by 1985-86. (2) Is it a fact that Australia's aid payments, as a proportion of gross domestic product, will fall to 0.45 per cent as a result of the 1985-86 Budget. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The Government endorses the United Nations target of providing 0.7 per cent of gross national pro- duct as official development assistance, but has not set a firm date for achieving this goal. The Government has not set an immediate target of 0.5 per cent for 1985-86. (2) It is expected that in 1985-86 Australia's official development assistance will represent 0.45 per cent of gross national product. As a proportion of gross domestic product it will represent 0.44 per cent. (Question No. 1969) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Is he able to state what the current strength of the Free Papua Organisation (OPM) is. (2) Has his attention been drawn to remarks by the Australian Ambassador to Indonesia, Mr Bill Morrison, in the Australian on 17 September 1985, that the OPM certainly had a decreasing influence in Irian Jaya; the people just wanted a quiet life and they saw the OPM as disrupting that quiet life. (3) If so, is he able to say whether he agrees with the statement. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) It is difficult to estimate the strength of the OPM because of the fragmented nature of the organisation. Estimates of 200-300 active members have been used in the press but I am unable to confirm this figure. (2) Yes. (3) Ambassador Morrison's comments were based on his personal observations during his recent visit there. They add to the range of views on the province available to the Government and naturally will be taken into account in our policy formulation. (Question No. 1970) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Is he able to state what the figure for transmigrants into Irian Jaya is and what the Indonesian target for the 1984-89 period is. (2) Is he also able to say what the strength is of the (a) Indonesian army and (b) police force in Irian Jaya. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's questions are as follows: (1) According to the Department of Transmigration of the Republic of Indonesia, as of the end of the third five year plan in 1984, approximately 82,000 Indonesians from other parts of the country have been settled in Irian Jaya under the transmigration program. In the fourth five-year plan covering 1984-89, it is proposed that around 600,000 transmigrants will be settled in Irian Jaya, as part of the national transmigration program involving approximately four million people. The program, however, is progressing slower than planned and it seems unlikely that the final targets will be achieved during the period. (2) (a) I understand from a recent Embassy visit that there are four Indonesian army battalions in Irian Jaya suggesting a troop strength of 2,700. I also understand that an additional 2,000 personnel, including some from the Indonesian navy and air force are assigned to administrative, logistical and training duties in the province. (b) I have been advised that there are also about 1,500 police officers on duty in Irian Jaya. (Question No. 1971) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: Is the Soviet Union a Party to the Convention for the Protection of the World Cultural and National Heritage; if so, which places in the Soviet Union are included in the World Heritage List. Mr Hayden —The answers to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Soviet Union is not a party to the Convention. (Question No. 1972) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Has consideration been given to Government involvement in a hydro-carbon corporation to operate in the Timor Gap. (2) Has his attention been drawn to a report in the Age, of 14 September 1985, that Department of Foreign Affairs officials in Canberra believe negotiations for joint development would be encouraged by a similar organisation on the Australian side; if so, has he made any statement on this matter. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: I have nothing further to add to the answer provided by Senator Gareth Evans to a question without notice in the Senate on 16 September. In his answer, Senator Evans said that the Government is not giving any formal consideration at this stage to the concept of a Government hydro-carbon corporation to operate in the Timor Gap. Such a corporation is one possible method of organising development on the Australian side in a possible joint development zone with Indonesia. There are many different ways in which the Australian interests could be represented and mobilised in the context of that proposed joint development zone. The hydro-carbon corporation or the notion of some governmental agency as the administering authority, no doubt in conjunction with private enterprise, is just one of a number of possible options and certainly should not generate any concern on the part of the oil industry. (Question No. 1973) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) What degree of importance does he attach to a settlement of the seabed boundary between Australia and Indonesia. (2) Has he raised the matter with the Indonesian Government; if so, when and with what result. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) A settlement of the seabed boundary between Australia and Indonesia is considered by the Government to be very important. The Prime Minister, in answer to a question without notice concerning East Timor on 22 August 1985, referred to the importance of a successful conclusion of the seabed boundary negotiations. (2) I last discussed the matter with the Indonesian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dr Mochtar, in Kuala Lumpur on 12 July 1985. As a result of that talk and subsequent contacts between Australian and Indonesian officials, it is hoped that the next round of discussions between officials of the two countries will take place in Canberra during October 1985. (Question No. 1974) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Is the Government continuing to negotiate with Indonesia on the seabed boundary south of East Timor. (2) When were the last delimitation talks held and who were the officials who represented Australia. (3) What progress was made at the talks. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. (2) 14-16 November 1984 in Jakarta. The Australian delegation was as follows: Mr J. H. Brook, First Assistant Secretary, Legal and Consular Division, Department of Foreign Affairs (Leader); Mr D. G. Nutter, First Assistant Secretary, South East Asia and Pacific Division, Department of Foreign Affairs; Mr J. C. Starkey, First Assistant Secretary, Petroleum Division, Department of Resources and Energy; Mr N. J. Quinn, First Assistant Secretary, Territories Division, Department of Territories and Local Government; Mr C. Veenstra, Director, Division of National Mapping, Department of Resources and Energy; Mr G. P. M. Dabb, Senior Assistant Secretary, Counsel 2 Branch, Attorney-General's Department; Mr A. C. Kevin, Assistant Secretary, Foreign Affairs Branch, Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet; Mr C. Robertson, Assistant Chief, Petroleum Branch, Bureau of Mineral Resources; Mr S. Bailey, Department of Law, Northern Territory; Mr J. Thompson, Crown Law Office, Western Australia; Brigadier G. J. Murphy, Defence Attache, Australian Embassy, Jakarta; Mr G. Atkin, First Secretary, Australian Embassy, Jakarta; Mr H. C. McMichael, Third Secretary, Australian Embassy, Jakarta. (3) Discussion continued on the four maritime delimitation matters outstanding between Australia and Indonesia; namely, the seabed boundary south of East Timor, the western end of the seabed boundary line agreed in 1972, the seabed boundary between Christmas Island and Java, and the maritime boundary for other than seabed purposes-agreement on a provisional fisheries line having been reached in 1981. One of the options discussed in relation to the seabed area south of East Timor-`the Timor Gap'-was the establishment of a Joint Development Zone which would allow Australia and Indonesia to cooperate in developing the resources of the area before final settlement of a delimitation line. (Question No. 1975) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say what the level of Jewish migration from the Soviet Union has been since 1980. (2) Has he raised this matter with the Soviet Union; if so, what was the response. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Jewish migration from the Soviet Union reached a high-point in 1979, with 51,320 being permitted to leave. The figures to date are 1980...approx...21,000 1981...9,500 1982...less than...3,000 1983...1,300 1984......896 1985 (first 8 months)...702 (2) During my discussions with the then Soviet Foreign Minister, Mr Gromyko, in Moscow in May 1984, I raised the question of Jewish migration. Mr Gromyko did not respond. (Question No. 1976) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether the Afghan Army has been reduced largely through desertion from some 90,000 in 1979 to around 35,000 to 40,000 in September 1985. (2) Is he also able to say whether conscription in Afghanistan is supplemented by roving press gangs and the draft age has been lowered to 16. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Morale in the Afghan Army has been at a low ebb during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan and desertion has been a factor in the reduction of its strength, now estimated at between 30,000 and 45,000 men, excluding militia and paramilitary forces. (2) Information available to my Department indicates that forced conscription of the type referred to by the honourable member has taken place in Afghanistan although to what extent it is not known. According to the `Report on the situation in Afghanistan' prepared by Special Rapporteur, Felix Ermacora and presented to the Forty-first Session of the Commission on Human Rights in February 1985 the age for conscription into the Afghan Army was lowered to 15 years in 1982. (Question No. 1977) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) What bilateral and multilateral assistance has been provided to Afghan refugees by the Government in each year since 1982-83. (2) What is the proposed level of assistance in 1985-86. (3) Is the Government providing any assistance to the 6 million to 8 million inhabitants still struggling to survive inside resistance held areas of Afghanistan. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The Government has provided the following amounts, all on a multilateral basis, in support of assistance programs by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and the International Committee of the Red Cross for Afghan refugees in Pakistan: 1982-83-$6.165m 1983-84-$6.363m 1984-85-$4.525m (2) In 1985-86 the proposed level of assistance is $4.600m. (3) The Government does not provide any direct assistance to the inhabitants of resistance held areas of Afghanistan and as far as the Government is aware the organisations to which Australia contributes do not operate in such areas. This does not mean that the Government is not concerned about the human suffering and deprivation of the Afghan people. The needless loss of life and suffering of the Afghan people will only come to an end when the Soviet Union withdraws its forces in accordance with UN resolutions. (Question No. 1978) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether the war in Afghanistan is still escalating and that no Australian newspaper, magazine or wire service has a full time correspondent reporting on Afghanistan. (2) What efforts has the Government made to negotiate with the Afghanistan Government to enable Australian journalists to report on the war inside Afghanistan. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The war in Afghanistan is certainly continuing at a high level. As far as the Government is aware no Australian newspaper, magazine or wire service has a full-time correspondent reporting on the war. The Australian Broadcasting Corporation has a correspondent based in New Delhi and there are Australian journalists based in Singapore who file periodic reports on developments in Afghanistan-though not from inside the country. (2) The Government does not recognise the Government of Afghanistan and is not in a position to negotiate arrangements for journalists to report on the war inside Afghanistan. (Question No. 1979) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say (a) to what extent Soviet forces in Afghanistan have increased since 1979 and (b) whether the Soviet Union has about 115,000 troops in Afghanistan, as at September 1985. (2) Is he also able to say what weaponry the Soviet Union is using in Afghanistan and whether this includes rapid fire MI-24 helicopter gun ship and SU-25 fighter bomber. (3) Did he raise these matters on his last visit to the Soviet Union; if so, with whom and what was the response; if not, why not. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) and (b). The number of Soviet troops in Afghanistan has increased slowly from approximately 80,000 at the beginning of the Soviet campaign to approximately 115,000 in September 1985. (2) The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is using a wide range of sophisticated weaponry in Afghanistan, including both the MI-24 helicopter gunship and the SU-25 fighter bomber. (3) Discussions with Mr Gromyko during my visit to Moscow in May 1984 covered a broad range of international, regional, and bilateral issues. A chief aim of the visit was to encourage the Soviet Union to resume a dialogue with the United States of nuclear disarmament. Time constraints did not permit a detailed discussion of Afghanistan although Australia's condemnation of its occupation was registered. It is well known, however, that Australia has condemned the Soviet invasion of that country and has frequently expressed, in Moscow and Canberra, its deep concern over events taking place there. (Question No. 1980) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether Soviet military tactics in Afghanistan have included high altitude saturation bombing, a scorched earth policy and the use of anti-personnel mines disguised as toys, watches and other objects that Afghan children or refugees would pick up. (2) Did he raise these matters on his last visit to the Soviet Union; if so, with whom and what was the response; if not, why not. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Since its invasion of Afghanistan in December 1979 the Soviet Union has used a variety of means including many of those referred to by the honourable member to subjugate the Afghan people, many of which have inflicted great suffering on Afghanistan's civilian population including women and children. (2) Discussion with Mr Gromyko during my visit to Moscow in May 1984 covered a broad range of international, regional, and bilateral issues. A chief aim of the visit was to encourage the Soviet Union to resume a dialogue with the United States on nuclear disarmament. Time constraints did not permit a discussion of Afghanistan, although I expressed Australia's condemnation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics' occupation of Afghanistan to Mr Groymko in Moscow. It is also well known that Australia has condemned the Soviet invasion of that country and has frequently expressed, in Moscow and Canberra, its deep concern over events taking place there. (Question No. 1981) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether any evidence exists that Soviet troops have used lethal chemical and toxin weapons in Afghanistan. (2) Has he received reports which have alleged the use of myco toxins, nerve gases, blister agents and incapacitants by the Soviet Union in Afghanistan; if so, did he raise these matters of his last visit to the Soviet Union. (3) If so, with whom did he raise them and what was the response; if not, why not. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The bulk of evidence produced in support of allegations that Soviet troops in Afghanistan have used lethal chemical and toxin weapons consists of refugee and defector reports, and chemical analysis by scientists in the United States of fragments of two Soviet gas masks acquired in Afghanistan in 1981: see for example the relevant sections of the United States' State Department Special Reports No. 98 `Chemical Warfare in South East Asia and Afghanistan' of March 1982 and No. 104 `Chemical Warfare in South East Asia and Afghanistan-An Update', of November 1982. Further details regarding the analysis of the gas masks were made public at an on-the-record State Department media briefing on 29 November 1982. Examples of refugee reports of alleged use of chemical weapons in Afghanistan may also be found in the Report of the Group of Experts to investigate Reports of the Alleged Use of Chemical Weapons sent to the United Nations Secretary General on 26 November 1982. (2) and (3) The Government has taken careful note of the allegations by the United States that the Soviet Union has used lethal chemical and toxin agents in Afghanistan, and of Soviet statements dismissing these allegations. It has also noted the inconclusive nature of much of the evidence (see e.g. the United Nations report cited above). Nevertheless the Government views these reports and allegations with considerable concern. There appears to be a case to answer and the Government hopes the Soviet Union will take appropriate steps to demonstrate its compliance with the relevant arms control agreements: in this case the 1925 Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating Poisonous or Other Gases and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare and the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention of 1972. This particular issue has not been raised with the Soviet Union. The Government has, however, stressed on a number of occasions to the Soviet Union the importance it places on full adherence by all parties to the terms of arms control treaties. It has also emphasised the importance it places on the urgent need for a comprehensive chemical weapons Convention which would outlaw the production, stockpiling and use of chemical weapons. The Soviet Union has also been made aware of Australian concerns over the number of reports of use of chemical weapons over the past few years and of Australia's firm view that all such reports should be promptly and thoroughly investigated. (Question No. 1982) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Did he state on Brisbane television, on 8 July 1984, that Indonesian death squads had murdered between 2,000 and 4,000 of their own citizens. (2) Are these death squads still operating; if so at what level. (3) Does evidence exist to show that there is any connection between these death squads and the Indonesian authorities. (4) Has he raised this matter with the Indonesian Government; if so, with whom and what was the response. Mr Hayden —The answers to the honourable member's questions are as follows: (1) Yes. On the basis of information available to the Government, I stated in public on 8 July 1984 that between 2,000 and 4,000 people had been shot without trial by so-called `death squads' in Indonesia. (2) There have been reports from time to time of `mysterious killings' in Jakata and other centres. In the absence of reliable information about the extent of the killings, it is difficult to determine their present level. At the same time, the number of victims of such killings appears to have substantially declined over the past eighteen months. (3) I am not aware of any firm evidence to show that there is a connection between these reported mysterious killings and the Indonesian authorities. If the Indonesian authorities have sanctioned the executions, as alleged in press reports, it would be a matter of deep concern to the Australian Government. (4) I raised this matter with relevant Indonesian authorities during my visit to Jakarta for the Association of South East Asian Nations Plus Ministerial Consultations in July 1984. The position of the Indonesian Government has been that the killings are the result of fighting between rival criminal gangs. The Australian Government believes that summary executions are a clear contravention of the fundamental human rights embodied in the universal declaration on human rights and the international covenant on civil and political rights. The Government has consistently taken the view that Australia has a strong interest in seeing internationally accepted human rights observed and respected, especially in our region, and believes that in all situations the due process of law should be followed. Our representations to the Indonesian authorities are in keeping with this interest. (Question No. 2259) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: Further to his answer to a question without notice on 15 October 1985 relating to the Achille Lauro incident, when was responsibility for public international law transferred to the Attorney-General and why was the change made. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: There has been no change in the division of responsibility for public international law between my Department and the Attorney-General's Department since the present arrangement was established in 1974. (Question No. 2260) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: (1) What administrative changes have taken place in his Department as a result of the transfer of responsibility for public international law to the Attorney-General. (2) What has happened to (a) the Law of the Sea Section, (b) the Treaty Section, (c) the International Law Section, (d) the Bilateral and Domestic Legal Section, (e) the Administrative Law Section, (f) the Multilateral Humanitarian Law Section, (g) the Refugees, Immigration and Asylum Section and (h) the Legal Adviser and how have the officers in each of these areas been redeployed within his Department. (3) Why does his departmental telephone directory list 23 different areas of legal responsibility. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: See my answer to question No. 2259. (Question No. 2261) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: Was his answer, to a question without notice on 15 October 1985, that responsibility for public international law rested with the Attorney-General, incorrect. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: No. See my answer to question No. 2259. The division of responsibility for public international law between the two Departments has always explicitly recognised the Ministerial authority of the Attorney-General as first Law Officer of the Commonwealth. (Question No. 2262) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: Is he able to say whether the aggregate of the Soviet Union's ABM and ABM related actions suggests that the Soviet Union may be preparing an ABM defence of its national territory in violation of the ABM Treaty. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: No. The question quotes the conclusion of Item 13 of the Reagan Administration's second report to the Congress on Soviet non-compliance with arms control agreements-1 February 1985. The Government is not in a position to expand on this conclusion. (Question No. 2263) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to say whether the Soviet Union has maintained an offensive biological warfare program and capability in violation of the Biological and Toxins Weapons Convention of 1972: if so, what representations has the Government made to the Soviet Union in this regard. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Government has noted United States allegations to this effect. It has stressed on a number of occasions the great importance it places on full compliance by all parties to arms control agreements with the terms of those agreements. Questions of verification and compliance with the 1972 Biological and Toxins Weapons Convention and the need to preserve and strengthen this important Convention have been discussed with the Soviet Union. It would not be appropriate to give details of confidential exchanges between Governments. (Question No. 2264) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: Is he able to say whether (a) the Soviet Union's SS-X-25 is a prohibited new type of Inter-continental Ballistic Missile and (b) the testing of the SS-X-25 and SS-X-24 is a violation of Strategic Arms Limitation Talks II. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The United States has charged that the Soviet Union has violated the relevant provision of the SALT II Treaty (Article IV.9) which prohibits each side from flight testing and deploying more than one new type of light ICBM. According to United States sources the Soviet Union advised the United States that a new multiple-warhead ICBM it began flight-testing in late 1982, designated the SS-X-24 by the United States, was its one new type of light ICBM permitted under the Treaty. Subsequently the Soviet Union began testing another ICBM, designated the SS-X-25 by the United States. In response to United States queries the Soviet Union claimed that this ICBM was only a modification of an existing ICBM, the SS13, first deployed in 1969. The United States does not accept this assertion. It believes the ICBM in question to be a second new type of ICBM and thus prohibited under SALT II. The issue of whether the SS25 is a new ICBM as defined by the SALT II Treaty involves complex technical and legal issues. The Government believes that the complex of issues surrounding the SS25 raises legitimate questions concerning Soviet compliance with the relevant provisions of the Treaty. There appears to be a case to answer and it hopes the Soviet Union will take appropriate steps to respond to United States concerns and demonstrate clearly its compliance with the relevant provisions of SALT II. The Australian Government regards the existing agreements between the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as important to all countries because the interests of all are engaged. It attaches great importance to full compliance by both parties with all their agreements, and has made this point to both of them. (Question No. 2265) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: Is he able to say whether the Soviet Union's deployment of the SS-16 at Plesetek is a violation of Strategic Arms Limitation Talks II. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: No. The Government is aware of United States concern that the Soviet Union may have deployed the SS-16 ICBM at Plesetsk in violation of the relevant provision of the SALT II Treaty. It notes however that in the February 1985 unclassified report to Congress entitled ``Soviet Non Compliance with Arms Control Agreements'' the Administration stopped short of alleging a Soviet violation in this respect, noting that the evidence was `somewhat ambiguous', that it could not reach a definitive conclusion, and that the activities at Plesetsk were a ``probable violation'' of the Treaty. The Government is not therefore in a position to say whether the Soviet Union has deployed the SS-16 at Plesetsk in violation of the SALT II Treaty. (Question No. 2266) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: Is he able to say whether the number of incidents of concurrent operation of surface to air missile (Surface to Air Missile) and anti-ballistic missile (Anti-ballistic missile) components indicate that the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics has violated the prohibition in the ABM Treaty on testing Surface to air missile components in an ABM mode. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Government is aware that ambiguous Soviet activities in this field have prompted United States requests for clarification for many years, but it is not in a position to make a judgment on the matter. The Government has noted reports that an important aspect of this matter was resolved in an agreement concluded in the Standing Consultative Commission, apparently in June 1985. (Science, 9 August 1985, pp 535-536.) (Question No. 2267) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: Is he able to say whether the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics' development of components of a new anti-ballistic missile (ABM) system is (a) designed to be deployable at sites requiring little or no preparation and (b) a potential violation of the ABM Treaty. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) No. (b) No. If the answer to (a) had been in the affirmative, such activity could have been interpreted as a violation of Article 1.2 of the Anti-ballistic missiles Treaty whereby 'Each party undertakes not to deploy Anti-ballistic missile systems for a defence of the territory of its country and not to provide a base for such a defence . . .' (Question No. 2268) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: Is he able to say whether the Soviet Union's preparations for SS-X-25 Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile deployment at dismantled SS-7 sites raise concern about future Soviet Compliance with Strategic Arms Limitation Talks I. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The United States Administration has indicated in its unclassified February 1985 report to Congress entitled `Soviet Non Compliance with Arms Control Treaties' that Soviet activity apparently related to SS-X-25 ICBM deployments at two former SS-7 bases (and not, as the Question states ``the Soviet Union's preparations for SS-X-25 ICBM deployment at dismantled SS-7 sites'') does not at present violate the agreed implementing procedures of the SALT I Interim Agreement. The Report goes on to indicate, however, that on-going activites raise concerns about compliance for the future, since use of ``remaining facilities'' to support ICBMs at deactivated SS-7 sites would be in violation of Soviet commitments. The Government notes that the United States has not stated that these activities constitute a violation of the SALT Interim Agreement or its implementing procedures. As it does not have access to the texts of the procedures implementing the Interim Agreement-it understands these were concluded between the United States and the Soviet Union in 1974 in the Standing Consultative Commission whose deliberations, by agreement, are conducted in private-it is not in a position to comment further. (Question No. 2269) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: (1) In what specific ways do the objects and policies of `Labor Parliamentarians for a Nuclear Free Australia' differ from those of the Government. (2) Is he able to say what the membership of `Labor Parliamentarians for a Nuclear Free Australia' is and how many Ministers belong to this group. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable members' question is as follows: This question would be best directed to the body `Labor Parliamentarians for a Nuclear Free Australia' which is not a formal body of the Government and for which, therefore, I do not have any ministerial responsibilities. (Question No. 2270) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: (1) How long does it take on average for Foreign Affairs officers holding honours or higher degrees to be promoted from the equivalent of clerical/administrative (a) class 5 to class 7, (b) class 7 to class 9 and (c) class 9 to class 11. (2) Is he able to say how these figures compare with the average periods taken for promotion for similarly qualified officers in the rest of the public service. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable members' question is as follows: (1) Based on the most recent promotions within my Department, Foreign Affairs officers holding honours or higher degrees are promoted on average from the equivalent of clerical administrative (a) class 5 to class 7 in 3.55 years; (b) class 7 to class 9 in 4.35 years and; (c) class 9 to class 11 in 7.74 years. These figures do not reflect the length of time spent at various levels by officers who have not been promoted recently as it is impossible to calculate a meaningful average length of time for promotions occurring some time in the future. (2) I am unable to say how these figures compare with the average periods for promotion for similarly qualified officers in the rest of the Public Service, as these details are not held by my Department. I suggest that this question would be better taken up with the Minister responsible for public service matters. (Question No. 2271) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: (1) Has his attention been drawn to issues of the Beijing Review of 19 and 26 August 1985 in which it is stated, in articles discussing the Government's review of the ANZUS Treaty, that (a) Australia's insistence on regionalisation implies that it was unwilling to take responsibility for events that occur outside its region, (b) by avoiding such involvement Australia had made it clear that it would not be an active supporter of the United States' world strategy and (c) the country's cardinal interests lie in Oceania's peace and security, and consequently, ANZUS should be focussed on the South Pacific. (2) If so, do these comments accurately reflect the Government's Policy. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) No. (2) The Government's policy remains as expressed in my Parliamentary statement of 15 September 1983 which described the outcome of the Government's review of ANZUS. In explaining the issues discussed and agreed with our Treaty partners at the ANZUS Council meeting in Washington in July 1983, I said: `. . . we cannot assume military support from our Treaty partners in every contingency; we should therefore develop a self-defence capability in case in a particular contingency we need to rely on our own resources. By definition, therefore, it would not be prudent to base the development of our Defence Force structure on the assumption that our forces will necessarily be part of a superpower deployment in the event of any form of hostilities in which we are involved. It is more prudent and proper to elaborate these force structures on the basis of a self-defence capability within our regional context. I hasten to add for clarity of record that our threat assessment is as it was for the previous Government, that is, that in the foreseeable future we are not confronted by any likely regional threat. Indeed, agreement was explicitly reached as to Australia's prime defence role, namely, as one of building our self-defence capability within our regional context, rather than as a presumed global role as some sort of appendix of a superpower. That clarification will allow a much more explicit and precise formulation of our defence thinking and will govern the defence structure that we establish for our Defence Force'. (Hansard, House of Representatives page 901) (Question No. 2272) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: (1) Did he reject a draft Cabinet Submission from his Department in 1983, which concluded that existing uranium safeguards were good, sufficient and effective. (2) If so, on what basis did he reject the submission. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1 and 2) In September 1983 a draft Cabinet Submission from my Department on the Government's review of nuclear safeguards policy was sent back to the Department for redrafting. I instructed the Department to give further consideration to the concerns which the Labor Party had expressed while in Opposition. (Question No. 2273) Mr Peacock asked the Minister of Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: (1) Did he write to the Prime Minister on 6 December 1983 stating that his Department's draft submission on uranium safeguards was not acceptable for Government purposes in that it proposed that the existing safeguards were good, sufficient and effective. (2) Did he also say in the memorandum that his Department's submission was probably true and that, (a) the Government could not very well expect to succeed in reporting back to the Australian Labor Party colleagues that all that was said in Opposition about the deficiencies in the safeguards was unjustified, (b) the concern that was built up within the ALP for the need for more effective safeguards could not be substantiated and (c) contrary to what the Government had been claiming, its opponents had done such a good job that it could not be improved upon. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1 and 2) A memorandum dated 6 September 1983 went from me to the Prime Minister, the purpose of which was to inform him of progress on the preparation of a draft Cabinet Submission on the subject of the review then being conducted of nuclear safeguards policy. The subsequent review by Cabinet and Caucus of a range of uranium issues led to the decisions on nuclear policy announced by the Government on 7 November 1983, and to the decision by the Government, announced on 10 November 1983, to ask the Australian Science and Technology Council (ASTEC) to conduct an inquiry into Australia's role in the nuclear fuel cycle, which included examination of the effectiveness of nuclear safeguards arrangements. (Question No. 2274) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: Does the Government intend to announce any changes to the Fraser Government's uranium safeguard measures; if so, when. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: In May 1984, the report of the Australian Science and Technology Council's inquiry into Australia's role in the nuclear fuel cycle was tabled in Parliament. As noted at that time, the Government considered it to be important that there should be an independent and objective audit of policies and practices in regard to Australia's uranium exports to ensure that they contributed to and strengthened Australia's pursuit of its disarmament and non-proliferation objectives. The Government's response to the Australian Science and Technology Council report indicated the manner in which it is addressing the wide range of issues examined in the inquiry. The Government's activities cover not only measures to enhance nuclear safeguards but efforts to improve the international non-proliferation framework within which safeguards systems operate. (Question No. 2275) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 18 October 1985: What advice, consultancy services or financial assistance has his Department given to the Australian Bicentennial Authority. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: My Department regularly, as part of its overall responsibility for the conduct of Australia's foreign relations, provides advice to the Australian Bicentennial Authority on the foreign relations aspects of its planning in respect of individual country participation. My Department has also assisted the Authority's communication with other countries. No actual consultancy services have been provided, neither has any direct financial assistance been given. (Question No. 2277) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: (1) How many (a) Australian and (b) Soviet, bases currently exist in the Australian Antarctic Territory. (2) Is he able to say what the functions of each of the Soviet bases are and how many personnel are present at each base. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) Three (Mawson, Davis and Casey). (b) Four Molodezhnaya, Mirny, Vostok and Leningradskaya). (2) All Soviet stations in the Australian Antarctic Territory are engaged in scientific research. Molodezhnaya is the largest Soviet station in Antarctica and functions as the command centre for Soviet activities on the continent. It is also the main Soviet Antarctic logistics centre being the focus of intracontinental movement by air and sea and the gateway for air, sea, and telecommunications traffic with the Soviet Union. In addition to its control/logistics functions, the station also has an important research function, especially in the fields of geophysics, meteorology and medicine. Mirny is officially designated as an observatory and its scientific program emphasises meteorological observations. An additional function of Mirny is to provide logistic support to the inland Vostok station. Vostok is an important centre for geomagnetic observations. Glacology and meteorological work is also conducted there. Leningradskaya is part of the Soviet meteorological system in Antarctica and functions as a collection point for geophysical and other data. According to information exchanged under the Antarctic Treaty concerning the 1984-86 Soviet Antarctic Expedition, Molodezhnaya has 124 winter personnel, Mirny 69, Vostok 27 and Leningradskaya 20. During the summer season, Molodezhnaya has an additional 9 personnel, Mirny an additional 20 personnel and Vostok an additional 5 personnel. (Question No. 2278) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: (1) Has the Soviet Union requested Australian permission for the establishment of Soviet bases in the Australian Antarctic Territory. (2) Has the Government given permission for the establishment of such bases. (3) If so, when was permission granted. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: On 30 July 1955, the then Minister for External Affairs issued a general invitation, in the form of a press statement, welcoming the interest of other countries in the coming International Geophysical Year (1957-58) and offering to provide assistance to anyone desiring to carry out scientific research in the Australian Antarctic Territory (AAT). This was followed, on 29 August 1955, by the despatch of a diplomatic note in similar terms to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Soviet Union. This note was presented on the Australian Government's behalf by the British Embassy in Moscow. Australia and the Soviet Union are both parties to the Antarctic Treaty. The Treaty guarantees freedom of scientific investigation in Antarctica, subject to its other provisions. Since the Treaty entered into force on 23 June 1961, the question of permission for the establishment of Soviet bases in the AAT since that date does not arise. (Question No. 2279) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: What form of monitoring of Soviet Union activities in the Australian Antarctic Territory is carried out by the Government. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty requires all parties, including the Soviet Union and Australia, to inform other Contracting Parties in advance of their activities in Antarctica. The Soviet Union regularly fulfils its obligation in this regard, including in relation to Soviet activities in the Australian Antarctic Territory. The Treaty also provides for the exchange of scientific personnel in Antarctica between expeditions and stations and for the exchange and free availability of scientific observations and results from Antarctica. Under these provisions of the Treaty Australia and the Soviet Union have regularly exchanged scientific data. Australian scientists occasionally participate in Soviet scientific programs in Antarctica. In addition, Article VII of the Antarctic Treaty permits any Antarctic Treaty Consultative Party to designate observers who shall have complete freedom of access at any time to any or all areas of Antarctica for the purposes of inspection, to ensure that the provisions of the Treaty are being complied with. Inspection visits carried out by Consultative Parties to date have confirmed that the Soviet Union is abiding by its Treaty obligations. (Question No. 2280) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: Is he able to say whether (a) the Soviet Union violated its political commitment under the Helsinki Final Act by failing to provide prior notification of a major Warsaw Pact manoeuvre (Zapad-81) exceeding 25,000 troops in 1981 at a time when great pressure was being put on Poland and (b) the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, provided only the bare minimum of information required under the Final Act in 1984. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: No. The Government is aware of United States allegations to this effect in the Administration's most recent unclassified Report of February 1985 entitled `Soviet Non Compliance with Arms Control Agreements'. The Government places great importance on full compliance by all parties with the terms of arms control agreements. It urges the Soviet Union to take steps to respond to Western concerns and demonstrate its compliance with the relevant provisions of the Helsinki Final Act. (Question No. 2281) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Is he able to say whether the Soviet Union's nuclear testing activities constitute a likely violation of the Threshold Test Ban Treaty of 1974 which banned underground nuclear tests in excess of 150 kilotons; if so, what representations has the Government made to the Soviet Union on this matter. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: No. The Government is, however, concerned about the uncertainty that surrounds compliance with the Threshold Test Ban Treaty. The Government has urged the Soviet Union to accept President Reagan's offer for Soviet specialists to observe and measure American tests at the Nevada test site and to reciprocate that offer. Similarly the Government's strong advocacy of a comprehensive test ban emphasises the crucial importance of having in place adequate means to verify compliance with this measure. (Question No. 2282) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: Is he able to say whether the Soviet Union's underground nuclear test practices have resulted in the venting of radioactive matter and caused such matter to be present outside the territorial limits of the Soviet Union in violation of the Limited Test Ban Treaty of 1963; if so, what representation has the Government made to the Soviet Union on this matter. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: In all its dealings with other countries, including the Soviet Union, on arms control and disarmament issues, the Government urges strict compliance with existing treaties. The Government is aware that both the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics have encountered some difficulty in totally containing all their underground nuclear tests and that both countries have raised this in discussions and exchanges on compliance. The Government believes the venting of radioactive matter for underground nuclear explosions in the United States and the USSR to be an increasingly rare occurrence. The Government would be deeply concerned if standards were to be relaxed and the immediate contamination of the environment through venting from underground nuclear explosions become a regular occurrence. (Question No. 1419) Mr Rocher asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, upon notice, on 20 August 1985: (1) Is the Committee to Review Australian Studies in Tertiary Education an official bicentennial activity. (2) If so, are (i) Kay Daniels, senior Lecturer in History, University of Tasmania, (ii) Bruce Bennett, Associate Professor of English, University of Western Australia and (iii) Humphrey McQueen members of the committee. (3) Who oppointed the committee and what are its terms of reference. (4) Who recommended the individuals appointed to the committee. (5) What special expertise does each of the members bring to the committee. (6) What support staff does the committee have. (7) Are members of the committee paid by stipend, sitting fee, allowance or similar method; if so, what are the amounts. (8) What have been the full costs of establishing and maintaining the committee to date. Mr Dawkins —The Minister for Education has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) Yes. The Australian Studies Project comprises the Review of Australian Studies in Tertiary Education and the Australian Studies School Project which is being undertaken by the Curriculum Development Centre. (2) Yes. (3) The Minister for Education. The terms of reference of the Committee are as follows: (i) review the provision of Australian studies in tertiary education institutions covering universities, colleges of advanced education and TAFE; (ii) make recommendations for the development of Australian studies in tertiary education in Australia and overseas; Note: `Australian studies' is to be defined as including all studies dealing with a distinctly Australian subject matter and is not limited to those studies designated Australian studies with a capital `S'. In undertaking the above, the committee will pay attention to: (i) the place of Australian studies as a discipline (in courses entitled ``Australian Studies''); within general course areas (e.g. literature, history, geography); within fields of study which combine a number of course areas (e.g. Aboriginal studies, women's studies, multicultural studies); and as areas of research; (ii) the role of Australian studies in science and technology and in professional and technical training; (iii) the needs of institutions providing courses in teacher education; (iv) the role of tertiary education institutions in developing and promoting an understanding in the general community of Australian society, history, culture and the built and natural environments; (v) any other related matters. (4) The appointments were made by the Minister for Education after wide consultations with members of the Australian academic community and the Bicentennial Authority. (5) (a) Prior to becoming Chairperson of CRASTE, Dr Daniels was a Senior Lecturer in History at the University of Tasmania. She was director, National Research Programme for International Women's Year 1975-77. She has published widely on social issues in Australian history. Her particular field of interest and expertise is in making history more accessible to people outside the history profession; (b) Bruce Bennett is an Associate Professor in the Department of English at the University of Western Australia and was previously President of the Association for the Study of Australian Literature; (c) Humphrey McQueen is a highly regarded author of works on many aspects of Australian history and in the field of the visual arts in Australia. Mr McQueen previously lectured in Australian History at the Australian National University and was also a Senior Lecturer in General Studies at the Canberra School of Art. He was awarded the Australian Book Review's award for Best Critic of the Year in 1984. (6) At present CRASTE has the following support staff: 1 Clerical Administrative, Grade 10; 1 Clerical Administrative, Grade 8; 1 Clerical Assistant, Grade 4; 1 Stenographer, Grade 1. (7) Dr Daniels is employed on a full-time basis and is paid an APS salary as determined by the Remuneration Tribunal equivalent to SES level 1. Her current annual salary is $46,019 plus the standard expenses of office allowance of $815. Associate Professor Bennett and Mr McQueen serve as part-time committee members and receive a sitting fee, set by the Remuneration Tribunal, of $180 per day when they attend meetings of the committee and when they do work on behalf of the committee. The Remuneration Tribunal also determined that they receive travel allowance of $110 per diem for capital cities and $85 per diem for other than capital cities. (8) A total of $196,370 has been spent on establishing and maintaining the committee as at 9 September 1985. (Question No. 1426) Dr Klugman asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, upon notice, on 20 August 1985: How many (a) university students and (b) recipients of Tertiary Education Assistance Scheme allowances reside in each (i) post code area and (ii) federal electoral division. Mr Dawkins —The Minister for Education has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: The information requested is not available because: (a) Data collected by the Commonwealth Tertiary Education Commission include the postcode of each university student's residence at the time of first enrolment at an institution and is not processed by electorate. (b) While residential addresses are supplied by TEAS recipients in their applications, these are not recorded on computer. What is recorded is the postal address provided by each applicant for receipt of correspondence or cheques. This may in some cases be the student's home address but for many it is a temporary address during term, a post office box number (which may be located close to the intitution rather than to the student's temporary or permanent address), or simply an address at which it is convenient for a student living away from home to receive mail. (Question No. 1474) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 20 August 1985: (1) What journals, digests, files, periodicals and the like are produced by instrumentalities within the Minister's portfolio. (2) For each publication (a) when was it established, (b) which section within the Minister's portfolio produces it, (c) how many staff are involved in its production and for what percentage of time are they involved, (d) how often is it produced, (e) by whom is it printed and what is the print run, (f) what is the circulation and to whom, or where is it circulated, (g) who has editorial control, (h) what are its stated objectives and (i) what are the printing, staff and administrative costs associated with its production. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The following publications are of the type referred to in the honourable member's question: Defence Force Journal (a) 1976 (b) Public Information Branch, Policy Co-ordination Division. (c) Managing Editor, which represents 100% of his duties. Other staff in the Public Information Branch provide clerical and typing support, as required. The Army Audio-Visual Unit provides support for the preparation of art-work. (d) 6 times per year. (e) Ruskin Press, Melbourne-17,000 copies. (f) Australian Defence Force, Department of Defence, Overseas Missions. The Journal is made available to the media and public on request. (g) The Journal is governed by a Borad of Management which has access, through its Chairman, to the Chief of the Defence Force. (h) To promote discussion and understanding within the profession of arms of all aspects of Defence: strategy, tactics, logistics and related defence and military matters. (i) Publication-$50,000. Salary of one Clerical Administrative Class 7 officer-$29,000 pa. Other associated costs, eg distribution costs, costs of staff resources mentioned in sub-paragraph c., non-effective benefits for civilian staff, etc cannot be readily identified. Defence Research News (a) August 1985 (b) Public Information Branch, Policy Co-ordination Division. (c) One person-5 days per month. (d) Quarterly (e) Pirie Printers, Canberra, 4,000 copies. (f) All areas of interest in Government departments, to defence industry and to the media. (g) Editorial control is exercised by the Superintendant, External Relations and the Director of Public Information. (h) To disseminate information about the activities, role and functions of the Defence Science and Technology Organisation. (i) Publication-$5,000. Salary of one Clerical Administrative Class 6 officer for 20 days per year $2,500 approx. Other administrative costs cannot be readily identified. Gibba Gabba-Defence Support Centre Woomera (a) 1950. (b) Defence Support Group Woomera. (c) Two persons 30% of their time. (d) Weekly. (e) Northern Newspapers Limited 15,000 copies. (f) The paper is circulated as follows: residents of Woomera and the surrounding district, various government departments, libraries, subscribers Australia wide. (g) Secretary of the Woomera Board. (h) Published as an information bulletin for Woomera residents. (i) Publication-$24,650.00. Annual income from advertising and subscriptions approximately $11,500.00. Salaries-$11,235.00. Navy News (a) 1958. (b) Navy Office. (c) Six persons 95% of their time. (d) Fortnightly. (e) Cumberland Press Pty Ltd Parramatta 17,500-45,000 copies. (f) RAN Personnel &Families, VIPs, MPs, Media Representatives, Advertisers. (g) Managing Editor directed by a Management Committee. (h) To inform and entertain. (i) $150,000 per annum. Costs met from Advertising Revenue (90%), Salaries $90,000. Army Newspaper (a) 1959 (b) Army Newspaper Unit, Personnel Branch Army Office (c) Six persons Full Time (d) Fortnightly (e) Cumberland Press Pty Ltd Parramatta 43,000 copies (f) Members of the Regular Army Army Reservists, paying subscribers, advertisers, service clubs, schools and business houses (g) Chief of Personnel-Army (h) To foster in the solider (and his dependants) a sense of belonging to, and an interest and pride in the Army. It is a medium for informing the soldier on Army and appropriate defence force matters and activities about which he would otherwise be unware; bolstering from time to time his own unit's esprit de corps; presenting appropriate policy matters and decisions in a less formal style than official promulgations; and expressions of views on matters of general interest (i) Publication-$121,500 (Printing cost is met by revenue from advertisers with any differential being made up from Army Amenities Funds). The paper is staffed by one Major, one Captain, one Warrant Officer Class 2, two Sergeants and a Corporal Salaries=$138,279 RAAF News (a) 1960 (b) RAAF (c) 2 Persons full time (d) Monthly, except Jan/Feb combined (e) Waverly Offset Publishing Group, Melbourne Print run 20,500 copies (f) Serving personnel and civilian RAAF staff, ex-Servicemen's groups, industry, public organisations, Government departments, print and electronic media, and subscribers (g) Director of the Office of the Chief of the Air Staff (DOCAS) (h) Promote the welfare and morale of RAAF members; and provide news and information germane to the RAAF to serving members and their families, and other interested parties. (i) Costs-$61,794.00 staff wages (other aspects are support by income from advertising, subscriptions and sales). Balmoral Papers Journal of the RAN Staff College (a) 1979 (b) RAN Staff College (c) Five Persons .8% of their time (d) Annually (e) Command Printing Sydney 100 copies (f) Navy Office, Ships and shore establishments, three Service Staff Colleges, Defence Libraries, Editors of Defence Publications (g) Director RAN Staff College (h) Contains a selection of papers written by RAN SC Students (i) Staff $2,000 Postage $65 Printing .5% of Command Printing time RAN College Magazine (a) 1913 (b) Academic Department RANC HMAS CRESWELL (c) Two persons 4% of their time (d) Annually (e) Australian Gourmet Printer Sub-contractor 1,000 copies (f) HMAS CRESWELL, Libraries, Schools, Universities (g) Editor-Commanding Officer HMAS CRESWELL (h) To chronicle annual activities of RANC for posterity (i) $2,855.00 Creswell Crier (a) 1960 (b) Academic Department HMAS CRESWELL (C) Three persons 12% of their time (d) Weekly (e) Training Resources HMAS CRESWELL 250 copies (f) HMAS CRESWELL and Local Community (g) Commanding Officer HMAS CRESWELL-Editor (h) To diseminate Naval and local news to local JERVIS BAY Community (i) Printing Cost = $2,500; Salaries = $8,280 Wishbone (a) 1979 (b) RAN Hydrographic Office (c) Two persons 4% of their time (d) Half-yearly (e) Command Printing Sydney 500 copies (f) Nationally and Internationally (g) RAN Hydrographer (h) To provide general information within the Australian Hydrographic Department (i) $1,250 (Question No. 1562) Mr Tuckey asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage and Environment, upon notice, on 22 August 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether large numbers of used car motors are imported for installation into vehicles driven on Australian roads; if so, is it a fact that these engines have been scrapped in their country of origin for environmental reasons. (2) What steps does his Department take to ensure imported motors meet Australian standards. Mr Cohen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Available statistics indicate that about 28,000 units of used or reconditioned petrol car engines were imported into Australia over the period January to August this year. Figures prior to this period are unavailable as imports of used car engines were not recorded separately. The question of assistance to the automotive engine reconditioning industry was referred to the Industries Assistance Commission (IAC) on 19 September in response to a request for assistance by the Engine Reconditioner's Association of Australia. The IAC has been requested to submit its final report by 18 September 1986. The Australian engine reconditioning industry has claimed that used engines exported from Japan no longer meet Japanese pollution standards. My Department is seeking further information on this matter. (2) My Department has no responsibility for ensuring that imported motors meet Australian standards. The Australian Motor Vehicle Certification Board, comprising representatives of the Commonwealth, States and Territories administers a national certification system for new vehicles to ensure that they comply with appropriate safety and environmental standards. However, this certification system does not apply to vehicle components, including engines marketed as replacement parts for cars already in use. State and Territory authorities are responsible for ensuring that vehicles in use are maintained so that they continue to meet safety and environmental standards promulgated under motor transport and environment protection laws. (Question No. 1620) Mr Staples asked the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 10 September 1985: (1) Is he able to say how many of Australia's private hospitals are owned or controlled by American corporations. (2) Is he further able to say what is (a) the total of their investment in this area, (b) what amount of the profits of these enterprises is retained in Australia and (c) what amount is repatriated to the United States. Dr Blewett —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1)- HOSPITAL CORPORATION OF AUSTRALIA (HCA) State Hospital Category Number of beds New South Wales... Baulkham Hills... 1 190 Wentworthville... 2 86 Dudley... 2 50 Lingard... 1 109 Victoria... Linacre... 2 59 Warringal... 2 80 Queensland... St. Andrews (Ipswich)... 1 102 Sunnybank... 2 96 Belmont... 2 107 South Australia... Central Districts... 2 68 Fullarton... 2 44 AMERICAN MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL INC. (AMI) State Hospital Category Number of beds Victoria... Avenue... 1 122 Peninsula... 2 72 Mildura... 2 40 (2) No. Private hospitals are not required, and usually do not, provide my Department with financial data. The same applies to companies, both local and foreign, that have invested in the private hospital sector. The Foreign Investment Review Board controls the level of foreign ownership in the private hospital sector. However, in a public document produced by HCA, it was stated that: `In Australia HCA has invested more than $40,000,000 to purchase hospitals and a further $17,000,000 to upgrade those facilities to the highest standards. In 1983/84, six years after HCA entered Australia, the company was able to achieve a small degree of profitability for the first time. No profits have been paid to the parent company.' I am not aware of any similar information published by AMI. (Question No. 1662) Dr Klugman asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, upon notice, on 14 October 1985: (1) Is the Minister able to say what proportion of medical students at the Universities of (a) Sydney, (b) New South Wales, (c) Melbourne and (d) Adelaide concluded their secondary education at (i) government and (ii) non-government schools. (2) Has the Minister received a letter from the Australian Medical Students' Association arguing against any proposal to recover a proportion of tuition costs from students. (3) What is the estimated cost of a medical course at each of these universities. Mr Dawkins —The Minister for Education has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) This information is not collected by the Commonwealth Tertiary Education Commission. (2) Yes. (3) Based on data held by the Commonwealth Tertiary Education Commission the estimated recurrent cost per student in 1983 was as follows: $/student (Estimated December 1984 prices University of Sydney... 6,790 University of New South Wales... 7,850 University of Melbourne... 6,450 University of Adelaide... 7,900 These estimates represent only the direct teaching and research expenditure from general recurrent grants associated with Medicine in 1983, per weighted student unit (WSU). For all disciplines in universities, such costs represent about 60 per cent of total recurrent expenditure. The figures exclude indirect or overhead costs such as those associated with research only staff, library facilities, central administration and student services. If an imputed value for such items were added, based on the average for the system, the total recurrent cost per medical student (WSU) would be in the range $11,000-$13,000 for 1983 (Est. December 1984 prices). This figure would not include capital or major equipment costs or grants provided for special purposes such as the teaching hospital recurrent grant provided through the Commonwealth Tertiary Education Commission. (Question No. 1828) Mr Lloyd asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) Which ships have or will receive the special taxation benefits for `efficiently manned Australian ships'. (2) What will these benefits cost. (3) What does the term `efficiently-manned' mean and how does it compare with the manning of similar ships already in service in Australia and overseas. Mr Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) As the Commissioner of Taxation is responsible for the administration of the income tax law, his advice was sought as to the ships that have attracted, or will attract, the special taxation concessions available for Australian trading ships. The Commissioner has advised that, because the income tax secrecy provisions prohibit the divulging of information about a person's taxation affairs, he is unable to provide the specific advice sought. My Department's records show that, up to the end of October 1985, manning notices have been issued for 13 ships. (2) The Commissioner of Taxation advises that if all the ships in respect of which manning notices have been issued to that date were to qualify for the special taxation concessions, the estimated total cost to the revenue of the special concessions, for the period 1983-84 to 1988-89, would be $70m. Of this amount, $48m would be in respect of depreciation deductions and $22m in respect of investment allowance. (3) The legislation requires a manning notice to specify the manning level required to enable a ship to be operated in a safe and efficient manner. In issuing a manning notice, the Secretary to the Department of Transport pays regard to the following criteria. A ship is considered to be operated in a safe manner if, in his view, there are sufficient numbers of qualified officers and crew to allow the vessel to meet the safety requirements of the Navigation Act and to comply with the provisions of the relevant international conventions, particularly the Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watch-keeping. A ship is considered to be operating efficiently if its manning level is such as to ensure commercial efficiency, including economy of operation. In reaching a judgement on this, the Secretary takes into account (a) the current training and experience level of available Australian crews (b) the present state in development of modern shipboard practices among Australian crews (c) the details of the ship and its trade (d) crewing levels on efficient, comparable, foreign flag ships. The determination of a safe and efficient manning level is undertaken on a ship by ship basis and varies according to ship type, trade and equipment on board. Of the five manning notices issued, for new dry bulk carriers, four were for levels of 26 and one for 27. Comparable bulk carriers in operation under the Australian flag have crews in the range of 31-35. Many of these vessels have been in service for a number of years and do not incorporate the level of technology available on modern vessels. A survey of North European and Japanese flag dry bulk carriers built since 1980 that have called at Australian ports shows that the average crew on the North European ships is 23.5 and on Japanese ships 20. (Question No. 1873) Mr Downer asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 September 1985: (1) Has the Australian Government requested items to be placed on the agenda for the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in the Bahamas in October 1985; if so, what are the details. (2) Which (a) Ministers, (b) ministerial officers and (c) public servants will be travelling to the Bahamas for the meeting. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The Prime Minister has advised the Commonwealth Secretary-General of the general directions that the Australian Government hopes discussions might take at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM). This was in response to an invitation from the Commonwealth Secretary-General addressed to all CHOGM Heads of Government to indicate their views on the forthcoming Meeting. Mr Hawke indicated his interest that the Commonwealth Heads of Government discuss in particular, the following items: Southern Africa International Peace and Security International Economic Issues The Special Needs of Small States Employment and Labour Issues The Role of Women in Development International Terrorism (2) The Prime Minister is the only Minister attending CHOGM. Ministerial officers travelling with the Prime Minister are: Mr Graham Evans, Principal Private Secretary Mr Peter Barron, Principal Adviser Mr Geoff Walsh, Press Secretary Mr John Bowan, Adviser (International Relations) Mr David Buckingham, Adviser Dr Joe Feldman, Consultant Physician Ms Jean Sinclair, Private Secretary Miss Sharon Massey, Personal Secretary to Mrs Hawke Ms Jenny Nicholson, Assistant to Press Secretary Mrs Libby Bogusz, Secretary Public Servants travelling to the Bahamas are: From the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet Sir Geoffrey Yeend, Secretary Mr C. Conybeare, First Assistant Secretary Mr P. Vaughan, Visit Coordinator Miss Anne Ryan, Personal Secretary From the Department of Foreign Affairs: Dr S. Harris, Secretary Mr M. Landale, High Commissioner to the Bahamas (resident in Kingston) Mr Ray Greet, First Assistant Secretary Mr Graeme Lawless, Assistant Secretary, Australian Development Assistance Bureau Mr David Poulter, Senior Administrative Officer Mr M. Williams, Administrative Officer Mr P. Foley, Third Secretary, Kingston Mr P. Penfold, Technical Officer Mr P. Smith, Technical Officer Miss A. Coutis, Senior Secretary Miss M. Graham, Stenographer Mr K. Smith, Communicator Miss H. Havu, Communicator Miss A. Klima, Communicator Security Officers: Det. Insp. Roger Martindale Det. Sgt. Graeme Sindel Snr. Const. Larry Andrews (Question No. 1880) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 18 September 1985: Is he able to indicate which countries that suspended bilateral aid to Vietnam in 1979 following the Vietnamese invasion of Kampuchea have (a) resumed bilateral aid programs, (b) continued to give aid to Vietnam through multilateral agencies, and (c) suspended both bilateral aid and aid through multilateral agencies. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The following countries suspended bilateral aid to Vietnam in 1979: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Italy, Japan, Federal Republic of Germany, New Zealand and the United Kingdom, although the United Kingdom delivered aid in 1980, under a prior agreement. (a) Of these countries none has resumed bilateral aid programs. However New Zealand, Australia, Japan and the Federal Republic of Germany have given limited assistance of a humanitarian nature since 1981. Austria and Switzerland, which reduced but did not completely suspend aid in 1979, also give assistance of a humanitarian nature. (b) All have continued to fund multilateral agencies which have programs in Vietnam. The European Economic Community has also provided humanitarian assistance. (c) No country suspended both bilateral aid and aid through multilateral agencies. (Question No. 1899) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Did his Department or any authority under his control hire any halls, meeting rooms, et cetera in 1984-85; if so, (a) what halls and meeting rooms were hired, (b) for what purposes were they used, (c) what was the cost of hirings and (d) was any of the expenditure related to the implementation of the assets test. (2) What is the (a) estimated cost and (b) purpose of hiring halls and meeting rooms, etc in 1985-86. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. (a) The Department does not maintain a consolidated record of the venues which have been hired. To obtain this information would require a manual search of all monthly expenditure details. This would necessitate the diversion of considerable resources from other work which I am not prepared to authorise. (b) The Department hires various halls, meeting rooms, etc. throughout Australia for various ongoing and ad hoc purposes such as training and staff development programs, internal conferences, visiting services to pensioners, public meetings, etc. (c) $76,000. (d) Yes. (2) (a) $70,000. (b) The purpose will be the same as for 1(b) above. (Question No. 2042) Mr Langmore asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 9 October 1985: (1) How many people who reside in the Australian Capital Territory other than ministers of religion, have been authorised to soleminise marriages in accordance with the Marriage Act 1961 and how many are (a) `private' or `civil marriage celebrants' and (b) celebrants who have been authorised by virtue of their employment. (2) Are celebrants included under part 1(b) permitted (a) to perform marriages at locations other than at an Office of the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages; if so, why, (b) to retain the prescribed fee or any portion thereof for personal use; if so, under what circustances and (c) to retain their authorisation to perform marriages when they cease to be employed by the Office of the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages. (3) How many marriages have been performed by celebrants included under part 1(a) at (a) the celebrant's home, (b) locations within 30 kms of the celebrant's home and (c) other locations, in each of the years 1981-82 to 1984-85. (4) How many marriages have been performed by celebrants included under part 1(b) at (a) an Office of the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages, (b) locations within 30 kms of an Office of the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages and (c) other locations, in each of years 1981-82 to 1984-85. (5) Are celebrants who are employed in an Office of the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages in (a) New South Wales, (b) Victoria, (c) Tasmania, (d) South Australia, (e) Western Australia, (f) Queensland and (g) Northern Territory, permitted to perform marriages at locations other than a Registrar's Office. Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) 6. (b) 5. (2) (a) Yes, at locations within the Australian Capital Territory only. These celebrants have solemnised marriages at locations other than at the Office of the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages since the Marriage Act came into operation in 1963. This is permitted under the legislation. (b) No. (c) Not generally, however upon application one officer who was authorised as a celebrant under sub-section 39 (2) of the Act for official purposes was allowed to retain his authorisation upon his retirement to enable him to operate as a private celebrant. (3) These figures are maintained by my Department. The figures for the calendar years 1983, 1984 and 1985 (to 30/9/85) only are available- (a) 1983 Nil; 1984 Nil; 1985 Nil (b) 1983 235; 1984 215; 1985 116. (c) 1983 20; 1984 16; 1985 4. (4) These figures are compiled by the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages and are maintained on a calendar year basis only- (a) 1981 279; 1982 287; 1983 255; 1984 234. (b) 1981 284; 1982 282; 1983 249; 1984 249. (c) The Registrar recalls only three marriages having been solemnised at locations further than 30 kms from the Office of the Registrar of Births, Deaths and Marriages during the period 1981-84. (5) Assuming that the question relates to the principal registry office in each of the States and the Northern Territory- (a) Only in special circumstances; (b) Only in special circumstances; (c) No; (d) Yes; (e) No; (f) No; (g) Yes. (Question No. 2048) Mr Blunt asked the Minister representing the Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce, upon notice, on 9 October 1985: (1) What amounts have been paid to Mr Phillip Adams and Mr Rod Cameron, their companies, or principals of their companies, for services rendered to the Minister's Department or authorities under the Minister's control and for what purposes in each case. (2) What amounts have been paid to each of these people or companies for (a) travel allowance, (b) air fares, (c) accommodation costs, (d) hire care expenses and (e) any other expenses incurred. Mr Barry Jones —The Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce has supplied the following answer to the honourable member's question: Mr Phillip Adams and Mr Rod Cameron, their companies or principals of their companies have received no payments of any kind for any services to the Department or authorities under the Minister's control. (Question No. 2120) Mr Staples asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 10 October 1985: (1) Did the Materials Research Laboratories (then the Defence Standards Laboratory, Melbourne) develop and test the fuel atmospheric explosion (concussion) bomb using fuel vapour in the early 1970's. (2) Was this type of weapon highlighted in the 1979 United Nations Conference on inhumane weapons as cruel and indiscriminate. (3) Is he able to say whether this was the type of weapon which President Carter refused to sell to Israel. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. In 1973 and 1974 the Materials Research Laboratories (MRL) conducted tests on fuel air explosives in canisters at the Puckapunyal Army Range. To describe the work as a development might suggest that the technology breakthrough was Australian. The technology already existed overseas and it was applied here to ensure that our defence scientists understood the technology sufficiently well to be able to provide soundly based advice to the Minister and to the Services in case these weapons emerged as options for Australian Defence. It should be emphasised that these were research tests and not weapon developments. (2) No. The issue of fuel air explosives (FAE) was the subject of a resolution introduced in 1978 by Sweden and Mexico at the first preparatory committee meeting of the United Nations Conference on Prohibitions or Restrictions of Use of certain Conventional Weapons which may be deemed to be Excessively Injurous or to have Indiscriminate Effects (commonly know as the Inhumane Weapons Conference). The resolution called for the banning of FAE for anti-personnel use. The question of FAE was not discussed in any depth at either the preparatory committee meetings or at the conference itself and accordingly was not covered in the draft convention and protocols adopted by the conference. (3) No. I am not able to say whether President Carter refused to authorise the sale of US FAE weapons to Israel, though such was widely alleged in news reports at that time. (Question No. 2129) Mr Jull asked the Minister representing the Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce, upon notice, on 10 October 1985: (1) Is it a fact that imported canned pineapple products are being sold in Brisbane supermarkets; if so, what are the (a) quantities and (b) value, of imported canned pineapple imported into Australia during 1984-85 from (i) the People Republic of China, (ii) Taiwan, (iii) Thailand and (iv) other sources. (2) Are there limits as to the quantity of canned pineapple which may be imported. (3) Is there any evidence of dumping of this product on the Australian market. Mr Barry Jones —The Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) Data available to me does not enable me to verify whether imported canned pineapple products are being sold in Brisbane supermarkets although it does indicate that they are being sold in Canberra and Melbourne supermarkets. Imports of canned pineapple are classified to paragraph 20.06.910 of the Customs Tariff, `pineapple otherwise prepared or preserved, whether or not containing added sugar or spirit'. This paragraph also covers pineapples packed in bottles and other airtight containers whether or not put up for retail sale. It is therefore not possible to separately identify imports of canned pineapple from official statistics. Available information suggests that the bulk of imports against this paragraph are packaged in cans. Details of imports in 1984-85 against 20.06.910 are set out below. IMPORTS-PINEAPPLE 20.06.910-1984-85(p) Source Quantity Value (litres) ($) China (Peoples Republic)... 2,333,112 1,583,908 Taiwan... 95,472 72,302 Thailand... 1,305,672 1,045,086 Other... 1,384,185 1,043,029 All countries... 5,118,441 3,744,325 (p) preliminary Source: ABS data (2) No. (3) The Australian Customs Service has the responsibility to conduct a dumping investigation upon the lodgement of a formal dumping complaint alleging imports at dumped prices. I am advised that a dumping complaint has not been lodged for these goods. (Question No. 2130) Mr Jull asked the Minister representing the Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce, upon notice, on 10 October 1985: (1) Is it a fact that canned Bartlett pears imported from the People's Republic of China are being sold in Brisbane supermarkets; if so, what are the (a) quantities and (b) value, of imported canned Bartlett pears into Australia during 1984-85 from (i) the People's Republic of China and (ii) other sources. (2) Are there limits to the quantity of canned Bartlett Pears which may be imported. (3) Is there any evidence of dumping of this product on the Australian market. Mr Barry Jones —The Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) Data available to me does not enable me to verify whether canned Bartlett pears imported from the People's Republic of China are being sold in Brisbane supermarkets although it does indicate that they are being sold in Canberra and Melbourne supermarkets. Imports of canned pears are classified to paragraph 20.06.990 of the Customs Tariff, `fruit otherwise prepared or preserved, whether or not containing added sugar or spirit'. A separate statistical key is provided for pears. This statistical key also covers pears packed in bottles and other airtight containers whether or not put up for retail sale. As well, types of pears are not separately identified. It is therefore not possible to separately identify imports of canned Bartlett Pears from official statistics. Available information suggests that the bulk of imports against this paragraph are packaged in cans. Details of imports of pears in 1984-85 against 20.06.990 are set out below. IMPORTS-PEARS ex 20.06.990-1984-85 (p) Source Quantity Value (litres) ($) China (People's Republic)... 158,680 93,201 Other... 164,483 143,520 All countries... 323,163 236,721 (p) preliminary Source: ABS data (2) No. (3) The Australian Customs Service has the responsibility to conduct a dumping investigation upon the lodgment of a formal dumping complaint alleging imports at dumped prices. I am advised that a dumping complaint has not been lodged for these goods. (Question No. 2182) Mr Campbell asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 14 October 1985: (1) How many (a) passengers were carried and (b) passenger trains were operated (i) to and (ii) from, Alice Springs by Australian National in the last 12 months and what was the average number of passengers per trip. (2) How many (a) passengers were carried and (b) passenger trains were run by Australian National in the last 12 months from (i) Port Pirie to Kalgoorlie and (ii) Kalgoorlie to Port Pirie and what was the average number of passengers per trip. (3) What was the average occupancy of the sit-up car in both directions over the route (a) Port Pirie to Kalgoorlie and (b) Port Pirie to Alice Springs. (4) Is there any plan to change the timetable of the Australian National service across the Nullarbor? If so, what changes are proposed and why. (5) Is there any plan to further reduce the passenger service across the Nullarbor. (6) Does Australian National consider that it has any responsibility in the area of tourist promotion. Mr Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: I am advised by the Australian National Railways Commission (AN) as follows: The information provided in answers 1, 2 and 3 below relates to services operated from July 1984 to June 1985. (1) (i) To Alice Springs* (ii) From Alice Springs* Total* (Both Directions) (a) Passengers carried... 20,928 19,080 40,008 (b) Passenger trains operated... 127 127 254 Average number of passengers per trip... 165 150 158 * Includes both The Ghan and The Alice. (2) (i) From Port Pirie to Kalgoorlie* (ii) From Kalgoorlie to Port Pirie* Total* (Both Directions) (a) Passengers carried... 30,850 29,649 60,499 (b) Passenger trains operated... 261 261 522 Average number of passengers per trip... 118 114 116 * Includes through passengers beyond Kalgoorlie and Port Pirie travelling on both Trans Australian and Indian Pacific. (3) Average occupancy of sit up class (a) (i) From Port Pirie to Kalgoorlie* (ii) From Kalgoorlie to Port Pirie* Total* (Both Directions) 29 27 28 (b) (i) From Port Pirie* to Alice Springs (ii) From Alice Springs to Port Pirie* Total* (Both Directions) 91 84 88 * Includes through passengers beyond Kalgoorlie and Port Pirie. (4) Yes. AN advises that the following timetable changes are proposed and are designed to decrease travel time, reduce costs and increase patronage by creating a direct Sydney to Adelaide service. Proposed Indian Pacific Westbound Proposed Trans Australian Westbound Existing Trans Australian Existing Indian Pacific Sydney... Dep 1515 hrs - - 1515 hrs Broken Hill... Arr Dep 0902 hrs 0940 hrs - - - - 0902 hrs 0940 hrs Adelaide... Arr Dep 1700 hrs 1800 hrs 1800 hrs 1240 hrs - Kalgoorlie... Arr Dep 2015 hrs 2050 hrs 2015 hrs 2050 hrs 1845 hrs 1930 hrs 1845 hrs 2030 hrs Perth... Arr 0630 hrs 0630 hrs 0600 hrs 0700 hrs Eastbound Eastbound Perth... Dep 2100 hrs 2100 hrs 2100 hrs 2100 hrs Kalgoorlie... Arr Dep 0630 hrs 0700 hrs 0630 hrs 0700 hrs 0630 hrs 0700 hrs 0630 hrs 0700 hrs Adelaide... Arr Dep 1110 hrs 1210 hrs 1210 hrs - 1655 hrs - - - Broken Hill... Arr Dep 1958 hrs 2058 hrs - - - - 1951 hrs 2054 hrs Sydney... Arr 1555 hrs - - 1555 hrs (5) No. (6) AN passenger services are promoted through its own extensive advertising program and it supports advertising conducted jointly with other rail systems through Railways of Australia. AN is prepared to assist local communities on its routes with distribution of their promotional material and supports the efforts by these communities to encourage passengers to visit local tourist attractions. (Question No. 2192) Mr Lloyd asked the Minister for Aviation, upon notice, on 14 October 1985: (1) When was the National Airports Consultative Council established. (2) How many times has it met and when was its last meeting. (3) Did he promise to present the proposed legislation to establish a Federal Airports Corporation to the Council prior to Cabinet consideration: if so, why was this not done. Mr Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The National Airports Consultative Council was established on 30 May 1984. (2) It has met three times. Its last meeting was on 7 March 1985. (3) No. (Question No. 2218) Mr Reith asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 16 October 1985: (1) When will the Government make an announcement as to the future use of Commonwealth land at Portsea, Victoria, currently under the control of his Department for the Officer Cadet School. (2) Will the Government consult with the local community and, in particular, the Shire of Flinders before finalising its decisions on the future usage of the area. (3) What provision has the Government made for the future employment of the 43 civilian employees who have been advised that their employment cannot be guaranteed after January 1986. Mr Beazley —I present the following in answer to the honourable member's question: (1) I made an announcement on 7 November 1985 on the future use of Commonwealth land at Portsea. This indicated that the School of Army Health would transfer from Healesville into the buildings currently used by the Army's Officer Cadet School at Portsea after the Officer Cadet School moves to Canberra at the end of 1985, and that about 210 ha of land at Portsea could be made available to the State. (2) Effects on the local community were considered in making this legislation. The Commonwealth will be discussing the future of Commonwealth lands at Portsea no longer required for Defence purposes with the State of Victoria. (3) There are currently 44 civilian staff employed at the Officer Cadet School, Portsea, 22 of whom are employed on a limited tenure basis. These staff are not covered by the CE (RR) Act and will cease their employment on 31 December 1985. Of the 22 long term staff, 2 are expected to take up duty in other localities, and my Department is confident that the remaining 20 will be employed at the School of Army Health when it moves to Portsea. (Question No. 2254) Mr Maher asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: What Commonwealth funds were paid to each non-government business college within the electoral division of Lowe in each of the years 1981-82 to 1984-85. Mr Dawkins —The Minister for Education has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: The one non-government business college in the electoral division of Lowe which has received per capita funding under States Grants arrangements is Drummoyne Business College. The funds paid in each year were: $ 1981-82...13,335.23 1982-83...11,107.69 1983-84...22,928.13 1984-85...40,901.54 (Question No. 2276) Mr Peacock asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: (1) How many Foreign Affairs officers have resigned from his Department since March 1983. (2) Who were they, at what levels did these resignations occur and what percentage of his Department's officers do they constitute. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) 32 officers of the Foreign Affairs Officer stream have left the Department of Foreign Affairs since March 1983. Of those, 15 resigned from the Public Service and 17 have transferred to other Departments. (2) I am not prepared to provide the names of the officers as I consider that to do so would be an unreasonable disclosure of their personal affairs. The levels at which these separations occurred were: Assistant Secretary, Level 1-2; Foreign Affairs Officers Class 4-5; Foreign Affairs Officers Class 3-9; Foreign Affairs Officers, Class 2-12; Foreign Affairs Officers, Class 1-4. Based on average staff numbers, these separations constituted an average of 2.3 per cent of the officers in the Department's Foreign Affairs Officer stream in each year. (Question No. 2312) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) What was the expenditure by the Minister's Department and authorities under the Minister's control on public relations in (a) 1983-84 and (b) 1984-85. (2) What was the nature or subject of the public relations expenditure. (3) Was outside assistance obtained for public relations, if so (a) who provided the assistance, (b) what payments were made and (c) why was the assistance sought. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) $491,300 (b) $630,500. (2) Expenditure on public relations was in the following categories: 1983-84 1984-85 $ $ Seminars... 11,540 14,000 Printing... 147,000 130,500 Promotions... 171,760 210,000 Cine Film Production... 128,646 238,000 Stills Photographic... 32,354 38,000 Total... 491,300 630,500 (3) No outside assistance was obtained for public relations. (Question No. 2384) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: Is he able to say whether (a) the USA has proposed at the Geneva Arms Control Summit, the complete prohibition of chemical weapons with a system of internationally organised inspectors to ratify compliance and (b) the Soviet Union has rejected the proposal for international inspection. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: I am not aware of any United States proposal on a chemical weapons ban for consideration at the forthcoming Summit between President Reagan and Mr Gorbachev. Australia would strongly support discussion of a chemical weapons ban at the Summit. (a) On 18 April 1984 the United States Vice President, Mr George Bush, tabled in the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva a draft Convention on the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. The objective of the United States draft Convention was to ban the production, stockpiling and use of all chemical weapons. The draft Convention also included prohibitions on preparations for the use of chemical weapons and assistance to anyone to develop stockpiles or use chemical weapons, and provided for the destruction of all existing stocks of chemical weapons and chemical weapons production facilities. The basic prohibitions in the draft Convention met all major Australian requirements and was welcomed at the time by the Australian delegation to the Conference on Disarmament. Since then Australia has worked to ensure that the draft receives full consideration by all countries. The United States draft Convention contained unprecedented verification measures including the `open invitation' principle, whereby all military and government-owned or controlled facilities can be subject to mandatory international on-site inspection upon request to ensure that there are no hidden stocks or undeclared production of chemical weapons. (b) The Soviet Union has strongly criticised the verification provisions of the United States draft Convention. It has claimed that the references to government-owned or controlled facilities in the United States draft Convention discriminates against socialist systems where all facilities are government-controlled. The United States has replied that no discrimination was intended and it is prepared to negotiate the point. Australia is concerned to ensure that the verification provisions in a future CW Convention apply consistently to both private and government-controlled facilities so that the international community is reassured that there is no diversion from commercial use to the production of chemical weapons. Australia has been active in urging all concerned to seek negotiated solutions to such problems and has welcomed United States assurances that its draft has not been presented on a `take-it-or-leave-it' basis and that the United States is prepared to negotiate on its contents. To date, however, the Soviet Union has not been prepared to offer alternatives to the United States provisions. (Question No. 2385) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: Is he able to say whether (a) the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks II Treaty permits the deployment of one new type of Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile and (b) the Soviet Union is currently deploying 2 new types of ICBM. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) Article IV.9. of the SALT II Treaty permits each Party to flight test and deploy one new type of light ICBM after 1 May 1979. (b) Please see answer to part (b) of question on notice No. 1776. (Question No. 2391) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) Does the Department intend to convert the VIP fleet Boeing 707 aircraft to an air tanker role. (2) Will any proposed air tanker aircraft be compatible with the two different refuelling mechanisms for the F/A18 and F111. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) A proposal to convert Boeing 707 aircraft to an air refuelling capability is currently being considered by my Department. No decision has been made to proceed at this time. The priority for this project, along with other bids for major defence capital equipments, is assessed on the contribution it might make to countering credible contingencies and to the expansion base. (2) The proposal under consideration is to convert Boeing 707s to provide a capability compatible with both the F/A18 and F111 air refuelling systems. As the two systems are different, the proposal is being considered in phases, with priority being given to the F/A18 capability. (Question No. 2393) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) What has been the cost of the Australian Army Small Arms Replacement Project to date. (2) Was the Israeli Galil 5.56mm Assault Rifle considered in the project. (3) Which manufacturers are currently participating in the project. (4) When is a final decision expected. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) About $6.15m has been spent on the Army Small Arms Replacement Project to date. (2) Yes, the Galil Assault Rifle was considered. (3) a. Colt Industries, United States of America; b. Steyr Daimler Puch of Austria; c. Fabrique Nationale Herstal of Belgium. (4) A decision is expected December 1985/January 1986. (Question No. 2394) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) What was the outcome of the Australian Army trials for a new disruptive pattern camouflage uniform. (2) What provision has been made for waterproof field clothing for members of the Australian Army. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The Australian Army trials of a new disruptive pattern camouflage uniform, conducted during the period July 1982 to April 1983, indicated overall satisfaction with the trial uniform fabric. The disruptive pattern is considered superior to the in-service plain jungle green and it is expected the new pattern will be introduced into service during 1987. (2) The field soldier is presently provided with a lightweight waterproof tropical smock as field clothing. Army is developing a set of waterproof jacket and trousers, with procurement planned for 1987. In the interim, sets of commercial-type jackets and trousers will be available to selected soldiers. (Question No. 2395) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: Has the Department given any consideration to: (a) the deployment of the Royal Australian Air Force jet trainer in a ground attack role; and (b) the procurement of close support ground attack aircraft such as the A-10 thunderbolt or attack helicopter. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) The Defence Force uses its Macchi jet aircraft solely in the training role for which they were designed. As part of this function, a small number of Macchi aircraft has been modified to train newly graduated pilots in ground attack skills prior to their progressing to fighter and strike aircraft. The Macchi aircraft in Defence Force service could be modified to perform limited ground attack tasks. (b) Dedicated ground attack aircraft were considered by my Department in the late 1960s and early 1970s as part of the new Tactical Fighter Force considerations. It was recognised then that the new-generation multi-role fighter aircraft, with the capacity to perform not only the standard fighter roles but also ground attack tasks, had distinct advantages in Australia's strategic circumstances. In consequence, the decision was made in 1982 to procure 75 F/A18s, which possess very substantial ground attack capabilities. Dedicated attack aircraft tend to be specialised and not necessarily appropriate to Australia's strategic priorities. For example, the A-10 Thunderbolt is designed primarily as an anti-tank aircraft employing its armour-piercing gun capability. (Question No. 2396) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) Will there be restrictions placed on the employment of 600 Belgium Mag 58 General Support Machine guns to be purchased by the Australian Army in roles other than in combat units. (2) Will there be any deployment of General Support Machine Guns in rear echelon roles. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) General Support Machine Guns are allocated to units in accordance with the current entitlement. No restrictions have been placed on the employment of the General Support Machine Gun and none are intended. (2) A number of Units that have an entitlement to this Machine Gun could be expected to operate in rear echelon roles and in forward areas. Such Units include: Construction Squadrons, and Transport Units. (Question No. 2397) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) What is the level of Australian industry participation in the procurement of the Swedish RBS-70 Air Defence Weapons. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) AB Bofors of Sweden have contractually agreed to an obligation of 30 per cent Australian industry participation in the supply of the RBS-70 Air Defence Weapons. (Question No. 2544) Mr Leo McLeay asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 19 November 1985: What is the procedure used in the Minister's office to respond to petitions referred by the House of Representatives. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: If by `respond' the honourable member means `reply', the answer to the question is that my office staff do not reply to petitions as there is usually no address to which a reply can be forwarded. However, my staff and I do respond to petitions by reading them, noting their contents, keeping them in mind and sometimes acting on their proposals. Petitions are forwarded to my department for information. (Question No. 299) Mr Ronald Edwards asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 21 March 1985: (1) How many compensation claims for repetitive strain injury were received by the Minister's Department and statutory authorities under his control in (a) 1983-84 and (b) 1984-85 to 20 March 1985. (2) What is the analysis of these claims giving details of sex, type of duties performed and the number of claims accepted, rejected and finalised. (3) How many employees are considered to have been successfully rehabilitated, and what steps were taken to achieve rehabilitation. (4) What steps are being taken to prevent this type of injury. Mr Keating —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Department of the Treasury (1) (a) 8 (b) 13. (2)- 1983-84 Male Female 1984-85* Male Female Typist... 1 2 Steno Secretary... 5 5 Word Processing Operator... 2 4 Clerical Administrative... 1 Clerical Assistant... 1 All claims have been accepted and none rejected. As they are all compensation claims some are inactive but none has been finalised. (3) Three staff have been returned to keyboard work. The rehabilitation involves the employee seeking and following medical advice, temporary deployment to other duties and where a medical clearance has been given for the return to normal duties, a gradual reintroduction to keyboard work is involved. (4) Steps taken to prevent this type of injury are as follows: development of preventive training courses for keyboard staff and their managers; mandatory rest breaks and exercises for keyboard staff; provision of ergonomic furniture; periodic engagement of a professional occupational therapist to assit staff to develop safe work postures and practices; and the working environment for keyboard staff has been, where possible, designed to provide a pleasant working atmosphere in an endeavour to reduce the possibility of personal stress and anxiety. Royal Australian Mint (1) (a) 4 (b) 11. (2)- 1983-84 Male Female 1984-85* Male Female Keyboard Staff... 1 1 Tradesmen... 1 2 Processing Staff... 1 1 2 6 All claims have been accepted and none rejected. As they are all compensation claims some are inactive but none has been finalised. (3) Three have returned to normal duties. No personnel have as yet been permanently redeployed to other duties although five are gainfully employed in accordance with the restrictions placed upon them be medical certificates and directions by the Commonwealth Medical Officer. The rehabilitation of two staff is in progress, involving a build up to normal hours of work. Currently five staff are absent with RSI. (4) The Mint established a working party to identify staff at risk of, and tasks likely to cause, RSI. The Mint's industrial engineering resources are being utilised to reduce reliance on manual systems where possible and to redesign tasks to limit the repetitive movements involved. In one case the previously necessary buffing of proof coins has been substantially avoided with a resultant lessening of RSI risk to staff in the Proof Coins and Medals Sub-section. Where possible staff performing at risk tasks are rotated to provide variety of work type. Ergonomically designed chairs are being purchased as appropriate for both keyboard and processing staff. Work stations for at risk tasks are being reviewed to ensure sound ergonomic practices are followed in job design. Prices Surveillance Authority (1) (a)- (b) 1. (2)- 1983-84 1984-85* Female Typist/Receptionist... 1 The claim has been accepted but not yet finalised. (3). One. The Typist/Receptionist has returned to her duties following a period of sick leave on medical advice. Since being cleared to return to normal duties, mandatory rest breaks have been introduced. (4) Steps taken to prevent this type of injury are the provision of mandatory rest breaks and the provision of ergonomic furniture. Australian Taxation Office (1) (a) 110 (b) 313 (2)- 1983-84 Male Female 1984-85* Male Female Typist... 26 43 Word Processing Typist... 9 7 Data Processing Operator... 33 115 Clerical Assistant (including those with some keyboard duty)... 3 33 10 115 Clerical Admini- strative... 5 9 12 Accounting Machinist... 1 2 All claims have been accepted and none rejected. As they are all compensation claims some are inactive but none has been finalised. (3) 239. Steps taken include the employee seeking and following medical advice, provision of advice by a consultant physiotherapist, deployment to other duties, and monitoring a gradual resumption of duties, where clearance is given for a return to normal duties, by a supervisor, physiotherapist and/or occupational health sister. (4) Steps taken to prevent this type of injury are as follows: development and purchase of furniture, fittings and equipment (including adjustable tables and chairs, keysets and screens, footrests and document holders) designed to promote a safe working environment; review of work practices, including review of work rates, work breaks, task rotation, work methods and multiskilling; engagement of consultant occupational physiotherapists to assist staff to develop safe work postures and practices, to encourage early reporting of symptoms, to oversight the redeployment and return to normal duties of injured officers and to provide ergonomic advice to management; and development and utilisation of training and information materials including production of videos. Australian Bureau of Statistics (1) (a) 67 (b) 76 (2)- 1983-84 Male Female 1984-85* Male Female Typists... 10 19 Word Processing Operator... 6 8 Data Processing Operator... 28 28 Steno Secretary... 7 7 Clerical Admini- strative... 4 3 3 Clerical Assistant... 3 4 2 4 Computer Operator... 1 1 Interviewer... 2 Accounting Machinist... 1 Senior Statistical Collections Officer... 1 Computer Systems Officer... 1 All claims have been accepted and none rejected. As they are all compensation claims some are inactive but none has been finalised. (3) Of the 143 staff involved, 61 are currently performing duties on a permanent basis. Some of these are doing work similar to the work they performed before contracting RSI, while others have been redeployed to other duties. In addition to this group, 34 staff have been temporarily redeployed to other work. Some of this latter group have been directed by Commonwealth Medical Officers to return to work on a progressive basis and are currently working restricted hours. As part of a rehabilitation program, a training course has been developed to assist keyboard staff suffering from RSI to move to clerical positions. This course is supplemented by intensive counselling. Where necessary, jobs are designed to suit individual requirements and special equipment and furniture are provided to overcome specific problems. (4) As part of an overall preventive strategy, comprehensive guidelines for the control and management of RSI have been developed and distributed to all staff. The guidelines include provision for mandatory rest breaks for keyboard staff, limitation on keystroke rates and restrictions on the amount of overtime staff are directed to perform. In addition to these guidelines, other preventive action taken by the Australian Bureau of Statistics includes: development of preventive training courses for keyboard staff and their managers; provision of ergonomic furniture and equipment; redesign of overall work station environment with special emphasis on aspects of health and safety; employment of specialist staff, including an occupational therapist, to assist staff and advise management on health and safety issues; and consideration of all relevant health and safety aspects in the design of jobs. Reserve Bank of Australia (1) (a) 14 (b) 51 (2)- 1983-84 Male Female 1984-85* Male Female Typing/Keyboard... 6 34 Clerical... 1 4 Note counting... 1 3 Cleaning... 1 1 Programming... 2 2 2 Cooking... - - 1 Other... 2 1 2 2 All claims have been accepted and none rejected. As they are all compensation claims some are inactive but none has been finalised. (3) 61 staff have been successfully rehabilitated. The employees concerned have been rehabilitated through being employed on alternative duties devised in conjunction with the treating doctors until the condition has resolved to the degree regarded as sufficient by the doctor to permit resumption of usual duties. (4) The following are the steps taken by the Bank to prevent this type of injury: orientation courses for new staff include a segment to raise awareness of RSI; all keyboard operators are given written guidelines which cover measures needed to minimise RSI; a training program conduced by an occupational physiotherapist covering exercises to be undertaken by operators during rest breaks; and ergonomic surveys of the working environment. Commonwealth Banking Corporation (1) (a) 121 (b) 244 (2)- 1983-84 Male Female 1984-85* Male Female Keyboard Operation... 1 50 5 102 Typing (Typewriter)... 22 43 Telling... 2 10 2 34 Batching (Adding Machine)... 9 1 9 Clerical/Writing... 8 2 13 Cleaning... 4 1 Catering (Kitchen)... 3 4 Other... 6 11 Not specified... 6 17 With the exception of one claim in 1984-85 all other claims have been accepted. As these claims are all compensation claims some are inactive but none has been finalised. (3) Procedures have not been in place for sufficient time to enable success rate to be determined, however it is considered that approximately 330 have been successfully rehabilitated. Steps taken to achieve rehabilitation include: encourage sufferers to return to work within the first two weeks of diagnosis in an endeavour to promote a more positive psychological approach; supervisor interview to ascertain area affected and what restrictions are applicable; and tailor job and amend duties with a view to eliminating any pain or discomfort experienced. (4) The Corporation's preventive process includes the provision of ergonomically sound furniture and equipment; instruction on their correct use; rest breaks of ten minutes in each hour; keystroke rates not above 12,000 per hour and modification of, or removal from, duties that cause pain to the affected area. The Corporation's Occupational Health Division, headed by a senior occupational health physician, also employs, on a part-time basis, a second medical practitioner who is presently concentrating on research and management of RSI. * Up to 20 March 1985 (Question No. 325) Mr Wright asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 21 March 1985: (1) What funds were received by Queensland during (a) 1982-83, (b) 1983-84 and (c) 1984-85 under the Federal-State Financial Arrangements. (2) What special grants or financial assistance was given to Queensland during each of these years for (a) education, (b) health and (c) welfare purposes. (3) Is he able to say what was the expenditure by Queensland in the areas of (a) health, (b) welfare and (c) education during the last year for which figures are available and how this expenditure compares with (i) other States and (ii) the national average. Mr Keating —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) Commonwealth payments to Queensland in the three years 1982-83 to 1984-85 comprised general revenue payments-largely tax sharing grants-a range of Commonwealth specific purpose payments including general revenue assistance for on-passing to local government authorities, and Queensland's share of the State Governments' Loan Council `borrowing' program which includes a capital grant component under the Financial Agreement. Local government authorities in Queensland also receive some limited assistance paid directly from the Commonwealth. Table 1 provides a summary of funds made available to the Queensland Government in 1982-83, 1983-84 and 1984-85 under these arrangements. Table 2 provides figures on Commonwealth specific purpose payments to the Queensland Government in the fields of education, health and welfare. These figures do not, of course, include Commonwealth payments direct to Queensland residents for these purposes. More details about these funds and arrangements governing their allocation are provided in the 1985-86 issue of the Budget Paper No. 7 titled `Payments to or for the States, the Northern Territory and Local Government Authorities'. (3) Comparisons of expenditures in specific areas from State budgets are not reliable due to the differences in the coverage of the State budgets. The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) collects data which are comparable across the Commonwealth and State/Territory levels of Government. Table 3 provides ABS estimates of expenditures on health, welfare and education by Queensland, the five other States, the Commonwealth and the Northern Territory for 1982-83 (the latest year for which comparable figures are available). TABLE 1: COMMONWEALTH PAYMENTS TO QUEENSLAND UNDER FEDERAL-STATE FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS 1982-83 $m % change 1983-84 $m % change 1984-85 $m % change General Revenue Funds Tax Sharing Grants... 1,527.4 21.3 1,684.8 10.3 1,885.6 11.9 Others (a)... 73.3 -67.2 131.0 78.7 104.7 -20.1 (1) Total... 1,600.7 7.9 1,815.8 13.4 1,990.3 9.6 (2) Specific Purpose Recurrent Payments (b)... 548.6 25.3 665.3 (b) 21.3 756.4 13.7 (3) Total Recurrent Funds = (1) + (2)... 2,149.3 11.9 2,481.1 15.4 2,746.7 10.7 (4) General Purpose Capital Funds... 182.1 5.1 194.8 7.0 207.4 6.5 (5) Specific Purpose Capital Payments... 424.4 62.0 520.7 22.7 474.0 (c) -9.0 (6) Total Capital Funds (gross) = (4) + (5)... 606.5 39.3 715.5 18.0 681.4 -4.8 less Repayments... 46.3 4.9 87.0 87.7 52.1 -40.1 (7) Total Capital Funds (net)... 560.2 43.2 628.5 12.2 629.3 0.1 (8) Commonwealth Direct Payments to Local Government... 4.6 17.9 5.9 28.3 11.6 95.8 (9) Total Commonwealth Payments (net) = (3) + (7) + (8)... 2,714.1 17.4 3,115.5 14.8 3,383.1 8.5 Notes: (a) Including identified health grants and special revenue assistance (in 1983-84). (b) The Medicare compensation grants commenced in 1983-84. Includes general revenue assistance to local government authorities. (c) The fall in these payments in 1984-85 is due to a decline in estimated capital advances, particularly for natural disaster relief. Full details of capital advances can be obtained from Table 132 of the 1985-86 issue of Budget Paper No. 7. Totals may not add due to rounding. TABLE 2: SPECIFIC PURPOSE PAYMENTS TO QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT FOR EDUCATION, HEALTH AND WELFARE PURPOSES 1982-83 $m % change 1983-84 $m % change 1984-85 $m % change Education (a) Recurrent... 394.8 15.6 433.9 9.9 472.9 9.0 Capital... 56.0 -1.3 68.8 22.9 76.3 11.0 Total... 450.8 13.2 502.7 11.5 549.3 9.3 Health (b) Recurrent... 1.7 14.6 37.7 n.a. 88.0 133.5 Capital... 0.1 -16.7 0.2 310.0 1.4 568.8 Total... 1.7 13.4 37.9 n.a. 89.3 135.8 Welfare (c) Recurrent... 4.3 n.a. 5.7 n.a. 10.4 n.a. Capital... 1.5 n.a. 1.4 n.a. 4.2 n.a. Total... 5.8 63.3 7.1 22.4 14.7 107.0 Notes: (a) Includes payments for Universities, Colleges of Advanced Education, Technical and Further Education, Schools, Child Migrant and Refugee Education, Educational Research, Video Facilities, Pre-School Education, School to Work Transition and Participation and Equity Program. (b) Includes payments for the running costs of public hospitals, Community Health Program, School Dental Scheme, Drug Education Campaigns, Blood Transfusion Services, Health Planning Agencies, National Diseases Control, Medicare (which commenced in 1983-84), and Funds to Combat AIDS (which commenced in 1984-85). (c) Includes payments for Home Care Services, Senior Citizens' Centres, Crisis Accommodation Program, Supported Accommodation Assistance, Women's Refuges, Children's Services, Family Support Scheme, Mortgage and Rent Relief. n.a. not applicable due to changes in composition of payments from year to year. Totals may not add due to rounding. TABLE 3: PUBLIC SECTOR OUTLAYS ON EDUCATION, HEALTH AND SOCIAL SECURITY AND WELFARE 1982-83 Queensland $m $ per cap. Other Five States $m $ per cap. Commonwealth Total $m Excluding Payments to the State and Local Government Sector $m $ per cap. Northern Territory $m Total (a) $m per cap. Education Current Outlays... 1,196 489 7,114 571 3,372 678 45 120 9,108 605 Capital Outlays... 116 47 560 45 449 44 3 17 737 49 Total... 1,312 536 7,674 616 3,821 722 48 137 9,845 654 Health Current Outlays... 632 258 3,648 293 3,393 (b) 3,140 209 78 7,498 498 Capital Outlays... 53 22 179 14 28 25 2 3 260 17 Total... 685 280 3,827 307 3,421 3,165 210 81 7,758 516 Social Security and Welfare Current Outlays... 104 42 589 47 13,936 13,855 921 30 14,578 969 Capital Outlays... 9 4 39 3 182 133 9 . . 181 12 Total... 113 46 628 50 14,118 13,988 930 30 14,759 981 Notes: (a) The Commonwealth (excluding payments to the State and local government sector), the States and the Northern Territory. (b) Identified health grants to the States and the Northern Territory have been treated as general purpose revenue grants and are not included here. Sources: Australian Bureau of Statistics, State and Local Government Finance, Australia 1982-83 (ABS Cat. No. 5504.0 and other data collected by the ABS but not published. Australian Bureau of Statistics, Commonwealth Government Finance, Australia 1982-83 (ABS Cat. No. 5502.0). (Question No. 364) Mr Leo McLeay asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 22 March 1985: (1) What (a) statutory authorities and (b) advisory panels or councils come within the Minister's jurisdiction and what is the (i) name, (ii) date and period of appointment of each member. (2) What (a) remuneration and (b) travelling allowance is payable for each position. Mr Keating —The answer to the honourable member's question, as at 22 March, is as follows: STATUTORY AUTHORITIES Position Name Date appointed Term Remuner- ation(1) $ Travelling allowance(1) $ per overnight stay Capital city Other Australian Bureau of Statistics Statistician R. J. Cameron, CB 7.3.84 Until 65 yrs 76 527 125 95 Australian Taxation Office Commissioner T. P. W. Boucher 14.6.84 7 years 81 193 125 95 Second Commissioner D. J. Black 18.2.81 7 years 76 527 125 95 Second Commissioner J. P. McDermott 14.6.84 7 years 76 527 125 95 Commonwealth Banking Corporation Board Chairman vacant . . . . 31 606 125 95 Deputy Chairman Sir Brian Massy-Greene 8.3.83 5 years 23 705 125 95 Member H. D. Huyer, AO 19.8.80 5 years 15 802 125 95 Member H. C. Schmidt, CBE 4.6.82 5 years 15 802 125 95 Member J. A. Rickard 18.7.82 5 years 15 802 125 95 Member C. O. Dolan, AO 8.3.83 5 years 15 802 125 95 Member J. J. Kennedy, CBE 19.2.84 5 years 15 802 125 95 Member (Secretary to the Treasury) B. W. Fraser . . Ex officio . . 125 95 Member J. N. Yates 1.2.85 5 years 15 802 125 95 Member (Managing Director CBC) V. T. Christie, AO . . Ex officio . . 125 95 Member (Deputy Managing Director CBC) N. B. Aspery . . Ex officio . . 125 95 Commonwealth Banking Corporation Managing Director V. T. Christie, AO 15.8.81 6.1 years 96 124 125 95 Deputy Managing Director N. B. Aspery 16.9.83 7 years 81 193 125 95 Insurance Commissioner Commissioner W. B. Tickle 5.12.83 7 years 62 718 100 80 Life Insurance Commissioner Commissioner J. R. Smart 9.1.84 3 years 62 718 100 80 Prices Surveillance Authority Chairman H. A. Rolfe 19.3.84 5 years 68 287 125 95 Member A. H. M. Fels 19.3.84 5 years 255 pd 125 95 Member M. N. Little 19.3.84 5 years 255 pd 125 95 Member L. C. Townsend 19.3.84 5 years 255 pd 125 95 Reserve Bank Governor R. A. Johnston 14.8.82 6.11 years 96 124 125 95 Deputy Governor D. N. Sanders, CB 23.7.82 7 years 81 193 125 95 Reserve Bank Board Member (Secretary to the Treasury) B. W. Fraser . . Ex officio . . 125 95 Member Prof. T. W. Swan 22.8.80 5 years 15 802 125 95 Member Sir Gordon Jackson AK 23.10.80 5 years 15 802 125 95 Member B. E. Quinn 2.8.84 2 years 15 802 125 95 Member Sir Peter Abeles 2.8.84 5 years 15 802 125 95 Member Sir Sammuel Burston OBE 16.9.82 5 years 15 802 125 95 Member J. N. Davenport, AO, DSO, DFC and Bar, GM 16.9.82 5 years 15 802 125 95 Member C. H. Fitzgibbon AO 8.12.83 5 years 15 802 125 95 Member (Governor RBA) R. A. Johnston . . Ex officio . . 125 95 Member (Deputy Governor RBA) D. N. Sanders, CB . . Ex officio . . 125 95 Taxation Board of Review No. 1 Sydney Chairman H. P. Stevens 31.10.84 5.3 years 68 287 125 95 Member P. M. Roach 30.4.84 7 years 62 718 100 80 Member T. J. McCarthy 1.2.83 7 years 62 718 100 80 Taxation Board of Review No. 2 Melbourne Chairman K. P. Brady 8.7.80 7 years 68 287 125 95 Member J. E. Stewart 22.5.80 7 years 62 718 100 80 Member D. J. Trowse 21.2.83 7 years 62 718 100 80 Taxation Board of Review No. 3 Brisbane Chairman M. B. Hogan 8.11.83 2.8 years 68 287 125 95 Member Dr. P. Gerber 28.4.83 6.9 years 62 718 100 80 Member Dr G. W. Beck 30.1.85 7 years 62 718 100 80 Tax Agents' Board NSW Member W. H. Bratby 1.1.82 At Pleasure 144 pd 100 80 Tax Agents' Board Victoria Member B. H. Pascoe 9.6.73 At Pleasure 144 pd 100 80 Tax Agents' Board Queensland Member A. R. Bottomer 9.6.73 At Pleasure 144 pd 100 80 Tax Agents' Board SA Member P. C. R. Edwards 28.7.73 At Pleasure 144 pd 100 80 Tax Agents' Board WA Member F. G. Stone 9.6.68 At Pleasure 144 pd 100 80 Tax Agents' Board Tasmania Member R. J. Dwyer 9.6.73 At Pleasure 144 pd 100 80 Relief Board Income Tax Assessment Act 1936, Payroll Tax Assessment Act 1941, Pay-roll Tax (Territories) Assessment Act 1971 Chairman-Substitute for Commissioner of Taxation M. J. McHugh 6.2.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member-Substitute for Secretary, Department of Finance C. J. Louttit 30.8.81 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member-Substitute for Comptroller-General of Customs P. A. Sargent 6.2.85 At Pleasure . . . . . . Alternative substitute for Commissioner of Taxation E. V. J. Killesteyn 8.5.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Alternative substitutes for Secretary, Department of Finance G. J. Balfour D. K. Wallace 30.6.78 23.12.80 At Pleasure At Pleasure. . . . . . . . . . . . Alternative substitutes for Comptroller-General of Customs M. H. Gallen B. M. Strang R. J. Stone 10.4.84 8.12.82 6.2.85 At Pleasure At Pleasure At Pleasure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Estate Duty Assessment Act 1914 Relief Board Chairman-Substitute for Commissioner of Taxation D. F. Murphy 6.2.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member-substitute for Secretary, Department of Finance C. J. Louttit 30.8.81 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member-Substitute for Comptroller-General of Customs N. S. Foldi 1.12.82 At Pleasure . . . . . . Alternative substitute for Commissioner of Taxation E. V. J. Killesteyn 8.5.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Alternative substitutes for Secretary, Department of Finance G. J. Balfour D. K. Wallace 30.6.78 23.12.80 At Pleasure At Pleasure . . . . . . . . . . . . Alternative substitute for Comptroller-General of Customs A. J. Moore 1.12.82 At Pleasure . . . . . . Commonwealth Banking Corporation Promotions Appeal Board Chairman F. L. Hall, AM 6.11.82 3 years 180 pd 100 80 Commonwealth Banking Corporation Tenure and Disciplinary Appeal Board Chairman Hon. Justice P. B. Toose 8.12.84 1 year 180 pd 100 80 Advisory Panels or Councils (2) Australian Statistics Advisory Council Chairman L. A. Brodribb, AM 3.8.81 5 years 8823 125 95 Member R. J. Cameron, CB . . Ex officio . . 125 95 Member Y. J. Bain 17.3.83 3 years . . 100 80 Member R. J. Blandy 17.3.83 3 years . . 100 80 Member W. Boetcher 17.3.83 3 years . . 100 80 Member W. J. C. Cushing 17.3.83 3 years . . 100 80 Member P. H. Goddard 1.3.85 3 years . . 100 80 Member R. E. Heasman 17.3.83 3 years . . 100 80 Member C. I. Higgins 1.3.85 3 years . . 100 80 Member M. S. T. Hobbs 17.3.83 3 years . . 100 80 Member P. D. Jonson 1.3.85 3 years . . 100 80 Member J. D. S. Macleod 17.3.83 3 years . . 100 80 Member R. C. Madden 1.3.85 3 years . . 100 80 Member N. Oakes 17.3.83 3 years . . 100 80 Member R. N. Overall 17.3.83 3 years . . 100 80 Member L. G. Pitt 1.3.85 3 years . . 100 80 Member V. A. Prosser 17.3.83 3 years . . 100 80 Member L. Purnell 18.10.83 3 years . . 100 80 Member K. G. Sanderson 1.10.82 3 years . . 100 80 Member A. M. Smith 21.4.83 3 years . . 100 80 Member T. P. Speed 7.12.83 3 years . . 100 80 Member D. I. Stanton 1.3.85 3 years . . 100 80 Member N. R. Stevens 1.7.82 3 years . . 100 80 Financial Corporations Act 1974, Advisory Committees under section 30 Building Societies Advisory Committee (3) Member President, Australian Association of Permanent Building Societies n.a. n.a. . . . . . . Member Senior Vice President, Australian Association of Permanent Building Societies n.a. n.a. . . . . . . Member Executive Director Australian Association of Permanent Building Societies n.a. n.a. . . . . . . Member T. T. Steel 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member H. W. Sorensen, MBE 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member J. L. Pounsett 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member R. V. Morris 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member N. J. Solomon 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member J. B. C. Kirby 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Credit Co-operative Advisory Committee (3) Member Chairman Australian Federation of Credit Unions Limited n.a. n.a. . . . . . . Member Deputy Chief Executive Australian Federation of Credit Unions Limited n.a. n.a. . . . . . . Member H. Betts 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member G. Furness 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member D. C. Hagan 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member P. Morley 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member J. Feetham 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Finance Companies and General Financiers Advisory Committee (3) Member Federal Chairman, Australian Finance Conference n.a. n.a. . . . . . . Member Deputy Chairman, Australian Finance Conference n.a. n.a. . . . . . . Member Executive Director, Australian Finance Conference n.a. n.a. . . . . . . Member R. A. Liddell 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member D. Broad 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member G. W. Bartlett 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member E. W. Thompson 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member R. A. Robson 26.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Authorised Money Market Dealers Advisory Committee (4) Member Chairman, Council of Authorised Money Market Dealers n.a. n.a. . . . . . . Member S. W. Thomson 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member R. E. Biven 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member L. R. Draney 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member E. B. Morey 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Money Market Corporations Advisory Committe (3) Member Chairman, Australian Merchant Bankers Association, n.a. n.a. . . . . . . Member P. R. Espie 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member R. M. Griffin 23.03.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member D. S. Clarke 23.3.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member B. R. Yuill 23.3.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member G. F. Redenbach 23.3.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Member J. B. Gledhill 23.3.84 At Pleasure . . . . . . Foreign Investment Review Board Chairman Sir Bede Callaghan CBE 08.04.76 At Pleasure 31 606 125 95 Executive Member F. G. H. Pooley . . Ex officio . . . . . . Member K. C. Stone 21.5.84 3 years 15 802 125 95 Member D. E. Halsted 19.10.84 3 years 15 803 125 95 General Insurance Consultative Committee (3) Member Mr J. F. Chappel 14.3.84 Subject to review each year . . . . . . Member Mr E. J. Cloney 14.3.84 Subject to review each year . . . . . . Member Mr K. W. Davern 14.3.84 Subject to review each year . . . . . . Member Mr I. F Hutchinson 14.3.84 Subject to review each year . . . . . . Member Mr R. J. Lamble 14.3.84 Subject to review each year . . . . . . Member Mr J. J. Mallick 14.3.84 Subject to review each year . . . . . . Member Mr J. K. Staveley 14.3.84 Subject to review each year . . . . . . Member Mr J. H. Winter 14.3.84 Subject to review each year . . . . . . Life Insurance Consultative Committee (3) Member Mr R. N. Duck-Chong 14.3.84 Subject to review each year . . . . . . Member Mr J. Graham 14.3.84 Subject to review each year . . . . . . Member Mr J. Kent 14.3.84 Subject to review each year . . . . . . Member Mr J. Milburn-Pyle 14.3.84 Subject to review each year . . . . . . Member Mr I. W. West 14.3.84 Subject to review each year . . . . . . Member Mr A. S. Wickenden 14.3.84 Subject to review each year . . . . . . (1) Remuneration and travelling allowance as determined by the Remuneration Tribunal for the position. In most cases Commonwealth public servants are paid the travelling allowance appropriate to their position. (2) Includes statutory advisory panels and councils. (3) No remuneration or travelling allowance is pay- able to members of the Advisory Committees under section 30 of the Financial Corporations Act 1974. The General Insurance Consultative Committee and the Life Insurance Consultative Committee. (Question No. 537) Mr Tickner asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 28 March 1985: (1) Which Australian banks or non-banking financial institutions have made loans to (a) South African companies in South Africa, (b) the South African government or State bodies, (c) South African companies investing in or trading with Australia, (d) Australian companies investing in or trading with South Africa. (2) When were each of these loans made, what was their value and for what purpose were they made. Mr Keating —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Australian banks provide some information on a confidential basis to the Reserve Bank on their aggregate cross-border exposures to particular countries, including South Africa. It is not possible, however, to provide responses to the detailed questions that have been raised. (2) Sub-section 62 (2) of the Banking Act 1959 provides that the Reserve Bank shall not require information to be furnished by banks with respect to the affairs of an individual customer. It follows that the Reserve Bank would be precluded from seeking the information you have requested regarding specific loans. (Question No. 1149) Mr Price asked the Minister, representing the Minister for Community Services, upon notice, on 16 May 1985: (1) Do formal procedures exist for the handling of Ministerial representations in the Minister's Department and statutory authorities for which the Minister is responsible; if so, (a) what are the titles of the instructions and when were they issued and (b) are target times provided (i) formally or (ii) informally; if so, what are they. (2) Is the performance with which representations are dealt with monitored; if so, what was the percentage of representations that met their targets in 1985, to 16 May. Mr Howe —The Minister for Community Services has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) Yes (a) Department of Social Security Ministerial and Parliamentary Handbook, July 1983 (b) Yes (b) (i) formally, 4 weeks from receipt in my department. (2) Yes, 40 per cent. (Question No. 1151) Mr Price asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 16 May 1985: (1) Do formal procedures exist for the handling of Ministerial representation in the Minister's Department and statutory authorities for which the Minister is responsible: if so, (a) what are the titles of the instructions and when were they issued and (b) are target times provided (i) formally or (ii) informally; if so, what are they. (2) Is the performance with which representations are dealt with monitored; if so, what was the percentage of representations that met their targets in 1985, to 16 May. Mr Keating —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Ministerial representations, following their receipt in my office, are forwarded to my Department for processing by a specialised Ministerial Correspondence Unit. This Unit distributes the correspondence to the relevant area within my portfolio for arrangement of a draft reply and also assists in the preparation and co-ordination of some replies. With the exception of the Australian Taxation Office and the Australian Bureau of Statistics, which maintain their own monitoring systems, the Ministerial Correspondence Unit also oversights the actioning of this correspondence by all other agencies within my portfolio. Central Office (1) (a) Yes, the latest formal instructions were contained in a Divisional Head Minute issued on 17 July 1984, entitled `Ministerial Correspondence Unit'; additionally, each representation is placed in a distinctive folder, upon which handling procedures are detailed. (b) (i) and (ii) Yes, formally. Within one month of receipt of the correspondence. (2) Yes, 89 per cent of representations in this period were dealt with within the target time. Australian Taxation Office (1) (a) Yes, the Commissioner of Taxation has advised that formal procedures do exist for the handling by the Australian Taxation Office of those Ministerial representations that are referred to it. The titles of the instructions are: `Head Office Instruction No 241, Ministerial Correspondence' issued on 27 April 1984, and `Head Office Instruction No 250, Correspondence Control System' issued on 7 September 1984. (b) (i) and (ii) Yes, formally. The target time for the issue of Ministerial correspondence is two months. (2) Yes, but not in the detail that allows this question to be answered. Australian Bureau of Statistics (1) (a) Yes, the Australian Statistician has advised that formal procedures exist. They are contained in the Australian Bureau of Statistics Cabinet, Ministerial and Parliamentary Liaison Procedures Manual, Chapter 3, first issued September 1981, revised and reissued May 1984. (b) (i) and (ii). Yes, formally. The Australian Bureau of Statistics aims to provide replies to Ministerial correspondence within twenty working days of receipt of the representations. (2) Yes. The number of ministerial responses which were completed in twenty working days or less in 1985, to 16 May, represented 85 per cent of the total ministerials received during that period. (Question No. 1384) Mr Jacobi asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 20 August 1985: (1) What progress has been made in the finalisation of matters relating to the Accounting Standards Review Board (ASRB) and the need to get approval on accounting standards. (2) Is he able to say whether the accounting profession has co-operated with the ASRB. (3) Which standards have been forwarded to the ASRB by the Australian Accounting Research Foundation (AARF) for approval and how many standards have been approved. (4) What is the cause of the delays in drafting standards and what action has been taken to overcome them. (5) Will he give a direction to the ASRB to give `in principle' approval to some standards until difficulties of delay are resolved. (6) Are there problems with the standards or simply with their format and uniformity. (7) Have standards been submitted for approval by any organisations other than the accounting profession; if so, which organisations and have they been approved. Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) to (6) The Accounting Standards Review Board has indicated to the Ministerial Council for Companies and Securities its concern over criticisms in the media and elsewhere as to the delay in producing approved accounting standards. The main reasons for the delay have been identified by the Board as being the need to resolve with the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia and the Australian Society of Accountants (the `joint accounting bodies') a number of difficult and complex threshold issues which affected the drafting style, content and copyright ownership of all future standards. However, following extensive consultations by the Board with the joint accounting bodies, and involving my Department and the National Companies and Securities Commission, the Board now believes that these fundamental issues have been substantially resolved. Hence, on 17 September 1985 the Board approved two accounting standards submitted by the Australian Accounting Research Foundation (AARF) as, respectively, `ASRB 1001 Accounting Policies-Disclosure' and `ASRB 1002 Events Occurring After Balance Date'. Nevertheless the Board accepts the need for the production of approved standards to be accelerated considerably in the future. On 18 October 1985 the Board announced that AARF has advised that it will be submitting four further proposed standards for approval by the Board. The Board said that it welcomed comments from the public on the suitability of the proposed accounting standards. The topics dealt with by each proposed standard are, respectively, `Disclosure of Revenue', `Accounting for Leases', `Accounting for Interests in Joint Ventures' and `Foreign Currency Translation'. (7) Proposed accounting standards have been submitted to the Board by the National Companies and Securities Commission and the Australian Shareholders' Association. The standard submitted by the NCSC was approved on 27 September 1985 as `ASRB 1003 Foreign Currency Translation-Disclosure'. In the case of the proposed standard on Consolidation submitted by the Australian Shareholders' Association, the Board has advised the Association that it requires additional material as set down in its Procedures. The Board will commence its review of that proposed standard as soon as this material is made available by the Association. (Question No. 1472) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 20 August 1985: (1) What journals, digests, files, periodicals and the like are produced by instrumentalities within the Minister's portfolio. (2) For each publication (a) when was it established, (b) which section within the Minister's portfolio produces it, (c) how many staff are involved in its production and for what percentage of time are they involved, (d) how often is it produced, (e) by whom is it printed and what is the print run, (f) what is the circulation and to whom, or where is it circulated, (g) who has editorial control, (h) what are its stated objectives and (i) what are the printing, staff and administrative costs associated with its production. Mr Kerin —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Australian Wheat Board (AWB) (1) The AWB produces one publication within this category: `Wheat Australia'. (2) (a) August 1967. (b) Australian Wheat Board. (c) Three; 38 per cent, 5 per cent and 3 per cent. (d) Wheat Australia Domestic (WAD)-6 times per year. Wheat Australia International (WAI)-6 times per year. (e) S.R. Frankland Pty Ltd; WAD-4000 copies; WAI-1500 copies. (f) WAD-3007 copies; WAI-1227 copies; WAI-customers, banks, trading companies, AWB government representatives; WAD-business and financial organisations, politicians, wheat industry and related organisations. (g) AWB management. (h) WAD-to keep subscribers informed about developments within the wheat industry; WAI-to communicate and promote the activities and services of the AWB to overseas customers, banks, trading companies and Australian Government representatives. (i) Production costs (per year) WAI WAD printing... $7 920 $5 310 staff... $4 682 $4 682 administration... $300 $300 TOTAL... $12 902 $10 292 Australian Dairy Corporation (ADC) (1) `Dairy Stats' (monthly production bulletin); `Gen' (quarterly statistics and market comment); and `Dairy Compendium' (Statistics). (2) `Dairy Stats' (a) September 1979 (b) ADC (c) Five; approximately 50-70 per cent for two staff and 10 per cent for other three (d) Monthly (e) ADC; 300 (f) Circulated to dairy companies, State producer and farmer organisations, Commonwealth and State government departments, media (including international), business etc. (g) Not relevant (h) To inform organisations listed in (f) above. (i) Not known as it is part of general staff &photocopy costs for the planning division. `Gen' (a) Established in November 1981 (b) ADC (c) Five; approximately 30-50 per cent for two staff and 10 per cent for other three (d) Quarterly (e) ADC; 300 (f) As for `Dairy Stats' (g) Not relevant (h) As for `Dairy Stats' (i) As for `Dairy Stats' `Dairy Compendium' (a) Established in 1981 (b) ADC (c) One; 10 per cent approximately (d) Annual (e) Speedgraphics, Armadale, Vic.; 250 (f) 250; circulated to dairy manufacturers and industry personnel (g) Not relevant (h) To inform organisations listed in (f) above (i) Staff costs cannot be isolated; print cost $3,000. Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation (AMLC) (1) `Meat Producer and Exporter`; `In Brief'; `Market Notes'; and `Shipping and Transport News'. (2) `Meat Producer and Exporter' (a) 1947 (b) AMLC (c) One; 20 per cent (d) Monthly (e) Watkins and Murphy, Surry Hills, Sydney; 6,500 (f) 6,400; industry-wide (g) AMLC (h) To promote all aspects of the Australian meat and livestock industry in Australia and overseas. (i) $95,000 pa. `In Brief' (a) 1978. (b) AMLC. (c) Average of nine, 30 per cent each. (d) Monthly. (e) AMLC; 4,800. (f) 4,700-producers, processors, exporters, government departments, libraries, commercial organisations. (g) AMLC. (h) Situation summary of industry prepared by economists. Includes price, production and export data as well as analysis of economic trends which influence domestic and export markets for meat. (i) Salaries $65,000; printing/administration $45,000. `Market Notes' (a) 1975. (b) AMLC. (c) Eight; 30 per cent each. (d) Weekly. (e) AMLC; 4,000. (f) Mainly producers, industry exporters, universities, overseas list. (g) AMLC. (h) Information bulletin providing current pricing, market intelligence and trend analysis, on both domestic/overseas markets. (i) Printing $23,000; mailing $55,000; Staff $35,000; miscellaneous $1,000; TOTAL $114,000 pa. `Shipping and Transport News' (a) February 1984. (b) AMLC. (c) 2; 3 per cent each. (d) Monthly. (e) AMLC; 500. (f) Licensed meat exporters, government departments, universities, agricultural bodies. (g) AMLC. (h) Advice to licensed exporters of variation in freight rates and other relevant information. (i) $10,000 pa. Australian Meat and Livestock Research and Development Corporation (AMLRDC) (1) `AMLRDC Review` and `AMLRDC Record'. (2) `AMLRDC Review` (formerly `AMRC Review') (a) 1971. (b) AMLRDC (c) Edited by an agricultural journalist on a contract basis. (d) Quarterly. (e) Northern Star Company, Lismore: 2,200. (f) Rural consultants and extension officers. (g) AMLRDC. (h) To inform readership of what is happening in meat and livestock research. (i) $20,000 pa. `AMLRDC RECORD' (a) 1983. (b) AMLRDC. (c) Edited by an agricultural journalist on a contract basis. (d) Approximately monthly. (e) In-house; 150. (f) Producer organisations such as breed societies. (g) AMLRDC. (h) To inform producers of what research is being carried out in the meat and livestock industries. (i) $30,000 pa. Australian Wool Corporation (AWC) (1) `Overseas Stock Catalogue'; `Minimum Reserve Price Schedule'; `AWC Terms and Conditions of Reserve Price Stock'; `Australian Wool Selling Regulations'; `Wool Selling Programs'; `Woolgrower'; `Wool News'; `Annual Price Summary'; `Area of Origin Statistics'; `Australian Wool Sale Statistics'; `Australian Wool Compendium'; `Monthly Perspective'; `Quarterly Review (Exports)'; `Total Offering by Micron': `Wool Market Summary'; `Wool Statistics'; `Wool Economic Research Newsletter'; and `Wool Research Trust Fund-Projects Supported during the Financial Year'. (2) Information relating to each part of this question is provided below under the title of each publication. The information on costs in respect of part (i) of this question does not include staff costs which cannot be isolated. `Overseas Stocks Catalogue' (a) 1976. (b) AWC. (c) Five; negligible. (d) Twice yearly. (e) AWC; 350. (f) Australian and Overseas Wool Buying Trade. (g) AWC marketing Division. (h) To publicise and enhance sales of reserve price stock held overseas. (i) Approximately $1,250 pa. `Minimum Reserve Price Schedule' (a) 1972. (b) AWC. (c) One; 8 per cent. (d) Yearly. (e) AWC; 1100. (f) Industry organisations, individuals, woolgrowers. (g) AWC Marketing Division. (h) To advertise new season's floor price to interested/involved parties. (i) Approximately $800 pa. `AWC Terms and Conditions for Sale of Reserve Price Stock' (a) 1971. (b) AWC Marketing Division. (c) One; 1 per cent. (d) Reviewed yearly. (e) AWC; 400. (f) Australian Council of Wool Buyers for distribution to Council members. (g) AWC Marketing Division. (h) To make known the conditions of sale under which the AWC sells its wool stocks. (i) Approximately $800 pa. `Australian Wool Selling Regulations' (a) 1972. (b) AWC Marketing Division. (c) One; 8 percent. (d) Updated as regulations area amended. (e) AWC; 860. (f) Australian Council of Wool Buyers, Wool Selling Brokers, Wool Council of Australia, ACTU. (g) AWC Marketing Division. (h) To ensure regulations are observed by those participating in the sale of wool. (i) Approximately $7,000 pa. `Wool Selling Programmes' (a) 1972. (b) AWC Marketing Division. (c) Two; 4 per cent each. (d) Twice yearly (plus amendments). (e) AWC; 400. (f) Industry bodies. (g) AWC Marketing Division. (h) To inform the industry of wool sale dates and approximate sale quantities. (i) Approximately $200 pa. `Woolgrower' (a) 1980. (b) AWC. (c) Two; between 5 per cent and 10 per cent each. (d) Four or five issues per year (depending on material available). (e) A number of different type setting and printing houses have been used over the years. Currently printing and type setting are both undertaken by Colour Offset, Stud Road, Scoresby. Print run approximately 62,000. (f) 61,500; financial members of State wool producer organisations and on request. (g) AWC. (h) To inform wool producers of activities and developments in wool marketing undertaken on their behalf by the AWC. (i) Approximately $30,000 pa. `Wool News' (a) April 1983. (b) AWC. (c) One; approximately 20 per cent (d) Five issues per year. (e) Printed by Polk Printing and Mailing, Welling Street, Collingwood. Print run approximately 20,000. (f) 19,000; by direct mail to wool consumers and on request. (g) AWC. (h) To provide wool consumers with information on wool usage in textile products. (i) Approximately $10,000 pa. `Annual Price Summary' (a) 1946/7. (b) AWC. (c) One; 1 per cent. (d) Annually. (e) Printed in house; print run approximately 4,500. (f) Circulation to wool growers, wool industry, trade and government. (g) AWC. (h) To provide statistical information on prices achieved for various Australian wool types. (i) Approximately $100 pa. `Area of Origin Statistics' (a) Old series-1946/77; New Series 1982/83. (b) AWC. (c) One; approximately 25 per cent. (d) Annually. (e) Printed in house. Print run approximately 600. (f) Circulation to wool growers, wool industry, trade and government. (g) AWC. (h) To provide statistical information for industry and Government on area of origin of wool production throughout Australia. (i) Approximately $1,500 pa. `Australian Wool Sale Statistics (Series A &B)' (a) 1946/7. (b) AWC. (c) One; approximately 50 per cent. (d) Annually. (e) Printed in house; print run approximately 600 of each. (f) Circulation to wool growers, wool industry, trade and government. (g) AWC. (h) To provide statistical information for industry and government on wool production. (i) Series A-$1,700 pa; Series B-$6,260 pa. `Australian Wool Compendium' (a) 1972. (b) AWC. (c) One; 50 per cent. (d) Monthly. (e) Printed in house; print run 650. (f) Circulation to wool growers, wool industry, trade and government. (g) AWC. (h) To provide statistical information for national and international use on various aspects of production, sales and distribution of Australian wool. (i) Approximately $2,400 pa. `Monthly Perspective' (a) 1972. (b) AWC. (c) Four; 15 per cent each. (d) Monthly. (e) Printed in house; print run 2,500. (f) Wool growers, wool industry, trade and government. (g) AWC. (h) To provide statistical information and market assessment. (i) Approximately $4,400 pa. `Quarterly Review (Exports)' (a) 1954. (b) AWC. (c) One; 12 per cent. (d) Quarterly. (e) Printed in house; print run 400. (f) Wool growers, wool industry, trade and government. (g) AWC. (h) To provide statistical information. (i) Approximately $500 pa. `Total Offerings by Micron' (a) 1978/79. (b) AWC. (c) One; 5 per cent. (d) Annual. (e) Printed in house; print run 200. (f) Wool growers, wool industry, trade and government. (g) AWC. (h) To provide statistical information on production/sales by micron. (i) Approximately $150 pa. `Wool Market Summary' (a) 1946/47. (b) AWC. (c) One; 20 per cent. (d) Weekly. (e) Printed in house; print run 4,500. (f) Wool growers, wool industry, trade and government. (g) AWC. (h) To provide information on current market performance. (i) Approximately $11,000 pa. `Wool Statistics' (a) 1958. (b) AWC. (c) One; 8 per cent. (d) Annually. (e) Printed in house; print run 750. (f) To wool growers, wool industry, trade and government. (g) AWC. (h) To provide statistical information. (i) Approximately $150 pa. `Wool Economic Research Newsletter' (a) 1978. (b) AWC. (c) One; 5 per cent. (d) Annually. (e) Printed in house; print run 200. (f) To research bodies and wool industry. (g) AWC. (h) To provide up-to-date information on research projects. (i) Approximately $100 pa. `Wool Research Trust Fund (WRTF)-Projects Supported During The Financial Year' (a) 1974. (b) AWC. (c) Ten; 10 per cent to 20 per cent each for two staff and 1 per cent to 2 per cent for other eight. (d) Annually. (e) Printer varies depending on competitive quotes; last run 850. (f) Australian wool grower organisations, Australian research organisations and all officers in charge of WRTF financed projects. (g) AWC. (h) To inform recipients of the publications of the nature of the total programmes supported by SRIF in current financial year; to encourage communication between researchers in common fields; to report results achieved in previous year; and to report final results of terminated projects/theses. (i) Approximately $15 000 p.a. Australian Apple and Pear Corporation (AAPC) (1) `Apple and Pear News'. (2) (a) 1976. (b) AAPC. (c) One; 20 per cent. (d) Monthly. (e) Ramsay Ware Stockland Pty Ltd; 3,500. (f) Apple and pear growers, State and Federal Departments of Agriculture, exporter bodies, related primary produce and marketing groups. (g) AAPC. (h) Communicate industry policy, news, comment, technical and research issues, on behalf of AAPC and Australian Apple and Pear Growers' Association. (i) Costs per issue ($) Printing Staff Labour Postage Total 1 425 471 501 2 397 Australian Wine Research Institute (AWRI) (1) `Technical Review' (2) (a) April 1981. (b) AWRI. (c) Four; 8 per cent, 5 per cent, 4 per cent and 1 per cent. (d) Six per annum. (e) Rank Xerox P/L, Adelaide; 500. (f) 500; to winemakers paying levy under Wine Grapes Levy Act, educational and research institutions and other interested persons and companies. (g) Director, AWRI. (h) To keep industry informed of AWRI activities and developments in the industry. (i) Costs per issue printing $340 staff $1 000 administration $350 Total $1 690. Pork Promotion Committee (PPC) (1) `Pork Update' (2) (a) March 1984. (b) PPC. (c) 3 persons; 5 per cent each. (d) Quarterly. (e) John Dixon Pty Ltd; 13,500. (f) Circulated on a national basis to pig producers, pig producer groups, Departments of Agriculture and official meat industry bodies. (g) PPC. (h) To inform producer groups of the Committee's activities and achievements to date. (i) $20 000 p.a. Bureau of Agricultural Economics (BAE) (1) `The Quarterly Review of the Rural Economy'; `BAE Crop Report'; `Indexes of Prices Received and Prices Paid by Farmers'; `Forest Products Trade'; and `Timber Supply Review'. The BAE also published a range of other publications including; occasional papers (approximately ten reports per year which provide an outlet for a wide variety of BAE research projects); submissions to inquiries (about four per year); policy monographs (one report every two to three years to publish the BAE's most significant pieces of long-term research). (2) As a specialised economic research organisation, the BAE's entire research staff is involved in its publishing program in one form or another-as data collectors, authors, referees, supervisors etc. It is therefore not possible to provide specific answers by publication in relation to parts (c) and (i) of this question. The BAE has a Publishing Section, employed full time to work on the BAE's printed and published output. It employs a staff of nine. In 1985-86 the BAE's budget for publishing and printing is $124 000. `The Quarterly Review of the Rural Economy' (a) November 1978 (replaced BAE's previous journal, the `Quarterly Review of Agricultural Economics'. (b) BAE. (d) Quarterly. (e) Australian Government Publishing Services (AGPS); 8,500. (f) Government, farm organisations, agribusinesses, farmers, research organisations, tertiary institutions and selected overseas organisations. (g) Director, BAE. (h) To provide the timely release of BAE commodity outlook assessments and articles providing the main findings of BAE research in a non-technical way. `BAE Crop Report' (a) 1980. (b) BAE. (d) 6 times a year. (e) AGPS document reproduction unit (DRU); 800. (f) 620; Organisations, departments, agribusinesses, media and individuals associated with the grain industry; approximately 5 per cent sent overseas. (g) Director, BAE. (h) To provide the Bureau's assessment of the prospects for all major field crops on a timely, consistent and regular basis. `Indexes of Prices Received and Paid by Farmers' (a) Early 1950's. (b) BAE. (d) Quarterly. (e) AGPS DRU; 550. (f) 370; agribusinesses, financial institutions, media, farmers, government departments, industry organisations and some overseas organisations. (g) Director, BAE. (h) To provide a ready reference on indexes of annual movements in the price of goods sold by farmers and the prices farmers pay for inputs. `Forest Products Trade' (a) 1984 (but similar information produced since 1976). (b) BAE. (d) Monthly. (e) AGPS DRU; 250. (f) 200; forestry organisations, government departments, agricultural departments, financial institutions, consultants, universities and some overseas organisations. (g) BAE Director since the forestry statistical section was moved to the Bureau in 1983. (h) To provide details on volumes and values of forest products imported into and exported by Australia. `Timber Supply Review' (a) 1950. (b) BAE. (d) Quarterly. (e) AGPS DRU; 500. (f) 300; forestry organisations, agribusinesses, government departments, financial institutions, universities, commissions, consultants, some overseas organisations. (g) BAE Director since the forestry statistical section was moved to the Bureau in 1983. (h) To provide details of domestic production, imports and exports to derive domestic consumption and supply of forest products. Department of Primary Industry (DPI) (other than BAE) (1) `Compendium of Rural Research and Development'; `Chemical Fertilisers'; `Resolutions of the Australian Agricultural Council (AAC)'; `Resolutions of the Australian Fisheries Council (AFC)'; `Animal Health Bulletins'; `Animal Health in Australia;' `Australian Fisheries'; `AFZ Bulletin'; `Domestic and Overseas Fish Market Notes'; ` Northern Prawn Fishery Statistical Summary'; `Australian Fishing Industry Directory'; `Rural Industry Directory'; `Government Policies and the Rural Sector'; and `Background Notes-Statutory Marketing Authorities'. (2) `Compendium of Rural Research and Development' The Compendium is a Standing Committee of Agriculture (SCA) project and the Department of Primary Industry has responsibility for it while it is in the developmental stage. It is proposed that ultimately it be self supporting. The Compendium data base was recently put on-line with CSIRONET and is expected to be publicly available on-line from late January 1986. The hard copy Compendium is expected to be reduced in length in 1986 and future years. (a) 1984. (b) Production Branch, DPI. (c) Three; 2 per cent, 3 per cent and 25 per cent. (d) Annually. (e) Arranged by AGPS; 760 in 1985. (f) 700; to research institutions and libraries throughout Australia including CSIRO, State Departments of Agriculture, universities, colleges of advanced education, agricultural colleges, State and Parliamentary libraries, other research institutions with a known interest in rural research, and companies and individuals with an apparent substantial interest in research (including members of Industry Councils distributing rural research funding). The other copies are distributed to Departmental areas with an interest in rural research and to overseas governments etc. (g) The Department of Primary Industry has editorial control with technical input from CSIRO's Central Information, Library and Editorial Section (CILES). (h) Primarily to aid communication between research workers by providing a facility through which basic information relating to current research projects is readily accessible. (i) In 1984-85 the costs were: Production and printing (including CILES costs) $38,000; DPI staff cost (as estimated from (c) above) $5,500. `Chemical Fertilizers' (a) 1964. (b) Production Branch, DPI. (c) 50 per cent of 1 officer's time 3 months prior to publication. (d) Irregular; 7 editions have been produced since 1974. (e) AGPS; 7th edition had 1000 printed. (f) Industry and government representatives, academic institutions, suppliers of statistical information and other groups with an interest in the fertilizer industry. (g) Production Branch, DPI. (h) To present a statistical background for those in industry, Government services, research and advisory centres where interests include the chemical fertilizer industry in Australia. (i) The 7th Edition cost $2000 to purchase in 1984. `Resolutions of the Australian Agricultural Council (AAC)' (a) The AAC was established in 1934 and resolutions of meetings have been tabled in the Commonwealth Parliament since 1973. (b) AAC Secretariat, DPI. (c) One; approximately 5 per cent. (d) Resolutions produced after each meeting. AAC holds two regular meetings each year. (e) Resolutions produced after each meeting. AAC holds two regular meetings each year. (e) Resolutions are either printed within the Department or sent out to private sub-contractors depending on workload of Department's Document Reproduction Unit; 600. (f) 428 copies are forwarded to Tabling Office and Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet as per tabling requirement. Remainder are distributed to AAC members, State/Commonwealth organisations involved in agriculture; rural media and industry groups; agricultural attaches; libraries; universities and colleges; and secretariats of other Ministerial Councils. (g) Secretariat in consultation with members. (h) To reflect the decisions of Council. (i) $3,700pa. `Resolutions of the Australian Fisheries Council (AFC)' (a) The AFC was established in 1969 and resolutions of meetings have been tabled in the Commonwealth Parliament since 1973. (b) AAC Secretariat, DPI. (c) One; less than 5 per cent. (d) Resolutions produced after each meeting. AFC regular meetings are held annually. (e) Resolutions are either printed within the Department or sent out to private sub-contractors depending on workload of Department's Document Reproduction Unit; 500. (f) 428 copies are forwarded to Tabling Office and Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet as per tabling requirement. Remainder are distributed to members; State/Commonwealth organisations involved in fisheries; and libraries. (g) Secretariat in consultation with members. (h) To reflect the decisions of the Council. (i) $1,700 pa. `Animal Health Bulletins' (a) 1976. (b) Australian Animal Health and Quarantine Service (AAHQS) (previously Australian Bureau of Animal Health (ABAH)). (c) A number of staff are involved in producing a Bulletin, but since the Bulletins are short and are not distributed very often, little total working time is involved. (d) The Bulletins are produced when required, i.e. in times of emergency. (e) The Bulletins are typed and run off in-house. About 4000 copies are made. (f) The Bulletins are posted to veterinarians in Australia and to animal health libraries both in Australia and overseas. (g) The Director of AAHQS. (h) The stated objectives of the Bulletins are to alert veterinarians concerned with the diagnosis and control of animal diseases to suspected or confirmed outbreaks of exotic disease in Australia, or to threatening ones overseas, and to inform the veterinary profession of action being taken to combat these outbreaks. This is a vital part of AAHQS's role in Australia's exotic disease preparedness. (i) The only significant cost associated with Animal Health Bulletins is postage, which amounts to about $500 per mailing. ``Animal Health in Australia'' (a) 1981. (b) AAHQS. (c) One; 30 per cent. (d) One or two volumes are produced each year. Originally it was planned to produce a ten-volume series in 5 years. This schedule is being maintained. (e) The series is published by AGPS. The original print run is 5000 for AAHQS use and more for AGPS sales. AGPS have reprinted the first four volumes at their own expense because of steady sales through their bookshops. (f) The volumes are distributed free to veterinarians in Australia and to animal health libraries both in Australia and overseas. (g) Director of AAHQS. (h) The stated objectives of the series are to assist veterinarians concerned with the diagnosis and control of animal diseases and to thus make them better equipped to recognise exotic diseases. This is a vital part of AAHQS' role in Australia's exotic disease preparedness. Rapid and correct diagnosis of exotic diseases is essential for minimising the devastating economic consequences of outbreaks. (i) Approximate costs per volume: Consultancy fee:...$11 000 Typesetting and printing:...$23 000 Mailing:...$ 5 000 Staff and administration:...$10 000 Total...$49,000. `Australian Fisheries' (a) 1941. (b) Australian Fisheries Service (AFS), DPI. (c) Six; 85 per cent each. (d) Monthly. (e) Ambassador Press, Sydney; 12,000. (f) 11,800; 10,000 distributed free to Commonwealth-licensed commercial fishermen, research institutions, government bodies, industry organisations within Australia and overseas; 1800 are sold on subscription. (g) Director, AFS. (h) To provide details to industry of the Commonwealth Governments management and research programs relating to fisheries. (i) Total costs are estimated at $340,000 pa comprising $230,000 printing and mailing costs and $110,000 salaries; the publication is partly funded by $130,000 pa from the Fishing Industry Research Trust Account and by advertising revenue of $100,000 pa. `AFZ Bulletin' (a) 1980. (b) AFS. (c) Three; 3 per cent, 5 per cent and 25 per cent. (d) Quarterly. (e) Camera-ready copy produced in-house and Bulletin is photocopied by a range of private firms; 700. (f) Distributed to fishermen, industry and fishery scientists in Australia and overseas. (g) AFS. (h) Aim of the Bulletin is to inform industry and scientists on location and catch by foreign and joint venture vessels within the Australian Fishing Zone. (i) Total costs are estimated at $9,600 pa comprising $1,600 printing and mailing costs and $8,000 salaries. `Domestic and Overseas Fish Market Notes' (a) April 1981. (b) AFS. (c) Two; 50 per cent and 10 per cent. (d) Quarterly. (e) CPN Publications Pty Ltd; 450. (f) 450; to Australian fishing industry and Government bodies (400 copies) and interested overseas parties (50 copies). (g) AFS. (h) To provide market intelligence to the fishing industry to assist in their business decisions. (i) Total costs are estimated at $15,800 pa comprising $4,800 printing and postage costs and $11,000 salaries. `Northern Prawn Statistical Summaries' (a) 1980. (b) AFS. (c) Two; 50 per cent and 20 per cent. (d) One annual report and one smaller summary are published each year. (e) Department of Primary Industry; 260. (f) Industry and government fisheries authorities. (g) AFS. (h) To provide goverment bodies and all sections of the fishing industry with a statistical summary of the performance of the fishery for management and business decisions. (i) Total costs are estimated at $17,600 pa comprising $5,000 printing and postage and $12,600 in salaries. `Australian Fishing Industry Directory' (a) 1977. (b) AFS. (c) One; 50 per cent (d) Every two years. (e) CPN Publications Pty Ltd; 4,000. (f) Australian fishery processors, marketers, government and interested parties overseas. (g) AFS. (h) To provide a comprehensive industry directory to assist trade contacts throughout the fishing industry. (i) Total costs are estimated at $10,400 pa comprising $4,000 printing and postage and $10,000 salaries. `Rural Industry Directory' (2) (a) 1967. (b) Public Relations Section, DPI. (c) One; approximately 15 per cent. (d) Usually annually. (e) AGPS; 700 for DPI and 1,000 for sale by AGPS. (f) Complimentary copies are sent for review to the rural media. Other complimentary copies are distributed within DPI, statutory authorities and other Federal Departments. The AGPS sells copies to the general public. (g) Public Relations Section, DPI. (h) To provide an up-to-date list of the office-holders and contact details for government (Commonwealth and State) and private organisations connected with Australia's primary industries. (i) Printing: $4,971 for DPI's 700 copies; Staff: $4,100 pa; Administration: postage and telephone costs estimated at $500 pa. `Government Polices and The Rural Sector' (2) (a) 1977. (b) Public Relations Section, DPI. (c) One; 5 per cent. (d) Twice a year. (e) Printed by DPI: 700. (f) Rural media, government departments, and to the public via a mailing list or on request. (g) Public Relations Section, DPI. (h) To provide a comprehensive and regularly updated description of the Government's rural policies. (i) Printing: approximately $700 per issue Staff: $1,400 pa. `Background Notes - Statutory Marketing Authorities' (a) 1975. (b) Public Relations Section, DPI. (c) One; approximately 1 per cent. (d) Updated twice a year. (e) DPI; 200. (f) Circulated to rural media and to the public on request. (g) Public Relations Section, DPI. (h) To have available an up-to-date description of the role, powers and functions of the Commonwealth statutory primary industry marketing authorities. (i) Printing: $100 per issue; Staff: $300 pa. (Question No. 1602) Mr Smith asked the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice, on 10 September 1985: Why has $100,000 been appropriated for compensation and legal expenses for national occupational health and safety purposes in Appropriation Bill (No.1) 1985-86 when, in 1984-85, no moneys were expended for these services. Mr Willis —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: An appropriation for compensation and legal expenses for national occupational health and safety purposes has been included in 1985-86 appropriations because the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission Act, 1985, is expected to be proclaimed in this budgetary period. During 1984-85 provision for compensation and legal expenses was included within the appropriations of the Department of Employment and Industrial Relations. (Question No. 1661) Dr Klugman asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 11 September 1985: Do the records of his Department contain details of overseas borrowings by private corporations; if so, is he able to say whether records of borrowings by Australian National Industries are held and whether the records indicate whether Mr John Leard was on the Board of the company at the time of any borrowings. Mr Keating —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Prior to the removal of almost all exchange controls in December 1983, Treasury received information on certain exchange control approvals of overseas borrowings by individual private corporations. Such information in respect of individual company transactions is, however, confidential, as is any similar information that might have been received from corporations in the course of administration of foreign investment policy. (Question No. 1167) Mr Jacobi asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 11 September 1985: (1) What documents relating to financial transactions are banks required to retain. (2) How long are they required to retain these documents. (3) Will he take steps to require banks and other financial institutions to keep records similar to the requirements placed on individuals under the Income Tax Assessment Act. (4) What power does the Commonwealth have in this area. (5) Has his attention been drawn to claims that the current rules relating to the retention of records by banks and other financial institutions create difficulties for law and enforcement and taxation authorities in investigating (a) narcotics and (b) fraud offences; if so, can he state whether there is any substance in the claims. Mr Keating —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) Banks are not required by statute to retain any documents relating to financial transactions involving their customers. Nevertheless, in 1978, at the request of the then Treasurer, banks agreed voluntarily to retain current account vouchers (paid cheques, deposit slips, other debit and credit vouchers) for a minimum period of four years. Depending on their own commercial requirements and practices, some banks and non-bank financial institutions do retain these records for periods longer than four years and do, of course, retain other documents for varying periods. (3) and (5) Several Royal Commissioners and Special Prosecutors have reported that the current minimum four year period for the retention of records observed by banks has created difficulties for law enforcement and taxation authorities and have recommended an extension of this period. The Government currently has this matter under review in the context of formulating its response to the recommendations in this and related areas of the Royal Commission on the activities of the Federated Ship Painters and Dockers Union, headed by Mr Costigan, QC. (4) I am advised that the Commonwealth generally has the constitutional power to enact legislation requiring the retention of records by banks and other financial institutions. The major exception to the Commonwealth's constitutional power arises in relation to `State banking' i.e. the business of banking engaged in by a State as banker within that State. (Question No. 1875) Mr Downer asked the Minister representing the Minister for Community Services, upon notice, on 17 September 1985: (1) Has the Government agreed to reconsider its freeze on Commonwealth subsidies to South Australian nursing homes; if so, what additional information or factors led to this change of attitude. (2) Will the Government consider the introduction of a shorter working week for nursing staff as a reason for reversing its decision on subsidy freezing. (3) What was the staff to patient ratio in nursing homes in each State and Territory as at 1 September 1985. (4) What was the nursing home benefit for South Australia (a) before the May mini-budget and (b) on 1 September 1985. Mr Howe —The Minister for Community Services has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) and (2) The Government decided to grant a $3 a day increase in the maximum rate of Commonwealth nursing home benefit payable in respect of patients accommodated in non-government nursing homes in South Australia and the Northern Territory with effect from 14 November 1985. This increase reflects the additional costs arising from the introduction of a 38 hour working week in the nursing home industry in April 1985. Otherwise the freeze on benefits continues to apply. (3) Exact information on the total staff to patient ratio in nursing homes as of 1 September 1985 is not available. However, the following table shows for each State the nursing staff requirements placed on nursing homes by the State or the Commonwealth Government, whichever is the greater. It also shows the actual nursing staff levels for Victoria, South Australia and Queensland (most recent figures available). Nursing Staff Hours Per Resident Per Week Required by Governments and the Average Actual Levels, by State Required Hours Actual Hours New South Wales... 13.8 not available Victoria... about 18 19.1 Queensland... 14.0 15.5 Western Australia... 14.3 not available South Australia... 17.9 20.0 Tasmania... 13.3 not available (4) Commonwealth nursing home benefits are reviewed annually and any resultant increases are timed to coincide with the first pension payday in November. The maximum benefit rate applicable in South Australia and the Northern Territory, with effect from 1 November 1984, was $39.05 a day. In accordance with the decision outlined in (1) and (2) above, the maximum benefit rate for non-government homes with effect from 14 November 1985 is $42.05 a day. However, the rate for Government homes remains at $39.05 a day. (Question No. 2028) Mr Braithwaite asked the Special Minister of State, upon notice, on 8 October 1985: (1) Further to his answer to a question without notice on 22 August 1985 (Hansard, 22 August 1985, page 219) in which he stated that the sideways looking airborne radar (SLAR) used on coastal surveillance across northern Australia will be replaced by the 360 degree radar, was any compensation paid to Airesearch Pty Ltd last year when his Department made the decision to redeploy funds for coastal surveillance from that firm to Skywest Pty Ltd. (2) Who (a) paid for and (b) owns the SLAR fitted to the Shrike aircraft in 1984 and what was the cost to the Government. (3) Who paid for the installation of the SLAR in the Shrike aircraft and what was the cost to the Government. (4) What amount has been paid to (a) Airesearch Pty Ltd, (b) Skywest Pty Ltd and (c) Northern Territory Aerial Work (NTAW) for coastal surveillance work since 1982. (5) What coastal surveillance work was carried out by Skywest between May and September 1984 and what was the cost to the Government. (6) What amount has the Government paid to Skywest since September 1984 for coastal surveillance work. (7) Who will (a) pay for and (b) own, the 360 degree radar to be fitted to Skywest Beechcraft and what is the cost of the radar. (8) Who will pay for the installation of the 360 degree radar in the Skywest Beechcraft and what is the cost of installation. (9) What is the expected operating cost to the Government of new arrangements with the 360 degree radar on the Beechcraft. (10) Will the new 360 degree radar be capable of undertaking the (a) search and rescue, (b) monitoring of pollution and (c) detection of illegal shipping functions previously performed from the Airesearch Nomad aircraft prior to April 1984. (11) Is it a fact that the redeployment of funds for coastal surveillance from Airesearch, NTAW and Skywest to a single contract for Skywest was for the purpose of saving $1 to $2 million; if so, has the failure of the experimental SLAR meant that the cost cutting exercise was not worthwhile. Mr Young —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The contract with Airesearch expired on 30 April 1984. It was not entitled to any compensation. (2) The SLAR, fitted to the Shrike aircraft, is leased to Skywest Pty Ltd by L. M. Ericcson. The Government had paid Skywest, in accordance with the contract, a total of $64,692.97 for SLAR for the period 1 June 1984 to 30 September 1985. (3) The Government paid Skywest $32,763.50 for installation of SLAR into the Shrike Commander aircraft. (4) For the period 1 July 1982 to 30 September 1985 the following amounts have been paid to surveillance aircraft contractors: (a) Airesearch Pty Ltd...$2,166,608 (b) Skywest Airlines Pty Ltd...$17,474,817 (c) Northern Territory Aerial Work (NTAW)...$8,055,517 (5) Littoral surveillance was carried out by Skywest between 1 May 1984 and 30 September 1984, at a cost to the Government of $3,022,715. (6) Since 30 September 1984 the Government has paid Skywest $7,181,739 for surveillance work. This amount covers the period to 30 September 1985. (7) The Beechcraft aircraft is presently undergoing trials on the Great Barrier Reef, for a three month period commencing 1 October 1985. The aircraft including the 360 degree radar is being provided by Skywest at no extra cost to the Government. (8) Skywest have supplied the aircraft, complete with 360 degree radar, for the evaluation period at no additional cost to the Government. (9) During the evaluation period there will be no additional operating costs to the Government. (10) The Beechcraft aircraft, 360 radar and a Forward Looking Infra Red System are undergoing evaluation. It is expected that the new 360 degree radar will have at least the same performance as that fitted to the Nomad for the detection of illegal shipping, and for any search and rescue (which is not a primary function of the coastal surveillance patrols). Neither radar can monitor pollution. (11) Funds were not redeployed from NTAW and Airesearch to Skywest. The contracts with NTAW and Airesearch expired on 30 April 1984; the ongoing contract with Skywest included sufficient flying hours to meet the revised requirements in the zones formerly covered by the other contracts. (Question No. 2073) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Local Government and Administrative Services, upon notice, on 9 October 1985: (1) What sums have been paid to Mr Phillip Adams and Mr Rod Cameron, their companies, or principals of their companies, for services rendered to the Minister's Department or authorities under the Minister's control and for what purposes in each case. (2) What sums have been paid to each of these people or companies for (a) travel allowance, (b) airfares, (c) accommodation costs, (d) hire care expenses and (e) any other expenses incurred. Mr Uren —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The following amounts, totalling $20,150 were paid to the advertising company Monaghan, Dayman and Adams Ltd of which Mr Adams is a principal on the dates indicated-$1.066 (4.12.84), $1,280 (17.12.84), $659 (15.2.85), $1,987 (28.3.85), $1,321 (17.4.85), $1,333 (21.5.85), $1,434 (13.6.85), $1,336 (18.7.85), $2,042 (12.8.85), $1,744 (12.9.85), $2,070 (19.9.85), $1,564 (23.10.85) and $2,314 (18.11.85). The Australian Government Advertising Service (AGAS) organised radio advertising on behalf of the Purchasing and Disposals Division of the Department for auctions of surplus goods. No moneys have been paid to the company Australian Nation-wide Opinion Polls of which Mr Cameron is a principal. (2) No amounts were paid to these people or their companies in the categories nominated. (Question No. 2354) Mr Tickner asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) What was the annual growth in Government spending after inflation under the (a) McMahon, (b) Whitlam, (c) Fraser and (d) Hawke Governments. (2) What is the estimated rate of growth of public expenditure for 1985-86 under the trilogy guidelines. Mr Keating —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a)-(d) Set out below are the annual percentage changes in Commonwealth Government budget outlays in real terms since 1970-71. CHANGE IN BUDGET OUTLAYS IN REAL TERMS (a) 1970-71 4.5 1971-72 4.8 1972-73 5.7 1973-74 5.5 1974-75 19.6 1975-76 5.1 1976-77 -0.7 1977-78 2.4 1978-79 1.5 1979-80 -0.9 1980-81 3.6 1981-82 2.5 1982-83 6.7 1983-84 7.3 1984-85 6.1 1985-86 (b) 1.3 (a) Budget outlays have been deflated by the implicit price deflator for non-farm GDP to obtain real percentage changes. (b) Budget estimate. (2) The trilogy required that Commonwealth budget outlays in nominal terms grow no faster than nominal Gross Domestic Product in 1985-86. In fact, 1985-86 outlays are estimated to grow by 8.4 per cent, compared with the budget-time estimate for growth in nominal GDP of about 12 per cent. (Question No. 294) Mr Ronald Edwards asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 21 March 1985: (1) How many compensation claims for repetitive strain injury were received by the Minister's Department and statutory authorities under his control in (a) 1983-84 and (b) 1984-85 to March 1985. (2) What is the analysis of these claims giving details of sex, type of duties performed and the number of claims accepted, rejected and finalised. (3) How many employees are considered to have been successfully rehabilitated, and what steps were taken to achieve rehabilitation. (4) What steps are being taken to prevent this type of injury. Mr Hawke —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) 22; (b) 86. (2) 105 female, 3 male. 86 keyboard, 18 clerical, 2 combination of clerical and keyboard, 2 tea attendants. 76 claims accepted, no claims rejected, 32 claims still under consideration. (3) 72 staff are considered to have been successfully rehabilitated in that they have returned to their former duties or have been placed on other full-time duties. Steps taken to achieve rehabilitation included: granting of leave to enable staff member to rest where so prescribed by doctor. placement on restricted or other specified duties in accordance with medical advice. counselling on preventative measures. replacement of furniture and equipment with ergonomically designed work stations. (4) Steps taken to prevent this type of injury include: Advice sought from occupational physiotherapist of Department of Health. Discussion sessions arranged to enable the physio- therapist to advise staff on the importance of correct posture, exercises, rest pauses, and on the identifi- cation of symptoms. Senior staff counselled on preventative measures for staff under their control. Ergonomically designed work stations provided. Duties of positions redesigned to avoid concentrations of repetitive tasks. (Question No. 445) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 26 March 1985: (1) What consultants have been engaged to work for the Minister or the Minister's Department since 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 Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT-CONSULTANTS ENGAGED FROM 1 APRIL 1983 TO 30 MARCH 1985 (1) and (2) What consultants have been engaged to work for the Minister or the Minister's Department since April 1983; 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 $ DEVELOPMENT OF NEW MOTOR VEHICLE CERTIFICATION SYSTEM: THIS PROJECT IS BEING UNDERTAKEN UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE AUSTRALIAN TRANSPORT ADVISORY COUNCIL: 1 Alan Gascoyne Hire... 2 A& Dutt Consultancy... 3 Dauron Resources... 4 Peter Kneeshaw Services... 5 Australian Vehicle Safety Compli- ance Services... 6 Diaflex Industries... 7 David Rees Design Drafting 8 Vehicle Technology... 9 Anenco Pty Ltd... 81 weeks 107 weeks 91 weeks 13 weeks 36 weeks 15 weeks 26 weeks 38 weeks 38 weeks 126,550 123,492 94,500 7,904 32,630 9,960 15,808 30,400 36,100 Consultants, numbers 1 to 23 inclusive, were engaged because of special expertise in automotive engineering and the application of vehicle regulatory procedures. The total development task was made up of a large number of component projects. Individual consultants were assigned to particular projects on the basis of detailed assessments of individual skills and expertise. 10 Chris Rogers Design Engineering... 34 weeks 34,340 11 Balgowlah Enterprises... 34 weeks 32,340 12 Automotive Consultant Services... 28 weeks 28,730 13 Vehicle System Engineering... 48 weeks 66,000 14 Em Tech Associates Pty Ltd... 26 weeks 17,800 15 Mount Martha Drafting Services... 55 weeks 36,580 16 L.M. Technical Services... 197 weeks 152,664 17 B.S.P. Technical Services Group... 6 weeks 11,362 18 Bisitechnics Pty Ltd... 28 weeks 48,910 19 C. R. Purdy &Partners... 25 weeks 17,700 20 Newport &Associates... 16 weeks 21,000 21 Independent Auto Data Services... 12 weeks 9,850 22 Carraturo Engineering... 43 weeks 47,056 23 O'Donohue Engineering... 35 weeks 23,940 24 Pak Poy and Kneebone... 26 weeks 95,100 * Computer systems Development expertise-transport-related experience with medium size design ability 25 R. J. Nairn &Partners... 14 weeks 22,760 * Expertise in small systems analysis and design 26 Nelson, English, Loxton and Andrews... 14 weeks 30,000 * Expertise in vehicle certification systems 27 Vipac Pty Ltd... 13 weeks 23,000 * Expertise of (27), (28) and (29) as in (1) to (23) above. 28 Ken W. Baldock &Associates... 44 weeks 55,704 * Expertise of (27), (28), and (29) as in (1) to (27) above. 29 Australian Road Research Board... 2 weeks 3,550 * Expertise of (27), (28) and (29) as in (1) to (23) above. 30 L-Tech Documentation... 16 weeks 5,800 * Expertise in design of manuals and forms 31 A and W Associates... 3 weeks 31,957 * Recognised international authority on quality assurance assessment and practices 32 P. N. Joubert... 5 months 30,000 * Expertise in motor vehicle design and motor vehicle/occupant interactions in crashes * MAINTENANCE OF EXISTING MOTOR VEHICLE CERTIFICATION SYSTEM: 33 Robert Simpson Consulting Services... 52 weeks 63,773 * A Computer Bureau servicing the Motor Vehicle Certification System which they originally developed and continue to operate Note: The costs of the majority of the consultancies (1) to (33) above are recoverable from the motor vehicle industry through compliance plate charges. * ROAD SAFETY RESEARCH: AN ESSENTIAL COMPONENT IN THE FORMULATION OF FEDERAL ROAD SAFETY POLICY: 34 Traffic Authority of NSW... 4 weeks 5,720 * Road safety research projects 35 Australian National University... 32 weeks 1,000 * Sociological survey expertise for road safety research 36 Road Traffic Authority, Victoria... 73 weeks 48,000 * Expertise in road safety research 37 Road Traffic Authority, Victoria... 52 weeks 11,000 * Expertise in road safety research 38 Dr A. C. Wolfe... 1 day 635 * Expertise in survey techniques 39 Prof. G. Starmer... 1 day 950 * Expertise in alcohol/drug interaction and effects on human skill performance 40 University of Sydney... 40 weeks 20,000 * Expertise in alcohol/drug interaction and effects on human skill performance-associated with road safety research 41 Macquarie University... 52 weeks 20,500 * Expertise in statistics, sociological survey and law-associated with road safety research 42 B. J. Elliott &Associates... 26 weeks 75,000 * Psychology and sociology expertise, with experience in interview and survey techniques 43 ANUTECH Pty Ltd... 52 weeks 15,000 * Expertise in statistics and survey techniques 44 University of Adelaide, National Health and Medical Research Council... 11 months 10,000 * Expertise in automotive engineering and research 45 University of Melbourne (Dr McDonald)... 4 months 15,000 * Expertise in psychology and applications to road safety research 46 Scott and Furphy... 12 weeks 137,950 * Consultant engaged to compile data on road accidents and analyse causes as part of Road Safety Research and Promotion Program. Expertise in collection and use of crash data 47 Social Data Australia... 26 weeks 489,700 * Consultant engaged to undertake National Road User Risk Exposure Survey of 30,000 households as part of Research and Promotion Program. International expertise in survey and complying techniques 48 Monash University... 7 weeks 7,374 * Expertise in behavioural science 49 O. Arup... 12 weeks 50,000 * Expertise in survey techniques 50 W. Fitzgerald... 12 weeks 8,000 * Expertise in data and statistical analysis 51 I. P. Sharpe and Associates... 2 weeks 6,150 * Expertise in computer software development 52 A. Bollen... 13 weeks 7,150 * Expertise in data and statistical analysis 53 Fisher-Cripps Laboratories Pty Ltd... 18 weeks 11,098 * Experience in laboratory test procedures for vehicle emissions 54 Media Monitors Pty Ltd... 39 weeks 700 * Expertise in media monitoring techniques 55 Prof. Sampson-Fisher... 12 weeks 19,400 * Expertise in behavioural science 56 Reark Research... 12 weeks 29,055 * Expertise in market surveying 57 Eric White Associates... 12 weeks 45,000 * Expertise in public education 58 Pedal Power ACT Inc.... 5 months 4,640 * Professional and Practical Expertise in pedal cycling-related data gathering techniques 59 University of Melbourne (Dr M. Good)... 1 day 1,150 * Expertise in motorcycle accident data analyses 60 University of Melbourne (Mr M. Prem)... 1 day 1,150 * Expertise in motor cycle accident data analyses 61 Tymson Communications... 2 months 2,000 * Expertise in market research 62 Elliott &Shanahan Research... 2 months 200 * Expertise in market research BUREAU OF TRANSPORT ECONOMICS-ANNUAL RESEARCH PROGRAM: 63 Reark Research Pty Ltd... 3 weeks 10,000 * Leading company in market surveying 64 University of Sydney Dept. of Psychology... 5 weeks 840 * Expertise in field survey questionnaires 65 University of Sydney Sample Survey Centre... 5 weeks 5,708 * Expertise in field survey questionnaires 66 W. Brog... 1 day 747 * International expert in transport planning 67 Denis Johnston &Associates... 9 months 10,000 * Particular expertise in use of mathematical transportation models 68 P. Jones... 1 day 159 * International expert in transport evaluation methods 69 Dr P. Stopher... 1 day 515 * International expert in transport evaluation methods 70 Dr S. Ritchie... 1 day 340 * International expert in transport evaluation methods 71 University of Wollongong (R. Robinson)... 7 months 8,750 * Leading expert in port containerisation and operations 72 Commed Associates... 3 months 279 * Road computing systems expert 73 Australian Bureau of Statistics... 4 weeks 554 * Statistical collection 74 P. Trompf... 2 weeks 450 * Expert in social aspects of coal haulage by road transport 75 J. W. Jacob... 2 weeks 985 * Road transport executive 76 Prof. C. A. Gannon... 1 day 450 * Professor in transport economics 77 D. Bendall... 1 day 950 * Leading shipping Consultant 78 Reark Research Pty Ltd... 5 weeks 61,000 * Leading company in market surveying 79 D. Bendall... 1 day 950 * Leading shipping Consultant 80 R. Robinson... 1 day 231 * Leading expert in port containerisation operations 81 Sealane Pty Ltd... 1 day 535 * Expertise in the field of freight forwarding and transport 82 Travers Morgan Pty Ltd... 7 weeks 1,000 * Specialist transportation consultants-particularly analysis of modal terminals 83 Travers Morgan Pty Ltd... 18 weeks 50,000 * Specialist transportation consultants-particularly analysis of modal terminals 84 Sealane Pty Ltd... 1 day 360 * Expertise in the field of freight forwarding and transport 85 Sealane Pty Ltd... 1 day 750 * Expertise in the field of freight forwarding and transport 86 Sealane Pty Ltd... 1 day 750 * Expertise in the field of freight forwarding and transport 87 Sealane Pty Ltd... 10 weeks 14,970 * Expertise in the field of freight forwarding and transport 88 Dr B. A. Murtagh... 10 weeks 5,250 * Computer programming expert-linear programming GENERAL MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE IN THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A NEW DEPARTMENT, INCLUDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF ADP SYSTEMS AND STRATEGIC PLANS AND FORMULATION OF PUBLIC INFORMATION POLICIES: The Department of Transport was created in March 1983 and was initially without a management services ca- pacity and lacked information management systems. The establishment of such systems is a once only develop- ment cost and it is not appropriate to employ large numbers of permanent staff to undertake the task 89 Price Waterhouse Associates... 1 month 10,345 * Extensive background in environmental security and contingency planning 90 Coopers and Lybrand... 23 weeks 127,400 * Engaged to advise on ADP strategic plan and determine and meet Department's information needs including Sea Safety and Surveillance Centre requirements. Extensive experience in ADP strategic planning in Government environment 91 The Consultancy Pty Ltd... 29 weeks 46,350 * Extensive experience and expertise in public information systems and requirements 92 NAIRN &Partners... 9 months 36,000 * Extensive experience in ADP Systems development 93 Computer Power... 7 months 18,000 * Extensive experience in systems development SPECIALISED NAVIGATION AIDS PROJECTS: 94 Coastal Environmental... 4 weeks 4,578 * Expertise related to a databank on sea and tidal conditions and the computer analysis of their effects on marine navigational aids 95 Det Norske Veritas... 3 months 25,000 -costs recovered from industry * Expertise in shipping safety studies with previous knowledge of the Hydrographer's Passage 96 Maunsell and Partners... 12 weeks 46,371 * Engineering and nautical expertise related to navigational traffic separation 97 Hayes Film and Video Productions... 2 days 2,040 * Task involved videotaping of part of a major navigation aid project. Firm has appropriate videotaping and processing expertise 98 G. Reid... 18 months 60,000 -costs to be recovered from sale of ensuing publication * Noted historian, author and journalist engaged to write a history of lighthouses in Australia for the Bicentennial Celebrations ROAD FUNDING ADMINISTRATION: SPECIALISED CARTOGRAPHIC DRAFTING: 99 Cangraphics... 3 weeks + 2.5 days 4,011.62 * Expertise in cartographic drafting SEA TRANSPORT POLICY: ENGAGEMENT OF CONSULTANT TO UNDERTAKE STUDY ON ROLE OF TRANSPORT COSTS IN RAW MATERIALS PROCESSING INDUSTRIES: 100 Rhan Services Pty Ltd... 12 weeks 17,000 * Expertise in transport economics/mining industry market research MARINE OPERATIONS DIVISION: SPECIALISED GRAPHIC DESIGNING: 101 D. F. Wrigley... 18 hours 936 * Expertise in industrial exhibition and graphic design Part (6): Was the merit principle applied in each case; if so, in what manner The engagement of consultants with the Department was carried out in accordance with guidelines issued by the Public Service Board. The guidelines provide for strict tests of essentiality and merit to be met before proposed engagements are approved. (Question No. 862) Mr Braithwaite asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 7 May 1985: (1) How many departmental files are currently held by the Australian Federal Police (AFP) for inquiry. (2) What sums are involved in the pending inquiries. (3) How many of these referrals have been investigated by the AFP in the last 6 months. (4) What is the authority which compels him to refer these inquiries to the AFP. (5) Is the current practice of the AFP carrying out these inquiries adequate. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Departmental files and papers may be referred to the Australian Federal Police in connection with possible offences against the Social Security Act or in connection with the fraudulent negotiation of cheques. The number of files and papers held by the Australian Federal Police at the end of July 1985 in connection with possible offences against the Social Security Act was 1166. Statistics are not maintained for the number of fraudulently negotiated cheques with AFP at any one time but on average 1400 cases a month were reported to AFP during 1984/85. (2) Cases referred to the AFP for investigation of possible offences against the Social Security Act include those referred for investigation of the extent of possible offences. Accordingly, it is not possible to indicate the amount involved until it has been established that the reference involves an offence and the extent of the offence has been established. For fraudulent negotiation of cheques details of the amounts involved in cases referred to the AFP at any particular time are not maintained. (3) The Special Minister of State has advised that he has been informed by the AFP that during the 6 month period from February to July 1985 a total of 2687 referrals were investigated or were under investigation by the AFP. (4) Section 7 of the Social Security Act places responsibility for the administration of that Act upon the Secretary of the Department. The Secretary or his delegates may refer cases involving suspected offences against the Social Security Act to the AFP where the circumstances suggest that investigation by Departmental officers would not be appropriate. Examples include instances where multiple claims have been made or complex investigations are likely to be involved or where there is a perceived threat to the personal safety of staff if departmental officers were to undertake the investigation. So far as fraudulent negotiation of cheques is concerned, all Australian Government Departments are required by the Department of Finance to advise AFP of these occurrences where they relate to negotiation of cheques drawn on an official bank account. (5) The Special Minister of State has advised that he has been informed by the AFP that deployment of staff to more pressing tasks and in areas of greater priority designated by the Government has prevented the AFP from investigating all matters referred by my Department. The Government is addressing the problem of AFP resources by the provision of additional funds during this and the next two financial years for the recruitment of a stronger AFP. Further, officers of my Department and the AFP are at the preliminary stages of negotiating working arrangements/guidelines for the investigation of social security fraud which will streamline referral/investigative procedures. It is also pointed out that the incidence of fraudulently negotiated cheques has, and will continue, to fall as payment by cheque is increasingly superseded by direct credit payments to the clients of the Department of Social Security. As at June 1985, 86 per cent of all pensions, 84 per cent of all unemployment and sickness benefits and 90 per cent of all family allowance payments were made by direct credit to a bank, building society or credit union. (Question No. 1245) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 23 May 1985: Has the Minister's Department or any statutory authority or organisation for which the Minister is responsible, employed consultants since March 1983; if so, (a) who has been employed, (b) for what purpose, (c) what working plan was given to them, (d) what was the cost of their services, (e) when did their services commence and finish, and (f) was any fee in excess of the initial quote; if so, by what amount. Mr Kerin —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: In respect of point (c) having regard to the Public Service Board Guidelines and Department of Finance Directions, consultants are given detailed terms of reference or direction appropriate to the nature and complexity of the assignment. Answers to the other points of the question are as follows: Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation (a) Computer Projects Manager (b) To undertake a word processing consultancy for the Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation (d) $195 (e) Consultant engaged for the days of the 8 and 27 November 1984 (f) No (a) Slade Consulting Group Pty Ltd (b) To assist with placement of shipping officer for the Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation (d) $1,080.70 (e) 29 January 1985 (f) No (a) Brian Bennett and Associates (b) Various tasks relating to systems design and modification for the Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation (d) $9891.25 (e) Engaged for various periods between 7 March 1984 and 25 October 1984 (f) No (a) Touche Ross Services Pty Ltd (b) To provide a staff appraisal for the position of Export Manager for the Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation (d) $1,256.40 (e) The assignment was commenced on 25 September 1984 and completed on 30 September 1984 (f) No (a) Deloitte Haskins and Sells (b) Evaluate computing systems for the Australian Wine and Brandy Corporation (d) $500 (e) 14 February 1985 (f) No Australian Dried Fruits Corporation (a) Pepsin Pty Ltd (b) Conduct a study into the introduction of a stock control system for the Australian Dried Fruits Corporation (d) $1765.02 (e) The assignment commenced on 21 February 1983 and was completed on 5 May 1983 (f) No (a) CR Mansfield (b) Conduct a study into small consumer packaging for the Australian Dried Fruits Corporation (d) $700 (e) The assignment was conducted during October 1984 (f) No (a) Computer Processing Pty Ltd (b) To assist with the choice and installation of a small computer and to develop systems and write programs for the Australian Dried Fruits Corporation (d) $11,400 estimate (e) The assignment commenced in December 1984 and is expected to be completed in November 1985 (f) Not expected to be (a) PA Australia (b) Were engaged for two assignments to provide assistance in recruiting to senior positions in the Australian Dried Fruits Corporation (d) $7,963.85 (e) The assignments were carried out during the period March 1983 to July 1985 (f) No Australian Dairy Corporation (a) Price Waterhouse (b) To review EDP efficiency and internal controls for the Australian Dairy Corporation (d) $3,500 (e) The assignment was conducted during September 1983 (f) No (a) K. J. Luscombe and Associates (b) To review the market for speciality cheese for the Australian Dairy Corporation (d) $3,500 (e) The assignment was conducted during March 1984 (f) No (a) W. D. Scott (b) Review of Australian Dairy Corporation management structure (d) $29,500 (e) The assignment was conducted in August 1983 (f) No The ADC also engaged three consulting organisations since March 1983 at a total cost of $44,679.50 to provide advice on specific commercial matters. I have decided that further details of these consultants should not be provided in this answer on advice from the Australian Dairy Corporation that the provision of more detailed information at this time could prejudice the commercial interests of the Corporation. Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation (a) R Lacey (b) Technical consultant for the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation (d) $14,691 (e) Engaged for the period 19 October 1984 to 30 June 1985 (f) No (a) Sir William Gunn (b) Consultant advisor to the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation (d) $6,000 (e) Engaged for a 12 month period from March 1985 (f) No (a) R. S. Jordan (b) Consultant advisor to the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation (d) Nil (e) Engaged for 12 months from May/June 1985 (f) No (a) R. S. Jordan (b) Consultant to Australian Meat Research Committee regarding administration and details for changeover to Australian Meat and Livestock Research and Development Corporation (d) $927 (e) Engaged for 3 days to end of June 1985 (f) No (a) N. MacDonald (b) Engaged as nutritionist/dietician for the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation (d) $29,908 (e) Engaged for 12 months from 25 June 1985 (f) No (a) W. F. Ritchie and Associates (b) Engaged as Journalist for Australian Meat Research Committee (d) $31,028 (e) Engaged prior to March 1983 (f) No (a) T. Mallos (b) Cookery consultant for the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation (d) $78,205.83 (e) Initial engagement commenced prior to March 1983, currently engaged for 2 years from 1 January 1984 (f) No (a) Clifford and Warnke, US Attorneys (b) Advise and recommend strategy and proceedings regarding US policies for the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation (d) $598,420 (e) Have been engaged since prior to March 1983 (f) No (a) Dr M. Jones (b) Engaged as Executive Officer to the Australian Meat Research Committee (d) $195,992 (e) Services commenced prior to March 1983 (f) No (a) C. le Gras (b) Public Relations consultant (d) $27,500 (e) 1 July 1983 (f) No (a) Eric Pringle and Associates (b) Public Relations consultant (d) $25,639 (e) Engaged for a 2 year period from 1 June 1984 (f) No (a) K. Wilcox (b) Engaged as technical consultant to Computer Aided Livestock Marketing Committee (d) $14,086 (e) Services commenced on 19 October 1984 and finished in June 1985 (f) No (a) N. Jackson-Hope (b) Assignment relates to Computer Aided Livestock Marketing and involves training assessors of livestock and assessment of livestock working paper (d) $1,445 (e) The assignment commenced on 27 March 1985 and is not yet completed (f) No (a) D. Scanlon (b) Assignment relates to Computer Aided Livestock Marketing and involves training assessors of livestock and assessment of livestock working paper (d) $1,790 (e) The assignment commenced on 27 March 1985 and is not yet completed (f) No (a) G. Steer (b) Assignment relates to Computer Aided Livestock Marketing and involves training assessors of livestock and assessment of livestock working paper (d) $1599.74 (e) The assignment commenced on 27 March 1985 and is not yet completed (f) No (a) R. Beasley (b) Assignment relates to Computer Aided Livestock Marketing and involves training assessors of livestock and assessment of livestock working paper (d) $2,146.90 (e) The assignment commenced on 27 March 1985 and is not yet completed (f) No (a) B. Sundstrom (b) Assignment relates to Computer Aided Livestock Marketing and involves training assessors of livestock and assessment of livestock working paper (d) $713.68 (e) The assignment commenced on 27 March 1985 and is not yet completed (f) No (a) R. Harris (b) Assignment relates to Computer Aided Livestock Marketing and involves training assessors of livestock and assessment of livestock working paper (d) $783.85 (e) The assignment commenced on 27 March 1985 and is not yet completed (f) No (a) Coopers and Lybrand (b) Engaged by the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation to develop proposal for corporate structure and to carry out feasibility study updating (d) $15,000 (e) Assignment commenced on 25 March 1985 (f) No (a) Housleys Computer Communications (b) Engaged by the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation to develop tender specifications and evaluate tenders. (d) $88,716 (e) Assignment commenced on 24 December 1984 (f) No Australian Wheat Board (a) Liveware Computer Systems (b) Report on computerised marketing information for the Australian Wheat Board (d) $750 (e) Engaged from July 1984 to August 1984 (f) No (a) MG Hollands (b) Engaged by the Australian Wheat Board to develop relationships with the Japanese market (d) $100 per day (e) Commenced 1 May 1985 and continuing (f) No (a) Datec Pty Ltd (b) Review of payments to grower system for the Australian Wheat Board (d) $27,444 (e) Commenced September 1983, finished June 1984 (f) Yes, by $3,444 (a) Datec Pty Ltd (b) System feasibility study for the Australian Wheat Board (d) $20,720 (e) Commenced October 1983, finished December 1983 (f) Yes, by $720 (a) Information Engineering Pty Ltd/Doll Martin Associates (b) Development of data model for the Australian Wheat Board (d) $25,000 (e) Commenced November 1982, finished August 1983 (f) No (a) Logica Pty Ltd (b) To purchase computer for the Australian Wheat Board (d) $57,533 (e) Commenced September 1983, finished May 1984 (f) No (a) Price Waterhouse (b) Various accounting and auditing assignments for the Australian Wheat Board (d) $1,500 per annum (e) Engaged August 1984 and continuing (f) No (a) P& Australia Ltd (b) Review of shipping functions for the Australian Wheat Board (d) $30,000 (e) Commenced November 1984 and continuing (f) No (a) Survey Computing Consultants (Vic) Pty Ltd (b) Computerised processing of stocktaking data for the Australian Wheat Board (d) $5,221 (e) Engaged for two periods, from July 1983 to October 1983, and from July 1984 to October 1984 (f) No Australian Wool Corporation (a) Corrs, Pavey, Whiting and Bryne Solicitors (b) Advise the Australian Wool Corporation on sub-lease at the Sydney Wool Centre (d) $8,845.00 (e) The assignment was carried out from May 1983 to May 1985 (f) No (a) Corrs, Pavey, Whiting and Bryne Solicitors (b) Act for the Australian Wool Corporation regarding a works construction dispute (d) $27,038.13 (e) Engaged pre March 1983 to February 1985 (f) No (a) Corrs, Pavey, Whiting and Bryne Solicitors (b) Advise and act for the Australian Wool Corporation in Freedom of Information requests (d) $11,828.68 (e) Assignment commenced on 12 January 1985 and is continuing (f) No (a) Sly and Russell with Hall and Hall Solicitors (b) Advise and act for the Australian Wool Corporation in regard to the Sydney Wool Centre (d) $5,564.05 (e) Assignment commenced in February 1983 and is continuing (f) No (a) Jones, Lang, Wootton Valuers (b) Value land and improvements for the Australian Wool Corporation (d) $450.00 (e) Assignment carried out during February and March 1984 (f) No (a) Arthur Robinson Solicitors (b) Advise the Australian Wool Corporation regarding powers and obligations under enabling legislation and commercial arrangements (d) $7,621.20 (e) Assignment was carried out from November 1982 to September 1984 (f) No (a) Davies and Collison, Patent Attorneys (b) Advise and act for the Australian Wool Corporation in obtaining and renewing registration of AWC trademarks (d) $7,295.00 (e) Engaged pre March 1983 and continuing (f) No (a) Phillip and Ward (Thermal Advisors) (b) To design and develop a wool bale identification system for the Australian Wool Corporation to facilitate and control the flow of wool from producer to processor whilst providing adequate information from which commercial documents can be generated (d) $35,000 (including approximately $17,000 for materials and equipment) (e) July 1981-March 1984 (f) No (a) J Skillecorn and Associates (b) To evaluate for the Australian Wool Corporation the method of wool pressing known as the U-Bale system, which transfers wool from farm bales or in bulk form into a super-density package suitable for overseas shipment (d) $4,500.00 (e) April 1984-March 1985 (f) No (a) J Skillecorn and Associates (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to detail the components of the brokers' delivery charges and reasons given by brokers for the higher rates of increase in the charges relative to the Consumer Price Index (d) $8,072.40 (e) March 1984-October 1984 (f) Yes by $572.40 (a) Nancye Kilner (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to critically analyse the ``Fulton Report'' on Wool Council of Australia policy on centralisation of freight (d) $300.00 (e) April-May 1985 (f) No (a) RR Ullett (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to analyse current Sydney Clearing House operations and recommend improvements to its structure and functions (d) $11,285.68 (e) December 1984-March 1985 (f) No (a) Sports Connection, Mr Ray Sneddon (b) To assist the Australian Wool Corporation in developing contacts and marketing programmes to (re) introduce wool into active sportswear products, including pre-and-post sports products (d) 1983/84 $25,000; 1984/85 $30,000 (e) Commenced 1983/84, due to finish end of 1985/86 (f) No (a) Stephen Fitzgerald &Co Pty Ltd (b) Guiding the Australian Wool Corporation in developing relationships with, and gaining access to appropriate organisations in China. Services are used in both formulating policy as well as undertaking operational tasks (d) 1983 $24,078; 1984 $23,600; 1985 $20,000 and expenses (committed) (e) Since 1978, contract renewed each calender year (f) No (a) Ward Holt Pty Ltd (b) Communicate to industry participants and the general public, information about the wool industry, Australian Wool Corporation and the International Wool Secretariat (d) Retainer $1,200 per month (e) July 1983-ongoing (f) No (a) Norman, Disney and Young (b) Comprehensive survey of fire control systems and evaluation of quotes for fire services maintenance, WA for the Australian Wool Corporation (d) $322.00 (e) September-October 1983 (f) No (a) Jones Lang Wooton (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to determine commercial valuation of the Spearwood site, WA (d) $250.00 (e) April 1985 (f) No (a) Jones Lang Wootton (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to determine commercial valuation for the South Fremantle Store, WA (d) $1,930.20 (e) March 1985 (f) No (a) Jones Lang Wooton (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to undertake a rent review and determine a commercial rate for the property at Palmyra, WA (d) $150.00 (e) January 1985 (f) No (a) Baillieu Allard (b) Obtain tenants for stores at Brooklyn and Port Melbourne for the Australian Wool Corporation (d) $6,202.00 (e) January, February, April, August 1984 (f) No (a) Baillieu Allard (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to undertake an annual review of rentals in Victoria and determine commercial rental rates (d) $3,500.00 (e) March 1984, February 1985 (f) No (a) Eggelston, MacDonald and Secomb (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to undertake layout design for Port Melbourne, Store F (d) $600.00 (e) June 1984 (f) No (a) Jones Lang Wootton (b) Obtain tenant at Brooklyn for the Australian Wool Corporation (d) $2,350.00 (e) August 1984 (f) No (a) Sedgwick Ltd (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to perform a survey undertaken as part of a fire safety audit (d) $2,680.00 (e) February 1985 (f) No (a) Jones Lang Wootton (b) Advise the Australian Wool Corporation on land acquisition and rail extension, Gillman, SA (d) $300.00 (e) November 1983 (f) No (a) Squire Photographics (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to photograph and provide prints of Gillman Estate, SA (d) $133.00 (e) February 1984 (f) No (a) Jones Lang Wootton (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to undertake rental review of Gillman Estate, SA and determine commercial rates (d) $650.00 (e) March 1984 (f) No (a) Baillieu, Bullock, Wilkinson (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to undertake land valuation, rent review and promotion for Gillman Estate, SA (d) $1,222.00 (e) November 1984, March 1985 (f) No (a) Mr L Potts (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to develop a set of pricing algorithms for implementation of GEMS (Grower Equity Matching System) (d) $1,750.00 (e) April 1985 (f) No (a) Jenny Dickson and Associates Pty Ltd (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to undertake a survey of private treaty wool trading in Australia (d) $17,500.00 (e) June-October 1985 (f) No (a) Coopers and Lybrand (b) Communication consulting services re selection of telephone switching equipment for the Australian Wool Corporation (d) $4,000 flat fee, plus out of pocket expenses up to 10 per cent (e) Commenced June 1984; Finished September 1984 (f) No (a) EP Haddad (b) Editorial function associated with production of policies and procedures manual for the Australian Wool Corporation (d) $15.00 per hour from December 1981 to June 1984; $20.00 per hour from July 1984 to June 1985 (e) Commenced December 1981-continuing (f) No (a) Dr B Montgomery (b) Two assignments conducting staff training and development for the Australian Wool Corporation (d) $300 and $300 (e) 1 day, March 1983 and 1 day, June 1983 (f) No (a) BIS-Shrapnel (b) Conducting staff training and development for the Australian Wool Corporation (d) $1,150.00 (e) 13 April 1983 (f) No (a) JKS Consulting Pty Ltd (b) Four assignments conducting staff training and development for the Australian Wool Corporation (d) $1,500, $1,500, $1,000, $2,000 (e) 30 and 31 May 1983, 14 and 16 August 1983, 15 and 20 September 1983, 7 and 8 February 1984 (f) No (a) Speech Dynamics (b) Conducting staff training and development for the Australian Wool Corporation (d) $1,885 (e) 4 and 5 July 1985 (f) No (a) Tony Smith Holdings Pty Ltd (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to undertake an Auction Microcomputer Acquisition Study (d) $5,600.00 (e) July 1984 to September 1984 inclusive (f) No (a) P Wengier and Associates (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to: (i) Specify and develop prime/time share link. (ii) Specify graphics approach and evaluate alternatives (d) $12,450.00 (e) August 1983 to September 1983 inclusive (f) No (a) Arthur Anderson and Co (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to undertake an EDP Applications Study (d) $60,000.00 plus out of pocket expenses (e) Commenced 13 May 1985-continuing (f) Consultancy not finalised, but final cost is expected to be within quotation (a) BT Australia Limited (b) BT Australia Limited was appointed Manager, Advisor and Promoter for the Australian Wool Corporation's initial approach to the Australian Promissory Note market. (d) $10,000 (e) Appointment is for a period of 12 months commencing 6 September 1984 (f) Fee is a once only flat charge and is not subject to adjustment (a) Eric White Associates, Brisbane (b) Provide public information services for the Australian Wool Corporation (d) $2,000 (e) March-June 1983 (f) No (a) Morse Cavender-The Mactan Company (b) To assist senior executives formulate the Australian Wool Corporation's Corporate Plan (d) 1982/83 (March-June) $3,508.74; 1983/84 $3,008.34; 1984/85 $5,765.11. (e) 1982 and continuing (f) No (a) Ellis Management Consultants (b) Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to undertake a study of the impact of Brokers' costs. Integrated centralised wool selling trial in Western Australia (d) 1983-84 $17,300 (e) October 1983 until final report presented in February 1984 (f) Yes, by $300 (a) Kinhill Stearns (b)Engaged by the Australian Wool Corporation to evaluate the benefits and cost of centralised wool selling in Victoria (d) 1984/85 $58,985.42 (e) July 1984. To commence in conjunction with the 84/85 wool selling season. (f) No Department of Primary Industry (a) Dr M. F. C. Day (b) To advise the Department on the establishment of a Bureau of Rural Science and Technology (d) $10,212.50 (e) Commenced January 1984, finished June 1984 (f) No (a) Spencer Stuart and Associates (b) To assist in the selection of a Board member on a Statutory Marketing Authority (d) $9,452.50 (e) Commenced September 1983, finished December 1983 (f) No (a) Dr K. Radway-Allen (b) Act as Chairman of a Shark Assessment Workshop conducted by the Department (d) $800 (e) Commenced 20 August 1984, finished 23 August 1984 (f) No (a) W. W. Fisheries Consultants Pty Ltd (b) Undertake southern bluefin tuna size length frequency sampling programme for the Department (d) $108,650 (e) Commenced 1 January 1985 for 12 months (f) Not expected to be (a) D. H. McKay (b) Chairman of the Australian Fisheries Conference (d) $1,500 (e) Commenced 31 January 1985, finished 2 February 1985 (f) No (a) Control Data Australia Pty Ltd (b) Conduct computer training for Departmental staff (d) $5,390 (e) Planned to commence in August 1985 and to be completed by September 1985 (f) Not expected to be (a) Dr K. Radway-Allen (b) Review of documents and preparation of report for Trawl Fish Workshop conducted by the Department (d) $1,857 (e) From 7-9 April 1984 inclusive (f) No (a) Dr L. A. Syme (b) Prepare a published scientific review of intensive sheep husbandry for the Department (d) $7,302 (e) Commenced February 1984, finished September 1984 (f) Yes, by $302 (a) Professor W. I. B. Beveridge (b) Undertake a revision of Volume 1 of The Animal Health in Australia Series entitled ``Viral Diseases of Farm Livestock'' (d) $4,000 (e) Commenced March 1984, finished April 1985 (f) Yes by $2,000 (a) Hassall and Associates Pty Ltd (b) Develop a sub-plan for Commonwealth involvement in the eradication of tuberculosis from feral buffalo (d) $25,022.23 (e) Commenced April 1984, finished June 1984 (f) Yes, by $22.23 (a) Livestock Services International Pty Ltd (b) Prepare a published scientific review on the humane destruction of animals during emergencies (d) $7,400 (e) Commenced April 1984, finished June 1984 (f) Yes, by $400 (a) Professor B. Morris and Dr J. N. Shelton (b) Prepare a published scientific review on the use and potential for animal embryos in international trade (d) $8,000 (e) Commenced April 1984, finished August 1984 (f) No (a) G. N. Arthur (b) Undertake a scientific literature review on Metaldeyde (d) $4,930 (e) Commenced April 1984, finished June 1984 (f) Yes, by $930 (a) AS Taylor (b) Undertake scientific literature reviews on Diphenylamine and Ethoxyquin (d) $15,288.78 (e) Completed over the period April 1984 to June 1985 (f) Yes, by $3,288.78 (a) Agricultural Business Research Institute (b) Undertake a scientific review of cattle breeding for export (d) $10,000 (e) Commenced March 1985, finished June 1985 (f) No (a) David Shave and Associates (b) Develop and conduct various courses as part of the Export Inspection Service national training strategy (d) Up to $119,850 (e) Commenced November 1983, not yet completed (f) Not expected to be (a) Precision Communication (b) Conduct communications courses for the Export Inspection Service (d) $22,280 (e) Commenced November 1984, finished March 1985 (f) No (a) Slade Consulting Group Pty Ltd (b) Conduct team building activities for the Export Inspection Service (d) Up to $8,100 (e) Commenced June 1985, expected to finish by December 1986 (f) Not expected to be (a) Moorabin TAFE College (b) Undertake detailed design work for multiskilling courses for Export Inspection Service staff (d) $20,100 (e) Commenced January 1984, finished June 1984 (f) No (a) GE Vaughan (b) Conduct refresher training courses for the Export Inspection Service (d) $1,446.36 (e) Commenced February 1984, finished June 1984 (f) No (a) Panorama Community College (TAFE) (b) Conduct training courses for Export Inspection Service staff (d) $4,244 (e) Engaged over the period November 1984 to May 1985 (f) No (a) Dr A. Crouch (b) Conduct staff survey and address senior management conference for the Export Inspection Service (d) $2,000 (e) Commenced 1 May 1985, finished 4 May 1985 (f) No (a) Mr O. Denmeade (b) Address senior management conference for the Export Inspection Service (d) $700 (e) One day-4 May 1985 (f) No (a) BJ Perry (b) Address conference for Export Inspection Service compliance staff (d) $100 (e) 12-13 March 1985 (f) No (a) Chandler and MacLeod (b) To review report on the management of human resources within the Export Inspection Service (d) $111,250 (e) Commenced May 1983, finished December 1983 (f) No (a) Chandler and MacLeod (b) To assist in the planning, preparation and facilitation of a team building exercise for the Export Inspection Service (d) $7,500 (e) Commenced 1 June 1984 finished 4 June 1984 (f) No (a) Coopers &Lybrand (b) Examine and report on the method of inspection charging (d) $65,220 (e) Commenced May 1983, finished November 1983 (f) No (a) Siromath Pty Ltd (b) Develop a sampling plan for quality control in meat processing plants (d) $9,760 (e) Commenced July 1984, finished January 1985 (f) No (a) B. J. Cameron (b) Undertake a review of the objective meat trade descriptions (d) $14,950 (e) Commenced August 1984, finished February 1985 (f) No (a) D. D. Schultz (b) Assist in the production of Ministerial Inspection Orders and associated manuals for Export Inspection Service (d) $48,000 (e) Commenced February 1984, finished May 1985 (f) No (a) E. L. Foster (b) Assist in a review of the administration and operation of export inspection services relating to fresh fruit and vegetable products (d) $11,802 (e) Commenced August 1983, finished March 1984 (f) No (a) C. R. Brough (b) Assist in a review of the administration and operation of export inspection services relating to fresh fruit and vegetable products (d) $29,640 (e) Commenced November 1983, finished April 1985 (f) No (a) Touche Ross Services Pty Ltd (b) Evaluate, design and implement a computerised integrated financial management system for the Department (d) $717,545 (e) Commenced October 1983, expected to finish December 1985 (f) Not expected to be (a) Pak-Poy and Kneebone Pty Ltd (b) Provide various computing services to the Department (d) $30,105.91 (e) Engaged for various assignments between 1983 and 1984 (f) Yes, by $865.91 (a) CR Eckermann and Associates (b) Provide various computing services to the Department (d) $10,000 (e) Engaged for two assignments between July 1983 and February 1985 (f) No Natural Software and Associates (b) Develop a computer based system for income equalisation deposit scheme (d) $6,000 (e) Commenced 15 April 1985, finished 31 May 1985 (f) No (a) Koranga Pty Ltd (b) Deliver Training Course in systems management for departmental staff (d) $4,240 (e) Commenced 23 July 1985, finished 26 July 1985 (f) No (a) David Angeloro and Associates Pty Ltd (b) Provide various computing services to the Department (d) $24,600 (e) Engaged for three assignments between October 1984 and May 1985 (f) No (a) BIS Applied Systems (b) Provide ADP Training for departmental staff (d) $43,271 (e) Commenced April 1985, finished July 1985 (f) No (a) Chan Computing Services (b) Write software to allow data flow between Micropad and Wang VS machines (d) $5,000 (e) Commenced March 1984, finished July 1984 (f) No (a) Dr T. Beed (b) Consultant to Household Meat Consumption Survey for the Bureau of Agricultural Economics (d) $6,000 (e) Commenced 14 March 1984 to present (f) No (a) Reark Research Pty Ltd (b) Conduct Household Meat Consumption Survey (c) $50,000 (d) Commenced August 1984 to present (f) Yes, by $39,000 due to increase in survey size (a) Professor T. D. Wallace (b) Provide advice on Bureau of Agricultural Economics projects and on happenings overseas (d) $878.28 (e) Engaged from 27 June 1984 to 29 June 1984 (f) No (a) Dr G. Caldwell (b) Advise senior Bureau of Agricultural Economics management on corporate planning. (d) $700 (e) Engaged from 22 March 1985 to 24 March 1985 (f) No (a) D. McKinna (b) Provide advice on Household Meat Consumption Survey (d) $1,030.60 (e) 12 December 1983 (f) No (a) M. Hall (b) Provide advice to the Bureau of Agricultural Economics on free fertilization (d) $318.60 (e) From 30 January 1985 to 1 February 1985 (f) No (a) W. Taubman (b) Provide assistance in editorial work for the Bureau of Agricultural Economics (d) $3,000 (e) From December 1984 to January 1985 (f) No (a) M. Allen (b) Provide assistance in editorial work for the Bureau of Agricultural Economics (d) $1,213.27 (e) From 4 June 1985 to 18 June 1985 (f) No (a) Dr Tangermann (b) Referee report-Agricultural Policies in EEC (d) $1,000 (e) March 1985 (f) No (a) K. Anderson (b) Referee report-Agricultural Policies in the EEC (d) $1,000 (e) March 1985 (f) No (a) Computer Sciences of Australia Pty Ltd (b) Review and advise on ADP Audit requirements for the Department (d) $25,000 (e) From March 1985 to June 1985 (f) No Industry Research Committees (a) J. A. A. Gardner (b) Technical Adviser to the Australian Pig Industry Research Committee (d) Engaged at a rate determined by the Remuneration Tribunal Cost from July 1984 to April 1985 was $46,324.10 (e) Engaged October 1984 and continuing (f) No (a) W. Munday (b) Engaged to write activities on Oilseeds Research Committee funded projects (d) $5,000 (e) Engaged for 1984-85 financial year (f) No (a) Dr J. Fairbrother (b) Technical Adviser to the Poultry Research Advisory Committee (d) Receives a $1,000 honorarium and $5,000 travelling expenses annually (e) Engaged on an annual basis since 1974 (f) No (a) R. N. Sandiford (b) Technical writer for the preparation of the Poultry Research Advisory Committees biannual report (d) $2,000 per report (e) Engaged on an annual basis since 1973 (f) No (Question No. 145) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism, upon notice, on 20 August 1985: (1) What advertising campaigns and research studies have been conducted or commissioned by the Minister's Department since March 1983. (2) Did any other Government agencies advise or co-ordinate any of these campaigns or research studies. (3) If an advertising agency or market research firm was used (a) what was its name and (b) what amount was it paid. (4) What was (a) the cost and (b) in the case of advertising campaigns, the split between agency fees and actual campaign costs for each campaign or study. Mr John Brown —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (2) (3) (a) (3) (b) (4) (a) (4) (b) Advertising campaigns and research studies conducted Other Government agencies involved in advising or co-ordinating Advertising agency or market research firm used Amount paid to agency or firm Cost of Campaign or study Split between agency fees and campaign costs Survey on Australia Day none Roy Morgan Research $7,120 $7,120 n.a. Post-event Community Awareness Survey of the Australia Games none McNair Anderson and Associates $10,300 $10,300 n.a. `A Guide to Taxation Reform' Booklet none John Clemenger (Vic) Pty Ltd $2,354 $95,195 $95,195-campaign cost $2,354-paid to agency Community Attitudes to Taxation none ANOP Market Research $160,000 $160,000 n.a. (Question No. 1477) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 20 August 1985: (1) What journals, digests, files, periodicals and the like are produced by the instrumentalities within the Minister's portfolio. (2) For each publication (a) when was it established, (b) which section within the Minister's portfolio produces it, (c) how many staff are involved in its production and for what percentage of time are they involved, (d) how often is it produced, (e) by whom is it printed and what is the print run, (f) what is the circulation and to whom, or where is it circulated, (g) who has editorial control, (h) what are its stated objectives and (i) what are the printing, staff and administrative costs associated with its production. Mr Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question, covering regular, publicly available publications produced within the Transport portfolio, is as follows: (1) Australian Shipping (2) (a) 1949 (b) Coastal Policy Section (c) 2 staff 40 per cent and 5 per cent (d) annually (e) AGPS; 400 to 600 (f) Government departments, shipping authorities and selected companies (g) Assistant Secretary, Coastal Shipping Branch (h) To provide an overview of the Australian shipping fleet (i) $1,800 annually for production (1) Transport (2) (a) 1983 (b) Public Affairs Section (c) 2 staff 1 per cent each (d) annually (e) AGPS; 1500 (f) Parliamentarians, media, public (g) Assistant Secretary, Coordination &Executive Services (h) To provide detail and background of funds allocated to transport in Federal Budget (i) $5,500 for printing 1985-86 (1) Bureau of Transport Economics Research Reports, Papers (Various) (2) (a) Since the establishment of the Bureau in 1970 (b) Bureau of Transport Economics (Various) (c) Majority of staff (100) are directly engaged in research activities which result in publications (d) Bulletins published quarterly or annually, other publications are produced on completion of research projects (e) AGPS 600 (average) (f) Government departments, transport planners, libraries and through AGPS bookshops (g) Director of the Bureau (h) To make available the results of the Bureau's research activities (i) Budget for printing 1985-86 $93,000 (Question No. 1584) Mr Smith asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 23 August 1985: (1) Will the Minister provide details of all expenditure within his Department in 1984-85 for compensation and legal expenses as outlined in Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 1985-86. (2) What was the (a) amount and (b) nature of the expenditure in each case for (i) compensation and (ii) legal expenses. (3) What was the name of each recipient of payment for legal expenses. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) to (3) Compensation under Compensation (Commonwealth Government Employees) Act. Expenditure in 1984-85 totalled $3,266,104. For the most part this covers regular ongoing compensation payments of $903,984 made to 86 former employees and payments of $1,764,763 made to current employees in accordance with Determinations of the Commissioner for Employees Compensation. The balance of expenditure ($597,357) covered payments to medical practitioners, chemists, hospitals etc., relating to employee Compensation Determinations in respect of 1,278 officers and comprising 4,320 individual transactions. Other Compensation Other payments for compensation in 1984-85 totalled $52,182 and covered such items as damage to personal property (e.g. clothing), fares to doctors and hospitals, accident settlement costs, etc. LEGAL EXPENSES Amount Recipient Service $ 150.00 Australian Government Solicitor Counsel fees-Mr P. A. Dawes 1,250.00 Australian Government Solicitor Fees 100.00 Mr M. Kellam Fees 1,424.00 Legal Aid Commission Fees 585.00 Ms S. Ward Fees 450.00 Mr A. Cavanough Fees 180.00 Mrs A. Bennett Fees 1,100.00 Mr D. M. J. Bennett Fees 585.00 Mr R. B. Wilson Fees 655.00 Mr Alan Robertson Fees 65.20 Registry, High Court of Australia Appeal to High Court 150.00 Mr K. Tose Fees 665.00 Mr J. J. Steele Fees 1,027.00 Ms Corrs Pavey Whitin Fees 7,000.00 Mr J. G. Santamaria Fees 8,780.00 Mr M. E. J. Black, QC Fees 4,037.48 Australian Government Solicitor Fees 60.00 South Australian Government Solicitor Fees 20.00 Mr H. G. Shore Fees 500.00 Mr A. L. Cavanough Fees 200.00 Mr D. Curtin Counsel fees 510.00 Mr K. M. Yates Counsel fees 635.00 Mrs P. Flemming Counsel fees 2,810.00 Australian Government Solicitor Counsel fees-Director of Social Security-Freedom of Information request 4,595.00 Australian Government Solicitor Counsel Fees-Messrs Snedden Hall &Gallop 475.00 Legal Aid Commission Memorandum of fees-W. J. N. Wells 700.00 A. Reach Counsel fees 2,500.00 Australian Government Solicitor Professional costs and disbursement-Messrs Poule &Co 1,160.00 Australian Government Solicitor Fees-Mr P. K. Thompson QC 80.00 Len Tony Blue Court appearance for T. Chandler 360.00 Director of Legal Service-Adelaide Legal Aid Commission Memorandum of fees N. Lowrie transcript supplied by Commonwealth Reporting Service 1,170.00 Miss Susan Ward Counsel fees 1.67 Dr A. Merrifield Mileage allowance for tribunal sitting 625.00 White Barnes &McGuire Counsel fees 861.38 Australian Government Solicitor Fees 125.00 Mr J. Karkar Counsel fee for drafting defence 375.00 Mr J. Karkar Counsel fee 134.75 Walker, Gibbs &King Solicitors Preparation &stamping of lease 12.00 G. Thomas Police accident Report 2.25 K. Gaunlet Declaration stationery 5,062.00 Clerk of Petty Sessions Cost of laying and serving summonses 340.00 G. Scragg Refresher 340.00 H. G. Shore Refresher 340.00 B. J. Skinner Sousounis v. D.G. of Social Security Brief to appear 680.00 B. J. Skinner S. Paradissus v D.G. of Social Security Conferences, Brief to appear 80.00 B. Wilson R. McKeown v. D.G. of Social Security Preparation for Hearing 850.00 R. B. Wilson Fee on Brief, refresher 200.00 B. C. Hunderford K. Chamma v. D.G. of Social Security Consultation refresher 850.00 M. J. Beazley Refresher brief 1,020.00 K. Chapple Brief on hearing 510.00 D. M. Yates Lewis v. D.G. of Social Security Brief on hearing 510.00 D. M. Yates Brief on hearing 342.00 Clerk of Petty Sessions Information @ $9.00 each search fee 9,139.00 Clerk of Petty Sessions Various information and searches 19.00 Corporate Affairs Comm. Searches 30.00 Websters Investigations Pty Ltd C of A. v. Pantasoulas Service fees 270.00 Mr David Nelson Conference and Brief on hearing 67.15 Deputy Crown Solicitor on behalf of Messrs Webb &Boland C of A. v. Moree Court of Petty Sessions Service fees 50.00 David Nelson Advice re Court Action 3,223.74 Maurice May &Co. Solicitors Counsel &Medico Legal, Fees, Disbursements, Applicants expenses 695.00 B. J. Skinner A. E. B. Drozdek Conference &Brief to Appear 9.50 Clerk of Petty Sessions Corp Affairs Commission requests 70.00 David Nelson C of A. v. Pantasoulas Conference 1,530.00 D. M. Yates Brief on hearing 850.00 M. Donoghue Counsel fees 460.00 B. C. Hungerford A. H. Core v. D.G. of Social Security Conference, Brief on Hearing 1,360.00 A. Reoch Fee on Brief, Conference 1,020.00 K. V. Taylor D.G. of Social Security v. McArthur Brief on hearing 760.00 S. Ward Brief to appear for Respondent Writ. Sub. for Respondent 60.00 Messrs Thompson Norrie Solicitors Solicitors fees 70.00 D. Nelson C of A. v. Pantasoulas Conference 9.91 Workers Health Centre Lidcombe Information 850.00 B. D. Dooley J. Commons v D.G. of Social Security Memo of Fees-brief on hearing-refresher 510.00 M. Donohoe Brief to appear 510.00 B. C. Hungerford A. H. Core v. D.G. of Social Security Fee on brief 510.00 A. N. Arena C. Fayad v. C of A Brief on hearing AAT 850.00 M. J. Donohoe Brief to appear (refresher) 1,580.00 M. J. Donohoe S. Lang v D.G. Social Security Conference, Brief to appear (refresher) X 3 340.00 M.J. Donohoe J. Ryan v D.G. Social Security Brief to appear refresher 50.00 R. S. Livingston Insurance Assessors Service of summons on Department of Social Security Service of summons on Commissioner of Police 510.00 D. B. McGovern Brief on hearing 52.00 Brophy Bridge &Mirow Solicitors Professional costs and disbursements 8.00 Corp Affairs Commis- sion Search fee 910.00 M.J. Donohoe Conference Brief to appear 3,570.00 B. Dooley Brief to appear on hearing 354.00 P. Maidien SAAD v. Department of Social Security Court appearance 250.00 G. Murrell Tripodi v D.G. of Social Security Brief to appear on hearing 680.00 G. Murrell Brief on hearing Refresher 760.00 G. Murrell Brief on hearing (refresher) 50.00 Rapid Process Service P/L Service of Summons 1,360.00 G. Scragg Fee on brief 850.00 D. M. Yates Brief on hearing Refresher 850.00 M. J. Beazley Brief to appear (adjournment) Brief to appear 510.00 G. Scragg Counsel's fees 56.00 Clerk of Petty Sessions Certificates 400.00 B.J. Skinner Counsel's fees 295.00 P. Fleming Australian Government Solicitor fees 4,476.00 Messrs W.C. Taylor &Scott Stevanovic v. Australia Telecom Solicitors costs 650.00 B. Hungerford Conference X 2 Brief on hearing 510.00 S. Ward Brief on hearing 1,850.00 E. Wasilenia Counsel's fees 65.00 Rapid Process Services P/L 2 X Service of summons 930.00 K. V. Taylor Brief on hearing Conference, refresher 56.00 Dr. P. Kendall Medical Report 75.00 Dr. J. D. Gillies Medical Report 200.00 Kenneth Duball P/L Supreme Court Action Medical Report 795.00 A. Reoch Osborne v D.G. of Social Security Fee of brief, Conference half refresher 45.00 Rapid Process Service P/L D. Mathews v. C of A hearing AAT 510.00 B. Skinner Brief to appear 340.00 P. Jones Refresher 650.00 A. Reoch 2 X Conference fee on brief 292.50 Anbel Services Pty Ltd Consultation, report, telephone discussions &report 340.00 B. Skinner Christophides v. D.G. of Social Security Brief to appear (refresher basis) 620.00 K. V. Taylor Counsel's fees 510.00 K. Chapple Fee on brief 925.00 M. Donohoe Brief to appear, Written submissions for Tribunal 850.00 K. V. Taylor Brief on hearing Refresher 50.00 Rapid Process Service Pty Ltd Summons service 510.00 M. Donohoe Counsel's fees 340.00 M. Donohoe Brief to appear refresher 975.00 P. Flemming Refresher (matter adjourned) Brief on hearing 1,000.00 P. S. Jones Ehamma v D.G. Social Security 3 X conference, brief on hearing refresher Brief on hearing 340.00 H. G. Shore A Youb v D.G. Social Security Refresher 510.00 K. V. Taylor Brief on hearing 1,410.00 R. B. Wilson Direction hearing, Fee of brief, loading refresher, telephone conference 850.00 R. B. Wilson O. Akkawy v. D. G. of Social Security Fee of brief, Refresher 73.50 Clerk of Petty Sessions Transcriptions 340.00 G. Murrell Breif to appear on hearing refresher 1,870.00 S. G. Finch Counsel's fees 510.00 A Robertson Brief on hearing 14.00 Solicitor for Public Prosecutions &Clerk for Peace Certificates 850.00 A. N. Arena Barrister-at-Law P. Machnig v. D.G. of Social Security Brief on hearing Refresher 510.00 B. D. Dooley D. Matthews v. D.G. of Social Security Brief to appear on hearing 50.00 E. Hedberg Attendance fees AAT 310.00 P. Maiden Brief on hearing AAT SAAD v Cofa 510.00 P. Maiden S. Samad v. Cofa Brief of hearing AAT 510.00 H. G. Shore Malkoc v. D.G. of Social Security Brief to appear 510.00 B. Dooley A. Alameddine v. D.G. Social Security brief to appear on hearing 655.00 A. Reoch A. Etri v. D.G. Social Security Conference, fee on brief 635.00 P. Flemming Conference Messrs Van Lees and Brown Brief on hearing 60.00 Websters Investigations P/L C. of A. v. Hasana Pty Ltd Service of Subpoena's to witness 40.00 Aust Govt Solicitor Personal Service of Notice 680.00 G. Scragg Refresher x 2 105.00 Aust Govt Solicitor Service fees- Supreme Court 19.00 Julie Peters Dept Social Security Summons fee 42.00 Court Reporting Branch Transcript of Evidence 510.00 B. D. Dooley Karageorgias v. Dept of Social Security Brief to appear on hearing 510.00 G. Murrell Brief on hearing 510.00 A. Reoch Fee on brief Refresher 1,661.00 A. Reoch Conference, fee on brief loading in Newcastle 30.00 Websters Investigations P/L Service fees 328.80 Anthony Smith Payment in settlement 45.00 Corporate Affairs Comm. Searches 225.00 K. V. Taylor Refresher (half) 930.00 P. Dwyer Barrister Conference (1hr) Brief on hearing refresher 340.00 M. Donohoe Brief to appear 88.50 Court Reporting Branch 2 x transcripts 10.00 Corp. Affair Comm. Searches 510.00 D. B. McGovern Brief on hearing 450.00 D. Nelson C. of A. v. Portasoulas Brief to appear 450.00 T. Jucovic Conference 4,080.00 Offices of Public Prosecution Fees 4,116.00 Australian Government Solicitor Administrative Appeals Tribunal Solicitor fees 21,482.00 Australian Government Solicitors Disbursements and costs/fees 1,296.00 Australian Government Solicitors Fees (Question No. 1637) Mr Milton asked the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 11 September 1985: (1) Has his attention been drawn to an article in the Australian on 23 July 1985 reporting that a preliminary Congressional study of chemical risks has suggested a link between high rates of respiratory cancer and the sites of petrochemical plants in the United States of America. (2) Can he state whether any similar studies have been conducted in Australia; if so, what are the details. (3) If no studies of this kind have been conducted, will he take steps to establish a monitoring body in his Department to conduct such studies on a national basis. Dr Blewett —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. (2) My Department is not aware of any studies of populations located in the vicinity of any petro-chemical plants in Australia. However a health surveillance program of the Australian petroleum industry, titled `Health Watch' is currently being undertaken by a team of researchers based in the University of Melbourne. This program is monitoring the health status of those currently employed at such plants and maintains contact with resigned and retired employees. It is specifically designed to detect health problems in those exposed to long hours to emissions from these plants. Initial findings concerning the incidence of cancer, released in the `Health Watch' fourth Annual Report 1984, suggest that workers in the industry as a whole are not at any greater risk of premature death than the Australian population in general. Future investigations will attempt to classify broad categories of jobs in terms of exposure and potential exposure to chemical substances and thus begin to narrow the focus onto particular jobs and categories. I shall make a copy of the report available to the honourable member if he so desires. (3) It is generally accepted that workers in petrochemical plants would usually have higher exposures to materials and pollutants from those plants than the general community. In view of the on-going nature of the `Health Watch' Study and its findings to date, I am advised that there are no indications for the Government to initiate additional studies at this stage. (Question No. 1891) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Has his Department or any authority under his control installed new security or alarm systems during 1984-85; if so, what was the cost of the equipment. (2) Is the installation of new security equipment proposed in 1985-86; if so what is the estimated cost of the equipment. (3) Does the installation of this equipment incur additional monitoring costs; if so, what are they. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes-$43,140. (2) Yes-$271,000. (3) Yes-$2,550 estimated for 1985-86. It should be noted that the above figures represent only those systems installed and funded by the Department of Social Security. The Department of Housing and Construction has also installed a number of security systems as part of fitout of regional offices, the actual costs of which are not possible to separate out from the total fitout cost, by the Department of Social Security. (Question No. 1893) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Has his Department or any authority under his control purchased or installed musaak-type sound systems in offices during 1984-85; if so, what was the cost. (2) Is it anticipated that such equipment will be installed during 1985-86; if so, what is the estimated cost. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes-$7,210 (2) Yes-$16,000 It should be noted that the above figures represent only those systems installed and funded by the Department of Social Security. The Department of Housing and Construction has also installed a number of musaak-type sound systems as part of fitout of regional offices, the actual costs of which are not possible to separate out from the total fitout cost, by the Department of Social Security. (Question No. 1904) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: What was the (a) amount paid for fees, charges and expenses, (b) basis of payment and (c) functions of each (i) consultant (ii) committee and (iii) advisory council employed by his Department and authorities under his control in 1984-85. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (i) The information regarding consultants is included in my answer to Question No. 1249 (Hansard of 15 October 1985, pages 2116-2123). Details in respect of (ii) Committees, and (iii) Advisory Councils whose activities are funded by the Department of Social Security are provided in the attached tables. It should be noted that the amounts specified as payment for fees, charges and expenses are only for the period up to 12 December 1984, the date on which responsibility for these bodies was transferred to the Department of Community Services. DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SECURITY-(ii) COMMITTEES 1984-85 Committee (a) Fees, Charges and Expenses (b) Basis of Payment (c) Functions New South Wales Consultative Committee on Social Welfare Queensland Consultative Committee on Social Welfare Victorian Consultative Committee on Social Welfare Western Australia Consultative Committee on Social Welfare South Australia Consultative Committee on Social Welfare Northern Territory Consultative Committee on Social Welfare Tasmanian Consultative Committee on Social Welfare Australian Capital Territory Consultative Committee on Social Welfare $10,013 $9,449 $8,797 $7,329 $5,349 $19,429 $7,204 $4,448 Payments are made in accordance with determinations of the Remuneration Tribunal State and Territory Consultative Committees on Social Welfare are responsible for advising the Secretary of the Department, through the State Director, on the administration at State level of Commonwealth Government social security and welfare programs administered by the Department and, in particular, to: * review the delivery of Commonwealth social security programs in each State or Territory; * review the relationship between the programs administered by the Department of Social Security and State social welfare services; * advise on social welfare programs and services administered by the Department of Community Services, and the effectiveness of service delivery in each State or Territory; and * provide within each State or Territory an assessment of the welfare service roles of local government and voluntary organisations and how these relate to the Department. DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SECURITY-(iii) ADVISORY COUNCILS 1984-85 Advisory Council (a) Fees, Charges and Expenses (b) Basis of Payment (c) Functions Disability Advisory Council of Australia (DACA) $42,959 Payments are made in accordance with determinations of the Remuneration Tribunal At the request of the Minister for Social Security and on the Council's own initiative, advise the Commonwealth Government on all matters connected with disability including the effects of Commonwealth policies, programs and activities on people with disabilities. Specific functions include: * develop proposals to achieve the objectives of `full participation' and `equality' for persons with disabilities in Australia in accordance with the United Nations World Program of Action Concerning Disabled Persons; * advise on the effectiveness of Commonwealth policies, programs and activities that affect or could affect people with disabilities, including progress towards the above objectives; * as approved by the Minister, undertake activities designed to increase knowledge of and interest in disability matters, issues and perspectives; * by agreement with the Minister, publish reports and other papers on issues in the field. * maintain liaison with international, national and other bodies concerned with disability; * stimulate data collection, research and evaluation in relevant disability areas and advise on utilisation of research grants as appropriate; * recommend measures for improved standards of service to disabled people, and especially greater accountability of Government-subsidised facilities and programs; * provide advice on appropriate initiatives for Australia internationally with particular reference to the Asia-Pacific region; * provide advice on such other matters as may be referred by the Minister. National Advisory Council on Social Welfare (NACSW) $18,313 Payments are made in accordance with determinations of the Remuneration Tribunal Within the responsibilities of the Commonwealth Government, the task of the NACSW is to advise the Minister for Social Security on current issues in social welfare (as relevant to the Minister's portfolio), including: * any specific issues which the Minister might refer to the Council for advice, or which the Council wishes to initiate; * assessment and review of social welfare priorities; * identification of gaps and deficiencies in social welfare programs; * modifications of ongoing programs in the light of consumer needs and social and economic conditions; * examination of the data requirement for the purpose of evaluation, research and the setting of priorities; and * establishment of channels of consultation and communication with the Minister and the Department of Social Security, both to and from the community in general, and, beneficiaries of the Department's services in particular. (Question No. 1906) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) Has his Department or any authority under his control undertaken any advertising, other than employment advertising, in 1984-85; if so, (a) what was the cost, (b) what were the subjects advertised, (c) who (i) designed and (ii) placed the advertisements and (d) will he make copies available. (2) Is it anticipated that advertising will be undertaken in 1985-86; if so, what will be the (a) purpose and (b) the estimated cost of the advertising. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. (a) Advertising cost $432,842. (b) The subjects advertised were: general publicity about eligibility, departmental services, rate changes, etc assets test direct deposit Regional Office activities including visiting services, availability of interpreters, etc handicapped persons welfare program rehabilitation services the honorary information officer program availability of new information material (c) (i) Departmental staff in the Communications Section at Central Office and in the Community Liaison and Services Sections at State Headquarters. (ii) Departmental staff either directly with the media, or through the Government's placement agency, Gordon and Gotch. (d) As many of the advertisements are variations on a theme-for such things as hot lines, visiting services, etc-a general selection has been provided to the honourable member. (2) Yes. (a) The purpose of the advertising is to publicise: eligibility, departmental services, rate changes, etc Regional Office activities, including visiting services, availability of interpreters, etc the Honorary Information Officer program (b) The estimated cost of national advertising is $250,000. (Question No. 1918) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 19 September 1985 (1) What overtime was paid to staff at each level in his Department and authorities under his control in 1984-85. (2) Was the overtime related to a specific project or projects; if so, what were they. (3) What is the estimated amount of overtime pay-able to staff at each level in 1985-86. (4) Is the estimated overtime in anticipation of specific projects; if so, what are they. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Overtime is payable to officers up to and including those classified as Clerical Administrative Class 8 who are required to work outside normal hours. Total expenditure in 1984-85 on overtime was $4.6m. Information is not readily available on the amount of overtime paid to each level of officer up to that of Clerical Administrative Class 8. (2) Some of the overtime expenditure was related to work on specific projects such as implementation of the Direct Credits System as the prime method of payment of social security benefits, implementation of Stratplan, implementation of the Assets Test, and establishment of Branch Offices of the Commissioner for Employees' Compensation. Specific information on expenditure on each of these projects is not available. Most overtime expenditure was necessary to clear arrears of work, to deal with seasonal peaks in workload, to perform urgent and unforeseen tasks, to carry out systems testing which cannot be performed in normal hours and in connection with relocation of offices which would cause disruption to client services if performed during normal working hours. (3) Total estimated expenditure on overtime is estimated to be $5.16m in 1985-86. (4) Provision has been made in the estimated expenditure for 1985-86 for overtime in connection with the establishment of Branch Offices for the Commissioner for Employees' Compensation, for work in connection with the introduction of rental assistance for the unemployed and for an increased requirement for computer matching associated with the detection of fraud and mispayment within the social security system. (Question No. 1992) Dr Klugman asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 30 October 1985: (1) Is he able to say: (a) what the estimated number of nuclear powered ships is in each of the navies which have them; (b) whether there have been any confirmed reports of death or injury due to nuclear power on any of the ships; and (c) whether there is any evidence that nuclear powered ships are less safe than other types of ships. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) Naval Ships Submarines Total United States of America... 13 131 144 Union of Soviet Socialist Republics... 2 179 181 United Kingdom... - 17 17 France... - 8 8 China... - 4 4 (b) There have been unconfirmed reports of nuclear accidents aboard Soviet nuclear powered warships, however, I am unaware of any confirmed reports of deaths or injury due to the nuclear power plants aboard any warship belonging to the nuclear powers. (c) I am not aware of any evidence indicating that nuclear powered ships are less safe than other types of ships. (Question No. 1995) Mr Lloyd asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 8 October 1985: (1) What progress has been made with the establishment of uniform axle loading limits for heavy vehicles and road train vehicles in Australia. (2) Is he able to say what the present differences are in State regulations. Mr Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The Government is well aware of the need to achieve uniformity in the area of regulations governing vehicle axle load limits, and is actively involved in the Australian Transport Advisory Council (ATAC) and the National Association of Australian State Road Authorities (NAASRA) which have a co-ordinating responsibility in this area. The Report of the National Road Freight Industry Inquiry (NRFII) recommended that vehicle limits be reviewed and in May 1984, NAASRA commissioned a Review of Road Vehicle Limits (RORVL) to examine existing limits with a view to achieving greater uniformity of regulations across the States and Territories. The RORVL study draft report is expected to be finalised in December 1985. For its part the Federal Government would welcome reforms that will result in improvements in the efficiency, equity and safety of the road freight industry. (2) Differences between States are concisely presented in tabular form in the NAASRA publication `Statutory Limits on Road Vehicles' copies of which can be obtained from the Tabling Office. (Question No. 2030) Mr Braithwaite asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 3 October 1985: (1) Has his attention been drawn to a petition presented to the House on 20 August 1985 from 2,300 residents of the Mackay region, Queensland, calling for effective Government action to support the sugar industry out of its crisis. (2) Does the 100-Day Committee Report recommend a price support level for sugar which would result in 43 per cent of cane growers being able to survive within the price support; if so, what is the expected increase in unemployment following the implementation of this recommendation in the major sugar growing areas in Queensland and northern New South Wales should the remaining 57 per cent of farmers be forced from their farms. (3) Does he recognise an urgent need for an effective package of assistance to the sugar industry to be announced before the end of the 1985 crushing season to immediately underwrite and give confidence to the decisions of farmers, millers and financiers. Mr Kerin —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. (2) The Sugar Industry Working Party Report recommended a price support level for the 1985 season of $220 per tonne. Based on the 1984 costs of production figures this would cover cash operating costs including growers' own labour for around 43 per cent of growers. However, this estimate does not necessarily reflect the overall viability of cane growers as the survey takes no account of non-cane income and other off-farm income available to the grower. Hence the proportion of growers at risk is nowhere near 57 per cent and is generally considered to be no more than about 10 per cent. (3) Yes. The Federal Government announced on 23 September 1985 an assistance package for the sugar industry totalling $150m over three years to cover price support, adjustment assistance and research funding. The levels of support to No. 1 Pool are $230 in 1985, $225 in 1986 and $220 in 1987. This is a more generous offer than that recommended by the Savage Committee and, if accepted, would mean more direct cash grants to sugar growers than any Government has given to a particular primary industry for many years. The Commonwealth offer is conditional both on State participation in the price support scheme and a preparedness on the part of the industry to accept a degree of deregulation sufficient to achieve a level of cost reduction necessary to compete at future price levels. The New South Wales Government is prepared to co-operate with the Commonwealth Government but the Queensland Government Government is not. (Question No. 2061) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 9 October 1985: (1) What sums have been paid to Mr Phillip Adams and Mr Rod Cameron, their companies, or principals of their companies, for services rendered to the Minister's Department or authorities under the Minister's control and for what purposes in each case. (b) What sums have been paid to each of these people or companies for (a) travel allowance, (b) air fares, (c) accommodation costs, (d) hire car expenses and (e) any other expenses incurred. Mr Hurford —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: During the period 11 March 1983 to 11 November 1985 no payments have been made to Mr Phillip Adams or Mr Rod Cameron, or their companies or principals of their companies by me, my Department or authorities under my control. (Question No. 2175) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 11 October 1985: (1) What is the estimated liability for age pensions, at current levels of payment, for (a) 1990, (b) 1995, (c) 2000, (d) 2005 and (e) 2010. (2) What would the annual cost to the Government be of establishing a fund capable of sustaining projected liabilities for age pension payments at current levels up to the year 2010. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Based on the assumption that the proportion of aged persons receiving an age or service pension would remain at its present level, the figures sought (including service pension liability for those of age pension age) are: (a) $7.8 billion (b) $8.6 billion (c) $9.2 billion (d) $9.9 billion (e) $11.0 billion (2) The cost to the Government of a fund to finance these liabilities would depend on (among other things) whether specific contributions would be levied, the size of such contributions, the earning rate of the fund over time, whether payments to the fund would be evenly spread over the entire period to 2010, and the extent to which liabilities beyond 2010 were to be financed by the fund. (Question No. 2228) Mr Jacobi asked the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 6 October 1985: (1) What is the substance sprayed on passengers after their aircraft has arrived from overseas. (2) Which other countries use this spraying technique. (3) Which animal plant or human disease carriers is the spray considered to be effective against. (4) What scientific tests have been conducted and by whom to determine the effectiveness of the spray. (5) What scientific literature is there on the subject. (6) Who manufactures the spray. (7) Is the spray commercially available; if so, under what brand name. (8) Is the spray considered to be effective (a) generally or (b) only in civilian airliners in Australia. (9) When was the effectiveness of the practice last reviewed. Dr Blewett —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The substance is 2 per cent d'phenothrin in a propellant of equal parts of freon 11 and 12. It is sprayed into the air above the passengers, not on the passengers. (2) Other countries using the spray are New Zealand, Fiji and Tonga. (3) It is effective against small soft-bodied insects which are carriers of disease, including mosquitoes, culicoides and flies. (4) Scientific studies measuring the killing rates in caged insects (exposed to the standard disinsection procedure have been conducted by entomologists employed by the Departments of Health and Primary Industry on commercial aeroplanes. The most recent study was conducted in September 1985 on aircraft operating the trans-Tasman run from Sydney to Auckland. (5) There is extensive literature in this area. A representative bibliography is listed with Chapter 7. `Mosquito and other Insect Introductions to Australia aboard International aircraft, and the monitoring of Disinsection Procedures' by Russell RC et al in `Commerce and the Spread of Pests and Disease Vectors' editor M Laird, Praeger Publishers, New York 1984. (6) Aerosol Fillers Division of Rite-Grow Pty Ltd, Sydney, NSW. (7) No. (8) It is considered to be generally effective. (9) The effectiveness is now being reviewed by the Departments of Primary Industry and Health, in consultation. Disinsection procedures are being examined, and risk assessments are being undertaken with reference to origin of flight, and port of arrival in Australia. (Question No. 2292) Mr Tuckey asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) Is it a fact that (a) a lengthy strike by British civil servants during 1984 delayed by several months the payment of United Kingdom pensions to residents in Australia and (b) that upon their return to work the civil servants processed outstanding pensions and forwarded the moneys to the beneficiaries in Australia on a lump sum basis. (2) Has this caused the income of many of the recipients of UK pensions to rise above the tax threshold for the first time in 1984-85. (3) Has the lump sum payment caused their Australian pension to be reduced in 1984-85. (4) Will he consider directing his Department to average the lump sum payment over 15 months to allow for a more equitable income figure to be projected so that these recipients are not disadvantaged further. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) In May 1984 industrial action in the computer section of the Department of Health and Social Security (`DHSS') Newcastle-upon-Tyne, delayed payments to British pensioners residing in Australia. There were no computer issued payments are 11 May 1984 until after the strike concluded in January 1985. However, emergency procedures were put in place by DHSS and the British High Commission in Australia whereby British pensioners were able to write to DHSS to obtain manual payment of their pensions. These arrangements were made in June 1984 with the assistance of my Department which was able to inform pensioners of the arrangements and assist in communications between pensioners, the High Commission and DHSS. (b) Advice to my Department from DHSS was that, by November 1984, all British pensioners in Australia were receiving their British pensions regularly through the manual arrangements. When the strike ended normal payment by computer was resumed. (2) United Kingdom pensions are paid 4-weekly or quarterly. Under the manual arrangements for the payment of United Kingdom pensions lump sum arrears were paid during the period June 1984 to November 1984 but, at most, only one extra payment of UK pension would have been paid to 30 June 1985. Because of the difference between the pensioner tax threshold and the maximum Australian pension rate, it is unlikely that the DHSS strike would have caused any pensioner to rise above the tax threshold for the first time. (3) and (4) Under the Social Security Act 1947 income is taken into account when it is `earned, derived or received'. Although some United Kingdom pensioners were not actually receiving their United Kingdom pension for a time, income was derived and was taken into account in the usual way to calculate the rate of Australian pension payable. A lump sum payment received later would therefore not have led to a reduction in Australian pension and averaging is not considered necessary. (Question No. 2314) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) What was the expenditure by the Minister's Department and authorities under the Minister's control public relations in (a) 1983-84 and (b) 1984-85. (2) What was the nature or subject of the public relations expenditure. (3) Was outside assistance obtained for public relations, if so (a) who provided the assistance, (b) what payments were made and (c) why was the assistance sought. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) and (b) Nil. (2) and (3) Not applicable. (Question No. 2443) Mr Sinclair asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 15 November 1985: (1) What proportion of Defence spending has been allocated to personnel in the last 5 years (a) in each individual Service and (b) overall. (2) What is the projected proportion of spending allocated to personnel under the current Five Year Defence Plan (a) in each individual Service and (b) overall. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) The following table shows defence spending allocated to the individual Services and overall, for salaries and allowances as a proportion of total defence expenditure for 1981-82 to 1984-85, the 1985-86 Budget estimate and those projections underlying the recently published Forward Estimates. The Forward Estimates are, of course, subject to subsequent Government consideration and decision in each annual Budget. SALARIES AND ALLOWANCES - PROPORTION OF TOTAL DEFENCE SPENDING Service Achieved Expenditure 81-82 % 82-83 % 83-84 % 84-85 % Budget Estimate 85-86 % Forward Estimate 86-87 % 87-88 % 1. Regular and Reserve Forces Navy... 8.6 7.7 7.1 6.4 6.0 5.8 5.6 Army... 16.7 15.2 13.6 12.7 12.3 12.1 11.7 Air Force... 11.4 10.1 9.4 8.9 8.6 8.4 8.1 Total Regulars and Reserves... 36.7 33.0 30.1 28.0 27.0 26.2 25.3 2.DFRDB... 5.8 5.6 5.8 5.9 6.0 5.8 5.8 3. Other Defence... 11.7 11.3 10.6 9.8 9.3 8.6 8.3 Total Defence Personnel... 54.2 49.9 46.5 43.7 42.3 40.7 39.4 Note: 1. Other Defence includes civilian personnel employed in the Department of Defence, the Office of Defence Production, remuneration for the CDF and the Chiefs of Staff and other Holders of Public Office related to the Defence Function but excludes personnel paid from trust accounts. Note: 2. The 1985-86 Budget and Forward Estimates percentages exclude bulk allowances for prospective wage and salaries increases. Note: 3. Some figures may not add due to rounding. (Question No. 134) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Communications, upon notice, on 19 March 1985: (1) Has the defamation action by the Premier of New South Wales against the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, arising out of a Four Corners television program, The Big League, been settled. (2) Do the terms of settlement include an award to the Premier of New South Wales of $400,000; if not, what is the sum. (3) As the ABC is a public authority, (a) are these moneys public funds and (b) will their payment to the Premier of New South Wales be disclosed in the ABC balance sheet. (4) Did the management of the ABC, on the advice of its inhouse lawyers, recommend against settling the action on these terms; if so, did the Board of the ABC over-rule the management on this matter. (5) Did the terms of the settlement include a secrecy arrangement between the Premier of New South Wales and the ABC; if so, (a) how is the arrangement in the public interest and (b) will it preclude the Auditor-General from investigating the matter and reporting on it to Parliament. (6) Is it consistent with ministerial poilicy that a settlement involving the payment of any substantial sum to a Premier by a public authority financed by the Commonwealth should not be disclosed to the public. Mr Duffy —The answer to the honourable member's question, based on advice provided by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, is as follows: (1) There were two actions by the Premier of New South Wales for defamation one in respect of a Four Corners program and one relating to a radio program broadcast on 19 April 1985. Both actions have been settled. (2) No. The terms of settlement, insofar as they relate to expenditure, are that the ABC only accepts liability for Mr Wran's legal costs incurred up to the time of settlement. Detailed bills totalling $118,545.21 have been submitted to the ABC and filed in the Supreme Court of New South Wales by Mr Wran's solicitors. This sum will be paid by the ABC. (3) (a) Yes. (b) The Premier of New South Wales will not receive any personal financial gain as a result of the legal expenses referred to in (2), above, and which will be incorporated in the ABC accounts. (4) The Board, of which the Managing Director is a member, acting upon advice of an outside legal adviser, Mr David Levine QC, as to the advantages of reaching a settlement, directed its Principal Legal Officer, as solicitor to the Corporation and solicitor on the record, to take necessary steps in approaching the Court. The Board did not overrule management in this matter. (5) The terms of the settlement orginally contained a secrecy agreement but this was subsequently removed by agreement between the parties. (6) The terms of the settlement of both actions have been disclosed. (Question No. 1252) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism, upon notice, on 23 May 1985: Has the Minister's Department, or any statutory authority or oganisation for which the Minister is responsible, employed consultants since March 1983; if so (a) who has been employed, (b) for what purpose, (c) what working plan was given to them, (d) what was the cost of their services, (e) when did their services commence and finish, and (f) was any fee in excess of the initial quote; if so, by what amount. Mr John Brown —The answer to the honourble member's question, as at 30 September 1985, is contained in the attached table. (a) Consultant (b) Purpose (c) Working Plan (d) Cost (e) Period (f) Excess over quote Department of Sport, Recreation and Tourism Roy Morgan Research P/L Conduct surveys of Australian activity levels during Winter 1984 and Summer 1985 Detail of methodology used in 1981 Canadian survey $38,300 3 weekends in June-July 1984 3 weekends in Jan.-Feb. 1985 Nil Ballarat College of Advanced Education Update Standing Committee on Recreation and Sport/Sport and Recreation Ministers' Council commissioned report Terms of Reference $5,000 May 1984-October 1984 Nil Uniquest Ltd, University of Queensland Conduct study of economic impact of low back pain and benefits of regular physical activity Terms of Reference $25,000 September 1984-June 1985 $5,000 McNair Anderson Assoc. P/L Survey of recreation patterns and preferences in Aust. Brief $29,080 26.4.85-14.6.85 Nil McNair Anderson Assoc. P/L Public Awareness survey of Inaugural Australia Games Direct consultation on questions to be asked and format for presentation $10,300 5.2.85-27.3.85 Nil Spectator Australia P/L Public relations and marketing program for National Australia Day Council Brief and Terms of Reference $143,500 30.4.83-30.6.85 (several contracts) Nil Roy Morgan Research P/L Market research into participation/attitudes relating to Australia Day Questionnaire and Brief $7,100 2.1.85-1.3.85 Nil Inview Pty Ltd Market research survey for AGPS Terms of Reference $16,990 Nov.-Dec. 1983 Nil O &M/Results Sales Promotion survey Terms of Reference $2,900 22.12.83-6.2.84 Nil Mr Stuart Devlin New artwork treatment of Coat of Arms in printing application Written design brief $4,820 Jan. 1983-Apr. 1984 Nil R. J. Nairn &Partners P/L Computing System for logging ministerial correspondence Specification $1,600 May-June 1985 Nil Management Solutions P/L Review current and future information and communications needs of the National Media Liaison Service Brief $50 per hour (part-completed estimated cost $4-5,000) June-November 1985 Nil Touche Ross Services Pty Ltd Feasibility Study for integrated Management Operation/Information System for AGPS Terms of Reference $38,225 3.12.84-28.2.85 Nil Management Solutions Pty Ltd Preparation of ADP Strategic plan for AGPS Recommendations of Touche Ross feasibility study $10,000 1.4.85-3.5.85 Nil David Wright Associates Conduct management seminars Terms of Reference $9,357 24-25.5.85 13-14.3.85 Nil Cruickshank Management Resources Pty Ltd Plan and introduce marketing activities for AGPS. Training courses for staff Terms of reference $55,000 4.2.85-July 1985 Nil Price Waterhouse Review and assess Australian Information Service and recommend improvements Terms of Reference $63,492 6.8.84-26.1.85 $3,492 Mr William Worth OBE Prepare program of activities for Expo 88. Prepare background paper of Australia's participation in international expositions Outline of purpose of consultancy $30,000 9.10.84-30.9.85 Nil (unfin- ished) Yoshinobu Ashihara Architect & Associates Design, fit-out and maintenance of Australian Pavilion at Expo 85, Tsukuba, Japan Sketch plan and schedules of materials and finishes provided by Dept of Housing and Con- struction Docu- menta- tion- 4% x 120% of work. Supervi- sion 2.5% x 120% of cost of work. 5.4.84-16.9.85 Nil (unfin- ished) Clive Lucas and Partners Research and advice on Housing Exhibit for Expo 85 Terms of Reference $28,199 30.11.84-15.3.85 Nil Bryce Design Consultants Design and co-ordinate artwork etc for Expo 85 Terms of Reference $56,839 15.10.84-May 1985 $12,339 Mr John White Advise on selection and display of museum objects. Arrange and supervise packing shipping and installation at Expo 85. Brief and Terms of Reference $15,200 31,10.84-22.3.85 $2,400 Mr Peter Buchanan Develop and conduct training course for Attendants at Expo 85 Brief and Terms of Reference $10,781 15.10.84-15.3.85 Nil The Mathes Group Architectural services associated with fit-out, graphics and interior design of Australia Pavilion at Expo 84-New Orleans Drawings and instructions provided by Department of Housing & Construction $149,852 29.2.84-11.11.84 Nil The Mathes Group Architectural services associated with restoration of Australian Pavilion site at Expo 84 Drawings provided by Dept of Housing & Construction $US4,000 28.9.84- current Nil Mr Peter Buchanan Develop and conduct training course for Attendants at Expo 84 Brief and Terms of Reference $6,794 13.2.84-11.5.84 Nil Mr G. Cox Provide specialist communications expertise in developing programs for presentation of information Terms of Reference $22,080 March-June 1983 Nil Dr P. Edwards Present paper to seminar ``Plain English in Government Communications'' Terms of Reference $1,546 May-June 1983 Nil Dr J. Gogen Present paper to seminar ``Plain English in Government Communications'' Terms of Reference $908 May-June 1983 Nil Prof R. Eagleson Present paper to seminar ``Plain English in Government Communications'' Terms of Reference $1,323 May-June 1983 Nil Frances Hellier Conduct research on public awareness and understanding of 1983-84 Budget. Brief and Terms of Reference $11,000 August 1983 Nil Coopers & Lybrand Review Government advertising procedures Terms of Reference $60,487 March-December 1983 $27,107 Mr D. Potts Consult with ICB on community information networks Brief $140 September 1983 Nil Dr T. Beed Consultant to ``Simpler Forms Program'' Brief $159 September 1983-June 1984 Nil Mr D. Sless Consultant to ``Simpler Forms Program'' Brief $4074 September 1983-June 1984 Nil Mr R. Barnett Consultant to ``Simpler Forms Program'' Brief $11,600 September 1983-June 1984 Nil Prof R. Eagleson Consultant to ``Plain English Program'' Brief $6,980 November 1983-June 1984 Nil ANOP Conduct research on views and attitudes of young Australians to various Government programs and policies Terms of Reference $155,000 December 1983-May 1984 Nil Coopers and Lybrand Assist in implementation of recommendations from Review of Australian Government advertising services' procedures and practices. Brief $39,550 January-June 1984 Nil Prof. R. Eagleson Consultant to ``Plain English and Simpler Forms'' program Brief $1,722 October-December 1984 Nil Mr D. Sless Consultant to ``Plain English and Simpler Forms'' program Brief $306 October 1984 Nil Product Development International P/L Advise on Government information services in France, UK and USA Brief $3,000 November 1984 Nil Mr D. Sless Consultant to ``Plain English and Simpler Forms'' program Brief $765 November 1984-March 1985 Nil Product Development International P/L Advise on strategy and development process for improving community access to Government information Brief $17,000 December 1984 Nil Product Development International P/L Marketing and strategic study on community access to Government information Brief $95,550 March-May 1985 Nil Mr R. Barnett Conduct workshops for departmental forms officers Brief $8,495 March 1985 Nil Coopers and Lybrand Assist with refinement of revised central advertising system Brief $9,750 April 1985 Nil ANOP Conduct research into community attitudes on taxation issues Brief and Terms of Reference $160,000 April-June 1985 Nil ANOP Research awareness and understanding in Tasmania of Government offers of assistance following decision on Franklin Dam Brief and Terms of Reference $74,000 March-April 1985 Nil The Consultancy Assist in development of a manual and guidelines on departmental information and in upgrading information units Brief $17,000 May-June 1984 Nil Lenehan Lynton Bloom Research to determine user difficulties with Income Tax Form `S' Terms of Reference $12,780 June 1984 Nil Coopers and Lybrand Assist in tender/selection procedures for establishment of management and financial systems of Government advertising Brief and Terms of Reference $44,840 July 1984, January 1985 Nil Mr R. Barnett Review forms management practices of Export Finance Insurance Corporation Brief $1,600 July-August 1984 Nil ANOP Evaluate community awareness and understanding of Federal Budget Brief and Terms of Reference $20,500 August 1984 Nil Mr R. Barnett Provide advice on forms for new system of Government Advertising Brief $800 September 1984 Nil Price Waterhouse Internal Audit Internal audit specification, scope and guidelines $11,500 March 1984-30 June 1985 Nil Coopers and Lybrand Conduct study on evaluation methodology for departmental publishing programs Brief and Terms of Reference $29,380 May-June 1985 Nil Communication Advisory and Research Enterprise Consultant to `Plain English and Simpler Forms'' Program Brief $8,800 May-June 1985 Nil Australian Tourist Commission K. Sh. Systems P/L Brief study of ATC general computing requirements * Overall computing requirements * Suppliers growth options * Alternative solution vehicles $2,500 13-22.2.84 Nil K. Sh. Systems P/L Review ATC's computing requirements Terms of Reference $800 6-9.3.85 Nil Australian Sports Commission Media Graphics P/L Eye Level Graphics The Artwork James Grosse Quantum Assist in development and production of logo and associated work. Brief and objectives $3,148 January-May 1985 Nil John Daly Bill Mandle Mungo McCallum John Bloomfield Brian Nettlelon Mike Jenkinson Bob Stewart Eunice Gill Assist in production of a book on history and development of sport in Australia Outline of publication, specific guidelines on chapter and style $3,500 May-October 1984 Nil Peat Marwick Michell Services Develop proposal for tax averaging sportsperson's incomes Terms of Reference explanatory notes $45,000 February-June 1985 Nil Eric White Associates J. Walter Thomas consortium Assist in development of communications/strategy for Children in Sport plan Copy of policy and action plan for program $90,000 23.4.85-July 1985 Nil (unfin- ished) Australian Institute of Sport Taro Enterprises Pty Ltd Computer Consultants Requirements Brief $11,610 June 1984-May 1985 Nil John Daly Write a history of AIS Brief $2,500 ($10,000 0ver 3 Years) December 1984 ongoing for three years Nil Allen, Jack &Cottier Furnishings new building Brief $6,179 (Contract $30,000) October 1984-July 1985 Nil (Question No. 1481) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Science, upon notice, on 20 August 1985: (1) What journals, digests, files, periodicals and the like are produced by instrumentalities within the Minister's portfolio. (2) For each publication- (a) When was it established; (b) Which section within the Minister's portfolio produces it; (c) How many staff are involved it its production and for what percentage of time are they involved; (d) How often is it produced; (e) By whom is it printed and what is the print run; (f) What is the circulation and to whom, or where is it circulated; (g) Who has editorial control; (h) What are its stated objectives; and (i) What are the printing, staff and administrative costs associated with its production. Mr Barry Jones —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) SCIFACTS (2) (a) Established in 1983 (b) Produced by the Public Relations and Information Section of the Department of Science. (c) One staff member involved for approximately 20% of time. (d) Produced every two months. (e) Printed by Microsystems. A print run of 800. (f) Circulation is approximately 600m to Australia media. (g) Editorial controls rests with Public Relations and Information Section. (h) Objective is to keep Australian media informed of the activities of the Department. (i) Printed at cost of $800 per issue. (1) ASCENT (2) (a) Established May 1983. (b) Produced by the Public Relations and Information Section of the Department of Science. (c) One staff member involved for 65% of time. (d) Produced three times a year. (e) Usually printed by Canberra Publishing and Printing Co. The print run is 5,000. (f) Circulation is approximately 4,000. Sent to industry, research institutions (both government and private sector) and to academia. (g) Editorial control rests with an Editorial Board made up of Department Secretary; Deputy Secretary; Assistance Secretary, Secretariat; Director of Public Relations. (h) Objective of Ascent is to promote science and technology issues; to develop and build links between the various sectors-industry, government and academia. (i) Production cost is approximately $10,000 per issue. (1) Staff Information Bulletin (SIB) (2) (a) Established 1983. (b) Produced by the Public Relations and Information Section of the Department of Science. (c) Two staff members involved 20% of time. (d) Produced each week. (e) Printed within the Department using photocopying facilities with a print run of 450. (f) Circulation is 450 to all Department staff (including some absent staff members on compensation), international delegates, and to the Department of Industry, Technology and Commerce. (g) Public Relations and Information Section has control of editorial. (h) Objectives are to notify staff of vacancies, and general information of interest to Department staff. (i) Production cost is approximately $2,000 per annum. (1) Science and Technology Statement. (2) (a) April 1980. (b) Scientific Development Division. (c) 3 or 4 involves 1.2 person years. (d) Annually. (e) Arranged through Australian Government Publishing Service total of 1,073. (f) Tabled in Parliament. Circulated to academics, business, government advisors, journalists and overseas. (g) Director, Indicator and Resource Analysis Section, Scientific Development Division. (h) To provide detailed information about expenditure by the Commonwealth Government in support of science and technology, particularly research and development as part of the information base for those concerded with Australian scientific and technological policy. (i) Cost-$4,703. (1) Australian S& Budget Brief. (2) (a) December 1983. (b) Scientific Development Division. (c) 2 or 3 involves about 0.1 person years. (d) Annually. (e) Arranged through AGPS total 1,000 copies. (f) Circulated to Parliament, academics, business, government advisors, journalists and overseas. (g) Director, Indicator and Resource Analysis Section, Scientific Development Division. (h) To provide a compact data source, complementary to the Science and Technology Statement and having a major focus on science and technology in the Commonwealth Budget, as part of the information base for those concerned with Australian scientific and technological policy. (i) Cost-$1,684. (1) WESTPAC Newsletter. (2) (a) May 1984. (b) Australian Institute of Marine Science (AMIS). (c) 5% of one man year-one staff. (d) Printed by Instaprint (primarily in-house at AIMS). Print run is 500. (f) Circulated to Australian researchers, WESTPAC National Members and Task Team, Working Group members, limited IOC and interested parties. (g) Chairman of WESTPAC. (h) Objective is information dissemination. (i) Cost-$1,500. (1) AMSTAC-Other Reports and Documents. (2) Australian Marine Sciences and Technologies Advisory Committee also produces, on average, three reports throughout each year on matters which arise in the course of its investigations or which are directed by the Minister for Science. The objectives of these reports are to comment on, or to improve overall awareness of particular matters relevant to the marine sciences and technologies. These reports, once approved by the Minister for Science and AMSTAC as appropriate, are generally public documents but usually have a fairly limited circulation to specific interest groups or persons. These documents are produced in-house within the Department of Science and generally have a print run of less than 75 copies. They are listed in the 1984 AMSTAC Annual Report. (1) Antarctic Treaty Exchange Information. (2) (a) 1976. (b) Antarctic Division. (c) Two-Publications Officer and Assistant 6%. (d) Annually (in October). (e) Local printers by competitive quotes, print run 200 copies. (f) Libraries, Antarctic community, interested parties. (g) Director, Antarctic Division. (h) Required under Article VII (5) of Antarctic Treaty. (i) Staff costs $3,700. (1) ANARE News. (2) (a) May 1981. (b) Antarctic Division. (c) Two-Editor and Publications Officer 40% and 8%. (d) Quarterly (monthly until June 1984). (e) Local printers by competitive quotes, print run 1 500 copies. (f) Libraries, Antarctic community, next of kin of expeditioners, media, by request. (g) Director, Antarctic Division. (h) To present information on Australia's Antarctic program. (i) Staff costs $18,000. (1) ANARE Handbook. (2) (a) 1980 (First Edition), 1982 (Second Edition). (b) Antarctic Division. (c) Two-Publications Officer and Assistant 11%. (d) Irregular. (e) Local printers by competitive quotes, print run 2 500 copies. (f) Australian National Antarctic Research Expedition expeditioners. (g) Director, Antarctic Division. (h) Introduction to Antarctica, ANARE and the Antarctic Division. (i) Staff costs $7,850. (1) ANARE First Aid Manual. (2) (a) 1979 (First Edition), 1980 (Second Edition), 1984 (Third Edition). (b) Antarctic Division. (c) Three-Publications Officer, Assistant, Medical Officer. 11%. (d) Irregular. (e) Local printers by competitive quotes, print run 2 500 copies. (f) ANARE expeditioners. (g) Director, Antarctic Division. (h) Practical guide to management of medical problems with emphasis on isolated conditions and cold environments. (i) Staff costs $8,750. (1) ANARE Field Manual. (2) (a) 1979 (First Edition), 1982 (Second Edition). (b) Antarctic Division. (c) Two-Publications Officer and Assistant. 20%. (d) Irregular. (e) Local printers by competitive quotes, print run 2 500 copies. (f) ANARE expeditioners. (g) Director, Antarctic Division. (h) Contains recommended practice for field operations in Antarctica. (i) Staff costs $13,050. (1) ANARE Reports (Formerly included ANARE Data Reports, ANARE Interim Reports and ANARE Scientific Reports). (2) (a) 1950. (b) Antarctic Division. (c) Two-Publications Officer and Assistant. 4%. (d) Irregular (currently 133 Reports). (e) Australian Government Publishing Service, print run 400 copies. (f) Libraries, Antarctic community, scientific community, by request. (g) Director, Antarctic Division. (h) Avenue for publication of significant and lengthy ANARE research that has undergone external review. (i) Staff costs $6,650. (1) ANARE Research Notes. (2) (a) 1982. (b) Antarctic Division. (c) Two-Publications Officer and Assistant. 58%. (d) Irregular (currently 28 Notes). (e) Local printers by competitive quotes, print run 400 copies. (f) As for ANARE Reports. (g) Director, Antarctic Division. (h) Avenue for rapid publication of technical data and/or scientific results. (i) Staff costs $27,200. (1) Antarctic Press Clippings. (b) Antarctic Division. (c) Two-Public Relations Officer and Assistant. 1%. (d) Irregular. (e) AGPS Document Reproduction Unit, print run 50 copies. (f) Largely internal. (g) Director, Antarctic Division. (h) Summary of Antarctic related articles appearing in Australian newspapers. (i) Staff costs $850. (1) Operations Manual. (2) (a) 1947. Revised format 1979. (b) Antarctic Division. (c) Two-Operations Manager and Publications Officer. 8%. (d) Updated annually. (e) Local printers by competitive quotes, print run 200 copies. (f) Antarctic Division staff, Antarctic stations and representatives of agencies working in Antarctica as part of ANARE. (g) Director, Antarctic Division. (h) Disseminate information and instructions to all people involved in ANARE. (i) Staff costs $5 600. (1) Operations Supplement. (2) (a) 1979. (b) Antarctic Division. (c) Two-Operations Manager and Publications Officer. 4%. (d) Annual. (e) Local printers by competitive quotes, print run 200 copies. (f) Holders of ANARE Operations Manuals. (g) Director, Antarctic Division. (h) Provide information on current season's ship and station operations and programs. (i) Staff costs $2 900. (1) ANARE Stores and Equipment Manual. (2) (a) 1979. (b) Antarctic Division. (c) Two-Supply Manager and Publications Officer. 8%. (d) Updated annually. (e) Local printers by competitive quotes, print run 100 copies. (f) Internal, Australian stations. (g) Director, Antarctic Division. (h) Stores list to facilitate re-ordering of station supplies. (i) Staff costs $5,320. (1) Communicating With Antarctica. (2) (a) 1980 (First Edition), 1981 (Second Edition). (b) Antarctic Division. (c) Two-Publications Officer and Welfare Officer. 8%. (d) Irregular. (e) Local printers by competitive quotes, print run 6,000 copies. (f) ANARE expeditioners and their next-of-kin. (g) Director, Antarctic Division. (h) To detail the various ways families and friends can keep in contact with members of ANARE during their term of service. (i) Staff costs $7,800. (1) Information Pamphlets 1 to 17. (2) (a) 1979. (b) Antarctic Division. (c) Two-Public Relations Officer and Assistant. 1%. (d) Reprinted irregularly. (e) Local printers by competitive quotes, various print runs. (f) By request from general public. (g) Director, Antarctic Division. (h) Inform public on Antarctica, source of project material for schools. (i) Variable. (1) Station Newsletters. (2) (a) May 1981. (b) Antarctic Division. (c) Two-Public Relations Officer and Assistant. 1%. (d) Monthly. (e) AGPS Document Reproduction Unit, print run 1,000 copies. (f) Family and friends of ANARE expeditioners. (g) Director, Antarctic Division. (h) To act as a source of regular news of station activities. (i) Staff costs $3,200. (1) Darwin Diagnostic Statement (2) (a) 1982. (b) Northern Territory office, Bureau of Meteorology. (c) 4 staff (3% total time). (d) Produced annually. (e) Copied in-house. (f) Circulation-126 (sales, subscriptions, official use and free issue). (g) Publications Manager. (h) Supply of meteorological information, furnishing advice on meteorological matters. (i) $938. (1) Daily Interstate Weather Bulletin. (2) (a) Not known. (b) Bureau of Meteorology NSW Regional Office. (c) 3 staff (12.46% total time). (d) Daily. (e) Copied in-house. (f) Circulation-13 through subscriptions. (g) Publications Manager. (h) Update of daily interstate information. (i) $424. (1) Daily Rainfall Bulletin. (2) (a) 1893. (b) Bureau of Meteorolgy WA, SA, Qld, NSW, Vic and Tas. (c) 16 staff (17.7% total time). (d) Daily. (e) Copied in-house. (f) Circulation-241 (sales, subscriptions, official use, free issue). (g) Publications Manager. (h) Update of daily rainfall information. (i) $49,812. (1) Daily Rainfall Map. (2) (a) Not known. (b) Bureau of Meteorology Qld, NSW and Vic. (c) 8 staff (11.71% total time). (d) Daily. (e) Copied in-house. (f) Circulation-91 (sales, subscriptions, official use, free issue). (g) Publications Manager. (h) Update of daily rainfall map. (i) $19,455. (1) Daily River Reports (2) (a) 1939. (b) Bureau of Meteorology NSW, SA, Vic and Tas. (c) 10 staff (12.18% total time). (d) Daily. (e) Copied in-house. (f) Circulation-122 (Subscriptions, official use, free issue). (g) Publications Manager. (h) Update daily river report. (i) $30,192. (1) Daily Synoptic Weather Chart of Australia. (2) (a) 1972. (b) Bureau of Meteorology Head Office. (c) 2 staff (5.4% total time). (d) Daily. (e) Copied in-house. (f) Circulation-2,100 (distributed to Regional Office). (g) Publications Manager. (h) Update of daily synoptic weather chart of Australia. (i) $4,325. (1) Daily Weather Bulletin. (2) 1936. (b) Bureau of Meteorology-WA, SA, Qld, NSW, Vic and Tas. (c) 16 staff (15.9% total time). (d) Daily. (e) Copied in-house. (f) Circulation-199 (subscriptions, sales, official use, free issue). (g) Publications Manager. (h) Update daily weather bulletin. (i) $63,744. (1) Weekly Rainfall Totals. (2) (a) 1914. (b) Bureau of Meteorology-SA, Qld, NSW, Vic and Tas. (c) 12 staff (4.6% total time). (d) Weekly. (e) Copied in-house. (f) Circulation-192 (subscriptions, sales, official use, free issue). (g) Publications Manager. (h) Update of weekly rainfall totals. (i) $11,603. (1) Weekly Weather Note. (2) (a) 1938. (b) Bureau of Meteorology-WA, SA, Qld, NSW, ACT, Vic and Tas. (c) 24 staff (6.5% total time). (d) Weekly. (e) Copied in-house. (f) Circulation-167 (subscriptions, sales, official use, free issue). (g) Publications Manager. (h) Update of weekly weather note. (i) $26,297. (1) Monthly Rainfall Bulletin. (2) (a) 1907. (b) Bureau of Meteorology-ACT, SA, QLD, NSW and VIC. (c) 13 staff (2.3% total time). (d) Monthly. (e) Copied in-house. (f) Circulation-321 (subscriptions, sales, official use, free issue). (g) Publications Manager. (h) Update of monthly rainfall bulletin. (i) $5,321. (1) Monthly Rainfall Map. (2) (a) 1950. (b) Bureau of Meteorology-WA, SA, QLD, NSW, VIC and TAS. (c) 17 staff (2.7% total time). (d) Monthly. (e) Copied in-house. (f) Circulation-118 (subscriptions, sales, official use, free issue). (g) Publications Manager. (h) Monthly issue of rainfall map. (i) $7,574. (1) Monthly Summary. (2) (a) 1918. (b) Bureau of Meteorology-SA, QLD and ACT. (c) 7 staff (1.4% total time). (d) Monthly. (e) Copied in-house. (f) Circulation-81 (subscriptions, sales, official use, free issue). (g) Publications Manager. (h) Summary of monthly information. (i) $994. (1) Monthly Rainfall Review. (2) (a) 1965. (b) Bureau of Meteorology-Head Office. (c) 4 staff (9.5% total time). (d) Monthly. (e) 6 monthly period-contract commercial printer. (f) Circulation 470-(subscriptions, sales, official use, free issue). (g) Publications Manager. (h) Update on monthly rainfall review. (i) $5,557. (1) Monthly Weather Review. (2) (a) 1957. (b) Bureau of Meteorology-WA, NT, SA, QLD, NSW, VIC and TAS. (c) 28 staff (17.5% total time). (d) Monthly. (e) Varies. (f) Circulation-1,118 (subscriptions, sales, official use, free issue). (g) Publications Manager. (h) Update on monthly weather review. (i) Not available. (1) Annual Rainfall Map. (2) (a) Not known. (b) Bureau of Meteorology-QLD, VIC and WA. (c) 8 staff (15.9% total time). (d) Monthly. (e) Copied in-house. (f) Circulation-243 (subscriptions, sales, official use, free issue). (g) Publications Manager. (h) - (i) $546. (1) Perth Data Proforma. (2) (a) Not known. (b) Bureau of Meteorology-WA. (c) 3 staff (13.6% total time). (d) Monthly. (e) Copied in-house. (f) Circulation-15 (subscriptions, official use). (g) Production Manager. (h) - (i) $317. (1) Hobart Daily Met Observations. (2) (a) 1908. (b) Bureau of Meteorology-TAS. (c) 4 staff (4% total time). (d) Monthly. (e) Copied in-house. (f) Circulation-100 (subscriptions, sales, official use, free issue). (g) Publications Manager. (h) Meteorological observations. (i) $148. (1) Hourly Rainfall Analysis. (2) (a) - (b) Bureau of Meteorology-WA. (c) 3 staff (20.4% total time). (d) Monthly. (e) Copied in-house. (f) Circulation-13 (subscription). (g) Publications Manager. (h) Rainfall Analysis. (i) $424. (1) Australian Meteorological Magazine. (2) (a) 1952. (b) Bureau of Meteorology-Head Office. (c) 4 staff (48% total time). (d) Quarterly. (e) AGPS. (f) Circulation-646 (subscription, sales, office use, free issue). (g) Chief Scientist Research. (h) Forum for meteorological researchers (international and national). (i) $30,640. (1) Drought Review Australia. (2) (a) 1965. (b) Bureau of Meteorology-Head Office. (c) 4 staff (12.9% total time). (d) In times of drought. (e) 6 monthly-commercial printer. (f) Circulation-470 (subscription, sales, official use, free issue). (g) Publications Manager. (h) - (i) $6,193. (1) Weather News. (2) (a) 1956. (b) Bureau of Meteorology-Head Office. (c) 2 staff (35% total time). (d) 6 issues per year. (e) 6 monthly-commercial printer. (f) Circulation-550. (g) Public Relations Officer. (h) Information magazine showing developments in the Bureau. (i) $12,171. (1) IPS Predictions. (2) (a) - (b) Ionospheric Prediction Service, Sydney. (c) Two man days. (d) Weekly or monthly. (e) IPS computer and Department of Defence (IPS radio and space services). (f) 400 copies x 40 pages. (g) - (h) - (i) 0.5 cents per page. (1) Technical Reports. (2) (a) - (b) Ionospheric Prediction Service, Sydney. (c) - (d) On request. (e) Private firms. (f) 50-500 copies. (g) - (h) - (i) $2,000 each. (1) IPS Handbook H8. (2) (a) - (b) Ionospheric Prediction Service, Sydney. (c) - (d) Updated every 2-3 years. (e) Private printing firm. (f) 3,000 copies-600 addresses. (g) - (h) - (i) $3,000. (1) IPS User Training Manual. (2) (a) - (b) Ionospheric Prediction Service, Sydney. (c) - (d) - (e) - (f) 400 copies sold at $10 each-500 copies run. (g) - (h) - (i) - COMMONWEALTH SCIENTIFIC AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH ORGANISATION (1) Australian Journal of Agricultural Research. (2) (a) Established 1950. (b) Produced by Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (c) Staff involved in production: 1.5. (d) Produced 6 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,900. (f) Circulation is approximately 1,700 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO and the Australian Academy of Science. (h) Objective is publication of original research. (i) Production cost is approximately $150,000 per annum. (1) Australian Journal of Biological Sciences. (2) (a) Established 1948. (b) Produced by Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.75. (d) Produced 4 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,700. (f) Circulation is approximately 1,500 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO and the Australian Academy of Science. (h) Objective is publication of original research. (i) Production cost is approximately $85,000 per annum. (1) Australian Journal of Botany Supplement. (2) (a) Established 1972. (b) Produced by Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.5. (d) Produced approximately once a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,100. (f) Circulation is approximately 900 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO and the Australian Academy of Science. (h) Objective is publication of original research. (i) Production cost is approximately $60,000 per annum. (1) Australian Journal of Botany. (2) (a) Established 1953. (b) Produced by Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.5. (d) Produced 6 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,400. (f) Circulation is approximately 1,200 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO and the Australian Academy of Science. (h) Objective is publication of original research. (i) Production cost is approximately $60,000 per annum. (1) Australian Journal of Chemistry. (2) (a) Established 1953. (b) Produced by Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (c) Staff involved in production: 5. (d) Produced 12 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,600. (f) Circulation is approximately 1,400 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO and the Australian Academy of Science. (h) Objective is publication of original research. (i) Production cost is approximately $530,000 per annum. (1) Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture. (2) (a) Established 1961. (b) Produced by Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (c) Staff involved in production: 2. (d) Produced 4 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,600. (f) Circulation is approximately 1,400 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO and the Standing Committee on Agriculture (h) Objective is publication of original research. (i) Production cost is approximately $140,000 per annum. (1) Australian Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research. (2) (a) Established 1950. (b) Produced by Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (c) Staff involved in production: 1. (d) Produced 6 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,600. (f) Circulation is approximately 1,400 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO and the Australian Academy of Science. (h) Objective is publication of original research. (i) Production cost is approximately $125,000 per annum. (1) Australian Journal of Plant Physiology. (2) (a) Established 1974. (b) Produced by Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.75. (d) Produced 6 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,350. (f) Circulation is approximately 1,150 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO and the Australian Academy of Science. (h) Objective is publication of original research. (i) Production cost is approximately $80,000 per annum. (1) Australian Journal of Physics. (2) (a) Established 1953. (b) Produced by Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (c) Staff involved in production: 1.5. (d) Produced 6 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,300. (f) Circulation is approximately 1,100 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO and the Australian Academy of Science. (h) Objective is publication of original research. (i) Production cost is approximately $200,000 per annum. (1) Australian Journal of Soil Research. (2) (a) Established 1963. (b) Produced by Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.5. (d) Produced 4 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,300. (f) Circulation is approximately 1,100 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO and the Australian Academy of Science. (h) Objective is publication of original research. (i) Production cost is approximately $80,000 per annum. (1) Australian Journal of Zoology Supplement. (2) (a) Established 1971. (b) Produced by Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.75. (d) Produced approximately 10 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,200. (f) Circulation is approximately 1,000 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO and the Australian Academy of Science. (h) Objective is publication of original research. (i) Production cost is approximately $125,000 per annum. (1) Australian Journal of Zoology. (2) (a) Established 1953. (b) Produced by Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.75. (d) Produced 6 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,200. (f) Circulation is approximately 1,000 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO and the Australian Academy of Science. (h) Objective is publication of original research. (i) Production cost is approximately $125,000 per annum. (1) Australian Wildlife Research. (2) (a) Established 1974. (b) Produced by Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.5. (d) Produced 4 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,400. (f) Circulation is approximately 1,200 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO and the Australian Academy of Science. (h) Objective is publication of original research. (i) Production cost is approximately $96,000 per annum. (1) Brunonia. (2) (a) Established 1978. (b) Produced by Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.25. (d) Produced 2 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 700. (f) Circulation is approximately 500 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO Editor. (h) Objective is publication of original research. (i) Production cost is approximately $40,000 per annum. (1) ECOS. (2) (a) Established 1974. (b) Produced by Science Communication Unit. (c) Staff involved in production: 3. (d) Produced approximately 4 times a year. (e) Printed by A. E. Keating. The print run is 10,500. (f) Circulation is approximately 9,500 to general public. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO Editor. (h) Objective is to report on environmental science for the non-specialist. (i) Production cost is approximately $150,000 per annum. (1) Rural Research. (2) (a) Established 1952. (b) Produced by Science Communication Unit. (c) Staff involved in production: 3. (d) Produced approximately 4 times a year. (e) Printed by A. E. Keating. The print run is 12,000. (f) Circulation is approximately 11,000 to general public. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO Editor. (h) Objective is to report on rural science for the non-specialist. (i) Production cost is approximately $150,000 per annum. (1) Scifile. (2) (a) Established 1977. (b) Produced by Science Communication Unit. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.25. (d) Produced approximately 3 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 10,500. (f) Circulation is approximately 10,000 to science teachers. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO Editor. (h) Objective is to increase current awareness of scientific development. (i) Production cost is approximately $15,000 per annum. (1) Industrial Research News. (2) (a) Established 1957. (b) Produced by Science Communication Unit. (c) Staff involved in production: 1.1. (d) Produced approximately 6 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 5,750. (f) Circulation is approximately 5,000 to secondary industry. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO Editor. (h) Objective is to increase current awareness of CSIRO research of interest to industry. (i) Production cost is approximately $40,000 per annum. (1) Directory of CSIRO Research Programs. (2) (a) Established 1976. (b) Produced by Science Communication Unit. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.6. (d) Produced approximately once a year. (e) Printed by various commercial printers. The print run is 2,000. (f) Circulation is approximately 1,500 to information workers. (g) Editorial control is with CSIRO Executive. (h) Objective is to provide a comprehensive directory of CSIRO research programs. (i) Production cost is approximately $45,000 per annum. (1) CSIRO Index. (2) (a) Established 1953. (b) Produced by Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (c) Staff involved in production: 2. (d) Produced 6 times a year. (e) Printed by Latrobe Studios. The print run is 850 (on microfiche only). (f) Circulation is approximately 800 to librarians. (g) Editorial control is with Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (h) Objective is to provide a directory of CSIRO research publications. (i) Production cost is approximately $25,000 per annum. (1) CRRERIS Index. (2) (a) Established 1981. (b) Produced by Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.5. (d) Produced 4 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 875. (f) Circulation is approximately 680 to energy workers. (g) Editorial control is with CRRERIS Editor. (h) Objective is information exchange between countries in Pacific and South East Asia. (i) Production cost is approximately $11,000 per annum. (1) CRRERIS Expert and Product Directories. (2) (a) Established 1982. (b) Produced by Central Information, Library and Editorial Section. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.5. (d) Produced 4 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 750. (f) Circulation is approximately 680 to energy workers. (g) Editorial control is with CRRERIS Editor. (h) Objective is information exchange between countries in Pacific and South East Asia. (i) Production cost is approximately $11,000 per annum. (1) Food Research Quarterly. (2) (a) Established 1971. (b) Produced by Division of Food Research. (c) Staff involved in production: 1.3. (d) Produced 4 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 2,700. (f) Circulation is approximately 2,000 to food industry. (g) Editorial control is with Divisional Committee. (h) Objective is to provide a general interest publication for the food industry. (i) Production cost is approximately $27,000 per annum. (1) Forest Products Newsletter (new series). (2) (a) Established 1985. (b) Produced by Division of Chemical and Wood Technology. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.2. (d) Produced 4 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 6,000. (f) Circulation is approximately 6,000 to timber industry. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to improve relations between research and industry. (i) Production cost is approximately $2,600 per annum. (1) Rebuild. (2) (a) Established 1976. (b) Produced by Division of Building Research. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.5. (d) Produced 6 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 12,000. (f) Circulation is approximately 10,000 to building industry. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to increase current awareness of Division's research work. (i) Production cost is approximately $30,000 per annum. (1) Australian Plant Introduction Review. (2) (a) Established 1963. (b) Produced by Division of Plant Industry. (c) Staff involved in production: 1. (d) Produced 3 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 500. (f) Circulation is approximately 400 to agriculturalists. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to provide a listing of all introduced plants. (i) Production cost is approximately $4,000 per annum. (1) Coresearch. (2) (a) Established 1958. (b) Produced by Science Communication Unit. (c) Staff involved in production: 1. (d) Produced 12 times a year. (e) Printed by various commercial printers. The print run is 8,600. (f) Circulation is approximately 8,4000 to CSIRO staff. (g) Editorial control is with Staff Editor. (h) Objective: staff newspaper. (i) Production cost is approximately $45,000 per annum. (1) CSIRO Alert. (2) (a) Established 1983. (b) Produced by Science Communication Unit. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.75. (d) Produced 6 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 500. (f) Circulation is approximately 500 to technical media. (g) Editorial control is with Staff Editor. (h) Objective is to provide information on research developments for technical medial. (i) Production cost is approximately $2,000 per annum. (1) Australian Forest Research. (2) (a) Established 1964. (b) Produced by Division of Forest Research. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.5. (d) Produced 4 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 600. (f) Circulation is approximately 500 to forest industry. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is publication of original research. (i) Production cost is approximately $64,000 per annum. (1) CSIRO Textile News. (2) (a) Established 1975. (b) Produced by Division of Textile Industry. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.2. (d) Produced approximately 2 times a year. (e) Printed by various commercial printers. The print run is 3,000. (f) Circulation is approximately 2,250 to textile industry. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to provide non-technical information on Division's work. (i) Production cost is approximately $4,000 per annum. (1) Minerals and Energy Bulletin. (2) (a) Established 1980. (b) Produced by Institute of Energy and Earth Resources. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.2. (d) Produced 4 times a year. (e) Printed by various commercial printers. The print run is 2,400. (f) Circulation is approximately 2,300 to minerals industry. (g) Editorial control is with Institute Director. (h) Objective is to provide short items of interest to industry. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Water and Land Resources-Technical Memoranda. (2) (a) Established 1959. (b) Produced by Division of Water and Land Resources. (c) Staff involved in production: 1. (d) Produced 20-40 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 200-400. (f) Circulation is approximately 200-400 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is the quick publication of results. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Water and Land Resources-Natural Resources Series. (2) (a) Established 1984. (b) Produced by Division of Water and Land Resources. (c) Staff involved in production: 1. (d) Produced 2-3 time a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,000. (f) Circulation is approximately 800 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to report results of major projects. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Water and Land Resources-Divisional Reports. (2) (a) Established 1980. (b) Produced by Division of Water and Land Resources. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.5. (d) Produced approximately 3 times a year. (e) Printed by various commercial printers. The print run is 500-600. (f) Circulation is approximately 500 to interested parties. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to provide information on Division's research results. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Water and Land Resources-Technical Papers. (2) (a) Established 1959. (b) Produced by Division of Water and Land Resources. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.5. (d) Produced 2-3 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,000. (f) Circulation is approximately 900 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to provide summaries of major research projects. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Textile Industry `G' Reports. (2) (a) Established 1960. (b) Produced by Division of Textile Physics. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.5. (d) Produced approximately once a year. (e) Printed by various commercial printers. The print run is 1,000. (f) Circulation is approximately 850 to textile industry. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to provide technical details of Divisional work. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Food Research Technical Papers. (2) (a) Established 1956. (b) Produced by Division of Food Research. (c) Staff involved in production: 1. (d) Produced 3-4 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 500. (f) Circulation is approximately 300 to industry. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to provide detailed reports of major research work. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Plant Industry Technical Papers. (2) (a) Established 1952. (b) Produced by Division of Plant Industry. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.2. (d) Produced less than once a year. (e) Printed by various commercial printers. The print run is 500. (f) Circulation is approximately 450 to plant scientists. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to provide reports of specialised research. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Applied Physics Technical Papers. (2) (a) Established 1979. (b) Produced by Division of Applied Physics. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.2. (d) Produced once a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 500-3,000. (f) Circulation is approximately 500-2,500 to research institutions. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to provide reports of specialised research. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Energy Technology Reports. (2) (a) Established 1981. (b) Produced by Division of Energy Technology. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.2. (d) Produced approximately once a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 250. (f) Circulation is approximately 250 to industry. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to report on finished projects. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Arid Zone Newsletter. (2) (a) Established 1956. (b) Produced by Division of Wildlife and Rangelands Research. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.1. (d) Produced once a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,200. (f) Circulation is approximately 1,000 to those involved in management of arid areas. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is communication between researchers and managers. (i) Production cost is approximately $3,000 per annum. (1) Atmospheric Research Technical Papers. (2) (a) Established 1983. (b) Produced by Division of Atmospheric Research. (c) Staff involved in production: 1. (d) Produced 3-4 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,200. (f) Circulation is approximately 1,000 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to provide reports of specialised work. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Fishery Situation Reports. (2) (a) Established 1979. (b) Produced by Division of Fisheries Research. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.2. (d) Produced approximately once a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 500. (f) Circulation is approximately 400 to industry. (g) Editorial control is with SE Fisheries Committee. (h) Objective is to improve fisheries management. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Marine Laboratory Reports. (2) (a) Established 1956. (b) Produced by CSIRO Marine Laboratories. (c) Staff imvolved in production: 0.2. (d) Produced 5-10 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 500. (f) Circulation is approximately 400 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with Chiefs of Divisions. (h) Objective is to provide reports of specialised research, new equipment, etc. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Chemical and Wood Technology Technical Papers. (2) (a) Established 1984. (b) Produced by Division of Chemical and Wood Technology. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.2. (d) Produced 7 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 500. (f) Circulation is approximately 300 to industry. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to provide reports of specialised research. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Wildlife and Rangelands Technical Memoranda. (2) (a) Established 1969. (b) Produced by Division of Wildlife and Rangelands Research. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.5. (d) Produced 1-2 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 500. (f) Circulation is approximately 400 to wildlife workers. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to report new techniques. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Wildlife and Rangelands Technical Papers. (2) (a) Established 1958. (b) Produced by Division of Wildlife and Rangelands Research. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.5. (d) Produced 1-2 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 500-1,000. (f) Circulation is approximately 800 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to report specialised work. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Soils Technical Papers. (2) (a) Established 1971. (b) Produced by Division of Soils. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.3. (d) Produced once a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 1,600. (f) Circulation is approximately 1,400 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to report specialised work. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Soils Divisional Reports (2) (a) Established 1975. (b) Produced by Division of Soils. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.5. (d) Produced up to 7 times a year. (e) Printed by Division of Soils. The print run is 350-1,000. (f) Circulation is approximately 800 to soils research workers. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to provide brief reports of Division's work. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Tropical Crops and Pastures-Technical Papers. (2) (a) Established 1961. (b) Produced by Division of Tropical Crops and Pastures. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.25. (d) Produced once a year. (e) Printed by Division of Tropical Crops and Pastures. The print run is 700. (f) Circulation is approximately 600 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to report specialised work. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Tropical Crops and Pastures-Technical Memoranda. (2) (a) Established 1976. (b) Produced by Division of Tropical Crops and Pastures. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.25. (d) Produced 4-5 times a year. (e) Printed by Division of Tropical Crops and Pastures. The print run is 200. (f) Circulation is approximately 200 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to report techniques and data. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Genetic Resources Communication Series. (2) (a) Established 1980. (b) Produced by Division of Tropical Crops and Pastures. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.1. (d) Produced 2 times a year. (e) Printed by Division of Tropical Crops and Pastures. The print run is 200. (f) Circulation is approximately 200 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to provide data bank. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Entomology Technical Papers. (2) (a) Established 1957. (b) Produced by Division of Entomology. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.1. (d) Produced once a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 600. (f) Circulation is approximately 500 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to provide records of research. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Entomology Divisional Reports. (2) (a) Established 1978. (b) Produced by Division of Entomology. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.1. (d) Produced 1-5 times a year. (e) Printed by Division of Entomology. The print run is 200. (f) Circulation is approximately 200 to entomologists. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is the rapid publication of results. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Geomechanics Technical Reports. (2) (a) Established 1963. (b) Produced by Division of Geomechanics. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.1. (d) Produced 1-5 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 250. (f) Circulation is approximately 100 to industry. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to provide summaries of research. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Geomechanics Technical Papers. (2) (a) Established 1965. (b) Produced by Division of Geomechanics. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.1. (d) Produced 1-2 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 500-1,500. (f) Circulation is approximately 500 to research workers. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to provide detailed research results. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Geomechanics Coal Mining Reports. (2) (a) Established 1978. (b) Produced by Division of Geomechanics. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.2. (d) Produced 5-10 times a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 150-250. (f) Circulation is approximately 100 to industry. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to provide detailed research results. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (1) Geomechanics Computer Programs. (2) (a) Established 1972. (b) Produced by Division of Geomechanics. (c) Staff involved in production: 0.1. (d) Produced less than once a year. (e) Printed by CSIRO Printing Unit. The print run is 200-500. (f) Circulation is approximately 100 to industry. (g) Editorial control is with Chief of Division. (h) Objective is to make available useful computer programs. (i) Production cost per annum is small and variable. (Question No. 1686) Mr Burr asked the Minister for Communications, upon notice, on 12 September 1985: (1) Can he indicate whether Tasmania comes under the south-eastern footprint of the Aussat satellite; if so what programs will be able to be received by Tasmanian television viewers? (2) What effect is Aussat programming expected to have on Tasmanian regional (a) Australian Broadcasting Corporation and (b) commercial programs? Mr Duffy —The answer to the honourable member's question, based on information provided by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation-ABC-is as follows: (1) Tasmania will come under the south-eastern footprint of the Aussat satellite. Services available for direct reception from the satellite will be the ABC Homestead and Community Broadcasting Satellite Service-HACBSS 1-due to be inaugurated on 26 January 1986; this will be followed sometime later by the Remote Commercial Television Service-RCTS-on HACBSS 2. The HACBSS 1 ABC television program will be identical to that transmitted throughout the south-eastern footprint, which covers New South Wales, Victoria and Tasmania. It is to be noted, however, that the great majority of residents in Tasmania will continue to be served from conventional terrestrial transmitters, programmed from the ABC's television studios in Tasmania. Apart from the existing transmission system, my Department is continuing to expand the network of television transmitters throughout Tasmania. (2) (a) The availability of Aussat will have little direct effect on programming to the present ABC television retransmission facilities in Tasmanian regional areas. However, use of the satellite for closed-circuit-non-broadcast-interchange of material between studio centres by the ABC, will enable wider and more immediate coverage of news and current events throughout Australia. Three ABC radio programs will be beamed over the entire state; regional listeners will be able to receive these radio services by installing the appropriate satellite equipment. Over time, the ABC intends extending three radio services to all regional areas by conventional transmitter, but the satellite will allow listeners to receive them sooner. The HACBSS radio programs include national radio services, Radio 2 and Stereo FM; Regional Radio 1 will also be available. Regional Radio 1 is a new country radio service specially developed by the ABC for its satellite services and will consist of news, current affairs, discussion and music based around the interests of the entire south-eastern footprint. Radio 2 is essentially a national spoken word radio network, with a percentage of transmission time devoted to state-based programmes. Stereo FM is a national stereo radio service presented from Adelaide, but with contributions from around Australia. It features the best in performing arts, particularly music and drama. (2) (b) Once the satellite is fully operational, commercial operators could have the capacity to deliver programs to all commercial television stations in Australia. This would increase the choice of programming available to the regional stations. Outside the service areas of existing regional commercial television stations, primarily remote areas, commercial programming will be available via direct reception from the satellite, of the RCTS service. (Question No. 1996) Mr Downer asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 8 October 1985: (1) Was Hong Kong initially included among the countries which were to be subject to the Andriessen Agreement to protect Australian beef markets in Asia from subsidised European Economic Community exports. (2) Why was Hong Kong subsequently excluded from this list. (3) Is he able to say how much subsidised beef the EEC has exported to Hong Kong since the Andriessen Agreement was signed. Mr Kerin —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) Australia has been seeking to ensure that EEC subsidies have the minimum possible impact on our markets. The objective through the Andriessen agreement was to restrict the use of subsidies as much as possible. A large number of countries including Hong Kong were considered by Australia in the run-up to negotiations with the EEC for inclusion in an agreement limiting the use of subsidies. Following negotiations, the agreement finally reached relates to a list of countries which did not include Hong Kong and some others. However, Australia's central objective was to ensure EEC subsidised beef was excluded from our major markets. Leaving aside the United States of America and Canada where reliance is being placed on other mechanisms to contain EEC competition, the Andriessen agreement covers almost 85 per cent of Australia's export markets for beef and veal. (3) Official Hong Kong statistics show imports of beef and veal from EEC countries from the beginning of February 1985 to the end of September as 208 tonnes. It is not possible to say precisely how much of this trade has been subsidised. (Question No. 2043) Mr Langmore asked the Minister for Science, upon notice, on 9 October 1985: (1) How many Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation staff have visited South Africa since January 1984 and for what purposes. (2) How many South Africans have visited CSIRO since January 1984 and for what purposes. Mr Barry Jones —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The number of staff who visited South Africa since January 1984 and the purposes of their visits are summarised in Table 1 attached. (2) The number of South Africans who have visited CSIRO since January 1984 and the purposes of their visits are summarized in Table 2 attached. Table 1 CSIRO STAFF VISITING SOUTH AFRICA SINCE JANUARY 1984 Division Number of visitors Reason for visit Applied Physics, Sydney... 1 Attend BELTCON-3 Conference. Animal Production, Sydney... 1 Attend and speak at two World Congresses on Sheep and Beef Cattle Breeding. Entomology, Canberra... 1 2 1/2 year posting at the Dung Beetle Research Unit in Pretoria. Entomology, Perth... 1 3 year posting at the Dung Beetle Research Unit in Pretoria. Entomology, Canberra... 1 Visit to the Dung Beetle Research Unit in Pretoria in order to monitor and supervise current research progress. 1 Visit to the Dung Beetle Research Unit to monitor current research progress and collect specimens. 1 Visit to the Dung Beetle Research Unit in order to collect specimens. Entomology, Queensland... 2 Attendance at the South African Entomological Conference. Study of the infestation of Salvinia molesta in Eastern Transvaal in order to discuss prospects of its biological control. 1 Discussions with officer-in-charge of the Dung Beetle Research Unit in Pretoria. Forest Research, Canberra... 1 Visiting various South African National Parks in order to monitor current afforestation progress. Tropical Crops and Pastures, Townsville 1 Collaborative work with Pasture scientists in the South African Department of Agriculture and Water Supply. Forest Research, Queensland... 1 Analysis of data on pine progeny tests which have been accumulated by the Forest Research Institute of South Africa. Wildlife and Rangelands Research, Alice Springs 1 6 month Research Fellowship with the South African Department of Agriculture and Water Supply to develop techniques to characterise range conditions and trends in savannah vegetation of the Northern Transvaal. Tropical Animal Science, Rockhampton 1 Presentation of paper at World Congress on Sheep and Cattle Breeding. Visit to Animal and Dairy Science Research Institute for research purposes. 1 Attendance at 2nd World Congress on Sheep and Cattle Breeding. Visiting farms and research institutions connected to Belmont Red/Bonsmara Project. Chemical and Wood Technology, Victoria 3 Attendance at the Forest Products Research International Symposium. Building Research, Victoria... 1 Attendance at the Forest Products Research International Symposium. Guest Professor at the University of Pretoria. Forest Research, Hobart... 1 Attendance at the Forest Products Research International Symposium. Forest Research, Mount Gambier... 1 Attendance at the Conference of Production of Fast Growing Plantations. Animal Health, Victoria... 1 Attendance at the 6th International IUPAC Symposium. Mineral Chemistry, Victoria... 1 Attendance at the Forest Mining Companies Symposium. Building Research, Victoria... 1 Attendance at the Innovations in Building Conference. Headquarters, Canberra... 1 Study Award Total... 26 Table 2 SUMMARY-SOUTH AFRICAN VISITORS TO CSIRO SINCE JANUARY 1984 Institute No. of visitors Purpose Institute of Biological Resources 1 5 Guest worker for 2 years. Collecting seeds/visits to the Seed Centre. 4 Attendance at conferences. 4 Consultation. 12 To discuss research activities of mutual interest in the management of forest, pasture, vegetation, game reserves, ecology or rangelands. Institute of Energy &Earth Resources 12 To discuss research activities of mutual interest in the minerals and energy area. Institute of Physical Sciences 1 3 Guest worker for 12 mths. To discuss research projects undertaken by staff in Divisions. Institute of Industrial Technology 1 3 Guest worker for 4 mths. Technical visits. Institute of Animal &Food Sciences 7 To discuss current research projects of mutual interest. Central Administration (HQ) 1 To discuss scientific administration and information networks. Total 54 (Question No. 2121) Mr Fife asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 10 October 1985: (1) What is the extent of overlapping State and Federal legislation in the primary industry area. (2) To what extent is this overlap (a) necessary and (b) unnecessary. (3) To what extent does this overlap add to rural costs. (4) What cost would be involved in the review of these legislative overlaps. (5) Is he undertaking any program of review into this issue. Mr Kerin —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) State and Federal legislation in the primary industry area overlaps only in the sense that provisions of State and Federal laws might apply to the same products or to the same activity. Because of constitutional and other constraints, however, there is no overlap in the legal sense-Federal legislation relates to international and interstate trade elements; State legislation relates to intra-State elements such as production, land use, pricing and transport. Because of these divisions of power, it is often necessary for the States and the Commonwealth to pass complementary legislation to implement an agreed program. (2) See (1). (3) Not applicable. (4) Not applicable. (5) As part of the Government's program of business deregulation, all Commonwealth primary industry legislation is being reviewed on a continuing basis. In addition, where it has been found that the practical implementation of complementary State and Federal legislation is imposing unnecessary costs, the Commonwealth has moved to remedy that situation by seeking the States' agreement to refer to the Commonwealth their powers on the issues concerned. An example of this is the Commonwealth's initiative in establishing a national meat inspection service. (Question No. 2422) Mr Simmons asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 14 November 1985: (1) What (a) individuals and (b) firms have received financial support from the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation for red meat marketing and research since 1 July 1984. (2) Will he provide (a) a financial analysis of such support and (b) a synopsis of results. Mr Kerin —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) In facilitating the sale of meat in Australia and overseas the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation engages industry consultants, research firms and other organisations to undertake special projects on behalf of the Corporation. It also provides market advice to companies/individuals and organisations who have novel ideas on product development, marketing and promotion of meat. Such advice is provided by AMLC as part of its day to day functions. The AMLC also undertakes expenditure on specific in-store promotions, trade fairs, meat cutting exhibitions etc, which support the promotion and sale of Australian meat and may supply product to support companies in promotional activities. The AMLC also provides direct financial assistance to individuals, companies and other organisations whose ideas and proposals on the development of new meat products and/or the marketing and promotion of meat are judged to be worthy. The AMLC advises that since 1 July 1984 expenditure under this category has been: Organisation Amount Purpose Comments Culinary Olympics Team $30,000 Promotion of Lamb Significant impact on food service sector WA Lamb Marketing Board $50,000 Promotion of Lamb Encourage lamb consumption Tasmanian Meat Industry Advisory Committee $30,000 Promotion of Lamb Encourage lamb consumption in Tasmania Deep Down Pty Ltd $3,500 To Develop Lamb Fast Food About to test market Tendapak Pty Ltd $25,000 To Develop New Meat Products Company now developing business plan Sabstar Pty Ltd $15,000 To Develop New Meat Products Pilot plant now constructed A. &J. Rich $4,500 Marketing Flavour Modified Lamb Sample product has been delivered to overseas markets Product Development International $39,000 To Develop New Lamb Products No product yet launched. Discussion continuing with the manufacturer WA Dept. of Agriculture $8,500 Deodorization of Sheepmeat Sample product soon to be despatched Vic. Dept. of Agriculture $66,000 To Develop Large Lean Lambs and Retail Products Results will have impact on production systems SA Lamb Committee $22,500 Investigate Boneless Lamb Cuts Retailers in SA encouraged to present boneless lamb cuts (Question No. 2427) Mr Staples asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 14 November 1985: (1) Is he able to say what the present position is of the complaint, jointly filed in the United States Court of International Trade in 1984, by the Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation, Thomas Borthwick and Sons (Australia) Limited and W. Angliss and Co. (Australia) Pty Ltd, concerning challenged limitations on meat imports. Mr Kerin —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The Australian Meat and Livestock Corporation in conjunction with Thomas Borthwick and Sons (Australia) Limited and W. Angliss and Co. (Australia) Pty Ltd., on 19 April 1984, lodged a formal complaint with the United States Court of International Trade seeking a judgment that under the Meat Import Act 1979 and the Agricultural Act 1956, the Meat Import Act's minimum access floor of 1.25 billion pounds for meat imports acts as an absolute minimum limit on aggregate US Meat Imports. The United States Meat Import Law requires the administration to impose quotas on supplying countries when estimated imports exceed a trigger level. The trigger level is calculated by a formula specified in the legislation. The United States Government was able to avoid imposing quotas in 1983 by the negotiation of voluntary restraint agreements with major suppliers including Australia. In June 1984 the Court of International Trade refused to grant an injunction to prevent the United States Government negotiating voluntary restraint agreements with supplying countries which limit US imports to less than the minimum access floor of 1.25 billion pounds annually. It was found that the 1979 Act did not restrict the President from negotiating voluntary restraint levels below the 1.25 billion pound minimum. The court did find that the United States action of restricting imports below the guaranteed floor level did cause material injury to the Australian Industry. The AMLC sought clarification of the judgment to determine whether the President has the discretion to negotiate voluntary restraint levels to the minimum access floor level even where the trigger level was below that floor. The court however declined to offer a judgment on the question as it was considered to be hypothetical at that time. The AMLC and the two exporters were invited to bring the matter before the court if the circumstances should actually arise. To date these circumstances have not arisen and accordingly the matter is in abeyance. (Question No. 2540) Mr Leo McLeay asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 19 November 1985: What is the procedure used in the Minister's Office to respond to petitions referred by the House of Representatives? Mr Kerin —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Petitions which have a bearing on my portfolio responsibilities are referred to my Department in respect of the issues raised. The concerns of petitioners are sympathetically considered in relation to the matters raised. I reply to the individual initiating the petition following its lodgement with the Tables Office. (Question No. 2545) Mr Leo McLeay asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 19 November 1985: What is the procedure used in the Minister's office to respond to petitions referred by the House of Representatives. Mr Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Petitions received in my office which are relevant to the transport portfolio are referred to the Department of Transport. The views expressed in the petitions are taken into account in the development and administration of policies and programs in the same way as the views expressed in direct representations received from other organisations and individuals. (Question No. 2559) Mr Hunt asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 19 November 1985: (1) Is it a fact that requests have been made under the Freedom of Information Act for confidential replies by beekeepers and honey packers to a request from his Department for their opinions on the role and functioning of the Australian Honey Board; if so, what does he intend to do to ensure the confidentiality of these replies is not broken and their contents made public. (2) Is the release of such information potentially damaging to future surveys requesting producer input into their industries. Mr Kerin —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The Department is currently undertaking a review of the role, powers and functions of the Australian Honey Board. To facilitate this a discussion paper titled `Review of the Australian Honey Board' was circulated to the industry in April this year. Subsequently the views of those people associated with the packing, sale and distribution of honey on the domestic and export market was sought in July. In September the Department received a request for access to these comments under the Freedom of Information Act. Consistent with the provisions of the Act all respondents were consulted to ascertain their views towards release of those comments. Only one respondent opposed disclosure in full while another asked that some deletions be made. (2) No. As illustrated in my response to (1) sensitive information provided to the Commonwealth by producers or packers is adequately protected from disclosure under the provisions of the Act. Appropriate appeal procedures exist to resolve any disagreement between parties over the release of such documents if this becomes necessary. (Question No. 2701) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 25 November 1985: (1) Has the Minister's attention been drawn to an advertisement in the Australian of 30 October 1985 in support of the Builders Labourers Federation, in which it was stated that the advertisement was supported by the (a) Abortion Counselling Service, (b) ACOA Rank and File Committee in Defence of Trade Union Rights, (c) ACT Shelter, (d) ACT Squatters Union, (e) ACT Youth Accommodation Group, (f) ACT Youth Forum, (g) Beryl Women's Refuge, (h) Campaign against Repression in the Pacific Area, (i) Canberra and South East Region Environment Centre, (j) Canberra Youth Refuge, (k) Chile Solidarity Committee, (l) Committee for Human Rights and Democracy in Turkey, (m) Committee in Solidarity with Central America, (n) Interchange Community Youth Support Scheme, (o) Jobless Action, (p) Jobline, (q) National Landrights Now Committee, (r) Photo Access, (s) Philippine Action Support Group, (t) Rape Crisis Centre, (u) Reachout, (v) Schools Against the Bomb, (w) Southern Africa Support Campaign of Australia, (x) Soweto Mobilisation Committee, (y) Students Against Apartheid, (z) Staff of Public Radio 2XX, (za) Toora - Single Women's Shelter, (zb) Women Against Racism and (zc) Trade Union Rights Committee. (2) Do any of the listed organisations receive financial support or grants from the Minister's Department or any statutory authority responsible to the Minister. (3) If so, has the Minister's Department or statutory authority received or searched the ACT Corporate Affairs Commission register for annual financial accounts and balance sheets of each organisation receiving funds. (4) Is each grant conditional upon (a) the submission of audited annual accounts and balance sheets and (b) a commitment to use the funds for the purpose for which the grant was made. (5) Does each grant permit use of funds contributed for political advertisements; if not, what checks have been made or will be made to ensure that the advertisement was not paid from grant funds. (6) Has each organisation receiving funds evidenced a capacity to raise money either in the past or in the year in question for its own purposes. (7) Have further applications for financial support been received or are likely to be received from each organisation; if so, will a check be made to ensure that the conditions of earlier grants have been honoured. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) No. (2) No. (3-7) See answer to (2). (Question No. 90) Mr Spender asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 27 February 1985: Will he bring up to date the information contained in his predecessor's answer to question No. 1539 of 1984 and add to it: (a) the number of Service Personnel, identified by Service and whether regular or reserve; (b) the number of civilians; and (c) the titles of Service units in each case. Mr Beazley —Further to my predecessor's answer to question No. 1539 (Hansard, 10 October 1984, page 2085-90), I provide the following information: Electorate Establishment/Unit Service Navy Regular Reserve Army Regular Reserve Air Force Regular Reserve Civil- ians Total resident per- sonnel Adelaide 41 Supply Battalion Army . . . . 12 . . . . . . 2 2 District Support Unit Adelaide Detachment Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . 4 Training Group Army . . . . 35 195 . . . . 7 . . 10 Royal South Australian Regiment Army . . . . 14 140 . . . . 1 . . 14 Psychological Unit Army . . . . 17 . . . . . . . . . . Adeliade University Regiment Army . . . . 10 346 . . . . 1 . . Defence Production Regional Office Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 . . Defence Force Recruiting Centre Tri-Service . . . . . . . . 35 . . 5 . . Security Branch Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . Naval Personnel Division Psychology Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . Directorate of Quality Assurance Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . RAAF Support Unit Air Force . . . . . . . . 35 . . . . . . Aston 7 Field Engineer Unit Army . . . . 14 272 . . . . 1 . . Ballarat Headquarters, 2 Royal Victoria Regiment and B Company, 2 Royal Victoria Regiment Army . . . . 14 109 . . . . 2 . . Army Career Information Centre, 2 Royal Victoria Regiment Army . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . 15 Transport Unit Army . . . . . . 11 . . . . . . . . Banks 3 Transport Squadron Army . . . . 5 61 . . . . . . . . District Support Unit, Liverpool Army . . . . 2 . . . . . . 5 225 Barker 27 Royal South Australian Regiment Admin Company Army . . . . 1 81 . . . . 1 . . Barton Headquarters, 4th Battalion New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 13 12 . . . . 1 . . Headquarters, 23 Field Regiment Army . . . . 1 66 . . . . 2 . . 2 Division, Royal Australian Army Band Army . . . . . . 33 . . . . . . . . Admin Company Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . . . 67 . . . . . . . . Bass Headquarters, 12 Independent Rifle Company Army . . . . 7 73 . . . . 1 . . 16 Field Battery, Launceston Army . . . . 7 73 . . . . 1 . . 10 Field Ambulance, Launceston Army . . . . 2 25 . . . . . . . . 12th Independent Rifle Company, (Scottsdale Detachment) Army . . . . . . 14 . . . . . . . . 6 Electrical &Mechanical Engineers Platoon Army . . . . . . 10 . . . . . . . . 16th Field Battery Army . . . . 7 74 . . . . 1 . . 12 Independent Rifle Company, George Town Army . . . . . . 32 . . . . . . . . Armed Forces Food and Science Establishment (Army) Army . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . 6 Army Recruiting Unit, Launceston Army . . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . Recruiting, Launceston Air Force . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . Batman Royal Victoria Regiment A Company 5/6 Battalion Army . . . . . . 52 . . . . 1 . . 3 Army Recruiting Unit Army . . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . Bendigo 3 Army Quality Assurance Unit Detachment Bendigo Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . Army Survey Regiment Army . . . . 262 23 . . . . 19 23 6 Platoon B Company Royal Victoria Regiment Army . . . . . . 13 . . . . 1 . . 15 Transport Squadron Army . . . . 6 109 . . . . 2 . . 3 Army Recruiting Unit Army . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . Ordnance Factory, Bendigo Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 647 . . Bennelong 4 Field Engineer Regiment Army . . . . 10 49 . . . . 1 . . 75 Water Transport Troop Army . . . . 2 15 . . . . . . . . 35 Water Transport Squadron 10 Terminal Regiment Army . . . . 92 . . . . . . 5 23 1 Watercraft Workshop Army . . . . 53 . . . . . . 1 2 Directorate of Quality Assurance Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . Blaxland Army Career Information Centre, Bankstown Army . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . Directorate of Quality Assurance Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 . . Engineering Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . Resident Engineer, Equipment Liason Office Air Force . . . . . . . . 20 . . . . . . Bonython 41 Supply Battalion Rapier Platoon Army . . . . 26 . . . . . . 44 7 Ikara Training Establishment Navy 22 . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . RAAF Base, Edinburgh Air Force . . . . . . . . 1967 164 120 or 105 583 Aircraft Research &Development Unit Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 . . Directorate of Quality Assurance Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 . . Inspector of Naval Ordnance Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 . . Defence Audit Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Security Branch Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 . . 3/9 South Australia Mounted Rifles A Squadron Army . . . . 10 168 . . . . 1 . . Defence Research Centre, Salisbury . . . . . . . . . . . . 2647 . . Boothby 27 Royal South Australia Regiment Army . . . . 11 149 . . . . 1 . . Braddon 44 Transport Squadron, Devonport Army . . . . 8 90 . . . . . . . . 44 Transport Squadron, Burnie Army . . . . . . 25 . . . . . . . . 44 Military District Reserve Band Ulverstone Army . . . . . . 21 . . . . . . . . Bradfield Headquarters 17 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 10 100 . . . . . . . . Brand 51 Supply Battalion Garden Island Army . . . . 4 . . . . . . 1 1 HMAS Stirling Navy 300 . . . . . . . . . . 32 59 Naval Officer Commanding WA Navy 83 . . . . . . . . . . 14 . . RAN Armament and Weapon Equipment Depot Navy 5 . . . . . . . . . . 14 . . Brisbane Headquarters, 1 Division Electrical and Mechanical Engineers Army . . . . 7 2 . . . . . . . . HQ 1 Division Medical Service Army . . . . 3 6 . . . . . . . . 8/9 Battalion Royal Australian Regiment Army . . . . 367 . . . . . . . . 87 1 Field Regiment Army . . . . 314 . . . . . . . . 75 1 Movement Control Unit Army . . . . 1 36 . . . . . . . . 2 Transport Squadron Army . . . . 5 93 . . . . . . . . 9 Battalion Royal Queensland Regiment Army . . . . 20 453 . . . . 1 . . Headquarters 1 Division Supply Company Army . . . . 9 2 . . . . . . . . 2/3 Field Engineer Regiment Army . . . . 262 . . . . . . . . 68 2/3 Field Engineer Workshop Army . . . . 27 . . 4 1 Training Group Enoggera Army . . . . 20 . . . . . . 2 6 11 Psychology Unit Army . . . . 7 . . . . . . . . . . 1 Signal Regiment and Workshops Army . . . . 290 . . . . . . . . 58 33 Treatment Section, 1st Div. Dental Unit Army . . . . 21 . . . . . . . . 6 6 Field Supply Company Army . . . . 35 . . . . . . . . 7 5 Transport Squadron 52nd Combat Supply Platoon Army . . . . 165 . . . . . . . . 50 Headquarters, 6 Brigade Army . . . . 76 . . . . . . 1 15 3/4 Cavalry Regiment Army . . . . 274 . . . . . . . . 51 1 Division Intelligence Unit Army . . . . 31 . . . . . . . . 3 139 Signals Squadron Army . . . . 84 . . . . . . . . 24 140 Signals Squadron Army . . . . 6 59 . . . . 1 141 Supply Company Army . . . . 33 . . . . . . 16 Headquarters, 1 Division Artillery Army . . . . 14 . . . . . . . . 2 Headquarters, 1 Division Engineers Army . . . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . 6 Battalion Royal Australian Regiment Army . . . . 496 . . 104 21 Psychology Unit Army . . . . . . 36 . . . . . . . . 1st Dental Unit Army . . . . . . 11 . . . . . . . . 1st Army Recruiting Unit Army . . . . 27 . . . . . . . . . . 9th Dental Unit Army . . . . 15 . . . . . . . . . . 20th Divisional Engineers Support Squadron and Workshop Army . . . . 135 . . . . . . . . 24 1st Royal Australian Army Pay Corps Unit Army . . . . . . 25 . . . . . . . . 1st Military District Band Army . . . . 48 . . . . . . . . . . 15th Dental Unit Army . . . . . . 10 . . . . . . . . 4 Preventive Medical Company Army . . . . 1 33 . . . . . . . . Headquarters, 7 Brigade Army . . . . 19 56 . . 7 . . . . 11 Field Ambulance Army . . . . 110 . . . . . . . . 72 131 Divisional Locating Battery Army . . . . 178 . . . . . . . . . . District Support Unit, Brisbane Army . . . . 103 . . . . . . 47 119 1 Field Survey Squadron Army . . . . 34 12 . . . . . . 7 1 Ordnance Service Unit/1 Ordnance Platoon Army . . . . 7 80 . . . . . . . . HQ 1 Division Transport Army . . . . 19 . . . . . . . . . . Brisbane Transport Unit Army . . . . 85 . . . . . . 6 . . 11 Supply Battalion Army . . . . 279 . . . . . . 306 . . HQ, 1 Platoon Army Special Investigation Army . . . . 10 3 . . . . 1 . . Headquarters, 1 Division Army . . . . 134 43 . . . . 13 10 Naval Personnel Division-Psychology Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . HMAS Moreton Navy 165 . . . . . . . . . . 9 . . Resident Naval Overseer Brisbane Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . Naval Officer Commanding Queensland Navy 44 . . . . . . . . . . 13 . . 5 Field Engineers Regiment Army . . . . 15 217 . . . . 1 . . 1 Military Police Company Army . . . . 74 30 . . . . . . . . 1 Division Royal Aust. Artillery Band Army . . . . . . 32 . . . . . . . . 1 Division Cash Office Army . . . . 6 2 . . . . . . . . Bruce 3 Army Quality Assurance Unit Rifles Mercedes Benz Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . Monash University Regiment Army . . . . 6 210 . . . . 1 . . Burke 5 Platoon, B Company, 2 Royal Victoria Rifles Army . . . . . . 14 . . . . . . . . 3 Army Quality Assurance Unit Detachment, Longlea Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . A Company, 1 Royal Victoria Regiment Sunbury Army . . . . . . 15 . . . . . . . . 3 Ordnance Service Detachment Army . . . . . . 35 . . . . . . . . B Squadron Troop, 4/19 Prince of Wales Light Horse Army . . . . . . 15 . . . . . . . . Proof and Experimental Establishment Graytown Army . . . . 44 . . . . . . 26 . . Engineering Development Establishment Proving Ground Army . . . . 2 . . . . . . 39 4 Somerton Armament Depot Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . Australian Counter Disaster Depot Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 . . Calare Inspector of Naval Ordnance, Lithgow Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . 7th and 8th Platoons, C Company, 17 Battalion, Royal New South Wales Regt Army . . . . 3 31 . . . . . . . . Small Arms Factory, Lithgow Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 . . 2 Army Quality Assurance Unit, Lithgow Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 . . 21 Supply Battalion, Bathurst Army . . . . 1 . . . . . . 2 . . 223 Supply Company, Marrangaroo Army . . . . 15 . . . . . . 38 16 12th Platoon D Company, 17th Battalion Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 3 26 . . . . . . . . Calwell 6 Receiving Troop Signal Regt Army . . . . 45 . . . . . . 3 15 3 Army Quality Assurance Unit Detachment Albion Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . A Company, 1 Royal Victoria Regiment Sunshine Army . . . . . . 35 . . . . . . . . Albion Explosives Factory Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . Canberra HMAS Harman Navy 378 . . . . . . . . . . 38 195 Australian National University Army . . . . 2 95 . . . . . . . . Company Sydney University Regt 69 Ground Liaison Section Army . . . . 3 2 . . . . . . . . Defence Force Careers Information Centre Army . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . CDSC Fyshwick Army . . . . 32 . . . . . . 23 . . Army Audio Visual Unit Army . . . . 19 . . . . . . 3 . . Air Force Personnel Records Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 . . Defence Central Stores Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 . . Canning Bushmead Rifle Range Army . . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . Capricornia District Support Unit Rockhampton Army . . . . 18 . . . . . . 4 2 42 Royal Queensland Regiment, Rockhampton Army . . . . 14 385 . . . . 3 . . Casey 3 Army Recruiting Unit Army . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . Chifley 2 Army Quality Assurance Unit Detachment St Mary's Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 . . Inspector of Naval Ordnance, St Mary's Navy Civil- ian . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 . . RAAF Telecommunications Unit, Sydney Air Force . . . . . . . . 89 . . . . . . 1 Central Ammunition Depot, Kingswood, 1 Camp Air Force 30 . . . . . . 221 3 291 156 Guided Weapons and Electronic Support Facility, St Mary's Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Munitions Filling Factory, St Mary's Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 778 . . Corio Army Career Information Centre, 3 Army Recruiting Unit Army . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . 10 Medium Regiment Army . . . . 16 178 . . . . 1 . . Deakin University Company Army . . . . 4 76 . . . . . . . . Government Aircraft Factory, Avalon Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 499 . . Corangamite Army Command and Staff College, Queenscliffe Army . . . . 160 . . . . . . 42 6 Cowper 2 Platoon, A Company, 41 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 4 98 . . . . 1 . . 11 Platoon, D Company, 2 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . . . 21 . . . . . . . . Cunningham B Company, 4 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 1 43 . . . . . . . . Defence Force Careers Information Centre Army . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . Recruiting, Wollongong Air Force . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . University of Wollongong Company, University of New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 2 74 . . . . 1 . . Curtin 51 Supply Battalion Army . . . . 54 . . . . . . 12 4 Special Air Service Regiment Army . . . . 434 15 . . . . 2 63 13 Field Squadron, Engineers Army . . . . 5 95 . . . . 1 . . Perth Transport Unit Army . . . . 27 . . . . . . . . 3 5 Military District Pipes and Drums Army . . . . . . 17 . . . . . . . . 5 Military District Band Army . . . . 37 . . . . . . . . . . 5 Military District Reserve Band Army . . . . . . 23 . . . . . . . . 11 Independent Rifle Company Army . . . . 6 68 . . . . 2 . . 5 Field Survey Squadron Army . . . . 50 16 . . . . . . . . 28 Independent Rifle Company Army . . . . 8 195 . . . . . . . . 22 Construction Squadron Army . . . . 189 . . . . . . 45 22 Construction Squadron Workshop Army . . . . 34 . . . . . . 5 . . 7 Field Battery Army . . . . 9 112 . . . . . . . . 5 Training Group Army . . . . 35 191 . . . . 2 . . 11 Dental Unit Army . . . . 10 . . . . . . . . . . 55 Military Police Platoon Army . . . . 12 . . . . . . . . . . Clearance Diving Team Navy 54 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Psychology Unit Army . . . . 1 25 . . . . . . . . RAAF Support Unit, Claremont Air Force . . . . . . . . 13 . . . . . . A Squadron, 10 Light Horse Army . . . . 11 147 . . . . 2 . . District Support Unit, Karakatta Army . . . . 53 1 . . . . 16 35 District Support Unit, Swanbourne Army . . . . 7 . . . . . . 16 . . Directorate of Quality Assurance, Subiaco Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Dawson 9 Field Ambulance Army . . . . 1 24 . . . . . . . . 42 Royal Queensland Regiment, Mackay Army . . . . 2 159 . . . . 1 . . Denison Headquarters, 6 Military District Army . . . . 34 44 . . . . 3 . . 16 Field Battery, Hobart Detachment Army . . . . 1 25 . . . . . . . . 146 Signals Squadron Army . . . . 5 52 . . . . . . . . 124 Signals Troop Army . . . . 11 . . . . . . . . . . 6 Intelligence Unit Army . . . . 1 17 . . . . . . . . 6 Movement Control Office Army . . . . 1 16 . . . . . . . . 6 Royal Australian Army Pay Corps Unit Army . . . . . . 20 . . . . . . . . 66 Military Police Platoon Army . . . . 1 17 . . . . . . . . 6 Military District Army Reserve Band Army . . . . 2 30 . . . . . . . . District Support Unit, Hobart Army . . . . 36 . . . . . . 13 34 6 Army Recruitment Unit Army . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . Headquarters, 10 Field Ambulance Army . . . . 5 65 . . . . . . . . 12 Field Squadron Army . . . . 5 67 . . . . . . . . 47 Transport Squadron Army . . . . 5 87 . . . . . . . . 611 Supply Company Army . . . . 32 . . . . . . 29 . . 6 Ordnance Platoon Army . . . . 2 19 . . . . . . . . Naval Staff Office Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . Hobart Workshop Platoon Army . . . . 19 . . . . . . 10 . . HMAS Huon Navy 21 . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . Naval Headquarters, Hobart Navy 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RAAF Support Unit, Hobart Air Force . . . . . . . . 7 1 . . . . Defence Regional Office Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 . . Defence Force Recruiting Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . Dundas Garden Island Dockyard, Ryde Annex Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 . . Dunkley Personnel Services Office, Frankston Navy 3 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . Eden-Monaro 4 Field Troop, 14 Field Squadron Army . . . . . . 37 . . . . 1 . . Fadden 106 Field Workshop Army . . . . 136 . . . . . . 20 . . Farrer 3 Army Quality Assurance Unit Detachment Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . 3 Army Recruiting Unit Army . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . A Squadron 8/13 Victorian Mounted Rifles Army . . . . 10 80 . . . . 2 . . Explosives Factory, Mulwala Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 326 . . 2 Royal Australian Army Pay Corps Unit Army . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . 331 Supply Company, 31 Supply Battalion Army . . . . 25 . . . . . . 42 8 Flinders Officer Cadet School, Portsea Army . . . . 344 . . . . . . 43 215 HMAS Cerebus Navy 1529 2 . . . . . . . . 143 364 Forde 2 Army Quality Assurance Unit Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. . Forrest 2nd Platoon 11 Independent Rifle Company, Bunbury Army . . . . 2 37 . . . . 1 . . 4th Platoon Independent Rifle Company, Albany Army . . . . 22 1 . . . . 20 . . 5th Platoon, 11 Independent Rifle Battalion, Collie . . . . . . 19 . . . . . . . . Franklin District Support Unit, Hobart Army . . . . 1 . . . . . . 6 . . 40 Independent Rifle Company, Huonville Army . . . . 1 23 . . . . 6 . . Headquarters, 40 Independent Rifle Company Army . . . . 6 62 . . . . . . . . Ammo Depot, 611 Supply Company Army . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . 8 Fraser Movement Control Office, Canberra Army . . . . 17 . . . . . . 2 . . A.C.T. Workshop Platoon Army . . . . 22 . . . . . . 1 3 135 Signals Squadron Army . . . . 81 16 . . . . 6 . . Royal Military College Army . . . . 739 3 . . . . 69 444 Royal Military College Band Army . . . . 46 . . . . . . . . . . 1 Psychology Research Unit Army . . . . 11 . . . . . . . . . . Naval Transmitter Station Navy 44 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chief Engineer, A.C.T. Army . . . . 22 . . . . . . 4 6 Battalion HQ, Support Company, and Admin Company, 3 Battalion Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 12 157 . . . . 3 . . Central Office Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,804 . . Navy Office, Russell/Campbell Park Offices Navy 985 27 . . . . . . . . 938 . . Air Force Office, Russell/Campbell Park Offices Air Force . . . . . . . . 891 14 170 . . Army Office, Russell/Campbell Park Offices Army . . . . 1,300 150 . . . . 180 . . HMAS Creswell Navy 310 1 . . . . . . . . 44 225 Target Services Group Navy 67 . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . RAAF Fairbairn Air Force 5 . . 5 . . 775 61 27 279 Office of Defence Production Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 434 . . Fremantle 5 Royal Australian Army Corps Unit Army . . . . . . 29 . . . . . . . . 5 Movement Control Unit Army . . . . 1 15 . . . . . . . . 5 Electrical and Mechanical Engineers Army . . . . 6 77 . . . . 1 . . Perth Water Transport Unit Army . . . . 15 57 . . . . 1 . . 5 Ordnance Platoon Army . . . . 2 27 . . . . 1 . . 51 Supply Battalion Army . . . . . . 12 . . . . . . . . 5 Dental Unit Army . . . . . . 10 . . . . . . . . HMAS Leeuwin Navy 41 . . . . . . . . . . 15 . . Personnel Services Office, Fremantle Navy 7 . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . Oil Fuel Installation Fremantle Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Principal Naval Overseer WA Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . 7 Field Ambulance Army . . . . 6 75 . . . . 1 . . General Overseer and Superintendent of Inspection Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . Naval Personnel Division Psychology Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . Gellibrand Engineering Development Establishment Army . . . . 21 3 . . . . 416 . . 3 Army Quality Assurance Unit HQ Army . . . . 3 . . . . . . 110 . . 3 Army Recuiting Unit Army . . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . D Company, 1st Battalion 1 Royal Victoria Regiment Army . . . . . . 32 . . . . . . . . 2 Commando Company, 1st Commando Regiment Army . . . . 12 115 . . . . 1 . . Ammunition Factory, Footscray Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 1247 . . Naval Supply Depot, Maribynong Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 . . Inspector of Naval Ordnance Navy 2 . . . . . . . . . . 56 . . Ordnance Factory, Mari- brynong Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 1020 . . Williamstown Naval Dock- yard Navy 46 . . . . . . . . . . 1985 . . Aust Frigate Project Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 . . 1 Stores Depot, Tottenham Air Force . . . . 1 . . 347 3 201 262 Materials Research Labora- tory Civilian . . . . . . . . 577 . . . . . . Explosives Factory, Mari- brynong Civilian . . . . . . . . 394 . . . . . . Gilmore 5 Platoon, B Company, 4 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . . . 22 . . . . . . . . Support Company, 3 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 1 26 . . . . 1 . . 9 Platoon, C Company Army . . . . . . 10 . . . . . . . . 17 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Australian Joint Anti-Submarine School Navy 13 . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . 71 Carrier Borne Ground Liaison Section Army . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . Australian Joint Acoustic Analysis Centre Navy 9 . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . HMAS Albatross Navy 1188 . . . . . . . . . . 118 223 Beecroft Missile Range Navy 12 . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . RAN Tactical Electronic Warfare Support Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Gippsland A Squadron, 4/19 Prince of Wales Light Horse Bairnsdale Army . . . . 1 18 . . . . . . . . A Squadron 4/19 Prince of Wales Light Horse Sale Army . . . . 2 32 . . . . . . . . 3 Communications Zone Recovery Platoon Army . . . . 2 46 . . . . 2 . . RAAF East Sale Air Force 10 . . 3 . . 605 4 38 214 Goldstein 132 Divisional Locating Battery Army . . . . 6 42 . . . . . . . . 3 Dental Unit Army . . . . 1 12 . . . . . . . . 6 Field Ambulance Army . . . . 5 90 . . . . . . . . Grayndler Directorate of Quality Assurance, Marrickville Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . Garden Island Dockyard, Marrickville Annex Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 . . Army Career Information Centre Training Depot Army . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . HMAS Nirimba Navy 793 4 . . . . . . . . 180 289 Greenway Support Company, 17 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 1 80 . . . . 1 . . Army Careers Information Centre Army . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . Grey 41 Supply Battalion Army . . . . 1 . . . . . . 2 . . District Support Unit, Adelaide El Alamain Detachment Army . . . . 3 . . . . . . 3 . . 10 Royal South Australia Regiment, a Company HQ 2nd Platoon Army . . . . 1 25 . . . . . . . . 10 Royal South Australia Regiment, A Company 1st Platoon Army . . . . . . 22 . . . . . . . . 10 Royal South Australia Regiment, A Company 3rd Platoon Army . . . . . . 15 . . . . . . . . 20 Transport Troop Army . . . . 1 28 . . . . 1 . . Defence Support Centre, Woomera Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 227 227 . . Security Branch Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . Griffith 1 Base Workshop Battalion Army . . . . 230 . . . . . . 138 68 Brisbane Water Transport Unit Army . . . . 15 94 . . . . 1 1 2 Field Hospital Army . . . . 4 107 . . . . 1 . . HMAS Tobruk, Army Detachment Army . . . . 14 . . . . . . 10 . . 4 Signals Regiment Army . . . . 177 . . . . . . 5 30 RAAF Support Unit, Brisbane Air Force . . . . . . . . 39 . . 6 . . Defence Production Regional Office Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 . . 1 Electrical &Mechanical Engineers Service Unit Army . . . . 10 151 . . . . 2 2 Headquarters, 1 Military District, Victoria Barracks Army . . . . 155 80 . . 93 3 . . Defence Audit Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 . . Directorate of Naval Recruiting Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Office of the Regional Secretary, Brisbane Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . Regional Advisory Services Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 . . Manpower Advisory Services Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . Civil Manpower Branch Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 . . Management and General Services Branch Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 . . Directorate of Quality Assurance Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 . . Groom 72 Electronic Warfare Squadron Army . . . . 123 . . . . . . . . 27 1st Aviation Regiment Army . . . . 67 9 . . . . . . 14 1st Aviation Regiment Workshop Army . . . . 28 . . . . . . . . 3 7 Signals Regiment Army 1 . . 232 13 . . . . . . 80 5 Base Workshop Battalion Army . . . . 247 1 . . . . 6 50 Headquarters, Army Aviation Centre Army . . . . 11 1 . . . . 1 . . Qld Agriculture College Training Unit Army . . . . 6 132 . . . . 1 . . School of Army, Army Aviation Centre Army . . . . 33 . . . . . . 1 2 Movement Control Office, Oakey Army . . . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . Base Support Unit Army . . . . 120 1 . . . . 37 16 25 Royal Queensland Regiment Army . . . . 15 192 . . . . 1 . . 173 General Support Squadron Army . . . . 124 . . . . . . . . 23 7 Stores Depot, Toowoomba Air Force . . . . . . . . 159 . . 156 62 Directorate of Quality Assurance Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 . . Gwydir 8 Squadron, 12/16 Hunter River Lancers Army . . . . 1 50 . . . . 1 . . Hawker 48 Field Battery Army . . . . 6 83 . . . . 1 1 41 Supply Battalion Army . . . . 38 1 . . . . 40 . . Vehicle Platoon, 41 Supply Battalion Army . . . . 11 . . . . . . 8 . . 4 Intelligence Unit Army . . . . 1 17 . . . . . . . . 4 Army Quality Assurance Unit Army . . . . 1 . . . . . . 44 . . 10 Dental Unit Army . . . . 7 . . . . . . . . . . 4 Military Police Company Army . . . . 17 51 . . . . 2 . . Headquarters, 4 Military District Army . . . . 69 92 . . . . 22 7 District Support Unit Adelaide Army . . . . 111 2 . . . . 8 8 District Support Unit Adelaide, Warradale Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . 4 Royal Australian Army Pay Corps Army . . . . . . 37 . . . . . . . . 10 Battalion Royal South Australia Regiment Band Keswich Army . . . . . . 33 . . . . . . . . 3 Field Squadron Army . . . . 8 59 . . . . . . . . 3 General Hospital Army . . . . 2 46 . . . . . . . . 4 Military District Band Army . . . . 34 . . . . . . . . 1 122 Signals Troop Army . . . . 12 . . . . . . . . . . Adelaide Transport Unit Army . . . . 39 . . . . . . 5 . . 8 Transport Squadron Army . . . . 5 98 . . . . 1 . . 4 Ordnance Platoon Army . . . . 2 29 . . . . . . . . 4 Electical &Mechanical Engineers Service Unit Army . . . . 6 57 . . . . . . . . 4 Field Survey Squadron Army . . . . 49 8 . . . . . . . . 3 Field Ambulance Army . . . . 5 54 . . . . 1 . . 14 Psychology Unit Army . . . . 6 30 . . . . . . . . 4 Dental Unit Army . . . . 1 15 . . . . . . . . Adelaide Workshop Comp- any Army . . . . 87 . . . . . . 23 . . 4 Movement Control Unit Army . . . . 1 23 . . . . . . . . Defence Audit Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . Regional Office Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . Management Advisory Serv- ices Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Civil Manpower Branch Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 . . Regional Finance Branch Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 . . Management and General Services Branch Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 . . Henty 3 Ordnance Service Unit Army . . . . 4 39 . . . . 1 . . Herbert Field Force Battle School Army . . . . 15 . . . . . . 1 4 31 Independent Rifle Company, Royal Queensland Regiment Army . . . . 9 185 . . . . . . . . 102 Field Workshop Army . . . . 122 . . . . . . . . 22 1 Royal Australia Regiment Army . . . . 684 . . . . . . . . 299 HQ 11 Field Force Group Army . . . . 16 46 . . . . 1 . . 11 Electrical &Mechanical Engineering Platoon Army . . . . 1 37 . . . . . . . . 4 Transport Squadron Army . . . . 4 86 . . . . . . . . 9 Field Ambulance Army . . . . 9 129 . . . . . . . . 4 Camp Hospital Army . . . . 43 . . . . . . 6 7 District Support Group, Townsville Army . . . . 145 6 . . . . 89 24 B Squadron, 3/4 Cavalry Regiment Army . . . . 126 . . . . . . . . 36 North Queensland Workshop Company Army . . . . 77 . . . . . . 10 14 103 Signals Squadron Army . . . . 121 . . . . . . . . 58 18 Field Squadron, 2/3 Field Engineers Army . . . . 222 . . . . . . . . 91 162 Reconnaissance Squadron Army . . . . 81 . . . . . . . . 14 70 Ground Liaison Squadron Army . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . 2/3 Field Engineer Regiment Workshop Army . . . . 29 . . . . . . . . 8 3 Field Supply Company Army . . . . 57 . . . . . . . . 11 29 Combat Supply Platoon Army . . . . 21 . . . . . . . . 6 Headquarters 3 Brigade Army . . . . 129 . . . . . . 1 33 4 Field Regiment, Royal Australian Artillery Army . . . . 332 . . . . . . . . 133 2 Field Supply Battalion Army . . . . 206 . . . . . . 32 68 Townsville Transport Unit Army . . . . 62 . . . . . . 2 8 9 Transport Squadron Army . . . . 149 . . . . . . . . 38 2/4 Royal Australia Regiment Army . . . . 680 . . . . . . . . 296 92 Military Police Platoon, 9 Military Police Company Army . . . . 27 1 . . . . 3 . . 16 Treatment Section Army . . . . 25 . . . . . . . . 4 1 Division Postal Unit Army . . . . 10 . . . . . . . . . . RAAF Base, Townsville Air Force 4 . . 4 . . 509 81 32 69 11 Training Group, Townsville Army . . . . 4 111 . . . . 1 . . Office of Regional Secretary, Townsville Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Finance Branch, Townsville Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . Civil Manpower Branch, Townsville Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . Holt Army Career Information Cente 3 Army Recruiting Unit Army . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . Hughes 1 Field Squadron, 2/3 Field Engineers Army . . . . 193 . . . . . . . . . . 17 Construction Squadron Army . . . . 227 . . . . . . . . . . 3 Royal Australia Regiment Army . . . . 496 . . . . . . . . 226 21 Supply Battalion Army . . . . 297 . . . . . . 326 . . 161 Reconnaissance Squadron Army . . . . 82 . . . . . . . . . . 8/12 Medium Regiment Army . . . . 421 . . . . . . . . 158 1 Field Supply Company Army . . . . 33 . . . . . . . . 18 2 Cavalry Regiment Army . . . . 315 . . . . . . 1 143 Headquarters, 1 Brigade Army . . . . 92 . . . . . . 3 2 7 Dental Unit Moorebank Army . . . . 1 . . . . . . 1 . . 104 Signals Squadron Army . . . . 84 . . . . . . . . 31 Liverpool Transport Unit Army . . . . 69 . . . . . . 2 . . Heaquarters, 1 Construction Regiment Army . . . . 29 2 . . . . . . . . 5/7 Royal Australia Regiment Army . . . . 474 . . . . . . . . 287 District Support Unit, Liverpool Army . . . . 18 2 . . . . 15 . . 1 Military Corrective Establishment Navy 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . School of Military Engineers, Casula Army . . . . 441 . . . . . . 53 263 2 Base Workshop Battalion Army . . . . 201 . . . . . . 138 57 35 Treatment Section, 1st Divisional Dental Unit Army . . . . 22 . . . . . . . . . . 85 Transport Troop and 18 Transport Squadron Workshop Army . . . . 79 . . . . . . . . . . Hume B Company 4 Platoon 3 Royal New South Regiment Army . . . . 3 33 . . . . 1 . . 172 Psychology Unit Army . . . . 8 . . . . . . . . . . 7 Camp Hospital Army . . . . 35 . . . . . . 10 . . 1 Recruit Traininig Battalion Army . . . . 834 . . . . . . 39 765 1 Recruit Training Battalion Band Army . . . . 33 . . . . . . . . . . 12 Dental Unit Army . . . . 13 . . . . . . 1 . . Regional Works Staff South Army . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . Movement Control Office, Wagga Army . . . . 6 . . . . . . . . . . Hunter 2 Platoon, A Company, 2 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . . . 13 . . . . . . . . 3 Platoon, A Company, 2 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . . . 14 . . . . . . . . 211 Supply Company Army . . . . 26 . . . . . . 24 . . 222 Supply Company Army . . . . 23 . . . . . . 35 5 Infantry Centre Army . . . . 872 . . . . . . 28 745 23 Military Police Platoon Army . . . . 6 . . . . . . . . . . Singleton Workshop Platoon Army . . . . 27 . . . . . . 13 . . District Support Unit, Singleton Army . . . . 76 2 . . . . 39 66 Singleton Transport Unit Army . . . . 48 . . . . . . 7 . . 18 Dental Unit Army . . . . 7 . . . . . . . . 3 8 Camp Hospital Army . . . . 15 15 . . . . 3 4 1 Field Ambulance Maitland Army . . . . 15 . . . . . . . . . . Indi 31 Supply Battalion Army . . . . 150 1 . . . . 231 28 4 Base Workshop Battalion Army . . . . 144 . . . . . . 152 43 District Support Unit, Albury/Wodonga Army . . . . 128 2 . . . . 59 31 Albury Transport Unit Army . . . . 53 . . . . . . 4 10 Army Map Depot Army . . . . 11 . . . . . . . . 4 6 Camp Hospital Army . . . . 31 . . . . . . 3 30 19 Dental Unit Army . . . . 11 . . . . . . . . 3 34 Military Police Platoon Army . . . . 14 . . . . . . . . 2 Army Apprentice School Army . . . . 375 . . . . . . 139 232 School of Military Survey Army . . . . 81 . . . . . . 2 39 Survey Detachment Army . . . . 9 6 . . . . . . . . Royal Australian Electrical &Mechanical Engineering Training Centre Army . . . . 207 3 . . . . 66 31 Royal Australian Army Ordinance Corps Centre Army . . . . 150 2 . . . . 35 22 A Squadron, 8/13 Victoria Mounted Rifles Army . . . . 3 69 . . . . 2 . . Army Special Investigation Branch Detachment Army . . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . Regional Engineer (Northern) HQ 3rd Military District Army . . . . 4 . . . . . . 1 1 Regional Office, Civil Manpower Branch Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . Finance Branch Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . Training and Logistic Centre, Bandiana Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . Mulwara Explosives Factory Detachment Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . Isaacs 3 Ordinance Service Platoon Army . . . . 2 33 . . . . . . . . Jagajaga Watsonia Detachment Army . . . . 1 . . . . . . 1 . . 6 Signals Regiment Army . . . . 216 35 . . . . 2 46 127 Signals Squadron Army . . . . 80 . . . . . . . . . . 13 Psychology Unit Army . . . . 11 . . . . . . . . 5 8 Dental Unit Army . . . . 23 . . . . . . . . 4 District Support Unit, Watsonia Army . . . . 87 . . . . . . 62 83 Schools of Signals Army . . . . 317 2 . . . . 17 137 2 Signals Regiment Army . . . . 234 . . . . . . 1 54 126 Signals Squadron Commando Regiment Army . . . . 26 82 . . . . 1 4 Melbourne Workshop Company Detachment, Watsonia Army . . . . 1 . . . . . . 1 . . Land Warfare Centre Victoria Detachment Army . . . . 10 . . . . . . 1 . . School of Music, Watsonia Navy/Army 23 . . 39 . . . . . . . . 26 Regional Office, Finance Branch Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . Kalgoorlie Naval Communications Station, Harold E. Holt Navy 46 . . . . . . . . . . 218 . . RAAF Base, Learmonth Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2 Pilbara Regiment Army . . . . 10 134 . . . . 1 . . 1 &2 Platoons, A Company 16th Battalion Royal Western Austalian Regiment, Geraldton Army . . . . 1 31 . . . . . . . . Kingsford- Smith Headquarters, 18 Transport Squadron 88 Transport Troop Army . . . . 46 . . . . . . . . 20 Headquarters, 7 Dental Unit Army . . . . 21 . . . . . . . . . . Headquarters, Sydney University Regiment Army . . . . 13 275 . . . . 3 . . Sydney Workshop Company Army . . . . 64 . . . . . . 27 . . District Support Unit, Randwick Army . . . . 73 . . . . . . 35 271 231/232 Supply Company Army . . . . 46 . . . . . . 44 . . 2 Field Survey Squadron Army . . . . 53 . . . . . . . . . . Sydney Transport Unit Army . . . . 36 . . . . . . . . . . 9 Divisional Topographical Survey Troop . . . . . . 6 11 . . . . . . . . Garden Island Dockyard, Roseberry Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 . . Engineering Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . Inspector of Naval Ordnance, Zetland Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 . . Resident Engineer/Equipment Liason Office, Qantas Mascot Air Force . . . . 10 . . . . . . 3 . . RAAF Movement Control Office, Mascot Air Force . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . Materials Research Laboratory, Alexandria Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 . . Directorate of Quality Assurance, Alexandria Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . Directorate of Quality Assurance, Zetland Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . Engineering Mascot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . Navy Supply Technical Services Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 . . Navy Supply Administration Warehousing and Services Zetland Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 916 . . Navy Supply, Victualling, Zetland Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 . . Navy Supply, Machinery, Zetland Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 . . Navy Supply, General, Zetland Navy 95 . . . . . . . . . . 93 . . Navy Supply, Electrical, Zetland Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 . . Kooyong Army Careers Information Centre 3 Army Recruiting Unit Army . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . 3 Military Police Unit Army Reserve . . . . . . 49 . . . . . . . . Headquarters, 5/6 Royal Victoria Regiment Army . . . . 12 151 . . . . 1 . . Support Company, 5/6 Royal Victoria Regiment Army . . . . . . 48 . . . . . . . . Engineer Cadet Squadron Frognau, Canterbury Air Force . . . . . . . . 239 4 30 154 Lalor 6 Signals Regiment, Transmitting Troop Army . . . . 36 . . . . . . 3 14 RAAF Base, Laverton Air Force 4 . . 3 . . 1355 162 89 410 RAAF Base, Point Cook Air Force 4 . . 38 . . 877 4 63 607 Albion Explosives Factory Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 217 . . Leichhardt HMAS Cairns Navy 144 . . . . . . . . . . 2 1 Resident Naval Overseer Cairns Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . Joint Tropical Trials Establishment, Innisfail Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 . . Lindsay Headquarters, 1 Ground Liaison Group Army . . . . 6 . . . . . . 1 . . 5 Field Squadron Army . . . . 2 82 . . . . 1 . . 212 Supply Company Army . . . . 56 . . . . . . 79 11 133 Signals Squadron Army . . . . 72 . . . . . . 11 20 RAAF Support Unit, Glenbrook Air Force 1 . . 7 . . 408 4 43 94 Headquarters Group Company, Penrith Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 . . Garden Island Dockyard, Kingswood Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Naval Stores Centre, Kingswood Navy 26 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RAN Missile Maintenance Establishment Navy 1 . . . . . . . . . . 134 . . Armament Depot, Kingswood Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 . . Lowe HQ 2 Electrical &Mechanical Engineers Service Unit and 2 Communications Zone Recovery Platoon Army . . . . 5 36 . . . . 2 . . 2 Army Quality Assurance Unit Army . . . . 3 . . . . . . 78 . . Lyons 40 Independent Rifle Company, New Norfolk Detachment Army . . . . . . 13 . . . . . . . . District Support Unit, Buckland Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . 6 Electrical &Mechanical Engineers Platoon, Brighton Army . . . . 2 21 . . . . . . . . 6 Training Group, Brighton Army . . . . 12 113 . . . . . . . . TC Simpson Rifle Range Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . District Support Unit, Brighton Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . 40 Independent Rifle Company, Queenstown De- tachment Army . . . . . . 16 . . . . . . . . 12 Independent Rifle Company, Longford, De- tachment Army . . . . . . 19 . . . . . . . . 12 Independent Rifle Company, Deloraine Army . . . . . . 14 . . . . . . . . Brighton Camp Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Pontville Rifle Range Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Lyne Army Component Australian Joint Warfare Establishment, Williamtown Army . . . . 11 . . . . . . . . . . 5 FMG Platoon Army . . . . . . 14 . . . . . . . . 2 Royal New South Wales Regiment D Company (A) 2 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 2 31 . . . . 1 . . Parachute Training School, Williamtown Army . . . . 71 . . . . . . 4 15 66 Ground Liaison Section Army . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . RAAF Base Williamtown Air Force 6 . . 10 . . 1855 111 81 471 Base Squadron, Williamtown Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 2 Mooring Facilities, Newcastle Air Force . . . . . . . . 16 . . . . . . Macarthur Radio Receiving Station, Bringelly Air Force . . . . . . . . 19 . . 1 9 McEwen 17 Dental Unit Army . . . . 11 . . . . . . . . 2 Army School of Transport Army . . . . 288 . . . . . . 34 150 Armoured Centre Army . . . . 315 . . . . . . 18 180 1 Armoured Regiment Army . . . . 471 . . . . . . 18 166 Regional Engineer (Central) HQ 3rd Military District Army . . . . 5 . . . . . . 1 . . Other Ranks Training Wing 3rd Training Group Army . . . . 22 77 . . . . 1 4 District Support Group, Puckapunyal Army . . . . 151 . . . . . . 101 43 26 Transport Squadron Army . . . . 146 . . . . . . . . . . Puckapunyal Transport Unit Army . . . . 55 . . . . . . 2 9 331 Supply Company Army . . . . 73 . . . . . . 58 14 Puckapunyal Workshop Company Army . . . . 125 . . . . . . 31 41 3 Camp Hospital Army . . . . 48 . . . . . . 17 13 Army School of Catering Army . . . . 89 4 . . . . 56 . . 21st Construction Squadron Army . . . . 214 . . . . . . . . 70 Regional Office, Finance Branch Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . Regional Office, Civil Manpower Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . Mackellar 28 Field Battery Army . . . . 1 40 . . . . 1 . . Pittwater Diving Complex Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . McMillan 39 Electrical and Mechanical Squadron 6 Engineer Group Army . . . . . . 91 . . . . . . . . A Squadron Troop, 4/19 Prince of Wales Light Horse Army . . . . 1 35 . . . . . . . . 38 Field Squadron, 7 Field Engineer Regiment Army . . . . 2 58 . . . . 1 . . McPherson School of Military Intel- ligence Army . . . . 24 . . . . . . . . 3 Land Warfare Centre Army . . . . 397 2 . . . . 72 184 Canungra Transport Unit Army . . . . 70 . . . . . . . . 32 Macquarie 68 Ground Liaison Section Army . . . . 4 . . . . . . 1 . . RAAF Base, Richmond Air Force 6 . . 55 . . 2611 191 103 598 HQ Log Comd Br Duty RAAF Base, Richmond Army . . . . 3 3 . . . . . . . . 176 Air Despatch Squadron Army . . . . 99 . . . . . . 1 30 3 RAAF Hospital, Richmond Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 . . Base Squadron, Richmond Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 . . Air Transport &Telecommunications Unit Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . HQ 1 Air Transport, Support Regiment and 2nd Aerial Delivery Equipment Platoon Army . . . . 23 . . . . . . 1 8 RAAF Londonderry Air Force . . . . . . . . 25 . . . . . . Air Movement Training and Development Unit Army . . . . 23 . . . . . . 1 1 Makin Aircraft Engineering Workshop, Pooraka Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 . . Mallee C Company, 2 Royal Victoria Regiment Army . . . . 1 54 . . . . . . . . 15 Transport Company Army . . . . 1 53 . . . . 1 . . Maranoa 131 Supply Company Army . . . . 29 . . . . . . 52 3 Mari- byrnong Headquarters, 1 Royal Victoria Regiment Army . . . . 12 91 . . . . 1 . . Mayo 16 Air Defence Regiment Army . . . . 194 . . . . . . . . 14 District Support Unit Adelaide, Murray Bridge Detachment Army . . . . 5 . . . . . . 4 . . District Support Unit Adelaide, Woodside Army . . . . 13 . . . . . . 9 . . 16 Air Defence Workshop Army . . . . 72 . . . . . . . . 14 111 Air Defence Battery (Light) Army . . . . 85 . . . . . . . . 13 27 Royal South Australian Regiment Sustained Fire Machine Gun Support Army Company Army . . . . . . 32 . . . . 1 . . Melbourne Headquarters, 4 Brigade Army . . . . 6 31 . . . . 1 . . Regimental Headquarters/Training Squadron 4/19 Prince of Wales Light Horse, Fitzroy Army . . . . 5 32 . . . . . . . . 3 Division Intelligence Unit Army . . . . 1 44 . . . . . . . . HQ B, Technical Support Band, 4/19 Prince of Wales Light Horse (Carlton) Army . . . . 9 122 . . . . . . . . 3 Psychology Unit Army . . . . . . 41 . . . . . . . . 108 Signals Squadron Army . . . . 6 67 . . . . . . . . Melbourne Workshop Company Detachment Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . 3 Royal Australian Army Pay Corps Unit Army . . . . 1 57 . . . . . . . . Melbourne University Regi- ment Army . . . . 9 297 . . . . 1 . . Defence Production Regional Office Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 433 . . Melbourne Ports District Support Unit Melbourne Army . . . . 78 . . . . . . 20 9 Melbourne Water Transport Unit Army . . . . 8 54 . . . . . . . . 3 Movement Control Unit Army . . . . 1 27 . . . . . . . . Melbourne Workshop Comp- any Army . . . . 26 . . . . . . 38 . . Melbourne Transport Unit, Movement Control Office Army . . . . 35 . . . . . . 3 14 HQ 3 Platoon Army Special Investigations Branch Unit, 3 Military Policy Company Army . . . . 2 . . . . . . 1 . . Melbourne Section Army Special Investigations Branch Unit 3 Military Police Company Army . . . . 5 4 . . . . . . . . 700 Signals Troop Army . . . . 5 . . . . . . . . . . 3 Military Police Company Army . . . . 40 . . . . . . . . 8 Maintenance Engineers Agency Army . . . . 85 1 . . . . 40 . . 3 Electrical &Mechanical Engineers Service Unit Army . . . . 8 6 . . . . 1 . . Army Health Records Office Army . . . . 10 . . . . . . 17 . . Headquarters, 3 Division Army . . . . 32 74 . . . . 13 . . Headquarters, Logistics Command Army . . . . 246 7 . . . . 474 . . 3 Army Quality Assurance Unit Detachment Industrial Products Group Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 . . 3 Army Recruiting Unit Army . . . . 23 . . . . . . . . . . Headquarters, 6 Engineers Group Army . . . . 14 53 . . . . 1 . . Headquarters, 22 Construction Regiment Army . . . . . . 20 . . . . . . . . 105 Construction Squadron Army . . . . . . 94 . . . . . . . . 3 Preventive Medicine Company Army . . . . 1 38 . . . . . . . . Joint Telecommunications Unit Tri-Service 50 . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 106 Construction Squadron Army . . . . . . 90 . . . . . . . . 107 Plant Squadron/Heavy Army . . . . . . 93 . . . . . . . . 203 Works Section Army . . . . . . 8 . . . . . . . . 91 Forestry Squadron Army . . . . . . 75 . . . . . . . . Headquarters, 3 Training Group Army . . . . 28 149 . . . . 5 . . Headquarters, 3 Military District Army . . . . 153 53 . . . . 60 . . Joint Telecommunications Unit, Melbourne Army . . . . 93 . . . . . . . . . . Naval Officer Commanding, Victoria Navy 18 1 . . . . . . . . 16 . . HMAS Lonsdale Navy 184 3 . . . . . . . . 12 96 HMAS Lonsdale Navy 184 3 . . . . . . . . 12 96 Naval Communications-Distributing Authority Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 . . General Overseer and Superintendant of Inspection, Victoria Navy 1 . . . . . . . . . . 37 96 Defence Signals Division Navy 20 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . Director of Naval Codification and Cataloguing Navy 1 . . . . . . . . . . 77 . . RAAF Support Unit, Melbourne Air Force 2 . . . . . . 1 568 . . 1 196 . . Aeronautical Research Laboratories, Fisherman's Bend Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 482 . . Government Aircraft Factory, Fisherman's Bend Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 483 . . Central Office Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 445 . . Office of Regional Secretary Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 603 . . Moore 51 Supply Battalion Army . . . . 21 . . . . . . 59 . . District Support Unit, Perth Army . . . . 5 . . . . . . . . 5 Perth Workshop Company Army . . . . 75 . . . . . . 22 6 RAAF Base, Pearce Air Force . . . . 4 . . 105 157 35 242 Caversham Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 Moreton 1 Military Hospital, Yeronga Army . . . . 128 1 . . . . 33 44 1 Intelligence Unit Army . . . . 1 31 . . . . . . . . 5/11 Field Regiment, Royal Australian Army Army . . . . 16 258 . . . . 3 . . 67 Ground Liaison Squadron Army . . . . 5 1 . . . . . . 1 Murray HQ A company, 3 Platoon, A Company, 4 Platoon, A Company, 2 Royal Victoria Regiment . . . . 3 76 . . . . 2 . . Newcastle 615 Signals Troop Army . . . . 6 . . . . . . . . . . 14 Field Squadron, 4 Field Engineers Regiment Army . . . . 2 42 . . . . 1 . . Headquarters/Support Company/Admin Coy 2 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 14 119 . . . . 2 . . District Support Unit Singleton Detachment, Adams- town Army . . . . 3 . . . . . . 8 . . Defence Force Careers Information Centre Army . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . University of Newcastle Company, University of New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 2 48 . . . . 1 . . Recruiting, Newcastle Air Force . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . 130 Signals Squadron, Fort Wallace Army . . . . 55 . . . . . . 8 27 Naval Quality Assurance Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . Naval Materiel-Minehunter Inshore Project Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . Directorate of Quality Assurance Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . New England Substained Fire Machine Gun Platoon, 41 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . . . 21 . . . . . . . . HQ, Technical Support Squadron, 12/16 Hunter River Lancers Army . . . . 13 57 . . . . 3 . . New England University Company Army . . . . 2 55 . . . . 1 . . A Squadron, 12/16 Hunter River Lancers Army . . . . 1 46 . . . . . . . . Northern Territory Army Component, HMAS `Coonawarra' Army . . . . 42 . . . . . . . . . . Headquarters, 7 Military District Army . . . . 99 22 . . . . 34 52 Norforce Army . . . . 35 170 . . . . 1 . . RAAF Base, Darwin Air Force 3 . . 1 . . 934 12 48 479 Base Squadron, Darwin Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 3 2 Cry Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Headquarters, Darwin Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Base Squadron, Darwin-Tindal Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . Project Jindalee Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2 Joint Deep Space Research Facility Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 36 Joint Deep Space Communications Station Tri-service . . . . . . 276 . . . . 202 . . SRO (NT) Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 1 HMAS `Coonawarra' Navy 213 . . . . . . . . . . 40 360 7 Military District, Kimbolton Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Command Personnel Service Office Navy 4 . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Naval Headquarters, Larra- keyah Navy 18 . . . . . . . . . . 1 20 Darwin Naval Base Navy 75 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Oil Fuel Installation Navy 2 . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 North Sydney 1 General Hospital Army . . . . 2 61 . . . . 1 . . 7 Field Regiment Army . . . . 12 25 . . . . 2 . . 1 Field Ambulance, Wil- loughby Army . . . . 6 48 . . . . . . . . Superintendant Aircraft Maintenance and Repairs Navy 27 . . . . . . . . . . 68 . . Ran Torpedo Maintenance Establishment Navy 7 . . . . . . . . . . 117 . . Ran Trials and Assessing Unit Navy 52 . . . . . . . . . . 58 . . Hydrographer, Ran Navy 11 . . . . . . . . . . 74 . . HMAS Waterhen Navy 261 . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . Garden Island Dockyard, North Sydney Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 . . HMAS Platypus Navy 261 2 . . . . . . . . 7 . . Headquarters, RAAF Support Unit, Sydney Air Force . . . . . . . . 37 1 4 . . Navy Supply, Armament Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 . . Navy Supply, Air Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 . . RAAF Police, Neutral Bay Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . O'Connor 51 Supply Battalion, Camp- earmark Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . 3 Platoon A Company, 16 Royal Western Australia Regiment Army . . . . 1 29 . . . . . . . . District Support Unit, Northam Army . . . . 6 . . . . . . . . 6 11 Independent Rifle Company, 3 Platoon Army . . . . . . 26 . . . . 1 . . Oxley RAAF Base, Amberley Air Force 2 . . 6 . . 2624 212 96 347 3 Aircraft Depot, Amberley Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Headquarters, Amberley Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Base Squadron, Amberley Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 . . 482 Maintenance Squadron, Amberley Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 . . Page Headquarters, 1 + 3 Platoons, A Company, 41 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 1 71 . . . . 2 . . Parkes 221 Supply Company, Bogan Gate Army . . . . 19 . . . . . . 28 6 10 and 11 Platoon, D Company, 17 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . . . 70 . . . . . . . . 2 Stores Depot, Detachment, Dubbo Air Force . . . . . . . . 19 . . 45 17 Directoriate of Quality Assurance Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Parramatta 1/15 Royal New South Wales Lances Army . . . . 16 298 . . . . 1 . . Defence Force Recruitment Information Centre Army . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . Recruiting, Parramatta Air Force . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . Perth 5 Army Recruiting Unit Army . . . . 15 . . . . . . . . . . 5 Intelligence Unit (Field Force) Army . . . . 1 12 . . . . . . . . 15 Psychology Unit Army . . . . 4 . . . . . . 3 . . 109 Signals Squadron Army . . . . 7 52 . . . .1 . . District Support Unit, Perth Army . . . . 10 . . . . . .3 . . Headquarters, 5 Military District Army . . . . 79 56 . . . . 36 . . 123 Signals Troop Army . . . . 18 . . . . . . . . . . Defence Production Regional Office, Perth Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 . . Western Australia University Regiment Army . . . . 7 238 . . . . 2 . . Defence Force Recruiting Centre (RAAF Psy- chology) Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . Defence Regional Office Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 . . Directorate of Quality Assurance Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . Phillip 2 Division Intelligence Unit Army . . . . 1 20 . . . . . . . . 2 Preventive Medical Company Army . . . . 1 27 . . . . 1 . . University of New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 13 245 . . . . 3 . . HQ 9th Transport Regiment Army . . . . 18 . . . . . . . . . . Naval Stores Centre, Randwick Navy 5 . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . 19th Chief Engineer Works Army . . . . 26 26 . . . . . . . . District Support Unit Randwick, Kingsford Army . . . .p . . . . . . . . 25 . . 1st Commando Regiment Army . . . . 11 13 . . . . . . . . Port Adelaide District Support Unit Adelaide, Dean Range Detachment Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . 10 Royal South Australia Regiment, Alberton (5th Platoon B Company) Army . . . . . . 23 . . . . 1 . . HMAS Encounter Navy 41 . . . . . . . . . . 15 . . District Support Unit Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . Rankin 49 Royal Queensland Regiment Army . . . . 6 408 . . . . . . . . 1 Training Group Army . . . . 39 284 . . . . 6 . . 2/14 Light Horse Regiment Queensland Mounted Infantry Army . . . . 15 281 . . . . 1 . . Reid 39 Air Equipment Platoon Army . . . . 30 . . . . . . . . . . 142 Signals Squadron Army . . . . 6 100 . . . . . . . . C Company, 4 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 1 78 . . . . 1 . . 177 Air Dispatch Squadron Army . . . . 6 80 . . . . 1 . . Headquarters, 5 Brigade Army . . . . 5 35 . . . . 2 . . Naval Stores Centre, Newington Navy 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Stores Depot, Regents Park/Chester Hill/ Villawood Air Force . . . . . . . . 415 . . 254 or 250 121 Directorate of Quality Assurance, Regents Park Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Navy Supply, Armament, Depot Newington Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 . . Richmond Headquarters, 41 Royal New South Wales Regiment (and Admin Coy &Support Coy, less Machine Gun Platoon) Army . . . . 13 115 . . . . 4 . . Riverina Darling 10 Royal South Australia Regiment, Broken Hill Assault Pioneer Platoon Support Coy Army . . . . 1 57 . . . . 1 . . 6 Platoon, B Company, 3 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . . . 10 . . . . . . . . Robertson 73 Terminal Troop Army . . . . 1 51 . . . . 1 . . 3 Platoon, A Company, 17 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 1 23 . . . . . . . . 1st Field Ambulance, Erina Army . . . . . . 26 . . . . . . . . Ryan 9 Military Police Company Army . . . . 32 . . . . . . 4 6 Queensland University Regiment Army . . . . 8 362 . . . . 2 . . Scullin District Support Unit Broadmeadows Army . . . . 35 . . . . . . 36 7 3rd Base Workshop Battalion Army . . . . 124 . . . . . . 141 46 32nd Supply Battalion Army . . . . 233 . . . . . . 246 40 3rd Army Quality Assurance Unit Liaison Office Broadmeadows Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . Melbourne Transport Unit Army . . . . 44 . . . . . . 2 17 3rd Training Group Education Section Army . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . 3 Shortland A Company, 2 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 1 17 . . . . 1 . . District Support Unit Singleton Newcastle Detachment . . . . 3 . . . . . . 8 . . 16 Transport Squadron Army . . . . 7 35 . . . . 1 . . 2 Royal Australian Corps of Transport Pipes and Drums Army . . . . . . 25 . . . . . . . . 113 Field Battery Army . . . . 2 65 . . . . . . . . Garrison Engineer Northern New South Wales . . . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . 111 Electrical and Mechanical Engineers Workshop Platoon Army . . . . 3 56 . . . . 1 . . 25th Military Police Platoon (Army Reserve) 2nd Military Police Company . . . . . . 11 . . . . 1 . . St George 113 Divisional Locating Battery Army . . . . 8 53 . . . . . . . . 2nd Royal Australian Army Pay Corps Unit Army . . . . . . 24 . . . . . . . . 11 Field Battery 23rd Field Regiment Army . . . . 1 69 . . . . 1 . . Stirling Recruiting Perth Air Force . . . . . . . . 10 . . 1 . . Streeton School of Army Health Army . . . . 139 . . . . . . 20 83 Sturt 144 Signals Squadron Army . . . . 6 41 . . . . 1 . . Swan 26 Transport Troop Army . . . . 4 52 . . . . 1 . . 16 Royal Western Australia Regiment Army . . . . 14 247 . . . . 2 . . 51 Supply Battalion Guildford Army . . . . 12 . . . . . . 12 . . Movement Control/Resident Engineer Perth, Belmont Air Force . . . . . . . . 9 . . . . . . Directorate of Quality Assurance Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 . . 201st Works Section Army . . . . . . 13 . . . . . . . . 103rd Electrical and Mechanical Engineers Company Army . . . . 8 55 . . . . 1 . . HQ 2nd Division Engineers Army . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . . 1st Port Construction and Repair Group Army . . . . . . 58 . . . . . . . . 21st Construction Regiment and HQ 21 Construction Regiment Army . . . . . . 29 . . . . . . . . 101st Construction Squadron Army . . . . . . 130 . . . . . . . . 102nd Construction Squadron Army . . . . . . 88 . . . . . . . . 103rd Construction Squadron Army . . . . . . 160 . . . . . . . . 108th Plant Squadron Heavy Army . . . . . . 118 . . . . . . . . Defence Force Careers Information Centre Army . . . . 25 . . . . . . . . . . Parachute Rigger Platoon Royal Australian Army Ordnance Centre Detachment Army . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . . . Sydney Regional Engineers Sydney Army . . . . 8 . . . . . . 2 . . 1 Amenities Unit Army . . . . 7 . . . . . . . . . . 21 Supply Battalion Air Delivery Equipment Platoon Army . . . . 27 . . . . . . 15 . . 16 Psychology Unit Army . . . . 11 . . . . . . . . . . HQ 5 Field Engineer Group Army . . . . 12 18 . . . . 1 . . 2 Ordnance Services Unit Army . . . . 3 24 . . . . 1 . . 12 Psychology Unit Army . . . . . . 37 . . . . . . . . HMAS Success Navy 38 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Vickers Cockatoo Island Dockyard-AOR Project Navy/Civilian 3 . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . Naval Stores Centres Spectacle Island Navy 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RAN Research Laboratory Civilian 5 . . . . . . . . . . 199 . . Training Technology Unit 2 Navy 14 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Garden Island Dockyard, Marrickville Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 . . Remington Centre Sydney RAAF Support Unit Air Force . . . . . . . . 8 . . 4 . . Public Relations Office, Millers Point Air Force Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . 1 . . 2 6 . . . . Garden Island Dockyard Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,101 2 Directorate of Quality Assurance, Leichhardt Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Throsby Reconnaissance Platoon, Support Company, 3 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . . . 4th Platoon, B Company, 4th Battalion, Royal New South Wales Regiment . . . . . . . . 8 . . . . . . . . Wakefield 10 Royal South Wales Regiment, Clare 6th Platoon B Company Army . . . . . . 16 . . . . 1 . . Proof and Experimental Establishment Port Wakefield Army . . . . 45 . . . . . . 28 8 10 Royal South Australia Regiment, Kadina 4th Platoon B Company Army . . . . . . 20 . . . . . . . . Wannon Support Company (Warrnambool) Assault Pioneer Platoon, Support Company (Portland) 12th Platoon Support Company, 2nd Royal Victoria Rifles Army . . . . 2 65 . . . . 1 . . Warringah Headquarters, 8 Brigade Army . . . . 7 20 . . . . . . . . District Support Unit, Sydney, North Sydney Detachment Army . . . . 6 . . . . . . 16 . . Headquarters Training Command Army . . . . 143 42 . . . . 26 30 Detachment 7 Dental Unit (Mosman) Army . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . . . Regimental HQ, 10th Terminal Regiment Army . . . . 26 . . . . . . 6 36 School of Artillery Army . . . . 240 . . . . . . 29 83 30 Terminal Squadron Army . . . . 127 . . . . . . . . 38 Army School of Instructional Training Army . . . . 16 . . . . . . 2 . . 11 Movement Control Group/11th Movement Control Unit Army . . . . 19 . . . . . . . . 4 Army Maritime School Army . . . . 77 1 . . . . 14 22 10 Terminal Regiment, Workshop Army . . . . 35 . . . . . . . . 9 HQ 33rd Terminal Squadron and 74th Terminal Support Troop Army . . . . 4 18 . . . . . . . . 1 Commando Company Army . . . . 21 139 . . . . 2 . . HMAS Penguin Navy 517 1 . . . . . . . . 47 126 Chowder Bay Fuel Depot Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Ran Staff College Navy 28 . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . School of Transport Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 3 School of Artillery, Manly Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 5 Naval Personnel Division Army . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Training and Education, Balmoral Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Wentworth Detachment 7 Dental Unit (Victoria Barracks) Army . . . . 1 . . . . . . 1 . . A Company, 4 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . . . 43 . . . . . . . . Headquarters, 2 Division Army . . . . 44 103 . . . . 12 . . 1 Psychology Unit Army . . . . 6 2 . . . . . . . . 2nd Division Dental Unit Army . . . . 1 37 . . . . 1 . . District Support Unit Sydney Army . . . . 102 4 . . . . 65 13 2nd Division Medical Services Army . . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . . Movement Control Office, Sydney Army . . . . 25 . . . . . . 1 . . Headquarters, 2 Military District Army . . . . 217 49 . . . . 103 . . Royal Australian Navy Research Laboratory, Edgecliff Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 . . Headquarters Field Force Command Army . . . . 114 21 . . . . 33 . . HMAS `Kuttabul' Navy 432 . . . . . . . . . . 28 184 Navy News Navy 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . RAN Sailing Association Navy 3 . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . Master Attendant Navy 6 . . . . . . . . . . 110 . . General Overseer and Superintendent of Inspection, East Australia Area Navy 13 . . . . . . . . . . 99 . . Headquarters, Naval Support Commander Navy 117 8 . . . . . . . . 100 . . Headquarters, Fleet Commander Navy 167 . . . . . . . . . . 5 . . HMAS `Watson' Navy 488 . . . . . . . . . . 69 291 Garden Island Dockyard-Garden Island Navy 208 1 . . . . . . . . 2,842 1 Garden Island Dockyard-Remington Building Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 1 Air Force Supply Officer Air Force . . . . . . . . 3 . . 2 . . Recruiting Sydney Air Force . . . . . . . . 23 . . 4 . . N.S.W. Air Training Corps, Darlington Air Force . . . . . . . . 2 . . . . . . Defence Production Regional Office Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 . . Inspector Naval Ordnance Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 . . Manpower, Sydney Psychology Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 . . Design, Sydney Naval Engineering Division Navy . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 . . Central Outposts Audit, Sydney Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 . . Central Outposts NDO, Sydney Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . Central Outposts TEP, Sydney Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 . . Directorate of Quality Assurance Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 . . Public Relations Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . Engineering, Sydney Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . Supply, Sydney Air Force . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 . . Werriwa 1st Military Corrective Establishment Army . . . . 29 . . . . . . . . 18 (includes 18 detainees) 2 Training Group Army . . . . 83 542 . . . . 5 10 2 Military Police Company Army . . . . 72 40 . . . . 2 8 Army Malaria Research Unit Army 1 . . 18 2 . . . . 2 3 Military Police School Army . . . . 20 . . . . . . 1 2 101 Field Workshop Army . . . . 112 . . . . . . . . . . 1/19 Royal New South Wales Regiment Army . . . . 8 442 . . . . 1 . . District Support Unit Liverpool Army . . . . 8 . . . . . . 81 178 1Preventive Medical Company Army . . . . 39 . . . . . . . . . . 2 Ordnance Platoon Army . . . . 2 29 . . . . . . . . 1 Field Hospital Army . . . . 99 . . . . . . . . . . 10 Field Battery, 23 Field Regiment Army . . . . 14 54 . . . . . . . . Wills 7 Transport Squadron Army . . . . 5 116 . . . . . . . . 2/15 Field Regiment Army . . . . 17 202 . . . . . . 4 3 Army Quality Assurance Unit Detachment Coburg Army . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . 3 Military District Band Army . . . . 43 . . . . . . . . . . Australian Government Clothing Factory Civilian . . . . . . . . . . . . 629 . . (Question No. 860) Mr Campbell asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 7 May 1985: (1) Are there any organisations currently supplying or holding contracts to supply ammunitions, shells or powder propellants of any nature to the Australian Defence Forces; if so, what are the details. (2) Have any contracts to outside organisations been supplied in the last 10 years; if so, what contracts and when. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) Defence has sourced approximately 314 munitions items from overseas suppliers during the past decade and is currently procuring an additional 97 such items. These items are predominantly special ammunition types or components which cannot be produced in Australia with due economy. Defence currently makes no significant purchases of finished ammunition products from commercial sources in Australia although there are many local suppliers of the raw and processed materials used for the production of such items. (Question No. 1250) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 23 May 1985: Has the Minister's Department, or any statutory authority or organisation for which the Minister is responsible, employed consultants since March 1983; if so, (a) who has been employed, (b) for what purpose, (c) what working plan was given to them, (d) what was the cost of their services, (e) when did their services commence and finish, and (f) was any fee in excess of the initial quote; if so, by what amount. Mr Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Department of Transport (a), (b), (d) and (e) Relevant information has been provided in the answer to question No. 445 asked by Mr Ruddock on 26 March 1985. Details have been forwarded to the honourable member. (c) and (f) It is the practice to send a commissioning letter to all consultants defining and framing the task to be undertaken. The general practice is that consultancies are subject to fixed fee arrangements. Requests for price variations submitted by consultants will only be approved for demonstrated direct cost increases which are reasonably regarded as beyond the control of the consultant and also beyond normal commercial risks. Where the Department alters the scope of work any additional cost must likewise be demonstrated. I am advised that substantial departmental resources would need to be diverted from normal duties to provide the more detailed information sought by the honourable member in relation to individual consultancy arrangements. I am therefore not prepared to authorise diversion of resources for this purpose. Statutory Authorities As Minister for Transport I am responsible for two statutory authorities-the Australian National Railways Commission (AN) and the Australian Shipping Commission (ANL). Both AN and ANL are required by legislation to operate as commercial undertakings. I am therefore not prepared to provide information which may prejudice their commercial operations, nor am I prepared to direct them to incur the substantial expenditure involved in collating the detailed information sought by the honourable member. Inter-State Commission I am also responsible for administration of the Inter-State Commission Act 1975 which provides for the operation of the Inter-State Commission (ISC), an authority established by the Constitution. With respect to consultants engaged by the Inter-State Commission, I am advised as follows: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) $ Prof. L. Zines, Australian National University Provide legal advice Opinions on sections of the Australian Constitution as applying to the ISC and matters relating to the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme 2,540 23.3.84 to 20.12.84 No Prof. C. Howard, University of Melbourne Provide legal advice Opinion concerning the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme 3,000 8.6.84 to 1.3.85 No Mr W. McComas, Counsel of the Sydney Bar Provide legal advice Advise on corporate structure of numerous companies receiving subsidies under the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme 4,890 25.7.84 to 19.12.84 No Mr M. Harvey, University of Queensland Provide economic advice Advise on shipping costs across Bass Strait for the investigation into the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme 480 10.5.84 to 18.7.84 No Gavan McDonnell and Co., Consulting Economists Provide economic advice Advise on rail costs for investigation into the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme 7,080 10.12.84 to 28.2.85 No Ms C. Pirie, Consulting Editor Edit the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme Report 11,858 13.11.84 to 14.3.85 Yes $4,342 Ms Di Keddie, Physiotherapist Occupational health aspects of ISC staff Occupational health aspects including measures to combat repetition strain injury 160 2.4.85 to 23.5.85 No (Question No. 1646) Mr Fisher asked the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 11 September 1985: Does the Minister's Department provide local call access to clients to the district or regional offices of the Department; if not, will the Department consider installing a 008 telephone number so that clients currently without local call access can have equal opportunity to contact the Department for assistance. Mr Hurford —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: My Department does not provide local call access to clients to Regional or Area Offices, nor is it proposed to install 008 telephone numbers for this purpose in the immediate future. By its very nature, my Department is in daily contact with a wide variety and vast numbers of clients of different backgrounds with whom it has dealings over a range of issues (e.g. migration, sponsorship, citizenship, residence, departure tax, passports (Darwin), post-arrival services etc). However, Departmental activities which come closest to being community support services are the post-arrival programs and services provided to migrants and refugees. By definition these are services which are directed towards an identified group rather than the whole community. At the last Census, in 1981, some 80% of all migrants (including refugees) were resident in a capital city or in a major urban centre where my Department has a Regional Office (e.g. Sydney, Melbourne, etc.) or an Area Office (e.g. Albury/Wodonga, Wollongong, Townsville, etc.). This is true of an even larger percentage of migrants who have been in Australia for less than five years, and who are likely to have more need of specialised post-arrival services than migrants of longer residence. The Government has given serious consideration to the introduction of a toll-free (008) telephone service by which all migrants, irrespective of their place of residence, could contact my Department's Telephone Interpreter Service (TIS) for assistance with interpreters or for information and referral. Already, automatic call diverters and tie-lines link nine areas of significant migrant population with TIS in the nearest capital city for the cost of a local call. Other priorities, such as the purchase of new telephone equipment and the development of a community resource index, both intended to enhance the quality of service by TIS, have meant that the provision of the toll-free facility covering the whole of Australia has had to be deferred. Only a small proportion of my Department's clientele is in the position of not having access either in person or by telephone to a local office of my Department. This, together with financial and practical considerations (including the real possibility that the provision of the 008 facility might tend to encourage unnecessary calls thus disrupting workflows and service to other clients) militate against the provision of the 008 facility to individuals at the taxpayers expense. (Question No. 1823) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: Will he implement any of the proposals of the Interim Committee of the Australian Sports Commission recommending that the Australian Olympic Federation, the Confederation of Australian Sport, the Australian Commonwealth Games Foundation, the Australian Sports Medicine Federation and the Australian Coaching Council should be subservient to the Australian Sports Commission with regard to Commonwealth funding; if so, what progress has been made. Mr John Brown —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The report from the Interim Committee for the Australian Sports Commission makes no reference whatsoever to any intention to make the organisations mentioned in the question subservient to the Commission. Although it is not clear in the question, I assume that the honourable member has drawn his wholly erroneous inferences from those sections of the report which emphasise that, so far as recommending and overseeing funding from the Commonwealth Government for sports development is concerned, the Commission should be the pre-eminent authority. In performing that role, which is entirely appropriate and necessary, the Commission in no way seeks to influence or undermine the status and authority of individual associations. That has already been substantially recognised by the sporting community itself. At the most recent annual meeting of the Australian Olympic Federation, an organisation cited by the honourable member in his question, the role and potential of the Commission was endorsed and supported in the strongest terms. Finally, I would draw the honourable member's attention to a key paragraph on page 9 of the Interim Report in the section entitled `The report: An Overview'. The Interim Committee states quite unequivocally: This report emphasises that the establishment of the Sports Commission will not reduce the autonomy or independence of sports organisations, umbrella groups or Governments. The Interim Committee believes that such independence is vital to the development of sport, and indeed, is enshrined in the constitution of bodies such as the Australian Olympic Federation. (Question No. 1827) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: What were the individual recommended allocations for assistance to (a) national sporting organisations, (b) the National Athlete Award Scheme, (c) the Sports Talent Plan, (d) the Children in Sport Program and (e) any other programs administered by the Australian Sports Commission (ASC), for 1985-86, by (i) the relevant funding committee within the ASC, (ii) the ASC executive, (iii) himself and (iv) any other person or group of persons. Mr John Brown —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The allocation of funds in respect of the programs and projects mentioned in parts (a) to (e) was decided in the normal context of Budget deliberations and were the subject of discussion between the Commission and myself. It is not the practice for the detail of such discussions, which are properly to be regarded as confidential, to be disclosed. (Question No. 1987) Mr Milton asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 8 October 1985: (1) Is there currently a problem with the disposal of radioactive wastes at the 4 Base Workshop at Bandiana Base, Wodonga, if so, is he able to say whether the Atomic Energy Commission is aware of the problem. (2) What is the (a) amount of radioactive waste involved, (b) current storage site, (c) period of time it has been stored and (d) origin of the waste. (3) Have appropriate safety procedures been followed to ensure that the waste is not endangering the health of military personnel; if so, what are they. (4) When and where is the radioactive waste likely to be disposed. (5) Why has there been a delay in the disposal of the waste. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) No. The waste is being transferred to interim storage facilities at 31 Supply Battalion, Bandiana Victoria. (2) (a) 2.5 cubic metres. (b) Radiac Calibration Centre at the 4 Base Workshops, Bandiana. (c) The waste has accumulated over the past 5 years. (d) Compasses, gauges and detection training items. (3) Yes, appropriate safety procedures based upon the Victorian Health Act 1958, Health (Radiation Safety) (Amendment) Regulation 1984, and supported by various departmental and unit safety instructions have been followed. (4) and (5) The Minister for Resources and Energy indicated in a Press statement of 21 May 1985 that an `office review' to identify possible locations suitable for national storage and burial facilities would take up to nine months. Field investigations would be undertaken after State and Federal Ministers have considered the results of that review. (Question No. 2037) Dr Klugman asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 9 October 1985: Has his attention been drawn to reports that the Ethiopian regime imposes a #20 (sterling) per ton tax on donations of grain; if so, is he able to say for how long this tax has been in place. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: There are no taxes, as such, charged by the Government of Ethiopia on donations of grain for aid or relief purposes. There are, however, a number of port handling and various other charges which are legitimately incurred and which are often incorrectly described by outside observers as a `tax'. Handling charges have recently been negotiated, on behalf of all donors, by the United Nations Office of the Assistant Secretary-General for Emergency Operations Ethiopia. Other costs paid by the donor or on its behalf may include port dues and fumigation, inland freight, surveys and rebagging and reconditioning as necessary. (Question No. 2219) Mr Reith asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 16 October 1985: Has a sum of $100,000 been received from the estate of Petro Fedorczenko as reported in the Melbourne Sun on 12 July 1985; if so, to what use have the funds been put. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: At this point in time no moneys have been received by the Department of Defence from the estate of Petro Fedorczenko. Arrangements have been made, however, between the Australian Government Solicitor and Mr Fedorczenko's Executors for the payment of an amount of $96,696.78 to the Department of Defence. Subject to existing financial and legal requirements it is intended that the bequest be utilized by the Australian Defence Force Academy, (Question No. 2230) Mr Staples asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 18 October 1985: (1) Have United Nations officials repeatedly insisted that there is no fault in the UN Charter if only member States would obey it, but admitted that the main reason of the UN's existence is to secure peace. (2) Does Australia support reform of the UN Charter towards an international authority with power to override national sovereignties in settling international disputes by peaceful means. (3) Have public opinion polls supported such reform. (4) What steps has Australia taken to provide international surveillance systems and to persuade citizens to support them as an essential first step in gaining international confidence in such an international authority. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The purposes of the United Nations are set out in Chapter 1 Article 1 of the Charter. The maintenance of international peace and security is central. The United Nations Secretary-General, Mr Perez de Cuellar, has said that the Security Council, the body charged with maintaining international peace and security, has not made full and effective use of the measures available to it under the Charter. (2) While the Government favours procedural reform of both the United Nations General Assembly and the Security Council, it does not believe that revision of the UN Charter towards creating such an international authority with power to override national sovereignties is a practical possibility in the foreseeable future. (3) I am not aware that there have been any public opinion polls taken in Australia on Charter reform. (4) While I am not certain what the honourable member means by `international surveillance systems', Australia participated in several UN peace-keeping operations and in such organisations as the Security Council, the Commission on Human Rights, the Conference on Disarmament, the International Atomic Energy Agency and Interpol, which in their various ways contribute to the maintenance of international order. Australia urges support for the work of these bodies. (Question No. 2232) Mr Staples asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 18 October 1985: (1) Has his attention been drawn to a statement at the 40th United Nations Anniversary Conference, by Mr Vernon A. Walters for the United States that if the rule of law is to replace anarchy, international law involves surrender of a certain amount of sovereignty. (2) Has his attention been drawn to a statement by the Soviet President, Mr Gorbachev, that detente is needed only as a transition from a world cluttered with arms to a reliable and all-embracing system of international security. (3) Will the Government commend these statements as the dawn of a sane alternative to the absolute sovereignty allowed to veto powers in disputes involving them at the Security Council of the UN. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) I am aware of a speech by Mr Walters on the occasion of the 40th Anniversary of the signing of the United Nations Charter, 26 June 1985, in which he said that `internationalism must inevitably involve the surrender by all nations of a certain measure of liberty of action'. (2) While General Secretary Gorbachev has put forward these general ideas on a number of occasions I am not aware of any recent statement by him using the exact words referred to. (3) The right of veto in the Security Council was a matter much debated at the time of the founding of the United Nations. While Australia and many other member states have reservations about the right of veto, it must be recognised that the crucial participation in the United Nations of the major powers is, to a significant extent, dependent upon their having the right of veto in the Security Council. Removal of that right would be likely to increase tensions among the great powers, with further adverse effects for world security. (Question No. 2355) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: How did Australia vote in 1984 at the United Nations General Assembly on questions of disarmament, nuclear and chemical weapons test explosions and related issues. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The First Committee, with deals with disarmament and related issues, recommended to the General Assembly in 1984 a total of 72 resolutions and one decision. Of these resolutions, 28 were adopted by consensus. Of the 44 put to a vote, Australia voted in favour of 23, against 7 and abstained on 14. With regard to the resolutions concerning a nuclear test ban, Australia and New Zealand worked vigorously at UNGA 39 for the adoption of a resolution which promoted a comprehensive nuclear test ban. This resolution gained the highest ever number of positive votes on a nuclear testing resolution (124 votes) and alone among three competing resolutions, attracted no negative votes. Australia abstained on the two competing nuclear test ban resolutions, those sponsored by Sweden, Mexico and the Soviet Union, because they called only for a nuclear weapons test ban, thus permitting the possibility of so-called peaceful nuclear explosions. On chemical and biological weapons six resolutions were presented. Australia co-sponsored and voted in favour of a United States resolution condemning the use of CW generally, and a French resolution on the United Nations CW experts' report on procedures for investigating allegations of the use of chemical weapons. Australia abstained on the German Democratic Republic resolution which called for the establishment of a Chemical Weapons Free Zone in Europe. Australia also co-sponsored a Norwegian Biological Weapons resolution and a Canadian/Polish resolution urging progress in the negotiation of a CW convention at the CD. Both of these resolutions were adopted by consensus. An Iranian resolution on chemcial weapons use in the Iran-Iraq war was not put to a vote. The full details of the resolutions and decision referred to above, including the voting record may be found in the United Nations Press Release GA/7095 of 21 January 1985 which is held in the Parliamentary Library. (Question No. 2377) Dr Klugman asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: What are the names of the members of the National Consultative Committee on Disarmament and Arms Control and on what basis was each appointed. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The name of the National Committee which I appointed to assist me in developing and giving effect to the program for the International Year of Peace, 1986, is The National Consultative Committee on Peace and Disarmament. Its members are: The Hon. A. J. Grassby (Chairman) Mrs Stella Cornelius (Director, IYP Program) Mrs Joyce Clarke (Australian Peace Committee) Mr Michael Clohesy (Youth Affairs Council of Australia) Mr Chicka Dixon (Aboriginal Arts Board, Australia Council) Mr Cliff Dolan (Australian Confederation of Trade Unions) Mr W. J. Henderson (Confederation of Australian Industry) The Rev. Philip Huggins (Victorian Association for Peace Studies) Sir William Keys (President, Returned Services League) Mr Jeffrey Kildea (Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace) Dr Ian Maddocks (Medical Association for the Previsions of War) Mr Ian Mathews (Editor, The Canberra Times) Mrs Elizabeth Mattrick (Women's International League for Peace and Freedom) Mrs Mavis Robertson (Australian Coalition for Disarmament and Peace) Mr Leon Stubbings (Australian Red Cross Society) Dr Keith Suter (United Nations Association of Australia) Dr P. G. Williams (Scientists Against Nuclear Arms) The Rev. Dr H. D'Arcy Wood (Australian Council of Churches) Mrs Kathleen Taperell (Department of Foreign Affairs) Mrs Tonia Shand (Department of Foreign Affairs) No formal criteria were laid down for selection of Committee members. However, in determining the composition of the Committee I took into account the need for the Committee to be broadly representative of the Australian community and the need to involve community groups which were national in character and which had demonstrated a concern for peace and disarmament issues. (Question No. 2382) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) What is the Government's attitude to the objectives of the Karen rebellion in eastern Burma. (2) What is the involvement of Australian citizens in providing assistance to the Karen rebellion. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The leaders of the Karen ethnic minority did not sign the Panglong agreement of 1947, by which the other ethnic minorities joined the Burman majority in forming the Union of Burma. Many Karens rebelled in 1949 in support of an independent Karen state between Burma and Thailand, and the rebellion has continued at varying levels of intensity since then. The rebel cause is now actively supported by only a small proportion of the Karen population in Burma, mainly in the border region. The majority lives at peace with the government in other parts of Burma. The Australian Government hopes that a settlement of the differences between the Government of Burma and the Karen rebels can be negotiated by the parties concerned. (2) I am aware of reports that Australians are allegedly assisting or have allegedly assisted Karen rebel forces. I am not able to substantiate these reports. Australian legislation imposes severe penalties on Australian citizens and residents who enter foreign countries to engage in hostile activities against the governments of those countries. (Question No. 2383) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: Has his attention been drawn to concern expressed by the United States Government that the Soviet Union may have exceeded the mutually agreed 150 kiloton threshold limit in its nuclear testing program; if so, does he support the United States proposal to allow the scientists of both countries to visit the nuclear testing in order to monitor measurements of yield and ensure complaince with treaty obligations. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Government is aware of United States Government concern that the Soviet Union may have conducted nuclear weapon tests with a yield greater than the 150 kilotons threshold provided for in the signed but unratified Threshold Test Ban Treaty and it does support the United States proposal to allow reciprocal visits by scientific teams to monitor test explosions and to calibrate monitoring equipment. Indeed, in June 1985 I wrote to Mr Gromyko-then the Soviet Foreign Minister-to urge that the Soviet Union take up this American proposal. I would add that, most recently, the United States has made this a unilateral invitation, not dependent on reciprocity. (Question No. 2398) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) What is the number of M113 armoured personnel carriers (a) in the Australian Army and (b) required by the Australian Army on mobilisation under the current Order of Battle. (2) If there is a shortfall in the number required under the Order of Battle, how would he propose to rectify it in the absence of local armoured personnel carrier production. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) There are presently 796 armoured personnel carrier variants in service. The current Order of Battle, on mobilisation, indicates a requirement for 1133 armoured personnel carrier variants. However, it is possible that the review currently being conducted by Mr Paul Dibb on Australia's future Defence capabilities may result in changes to the Order of Battle, varying the numbers of armoured personnel carriers considered appropriate to Australia's strategic circumstances. (2) The Order of Battle on mobilisation would be dependent on the strategic requirements then perceived. Were there to be a requirement to increase the numbers of light armoured fighting vehicles of the M113 type, additional vehicles would be procured from overseas sources during the warning time that would necessarily precede the initiation of any but the lowest levels of hostility. (Question No. 2437) Mr Sinclair asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 15 November 1985: (1) Is it a fact that (a) the Defence Force Service Awards were instituted in May 1980 and (b) there are many thousands of serving members of the Defence Forces, both permanent and Reserve, who although qualified for these awards have yet to be gazetted. (2) Are the delays from gazettal to issue of the Defence Force Service Awards in excess of 18 months; if so, has he discussed with the Minister for Administrative Services what action can be taken to stop such delays occuring. (3) Is it a fact that the percentage of Air Force Service Awards issued to the Reserve and ex-permanent members serving in the Reserve is significantly less than the Reserve percentages in the other 2 services. (4) Will he ensure that similar delays are avoided for those members of the Defence Forces who have qualified for the National Medal under the 1982 amendments the issue of which has been delayed until the backlog of Service Awards has been processed. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) No. The Defence Force Service Awards were formally instituted by Her Majesty The Queen on 20 April 1982. (b) Yes. (2) No, medal entitlements are generally despatched within 3-5 months from gazettal. There have been infrequent occasions however, where, due to such difficulties as locating members the medal entitlement has been delayed beyond 12 months. It would be a most unlikely situation where the despatch of the medal was delayed by 18 months. (3) No it is not a fact that the percentage of Air Force Service Awards issued to Reserves is significantly less than the other two Services. The Air Force figure is slightly under 2 percent as in Navy's. The figure for Army is in the order of 24 per cent which reflects a higher proportion of Reserves as a part of the total Army force. (4) As the 1982 amendments to the National Medal Regulations removed members of the Defence Force from the categories of persons eligible to qualify for the Medal, the question is not applicable. (Question No. 2440) Mr Sinclair asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 15 November 1985: What were the pay scales for (a) regular warrant officers, senior non-commissioned officers and other ranks in the Army, (b) equivalent ranks in the Royal Australian Navy and (c) equivalent ranks in the Royal Australian Air Force at (i) 30 June and (ii) 14 November 1985. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is contained in the table of salary rates attached. The attached rates do not include the Service Allowance component of annual salary payable to all these categories. The Service Allowance at 30 June 1985 was $2786; at 14 November 1985 was $3062. SALARIES-OTHER RANKS Salaries (Old) as at 30 June 1985; (New) from 14 Nov 1985 Navy Army Air Old Salary New Salary (Private; Private (P); Lance Corporal; and Equivalents) Seaman Wran Private Aircraftman Pay Level 1... 13,368 14,695 Pay Level 2... 14,258 15,673 Pay Level 3... 15,039 16,531 Pay Level 4... 15,931 17,512 Pay Level 5... 16,487 18,123 Pay Level 6... 17,713 19,471 Pay Level 7... 17,713 19,471 Able Seaman Senior WRAN Private (P) Lance Corporal Leading Aircraftman Pay Level 1- Under 1 Year... 13,702 15,061 After 1 Year... 14,037 15,430 Pay Level 2- Under 1 Year... 14,593 16,041 After 1 Year... 14,927 16,409 Pay Level 3... 15,373 16,899 Pay Level 4... 16,264 17,879 Pay Level 5... 16,821 18,490 Pay Level 6... 18,047 19,838 Pay Level 7... 18,493 20,328 (Leading Seaman and Corporal) Leading Seaman Leading WRAN Corporal Corporal Pay Level 1- Under 1 Year... 14,705 16,165 After 1 Year... 15,151 16,655 Pay Level 2- Under 1 Year... 15,596 17,144 After 1 Year... 16,042 17,634 Pay Level 3- Under 1 Year... 16,042 17,634 After 1 Year... 16,599 18,246 Pay Level 4- Under 1 Year... 16,933 18,613 After 1 Year... 17,489 19,225 Pay Level 5- Under 1 Year... 17,489 19,225 After 1 Year... 18,407 19,838 Pay Level 6- Under 1 Year... 18,603 20,450 After 1 Year... 19,162 21,064 Pay Level 7- Under 1 Year... 19,162 21,064 After 1 Year... 19,718 21,674 (Petty Officer and Sergeant) Petty Officer Sergeant Sergeant Pay Level 1- Under 1 Year... 16,042 17,634 After 1 Year... 16,487 18,123 After 2 Years... 16,933 18,613 After 3 Years... 17,378 19,102 After 4 Years... 17,824 19,593 After 5 Years... 18,269 20,082 After 6 Years... 18,714 20,571 After 7 Years... 19,162 21,064 Pay Level 2- Under 1 Year... 16,933 18,613 After 1 Year... 17,378 19,102 After 2 Years... 17,824 19,593 After 3 Years... 18,269 20,082 After 4 Years... 18,714 20,571 After 5 Years... 19,162 21,064 Pay Level 3- Under 1 Year... 17,489 19,225 After 1 Year... 18,047 19,838 After 2 Years... 18,603 20,450 After 3 Years... 19,162 21,064 Pay Level 4- Under 1 Year... 18,603 20,450 After 1 Year... 19,162 21,064 After 2 Years... 19,718 21,674 Pay Level 5- Under 1 Year... 19,162 21,064 After 1 Year... 19,718 21,674 Pay Level 6- Under 1 Year... 20,275 22,287 After 1 Year... 20,832 22,899 Pay Level 7- Under 1 Year... 20,832 22,899 After 1 Year... 21,389 23,512 (STAFF SERGEANT; FLIGHT SERGEANT; CHIEF PETTY OFFICER AND WARRANT OFFICER) Staff Sergeant Flight Sergeant Pay Levels 1 to 3- Under 1 Year (Army and RAAF)... 20,275 22,287 After 1 Year (Army and RAAF)... 20,832 22,899 After 2 Years (Army and RAAF)... 21,389 23,512 After 3 Years (Army and RAAF)... 21,945 24,123 After 4 Years (RAAF only)... 22,503 24,737 After 5 Years (RAAF only)... 23,059 25,347 After 6 Years (RAAF only)... 23,617 25,960 After 7 Years (RAAF only)... 24,174 26,573 Pay Levels 4 and 5- Under 1 Year (Army and RAAF)... 20,832 22,899 After 1 Year (Army and RAAF)... 21,389 23,512 After 2 Years (Army and RAAF)... 21,945 24,123 After 3 Years (RAAF only)... 22,503 24,737 After 4 Years (RAAF only)... 23,059 25,347 After 5 Years (RAAF only)... 23,617 25,960 After 6 Years (RAAF only)... 24,174 26,573 Pay Level 6- Under 1 Year (Army and RAAF)... 21,945 24,123 After 1 Year (Army and RAAF)... 22,503 24,737 After 2 Years (Army and RAAF)... 23,059 25,347 After 3 Years (RAAF only)... 23,617 25,960 After 4 Years (RAAF only)... 24,174 26,573 After 5 Years RAAF only)... 24,731 27,185 Pay Level 7- Under 1 Year (Army and RAAF)... 22,503 24,737 After 1 Year (Army and RAAF)... 23,059 25,347 After 2 Years (RAAF only)... 23,617 25,960 After 3 Years (RAAF only)... 24,174 26,573 After 4 Years (RAAF only)... 24,731 27,185 Chief Petty Officer Warrant Officer II Pay Levels 1 to 5- Under 1 Year... 23,170 25,469 After 1 Year... 23,728 26,083 After 2 Years... 24,284 26,694 Pay Levels 6 and 7- Under 1 Year... 24,284 26,694 After 1 Year... 24,843 27,309 Warrant Officer Warrant Officer I Warrant Officer Pay Levels 1 to 5- Under 1 Year... 25,733 28,287 After 1 Year... 26,290 28,899 After 2 Years... 26,487 29,511 Pay Levels 6 and 7- Under 1 Year... 26,290 28,899 After 1 Year... 26,847 29,511 (Question No. 2441) Mr Sinclair asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 15 November 1985: (1) Have any studies been made by (a) his Department or (b) any consultant, into changes in available financial resources which may result from any decision not to maintain any previously existing capability of the Australian Defence Force (ADF); if so, what (a) ADF capabilities have been studied and (b) was the outcome of the studies. (2) Were any consultants employed; if so, (a) who were they, (b) what fees were paid to them and (c) what conclusions did they reach. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) and (b) It is a normal part of my Department's operations that alternative means of meeting capability requirements are assessed. Alternatives are generally assessed for their contributions to Australia's particular strategic situation and could include changes to existing equipment or other resources if other more appropriate approaches are identified. An important element of such investigations is the financial implications, without which a judgment on relative priorities would be deficient. The Department employs external consultants to provide technical advice on many issues; eg. environmental issues, detailed design, technology or production questions. Details of the broader investigations being undertaken by Messrs Dibb and Cooksey are provided below. Given the very large number of capability analyses undertaken by my Department and the level of security classification attached to most studies of this type, I am not in a position to provide the full range of details sought. (2) (a) and (b) Aside from the Departmental consultants mentioned above, two consultants have been appointed by the Government to address major policy matters that may be relevant in the context of the honourable member's questions-Mr Paul Dibb and Mr Robert Cooksey. Mr Dibb is conducting a review of Australia's defence capabilities. His salary is $63,972 per annum plus an expense of office allowance of $1,900. Mr Robert Cooksey is conducting reviews of Australia's defence co-operation program and policy on the export of defence equipment. His salary is $50,504 per annum plus an expenses of office allowance of $815. (c) The conclusion of the reviews being conducted by Messrs Dibb and Cooksey are not expected to be available until early 1986. Mr Dibb's review is intended for publication in modified form. Mr Cooksey's is not. (Question No. 2514) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 18 November 1985: (1) Does the Minister's Department, or any statutory authority responsible to the Minister, provide grants to organisations operating in the Australian Capital Territory. (2) Do such grants have a requirement that any organisation so funded be registered under the Australian Capital Territory Association Incorporation Ordinance 1953; if so, what steps are taken by the Minister's Department to ensure that the funded organisation has complied with the Ordinance before any grant is made. (3) Does the Minister's Department or statutory authority carry out a search of the register at the Australian Capital Territory Corporate Affairs Commission. (4) If the search discloses a failure to comply with the Australian Capital Territory Associations Incorporation Ordinance, what steps are taken to ensure that the matter is remedied by those responsible for administration of the Ordinance or the incorporated association. (5) Have all incorporated associations within the Australian Capital Territory funded by the Minister's Department or statutory authority complied with the Ordinance requirements for lodging particulars or financial affairs and balance sheets annually. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The Department of Defence provides a grant-in-aid to the Royal United Services Institute of Australia (RUSI), an organisation which operates in the Australian Capital Territory but is not incorporated; (2) The grants do not have a requirement that the RUSI be registered under the Australian Capital Territory Association Incorporation Ordinance 1953; (3) and (4) The Department does not carry out a search of the register of the Australian Capital Territory Corporate Affairs Commission. (5) As the RUSI is not an incorporate body compliance with the Ordinance requirements are not in question, however the RUSI is required to provide the Department annually with an audited statement of its financial affairs. (Question No. 2534) Mr Leo McLeay asked the Special Minister of State, upon notice, on 19 November 1985: What is the procedure used in the Minister's Office to respond to petitions referred by the House of Representatives. Mr Young —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Copies of petitions received from the House of Representatives are passed to my Department for information. (Question No. 2610) Mr Hunt asked the Minister for Primary Industry, upon notice, on 20 November 1985: Which questions placed on notice within the last (a) month, (b) 6 weeks, (c) 2 months, (d) 3 months, (e) 4 months and (f) 6 months to 19 November 1985 had not received a final answer at that date. Mr Kerin —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: As at 19 November 1985 the following questions on notice had not received a final answer: (a) 1 month-2288, 12.11.85, Hawker. 2289, 12.11.85, Hawker. 2338, 12.11.85, Blunt. 2310, 12.11.85, Blunt. 2422, 14.11.85, Simmons*. 2427, 14.11.85, Staples*. 2481, 18.11.85, Hodges. 2512, 18.11.85, Ruddock. 2540, 19.11.85, McLeay*. 2559, 19.11.85, Hunt*. (b) 6 weeks-2252, 17.10.85, Hunt. 2123, 10.10.85, Hawker. 2121, 10.10.85, Fife. 2058, 9.10.85, Blunt. 2030, 8.10.85, Braithwaite*. 1996, 8.10.85, Downer*. (c) 2 months-Nil. (d) 3 months-1472, 20.8.85, Blunt*. 1644, 11.9.85, Fisher*. (e) 4 months-Nil. (f) 6 months-1245, 23.5.85, Blunt*. * Since answered. (Question No. 2612) Mr Hunt asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 20 November 1985: Which questions placed on notice within the last (a) month, (b) 6 weeks, (c) 2 months, (d) 3 months, (e) 4 months and (f) 6 months to 19 November 1985 had not received a final answer at that date. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) 2312, 2340, 2364, 2365, 2366, 2378, 2391, 2392, 2393, 2394, 2395, 2396, 2397, 2398, 2406, 2229. (b) As for (a) and 2039, 2041, 2119, 2120, 2218, 2219, 2249. (c) As for (a) and (b) and 1884, 1886, 1945, 1987, 1992, 1997. (d) As for (a), (b) and (c) and 1446, 1474, 1854, 1856. (e) and (f) As above. (Question No. 2615) Mr Hunt asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 20 November 1985: Which questions placed on notice within the last (a) month (b) 6 weeks (c) 2 months (d) 3 months (e) 4 months and (f) 6 months to 19 November 1985 had not received a final answer at that date. Mr Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) Questions Nos: 2565, 2545, 2517, 2343, 2315 2297. (b) Questions Nos: 2243, 2241, 2240, 2210, 2190, 2188, 2180, 1998 and 1995. (c) Nil. (d) Questions Nos: 1930, 1685 and 1622. (e) Questions Nos: 1449 and 1477. (f) Nil. (Question No. 2671) Mr Hollis asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 21 November 1985: (1) Is he able to say which states have become parties to the 1975 Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in their Relations with International Organisations of a Universal Character. (2) Is Australia a party to the convention; if not, why not. (3) Has Australia taken steps to have the convention reviewed. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The following states are parties to the convention-Argentina, Barbados, Bulgaria, Byelorussian SSR, Cameroon, Chile, Cuba, Cyprus, Czechoslovakia, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Ecuador, German Democratic Republic, Guatemala, Hungary Mongolia, Panama, Poland, Rwanda, Tunisia, Ukrainian SSR, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Viet Nam, Yugoslavia. (2) Australia is not a party to the convention (which has not yet entered into force) because the privileges and immunities granted under it are considered not to take into consideration adequately the interests of the states which host international organisations. (3) Australia has not taken steps to have the convention reviewed, but follows closely the work of the International Law Commission on the topic of Relations between States and International Organisations from which a more acceptable multilateral agreement might emerge. (Question No. 2699) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 27 November 1985: (1) Has the Minister's attention been drawn to an advertisement in the Australian of 30 October 1985 in support of the Builders Labourers Federation, in which it was stated that the advertisement was supported by the (a) Abortion Counselling Service, (b) ACOA Rank and File Committee in Defence of Trade Union Rights, (c) ACT Shelter, (d) ACT Squatters Union, (e) ACT Youth Accommodation Group, (f) ACT Youth Forum, (g) Beryl Women's Refuge, (h) Campaign against Repression in the Pacific Area, (i) Canberra &South East Region Environment Centre, (j) Canberra Youth Refuge, (k) Chile Solidarity Committee, (l) Committee for Human Rights and Democracy in Turkey, (m) Committee in Solidarity with Central America, (n) Interchange Community Youth Support Scheme, (o) Jobless Action, (p) Jobline, (q) National Landrights Now Committee, (r) Photo Access, (s) Philippine Action Support Group, (t) Rape Crisis Centre, (u) Reachout, (v) Schools Against the Bomb, (w) Southern Africa Support Campaign in Australia, (x) Soweto Mobilisation Committee, (y) Students Against Apartheid, (z) Staff of Public Radio 2XX, (aa) Toora-Single Women's Shelter, (bb) Women Against Racism and (cc) Trade Union Rights Committee. (2) Do any of the listed organisations receive financial support or grants from the Minister's Department or any statutory authority responsible to the Minister. (3) If so, has the Minister's Department or statutory authority received or searched the ACT Corporate Affairs Commission register for annual financial accounts and balance sheets of each organisation receiving funds. (4) Is each grant conditional upon (a) the submission of audited annual accounts and balance sheets and (b) a commitment to use the funds for the purpose for which the grant was made. (5) Does each grant permit use of funds contributed for political advertisements; if not, what checks have been made or will be made to ensure that the advertisement was not paid from grant funds. (6) Has each organisation receiving funds evidenced a capacity to raise money either in the past or in the year in question for its own purposes. (7) Have further applications for financial support been received or are likely to be received from each organisation; if so, will a check be made to ensure that the conditions of earlier grants have been honoured. Mr Beazley —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) No. (1) to (7) Not applicable to the Department of Defence. (Question No. 1061) Mr Sinclair asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 10 May 1985: Was a company named Aquaglen Ltd. or Aquaglen Pty. Ltd. either registered or incorporated anywhere in Australia between 1976 and 1979; if so (a) where and (b) what details are available. Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: No. However I am advised that a company called Aquaglen Pty. Ltd. was incorporated in New South Wales on 3 January 1984 and, on 21 February 1984, changed its name to Morris Fire Protection and Cleaning Co. Pty. Ltd. (Question No. 1122 and 1123) Mr Wright asked the Attorney-General and the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 15 May 1985: (1) In view of criticism by the Australian Federation of Consumer Organisations that existing information on pharmaceutical labels is not sufficient for informed consumption, will he give consideration to new Commonwealth laws which would require labels to give (a) the generic name, (b) the nature of uses of the product, (c) dosage and administration guides, (d) unwanted effects and contraindications, (e) storage life and conditions, (f) multi-lingual explanations and (g) mandatory explanations of side effects. (2) Will he also investigate with the view to implementing, the French policy of requiring drug firms to disclose evidence of the product's efficacy. Dr Blewett —The honourable member has asked identical questions of both the Attorney-General and me, as indicated by the above question numbers. With the concurrence of the Attorney-General, I provide the following answer to the honourable member's questions: (1) The labelling of pharmaceutical products has been of concern to my Department for a number of years. As a result an Order entitled `General Requirements for Labels for Therapeutic Goods' has been developed by the Therapeutic Goods Standards Committee. The draft Order specifies the information to be included on labels applied to containers and primary packs of a wide range of pharmaceuticals. The labelling requirements address, amongst others, the points raised in the honourable member's question under- (a) the generic name; (b) the nature and uses of the product; (c) dosage and administration guides and (e) storage life and conditions. Limitations of available space on labels preclude the inclusion of information under- (d) unwanted effects and contraindications; (f) multi-lingual explanations and (g) mandatory explanations of side effects, and this information is normally included in product literature which may accompany the product or can be found in product reference books. A final draft of the Order which has involved extensive consultation with industry, Government and user groups will be considered for adoption under the Therapeutic Goods Act by the Therapeutic Goods Advisory Committee later this year. In the event that the Order is acceptable to the Therapeutic Goods Advisory Committee the requirements will become mandatory for all goods covered by the Commonwealth Therapeutic Goods Act. The individual States and Territories have agreed, in principle, to draft complementary legislation to ensure the requirements are uniformly applied throughout Australia. (2) My Department has not been able to determine the point of difference between French and Australian policy regarding disclosure of efficacy. The detailed data submitted by a company to the Australian Government are regarded as confidential. Claims of efficacy are subjected to careful assessment by my Department and the independent Australian Drug Evaluation Committee. My Department reviews promotional claims by companies against these assessments. The Australian mechanism for drug evaluation has worked well and is regarded internationally as one of the best. (Question No. 1135) Mr Staples asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 15 May 1985: (1) What actual or approximate amount has been provided by the Commonwealth, directly or indirectly, for legal advice and representation in respect of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 in each year since its commencement in respect of each department or agency. (2) What was the total amount paid for the engagement of private counsel to represent agencies in proceedings under the Freedom of Information Act in each year since its commencement in respect of (a) preliminary conferences conducted before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal, (b) the hearing of applications for review or other applications by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and (c) proceedings before the (i) Federal Court of Australia and (ii) High Court of Australia. (3) In respect of the Freedom of Information Act, to what extent is legal advice and assistance furnished to agencies by (a) his Department, (b) Departments of State or agencies and (c) private legal practitioners. (4) What principles or criteria are applied in determining whether a department of State or agency obtains legal advice and/or assistance and/or representation under the Freedom of Information Act from (a) his Department, (b) another department of State or agency, and (c) private legal practitioners including counsel. (5) Who is responsible for making decisions about whether an agency will receive legal advice or assistance or representation in respect of the Freedom of Information Act or proceedings brought under the Act. (6) In relation to the decisions referred to in part (5), are there any limits in relation to expenditure on legal assistance; if so, (a) what are they and (b) who is responsible for determining them. (7) Is there any tension in his Department's responsibility for administering the Freedom of Information Act and in its role as a source of legal advice or representation to agencies concerned to limit access under the Act. (8) How many recommendations have been made in accordance with sub-section 66 (1) of the Freedom of Information Act and what has been the outcome of each such recommendation. (9) Will the Government give consideration to including in the Freedom of Information Act a provision similar to that contained in section 170 of the Trade Practices Act 1974. Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) I do not propose to provide detailed information on the specific matters raised. The work involved in answering in detail would exceed what is customarily accepted for answers to parliamentary questions and I am not prepared to divert the resources of my Department for that purpose. (2) I am not able to provide a detailed break up in response to this question, but the following material was reasonably accessible and is provided in partial answer. The Attorney-General's Department receives information from agencies subject to the Freedom of Information (FOI) Act on their costs of operating under the Act for the purpose of publication in the Attorney-General's Annual Report to Parliament on the operation of the Act. The Annual Report for 1983-84 reported that fees paid to legal counsel amounted to $24,897. The 1984-85 Annual Report reports that fees paid to legal counsel amounted to $107,865. Specific records on the cost of defending appeals in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), and the Federal Court have not been maintained. No FOI case has yet been heard by the High Court. (3) and (4) My Department gives legal advice on the FOI Act to Commonwealth bodies in the normal performance of its functions. In addition the FOI Act recognises the role of the Attorney-General's Department in assisting agencies to comply with their obligations under the Act. It requires that the Annual Report on the Act describe the relevant activities undertaken by the Department: see Chapter 3 of the 1982-83 Annual Report and Chapter 5 of both the 1983-84 Annual Report and the 1984-85 Annual Report. In addition to the work undertaken by the FOI Branch of my Department, the Australian Government Solicitor represents many agencies in relation to proceedings under the FOI Act as in any other situation. Some statutory bodies receive legal advice on FOI matters from legal advisors in their own staff or from private legal practitioners. (5) The Attorney-General's Department provides legal advice or assistance on request to all agencies in respect of the Act or proceedings thereunder and the Australian Government Solicitor represents agencies in appeal proceedings on instruction. It is a matter for each agency to consider whether it will seek legal advice or assistance on FOI matters, except where proceedings in a Court are involved. (6) There are no special guidelines limiting expenditure on legal assistance in respect of the Freedom of Information Act or proceedings brought under the Act. However, pursuant to Finance Direction 13/7 and 13/8, claims for payment of legal costs shall not be certified in accordance with section 34 (2) of the Audit Act 1901 unless they have been endorsed fair and reasonable by the Secretary, Attorney-General's Department or a Director of Legal Services or an officer appointed by him. Also, where the Australian Government Solicitor acts for a Department or agency, the Australian Government Solicitor has a role in determining whether counsel should be engaged and, if counsel is to be engaged, has the final responsibility for the selection of counsel. On 14 June 1985 it was announced that the Government has decided that agencies should reimburse the Australian Government Solicitor in defending FOI cases in the AAT and the Federal Court. This is consistent with the provisions of section 29/1 of the Finance Directions. (7) Measures have been taken to avoid any difficulties resulting from the performance of the dual responsibilities. For example, my Department in its role as the Department responsible for administering the Act might advise an agency not to contest an appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal against a decision made by the agency under the Act and, if the agency was not dissuaded from contesting the appeal, my Department would bring the matter to my notice. It has been arranged, however, that in such circumstances the Australian Government Solicitor would continue to act in the ordinary way as solicitor on the instructions of the client agency. Also, measures have been taken within my Department with a view to ensuring co-ordination of advice as to prospects of resisting an appeal to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and advice generally under the Act. (8) There have been three recommendations in accordance with sub-section 66 (1). Decisions in respect of each have yet to be made. (9) This matter could be considered in the context of a general review of the FOI Act which is expected next year. (Question No. 1156) Mr Price asked the Minister representing the Minister for Resources and Energy, upon notice, on 16 May 1985: (1) Do formal procedures exist for the handling of Ministerial representations in the Minister's Department and statutory authorities for which the Minister is responsible; if so, (a) what are the titles of the instructions and when were they issued and (b) are target times provided (i) formally or (ii) informally; if so what are they. (2) Is the performance with which representations are dealt with monitored; if so, what was the percentage of representations that met their targets in 1985, to 16 May. Mr Barry Jones —The Minister for Resources and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) Yes. (a) Typing Manual for Authors issued in August 1981. (b) Replies to correspondence from: * Federal and State Parliamentarians-10 working days; and * Private citizens-20 working days from receipt in my Department unless otherwise indicated by my Office. (2) Yes; 47 per cent. My Department has recently completed entering records of Ministerial Correspondence received since December 1984 into a central computerised information system which resulted in the delay in providing this part of the answer to the honourable member. (Question No. 1266) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Trade, upon notice, on 23 May 1985: (1) In view of the Government's decision to exclude tourism from the export market development grants scheme, has the Government given any undertaking to maintain eligibility for grants for operators with contractual marketing operations extending beyond 20 May 1985. (2) If the Government has adopted this policy, how many firms and businesses are involved and what is the cost of this undertaking. Mr Dawkins —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) At the time the Government announced that the tourism industry was to be excluded from the export market development grants (EMDG) scheme, effective from 20 May 1985, it indicated that the Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism, Mr John Brown, would be bringing forward separate proposals for providing assistance to the industry. Subsequently, on 19 June 1985, the Acting Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism, Mr Peter Morris, announced the introduction of the tourism overseas promotion scheme, effective 20 May 1985. Detailed guidelines for TOPS were released by the Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism, on 25 September 1985. In the circumstances there is no need for the Government to give an undertaking to maintain eligibility for grants for operators with contractual marketing operations extending beyond 20 May 1985, since the overseas promotional activities of these operators will be subject to the provisions of the tourism overseas promotion scheme from that date. A Bill to give effect to the amendments to the EMDG scheme was enacted on 16 October 1985. (Question No. 1433) Mr Blunt asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 20 August 1985: (1) What advertising campaigns and research studies have been conducted or commissioned by the Minister's Department since March 1983. (2) Did any other Government agencies advise or co-ordinate any of these campaigns or research studies. (3) If an advertising agency or market research firm was used (a) what is its name and (b) what amount was it paid. (4) What was (a) the cost and (b) in the case of advertising campaigns, the split between agency fees and actual campaign costs for each campaign or study. Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: FAMILY CONCILIATION CENTRE PILOT PROJECT, JANUARY 1985 (1) Research studies were conducted for this project in relation to the naming of the centres and to community awareness studies. (2) Information Co-ordination Branch Advertising Services, Department of Sport, Recreation and Tourism. (3) (a) Australian Market Research Pty Ltd. (b) $30,625. (4) Not applicable. REFERENDUM CAMPAIGN, NOVEMBER 1983 (1) An advertising campaign and a research study were commissioned by the Department in November 1983 in relation to the proposals that the Government intended to put to referendum in February 1984. (2) The Department of the Special Minister of State provided advice and co-ordinated both the advertising campaign and the research study. (3) (a) The advertising agency selected was Chandler Hambleton and the market research firm selected was Australian National Opinion Polls (ANOP). (b) Chandler Hambleton was paid $73,444. ANOP was paid $43,845. (4) The amounts which were incurred prior to the rejection of the Referendum (Constitution Alteration) Amendment Bill 1983 were as follows: Preparation and production of information kits, $33,603; travel and incidentals, $1,628; research, $42,218; two lots of agency time that were billed separately, $25,891 and $8,027; production, including a television cancellation fee, $5,922; a total of $117,289. (Question No. 1436) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice, on 20 August 1985: (1) What advertising campaigns and research studies have been conducted or commissioned by the Minister's Department since March 1983. (2) Did any other Government agencies advise or co-ordinate any of these campaigns or research studies. (3) If an advertising agency or market research firm was used (a) what was its name and (b) what amount was it paid. (4) What was (a) the cost and (b) in the case of advertising campaigns, the split between agency fees and actual campaign costs for each campaign or study. Mr Willis —The answer to the honourable member's question is given in the following table: ADVERTISING CAMPAIGNS (1) (2) 3 (a) 3 (b) 4 (a) 4 (b) Campaign title Other Government Agencies Agency Agency costs Total campaign costs Media costs $ $ $ Prices and Incomes Accord assessment and production of publicity materials (1984-85) Department of the Special Minister of State and Australian Government Advertising Service (AGAS) Hyde, Everett and Fuller (Vic.) Payment included production costs 11,693.86 See Column 3 (b) Recruitment of Assistant Research Officers (August 1983) AGAS Neville Jeffris (N.S.W.) Payment included placement of advertisement and production costs 4,742 See Column 3 (b) Recruitment of Assistant Research Officers (August 1984) AGAS Neville Jeffris (N.S.W.) Payment included placement of advertisement and production costs 2,500 See Column 3 (b) Recruitment of Assistant Research Officers (June 1985) . . Gordon and Gotch (N.S.W.) Payment included placement of advertisement and production costs 3,892 See Column 3 (b) Employee Participation/Industrial Democracy Research Grants Scheme and Cost Subsidisation Program-Advertising campaign calling for applications (1983-84) Advertisement prepared by the Department of Employment and Industrial Relations Gordon and Gotch (N.S.W.) The Agency arranged placement of advertisement in nominated newspapers 10,750 See Column 3 (b) Employee Participation/Industrial Democracy Research Grants Scheme and Cost Subsidisation Program-Advertising campaign calling for applications (1984-85) Advertisement prepared by the Department of Employment and Industrial Relations Gordon and Gotch (N.S.W.) The Agency arranged placement of advertisement in nominated newspapers 11,000 See Column 3 (b) Community Employment Program Promotion (1983-84) AGAS Ogilvy and Mather (Vic) Monahan Dayman Adams (Vic) 8,474 14,194 71,535 48,867 National Training Council Promotion (1983-84) AGAS/NTC Hyde Everett Fuller Kutt (Vic.) 2,647 80,475 77,828 National Training Council Promotion (1985) AGAS/NTC Schofield Sherbon Baker (Vic.) 15,326 127,331 112,005 National Aboriginal Employment Development Committee (Aboriginal Employment)-promotion to encourage the employment of Aboriginals (1984) NAEDC Le Grand McCann Erikson (Qld) 490 78,158 77,668 National Aboriginal Employment Development Committee (Aboriginal Employment)-promotion to encourage the employment of Aboriginals (1985) AGAS/NAEDC Le Grand McCann Erikson (Qld) 26,973 205,931 178,958 Apprenticeship Support-promotion to encourage employers to recruit apprentices through the CES and promotion of CRAFT rates (1984) AGAS Schofield Sherbon Baker (Vic.) Adex Fortune (S.A.) 10,333 213 229,209 218,663 Job Bank-promotion to launch Job Bank (1983-84) AGAS Schofield Sherbon Baker (Vic.) 27,234 84,593 57,359 Templine-promotion to launch Templine (1983 + 1985) AGAS Schofield Sherbon Baker (Vic.) Le Grand McCann Erikson (Qld) 630 1,307 98,265 96,328 (Question No. 1442) Mr Blunt asked the Minister representing the Minister for Resources and Energy, upon notice, on 20 August 1985: (1) What advertising campaigns and research studies have been conducted or commissioned by the Minister's Department since March 1983. (2) Did any other Government agencies advise or co-ordinate any of these campaigns or research studies. (3) If an advertising agency or market research firm was used (a) what was its name and (b) what amount was it paid. (4) What was (a) the cost and (b) in the case of advertising campaigns, the split between agency fees and actual campaign costs for each campaign or study. Mr Barry Jones —The Minister for Resources and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) to (4) Campaign/Study Other government involvement (1) Agency/Consultancy (2) Media used Costs Fees Exp/prod'n Media (a) Advertising Campaigns 1983- Fuel Consumption Guide Nil John Clemenger (NSW) P/L Press (National Daily) (3) 1,400 2,685 National Energy Management Awards Nil John Clemenger (NSW) P/L Press; professional journals (3) 1,654 22,961 1984- Fuel Consumption Guide Nil Harris Robinson Courtenay Press 4707 (4) 1,827 9,585 Fuel Consumption Guide Nil Harris Robinson Courtenay Display material (4) 910 - National Energy Management Awards Nil Harris Robinson Courtenay Press; journals (3) 794 36,148 Energy Audit Subsidy Scheme Nil - Press; journals - 805 11,637 1985 Fuel Consumption Guide Nil Harris Robinson Courtenay Press; journals 2240 (4) 1,490 25,904 Fuel Consumption Harris Robinson Courtenay Display material 360 2,351 - National Energy Management Awards Nil Harris Robinson Courtenay Press; journals 2358 (4) 1,180 11,937 Heavy vehicle fuel economy Nil USP Needham Magazine insert (3) - 5,228 Commonwealth Energy Management Program Nil Harris Robinson Courtenay Display materials 11,076 (4) 12,189 - (b) Research Studies 1983- Energy Labelling of Appliances Consumer Attitudes State energy departments/authorites Australian Nationwide Opinion Polls - 23,000 (5) incl - 1984- Impact of fuel consumptions data on vehicle purchase patterns NSW Energy Authority Australian Nationwide Opinion Polls - 14,000 (5) incl - 1985- Energy education materials availability and usefulness Department Education (Curriculum Development Centre Corporate Education Resources Pty Ltd - 10,000 incl - Notes: (1) All advertising arrangements conducted through Information Co-ordination Branch, Department of Sport, Recreation and Tourism, or as instructed by that Branch. (2) In the case of Clemengers and Harris Robinson Courtenay, agency provides creative/advisory services. Other agencies involved in media placement. (3) Creative fees not separately available. Paid from media etc. commissions pool in accordance with established procedure. (4) Fees encompass considerably wider services than creation of media or materials. However, fees directly related to individual campaign components cannot be separately identified. (5) Commonwealth share only. (Question No. 1513) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 20 August 1985: (1) What brands of computer or automatic data processing hardware are in use in the Minister's Department and each authority for which the Minister is responsible. (2) For each major system (a) what is its principal function, (b) when was it installed, (c) what was the hardware cost, (d) what is its anticipated life and (e) what action is being taken in relation to its replacement. (3) Is any major system shared with any other user; if so, who and for what main purpose. Mr Holding —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The relevant agencies using computer or ADP hardware are the Department of Aboriginal Affairs, the Aboriginal Development Commission, the Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, Aboriginal Hostels Limited and the Aboriginals Benefits Trust Account. The response in respect of each of these agencies is set out on the following table. ADVERTISING CAMPAIGNS (1) Campaign title (2) Other Government agencies 3 (a) Advertising agency 3 (b) Agency costs 4 (a) Total campaign costs 4 (b) Media costs ($) ($) Labour Market Programs-promotion to encourage employers to use Government Labour Market Programs (1984-85) - Le Grand McCann Erikson (QLD) 9 133 66 484 57 351 Disadvantaged Groups (eg Disabled)-promotion to encourage employment of the disadvantaged (1983-85) - Le Grand McCann Erikson (QLD) Adex Fortune (SA) 80 150 35 288 35 058 CES Self Service-promotion to encourage usage of Self Service in CES to Job Seekers and Employers (1983) - Le Grand McCann Erikson (QLD) 158 4 622 4 464 General promotion of CES Services to employers (1983-85) - Le Grand McCann Erikson (QLD) I H J Advertising (NSW) 444 9 901 97 197 86 852 Tourism/Hospitality Employment Services-promotion to encourage employers in the Tourism/Hospitality industries to use the CES when vacancies arise and promote jobs in those areas to job seekers (1983-85) - I H J Advertising (NSW) Barr Wolard Course Advertising (NT) Adex Fortune (SA) 3 335 700 130 24 862 20 697 Rural Employment Services-to promote CES services to the Rural Sector (1984-85) - Adex Fortune (SA) 717 22 460 21 743 School Leavers-promotion to encourage employment of School Leavers (1984) AGAS Advertisement prepared by the Department of Employment and Industrial Relations - - 10 542 10 542 CES Casuals Services-promotion of these services to employers (1984-85) - I H J Advertising (NSW) 6 327 19 266 12 939 Professional Employment Service-promotion of this service to employers (1984-85) - I H J Advertising (NSW) 2 094 9 110 7 016 Career Reference Centre/Work Information Centre-promotion of the range of information available to Job Seekers (1983-85) - Adex Fortune (SA) 497 38 360 37 863 Skills West-to promote joint State/Federal Government employment scheme (1985) - Langoulant Needham (WA) 94 4 775 4 681 Migrant Skills Promotion AGAS Advertisement prepared by the Department of Employment and Industrial Relations - - 1 760 1 760 School to Work Transition-promotion to encourage young people to take part in courses and promote employment of graduates of the courses (1983-85) - Adex Fortune (SA) 61 3 870 3 809 Let's Get the North Working-Job Drive promotion in South Australia (1984) - Adex Fortune (SA) 173 3 521 3 348 RESEARCH STUDIES (1) Study (2) Other Government agency (3) Research firm (4) Cost ($) CES Vacancy Market Penetration in ACT (1983) - Canberra College of Advanced Education (ACT) 5 625 Employer Perceptions to CES in Darwin (1983-1984) - Australian National University (North Australia Research Unit) 10 000 Employer Attitudes to Aboriginal Employment (Qld) (1984) - Catalyst Consulting Group (Qld) 14 400 Gold Coast Hospitality Industry (1984) - Catalyst Consulting Group (Qld) 3 000 CES Market Penetration Tasmania (1985) - Tastech (TAS) 19 300 Tasmanian Tourism and Hospitality Industry Survey (1985) - Markrand Pty Ltd (TAS) 2 300 National Employer Survey-Professional Employment Service (1985) - Roy Morgan Research (VIC) 40 600 Prices and Incomes Accord-questions on perceptions of the Accord in Omnibus Surveys (December 1983) - Roy Morgan Research (VIC) 2 440 Prices and Incomes Accord-questions on perceptions of the Accord in Omnibus Surveys (August 1985) - Roy Morgan Research (VIC) 9 959 Prices and Incomes Accord-monitoring of perceptions of the Accord (1985) - Hyde, Everett and Fuller, Advertising Agency (VIC) (Research was sub-contracted to Survey Research Group (VIC)) 26 866.84 Brand of Computer or ADP Hardware Principal Function When Installed Hardware Cost $ Anticipated Life DEPARTMENT OF ABORIGINAL AFFAIRS (i) Raytheon PTS 1000/2000/4000 Budget (Financial control); community profiles; ministerial correspondence register; mailing lists; register of councils and associations 1982 1983 1984 1985 68,000 5 years (ii) IBM PC/XT Statistical analysis and reporting 1984 9,000 5 years (iii) IBM PC Budget (financial control) 1985 8,000 5 years (iv) Remington PCs Management services systems 1984/85 16,000 5 years No action has yet been taken to replace systems. For most of its data processing the Department uses the Department of Health IBM network. ABORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Honeywell and NEC Information storage and retrieval system for housing and enterprise loan functions 1983 72,521 (initial) 50,000 (subsequent) 3-5 years No action has yet been taken to replace the system. The system is not shared with any other user. ABORIGINALS BENEFIT TRUST ACCOUNT IBM PC/XT Accounts, Word Processing 1983/84 10,000 5 years (i) WICAT Data processing (library); word-processing 1984/85 83,760 20,818 (upgrade) 6-8 years (ii) MICROMATION Back-up services 1981-82 7,100 20,000 (upgrade) 6-8 years (iii) DEC Accounts system 1984 8,580 6-8 years (iv) Osborne/Kaypro Field (portable) use; word-processing and data storage 1983/84 44,600 4-6 years (v) Compugraphic Typesetting and page designing 1985 89,000 6-8 years No action has yet been taken to replace systems. The systems are not shared with any other user, but eventual integration with the Museum of Australia is planned. ABORIGINAL HOSTELS LIMITED (i) Sanyo MBC-1000 Word-processing and training 1984 39,000 5 years (ii) Altos ACS 8000 Accounts processing and reporting 1983 13,500 3 years Associated Hardware Actstar Winchester Project development construction; Budget preparation; financial tasks 1984 3,525 5 years Data Bridge V22 telephone modem Transfer of information between Regions and Central Office. 1984 8,847 5 years VDU Payroll processing 1980 and 1983 4,288 10 years Toshiba Pl350 High Speed Printer Accounting reports and drawing cheques 1983 and 1984 5,572 3 years Black Box Switch Enables printers to be switched between Sanyo and Altos computers 1983 350 10 years Digital Decwriter Production of payroll cheques and reports 1980 3,333 7 years Altos Magnetic Tape Unit To back up all information stored on Altos computer 1985 4,000 5 years The Altos ACs 8000 is the major piece of equipment which will require replacement. Action will be taken in the light of advice provided by a firm of consultants. There is no sharing with another organisation. (Question No. 1518) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Trade, upon notice, on 20 August 1985: (1) Were any tourism operators granted interim assistance under the Export Market Development Grants (EMDG) scheme after 20 May 1985 when tourism was excluded from the scheme; if so, (a) who were they, (b) why were they granted assistance and (c) who approved this assistance. (2) Which tourism operators were not extended interim assistance under the EMDG scheme after it ceased to cover tourism. (3) Were any tourism operators denied interim assistance; if so, (a) who were they, (b) why were they denied assistance and (c) who decided that such assistance should be denied. Mr Dawkins —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) to (3) At the time the Government announced that the tourism industry was to be excluded from the Export Market Development Grants (EMDG) scheme, effective from 20 May 1985, it indicated that the Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism would be bringing forward separate proposals for providing assistance to the industry. Subsequently, on 19 June 1985, the Acting Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism, the Hon Peter Morris, announced the introduction of the Tourism Overseas Promotion Scheme, effective from 20 May 1985. Detailed guidelines for TOPS were released by the Minister for Sport, Recreation and Tourism, Mr John Brown, on 25 September 1985. In the circumstances no interim assistance has been necessary for tourism operators under the EMDG scheme after 20 May 1985 since their overseas promotional activities will be subject to the provisions of the Tourism Overseas Promotion Scheme from that date. A Bill to give effect to the amendments to the EMDG scheme was enacted on 16 October 1985. (Question No. 1559) Mr Jacobi asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 22 August 1985: (1) Is it a fact that (a) certain provisions of the Companies Code concern defaulting and/or fraudulent company directors, (b) the courts have applied strict interpretations in dealing with the component of fraud in fraudulent transactions and (c) s.556(1) of the Code and its associated provisions could be a major weapon in the armoury against misfeasance. (2) Has his attention been drawn to (a) the statements by Mr James Farmer in his publication `Creditor and Debtor Law' which hailed s.556(3) of the Code as a boon to liquidators stating that they would not have to wait for convictions before bringing in funds under ss.556(1) and (3) and (b) the judgment of Young J. in the New South Wales Supreme Court Ross, McConnel Kitchen &Co. Pty Ltd (in liquidation) v Ross and Ors (1985) 3ACLC 326, 329) which held that only creditors could bring actions under s.556(3). (3) Are s.556(3) proceedings available to creditors only and not liquidators who are able to assess whether or not s.556(1) applies; if so (a) why and (b) will the provisions be amended to make Parliament's intention clear. (4) Is it a fact that (a) s.557(1) allows the court to make a declaration of personal liability where a director has been found guilty of reckless trading and (b) a recovery from a director by the creditor will result in a reduction of the amount of indebtedness of a company; if so, why is the `prescribed person' not given standing under s.557(1) to apply for a declaration of liability. (5) Is it a fact that ss.557(1) and 556(3) restrict the court in the order it may wish to make in that it must make an order or give judgment in favour of the creditor; if so, will he amend the legislation to give the courts a broader discretion. (6) Is it a fact that s.556(1) substantially re-enacts the provisions of s.374C, UCA, in that a controlling director of a company can say that he is prepared to support the company at the time the debt is incurred and then later refuse that support and not pay, leaving the company with no means of paying the creditor; if so, will he take urgent steps to amend the provision to outlaw or discourage this behaviour; if not, why not. Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) In certain circumstances ss.556 and 557 of the Companies Code impose civil and criminal liability on company directors for the debts or fraudulent conduct of a company. (b) Similar provisions dealing with fraud in earlier legislation have been interpreted by the courts as requiring proof of actual dishonesty. (c) Section 556(1) may render the directors and persons involved in the management of a company civilly and criminally liable for a debt of the company if immediately before the debt was incurred there were reasonable grounds to expect that the company would not be able to pay its debts as they fell due. The section is an important element in the scheme of creditor protection adopted by the Code. (2) Yes. (3), (4) and (5) The recent decision of Young J. in the New South Wales Supreme Court in Ross McConnel Kitchen &Co. Pty Ltd (in liquidation) v. Ross &Ors (1985) 3 ACLC 326 was that proceedings for the recovery of a debt under sub-section 556(1) are available to creditors only and not to liquidators. Similary, sub-section 557(1) allows the court to make a declaration of personal liability to a creditor where a person has been convicted of an offence under s.556(1). This is quite different from s.557(2) which allows the court, on the application of a `prescribed person' as defined by s.557(3), to make a declaration of personal liability to the company where a person has been convicted of an offence under s.556(5). There seems little point in allowing a `prescribed person', such as a liquidator, to apply in his representative capacity for a declaration under sub-section 557(1) when the benefit will only accrue to an individual creditor. On the other hand, under sub-section 557(2) the liquidator is quite appropriately seeking a declaration of liability for the benefit of the company as a whole. (6) While s.556(1) is based on s.347C(1), UCA, it has been restructured to place greater responsibility on directors and persons involved in the management of a company at the time when unreasonable debts are incurred. A significant difference relates to the burden of proof. It was an element of the offence under s.347C(1) that the defendant had no reasonable or probable grounds to expect that the company would be able to pay its debts. This placed the burden of proof on the prosecution, making conviction difficult in the case of a director who claimed that at the time the debt was incurred he was prepared to support the company. Under s.556(1) it need only be proved that there were reasonable grounds to expect that the company would be unable to pay its debts. The defendant would then have a defence under s.556(2) only if he were able to prove that the debt was incurred without his authority or consent or that he did not have reasonable grounds to expect that the company would not be able to pay its debts. (Question No. 1560) Mr Smith asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 22 August 1985: (1) How many (a) applications for legal aid were received and (b) grants were made, by the Australian Legal Aid Office in Launceston in each year since 1980. (2) How many grants of legal aid have been made by that office for (a) family law matters, (b) criminal matters, (c) claims for personal injuries and (d) defence of debt recovery services, in each year. (3) What was the average delay between the receipt and the making of a determination on applications in each year. (4) What was the office's staffing level in each year. (5) What procedures does the office have for handling urgent applications for legal aid. Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) Applications received Grants of Aid (a) Grants of Aid in Family Law Matters (b) Grants of Aid in Criminal Law Matters (c) 1980-81... 1,310 1,224 517 290 1981-82... 1,478 1,369 515 379 1982-83... 1,721 1,576 517 490 1983-84... 1,488 1,371 475 454 1984-85... 1,268 1,226 397 396 Notes: (a) While no statistics are available, it is considered that claims for personal injuries would amount to approximately 3 per cent, and defence of debt recovery actions would amount to approximately 3 to 4 per cent, of the total grants of aid. (b) The relevant available statistical information distinguishes, for the most part, only between applications for legal aid arising in family law and general law matters. The latter broad category includes civil and criminal matters such as those described in parts (b), (c) and (d) of question (2). (c) The number of matters shown as grants in criminal law matters relates only to those applications involving State laws. Figures relating to grants of aid in Commonwealth criminal law matters have not been separately recorded (see note (b) above). (3) There is no specific information available as to the average delay between the receipt and the making of a determination on applications. However, I understand that at the present time, unless an application for aid is seen clearly to be urgent (see answer to question (5) below), the time taken to determine an application for aid from its receipt until a letter notifying the decision is despatched is, on average, 7 days. (4) The establishment level and also the average staffing level for each year ending at 30 June are as follows: Establishment Average 1980... 4 4 1981... 4 4 1982... 4 3 1983... 4 4 1984... 4 4 1985... 5 5 (5) Where an application for aid is made to the office that is seen clearly to be urgent, for instance it may have been hand-delivered or preceded by a telephone enquiry, it will be immediately directed for consideration. The usual practice is for the applicant or his or her solicitor to be informed of the decision by telephone before formal notification of the decision is made in writing. The office will also consider applications for aid in urgent cases that are made by telephone. If time permits, the solicitor making such a request is asked to submit an application in the usual manner. If it is not possible in the time available for the solicitor to obtain a completed application form from the client the solicitor may be able to submit a letter containing the relevant facts. However, if the matter is of such urgency that an application form cannot be obtained and the solicitor cannot forward a letter regarding the matter, consideration can be given to the application on the facts obtained by telephone. A careful note of the relevant facts is made when the matter is being discussed with the solicitor, including the full name and address of the client, and the solicitor is advised to submit a proper application without delay. If the facts stated in the application confirm the information furnished by telephone the grant of aid will backdate to the date of the telephone conversation. On occasions, aid is granted over the telephone. (Question No. 1573) Mr Smith asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 23 August 1985: (1) Will the Minister provide details of all expenditure within his Department in 1984-85 for compensation and legal expenses as outlined in Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 1985-86. (2) What was the (a) amount and (b) nature of the expenditure in each case for (i) compensation and (ii) legal expenses. (3) What was the name of each recipient of payment for legal expenses. Mr Keating —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Total expenditure in 1984-85 for item 670-3-01, `Compensation and Legal Expenses', as contained in Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 1985-86, was $193,085.75, comprising $34,210.13 in compensation payments and $158,875.62 in legal expenses. (2) and (3) Details of all expenditure included in the item `Compensation and Legal Expenses' are as set out in Table 1 for compensation and Table 2 for legal expenses. TABLE 1-DETAILS OF COMPENSATION PAYMENTS, 1984-85 Case Amount $ Particulars 1. Arm neck and thumb injury... 89.50 Medical expenses 2. Knee injury... 254.00 Medical expenses 3. Head injury... 429.30 Medical expenses 240.00 669.30 Medical reports 4. RSI... 425.10 Medical expenses 77.59 Misc. expenses 89.00 Medical report 591.69 5. Stress... 13.20 Medical expenses 6. RSI... 124.00 Medical expenses 7. Strained back muscles... 125.00 Medical expenses 8. RSI... 4.00 Misc. expenses 999.34 Medical expenses 1,003.34 9. RSI... 4.00 Misc. expenses 118.50 Medical expenses 122.50 10. RSI... 500.00 Medical expenses 11. RSI... 1,562.50 Medical expenses 201.75 Misc. expenses 1,764.25 12. RSI... 682.00 Medical expenses 65.00 Medical report 747.00 13. Back injury... 392.49 Misc. expenses 815.50 Medical expenses 60.00 Medical report 6,279.52 Compensation 7,547.51 14. RSI... 361.50 Medical expenses 45.00 Medical report 2.30 Misc. expenses 408.80 15. RSI... 1,554.80 Medical expenses 4.00 Misc. expenses 50.00 Medical report 1,608.80 16. Bruising and back pain... 32.00 Medical report 697.85 Medical expenses 6.40 Misc. expenses 736.25 17. Onychoschizia... 12,675.00 Compensation 18. RSI... 873.50 Medical expenses 19. RSI... 212.90 Medical expenses 20. Chronic neck strain... 97.00 Medical expenses 21. RSI... 635.00 Medical expenses 22. RSI... 35.00 Medical expenses 180.00 Medical expenses 215.00 23. Bruising and knee abrasions... 44.10 Medical expenses 24. RSI... 15.00 Medical expenses 25. Knee injury... 1,557.54 Medical expenses 26.90 Misc. expenses 20.00 Medical report 1,604.44 26. Neck and spine injury... 75.00 Medical expenses 27. Broken nose... 370.50 Medical expenses 28. RSI... 30.00 Medical expenses 29. Eye tests... 86.00 Medical expenses 30. Eye tests... 43.00 Medical expenses 31. Damage to clothing... 34.95 Reimburse 32. Damage to clothing... 70.00 Reimburse 33. Damage to clothing... 40.00 Reimburse 34. Damage to clothing... 3.60 Reimburse 35. Damage to clothing... 5.00 Reimburse 36. Damage to clothing... 49.00 Reimburse 37. Damage to clothing... 40.00 Reimburse 38. Damage to clothing... 35.00 Reimburse 39. Damage to glasses... 179.00 Reimburse 40. Eye tests... 43.00 Medical expenses 41. Injury to thigh and shoulder... 35.00 Medical report 42. Other medical reports (a)... 464.00 TOTAL... 34,210.13 (a) Includes reports associated with invalidity retirement and employment matters. TABLE 2 DETAILS OF LEGAL EXPENSES, 1984-85 Amount Nature of expenditure Recipient $ 1. Mr Manzo-Prosecution under Banking (Foreign Exchange) Regulations 120.00 Interpreter fees... Dimo Galiungi and Associates 2. M. S. Moussa-Prosecution under Banking (Foreign Exchange) Regulations 520.00 Interpreter fees... Dimo Galiungi and Associates 3. Murchinson vs Keating Fed. Court ADJR 2,500.00 Counsel fees... Mr R. S. French 4. V. Leelhasuwan-Prosecution under Banking (Foreign Exchange) Regulations 120.00 Interpreter fees... Dimo Galiungi and Associates 5. Swann Insurance and Others-Prosecution under Banking (Foreign Exchange) Regulations 730.00 Expert advice... D. R. Prideaux 550.00 Legal opinion... Mr R. Maidment 908.00 Costs associated with provision of advice... Mr N. A. J. Watson 6. Mr D. H. Eastman-Freedom of Information Appeal 1,300.00 Counsel fees... Australian Government Solicitor who paid Dr G. Flick 7. Insurance Commissioner and Crest Insurance 2,555.00 Counsel fees... Mr R. A. Emmett 645.00 Cost of complying with the subpoena... Australian Government Solicitor who paid Co-Insurance Underwriters Pty Ltd 8. Hamidan Pty Ltd Prosecution 400.00 Counsel fees-opinion... Mr D. A. Ipp 18,570.00 Counsel fees... Mr A. J. Templeman 17,410.00 Counsel fees... Mr R. S. French 5,750.00 Counsel fees... M. McCusker, QC 75.00 Searches in Hong Kong... Dun and Bradstreet 8,187.51 Verbatim report of committal hearing... Crown Law Department (WA) 9,650.00 Counsel fees... Mr G. Maguire 2,199.46 Reimburse expenses incurred in Singapore interviewing witnesses... Director of Legal Services Attorney-General's Department, WA 9,887.66 Reimburse witnesses expenses: 3 from Hong Kong, 1 from Brisbane... Director of Legal Services Attorney-General's Department, WA 8,225.51 Reimburse witnesses expenses... Director of Legal Services Attorney-General's Department, WA 1,110.55 Legal Officer fees... Director of Legal Services Attorney-General's Department, WA 437.82 Administration fees... Director of Legal Services Attorney-General's Department, WA 808.04 Legal fees... Director of Legal Services Attorney-General's Department, WA 3,885.80 Reimburse telephone expenses... Australian Government Solicitor Perth 386.81 Provision of International directories... Australian Government Solicitor who paid World Telex (Aust.) Pty Ltd 110.00 Witness expenses... Barclays Bank International Ltd 9. Savona Pty Ltd and J. S. Young-Prosecution under Foreign Takeovers Act 11,325.00 Counsel fees... Mr B. T. Sully, QC 7,413.00 Counsel fees... Mrs P. Flemming 10. E. Taouk and H. Taouk-Prosecution under Banking (Foreign Exchange) Regulations 200.00 Interpreter fees... Dimo Galiungi and Associates 126.74 Witness expenses... Mr P. Dagher 138.60 Witness expenses... Mr N. Gallagher 17.00 Witness expenses... Mr B. W. Roberts 4.90 Witness expenses... Ms L. Stewart 11. Forsyth and others-forged $50 notes 200.00 Witness expenses... J. Febrato 138.20 Witness expenses... J. Fernandez 832.00 Witness expenses... B. Haynes 1,133.52 Witness expenses... H. A. Lucas 78.90 Witness expenses... J. Manning 4,500.00 Counsel fees... Mr I. McIvor 12. Cargo and Marine Underwriting Agency Pty Ltd vs Trans-Pacific Insurance 525.00 Counsel fees... Mr J. Harris 13. Sentry Life Assurance vs Life Insurance Commissioner 22.40 Printing documents... Australian Government Solicitor who paid Printers Devil 5,550.00 Counsel fees... R. J. Burbridge 2,998.00 Counsel fees... L. Katz 2,946.00 Counsel fees... Ms C. Prime 14. J. Waterford-Freedom of Information Appeal 1,803.00 Counsel fees... Australian Government Solicitor who paid J. J. Steele 15. M. Alexis Prosecution under Banking (Foreign Exchange) Regulations 80.00 Interpreter fees... Dimo Galiungi and Associates 16. J. L. Houri Prosecution under Banking (Foreign Exchange) Regulations 160.00 Interpreter fees... Dimo Galiungi and Associates 17. D. C. Waterhouse Prosecution under Banking (Foreign Exchange) Regulations 850.00 Counsel fees... Mr P. Roberts 18. Marine Hull and Liability Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Insurance Commissioner 750.00 Counsel fees... Mr J. Burnside 1,485.00 Counsel fees... Mr J. J. Steele 19. Falkirk Assurance Society vs Life Insurance Commissioner 600.00 Counsel fees... Mr Whittle 20. The Hon. John Howard, MP-Freedom of Information Appeal 5,790.00 Counsel fees... Australian Government Solicitor who paid Dr. G. A. Flick 21. Plegas-Prosecution under Banking (Foreign Exchange) Regulations 1,125.00 Counsel fees... Mr N. R. Cowdery 240.00 Interpreter fees... Dimo Galiungi and Associates 22. S. Maneesaeng-Prosecution under Banking (Foreign Exchange) Regulations 80.00 Interpreter fees... Dimo Galiungi and Associates 23. M. Salim-Prosecution under Banking (Foreign Exchange) Regulations 900.00 Counsel fees... Mr N. R. Cowdery 370.00 Interpreter fees... Mr Nadv Tan-Widvasurva 24. Waterford-Freedom of Information Appeal 2,551.00 Counsel fees... Australian Government Solicitor who paid J. J. Steele 25. D. McKay and M. Wrest Prosecution under RBA Act 675.00 Counsel fees... Mr B. Skinner 26. A. Pandeleos and C. Kathiotis Prosecution under RBA Act 200.00 Counsel fees... Mr R. F. Sutherland 27. Onsite Mobile Industries Pty Ltd vs Old Charter Insurance Co. Pty 410.00 Counsel fees... Mr R. M. Goot 28. Maher-Freedom of Information Appeal 3,087.00 Counsel fees... Ms S. Kenny 29. Lordsvale Finance Freedom of Information Appeal 2,213.00 Counsel fees... Australian Government Solicitor who paid Ms S. Kenny 30. Other Items 58.50 Copy of Court Transcript... Chief Court Reporter 15.00 T. R. White-Service of Documents... Australian Government Solicitor who paid Southern Tablelands Investigations 2.00 Copy of Judgment... High Court 139.20 Travel of draftsman to meeting `Insurance Contracts Standard Cover Regulations'.... Law Reform Commission TOTAL... $158,875.62 (Question No. 1579) Mr Smith asked the Minister for Trade, upon notice, on 23 August 1985: (1) Will the Minister provide details of all expenditure within his Department in 1984-85 for compensation and legal expenses as outlined in Appropriation Bill (No. 1) for 1985-86. (2) What was the (a) amount and (b) nature of the expenditure in each case for (i) compensation and (ii) legal expenses. (3) What was the name of each recipient of payment for legal expenses. Mr Dawkins —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) to (3)- (i) Compensation under Compensation (Commonwealth Government Employees) Act: Expenditure in 1984-85 totalled $136,910.60. This covered regular on-going compensation payments ($37,625.22) made to or on behalf of eight former employees and three current employees on long term sick leave in accordance with determinations of the Commissioner for Employees' Compensation. The balance of expenditure ($99,285.38) covered payments to medical practitioners, chemists, hospitals, etc., relating to employee compensation determinations in respect of 47 officers and comprising 146 individual transactions. (ii) Other Compensation Payments: Expenditure in 1984-85 totalled $687.35 for damage to clothing and personal effects. (iii) Legal Expenses Amount Recipient Service $ 3,250 M. McHugh QC Memorandum of fees-advice in the matter of the Gove Peninsular Bauxite and Alumina Project 1,420 N. Moshinsky Memorandum of fees-representing the Commonwealth re appeal under the CE(RR) Act 60 G. Conron Memorandum of fees-cost for attending hearing re appeal under the CE(RR) Act 160 A. V. &F. P. Borland Reimbursement of costs for Dr Schiller attending hearing re compensation claim 525 Australian Government Solicitor Memorandum of fees-Chris Hudson &Co. representing the Commonwealth at compensation hearing 80 Australian Government Solicitor Cost of attending hearing for Dr Cassar re compensation claim 45 Australian Government Solicitor Cost of attending hearing for Dr Chandran re compensation claim 40 Australian Government Solicitor Service of documents-Southern Tablelands Investigations re compensation claim 1,260 Australian Government Solicitor Memorandum of fees-Mr J. Dunford representing the Commonwealth at compansation hearing 600 Australian Government Solicitor Memorandum of fees-Mr R. Williams representing the Commonwealth at compensation hearing 1.777 (additional $11,343 refunded by recovery from Australian Government Solicitor Australian Government Solicitor Memorandum of fees-Mr H. Fryberg, Mr R. Gotterson and Mr C. Pincus for legal services in Commonwealth vs Curragh Coal Sales. (Question No. 1593) Mr Smith asked the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 23 August 1985: (1) Will the Minister provide details of all expenditure within his Department in 1984-85 for compensation and legal expenses as outlined in Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 1985-86. (2) What was the (a) amount and (b) nature of the expenditure in each case for (i) compensation and (ii) legal expenses. (3) What was the name of each recipient of payment for legal expenses. Mr Holding —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Compensation payments under the Compensation (Commonwealth Government Employees) Act 1971 in 1984-85 totalled $123,000. (2) Expenditure in (1) consisted of compensation payments to 57 employees and former employees and 1 dependant of a former employee. All expenditure was in accordance with determinations of the Commissioner for Employees' Compensation and involved payments to medical practitioners, chemists, hospitals etc. for medical expenses. (3) No payments were made for legal expenses. (Question No. 1600) Mr Downer asked the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice, on 23 August 1985: (1) How many Community Youth Support Scheme projects were operating in South Australia on 20 August 1985. (2) Where was each project located. (3) What was the funding level for each project as at 20 August 1985. (4) What was the estimated catchment level of unemployed and disadvantaged youth aged between 15 and 25 years for each project as at 20 August 1985. (5) Which projects in existence in South Australia on 20 August 1985 will be upgraded to a new level as stated in Budget Paper No. 13. (6) How may people were employed by each project operating on 20 August 1985. (7) What was the salary of each employee as at 20 August 1985. Mr Willis —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) There were 34 Community Youth Support Scheme projects operating in South Australia on 20 August 1985. Questions 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 are answered in the table attached. (5) The projects which have been upgraded to a new funding level for the 1985/86 grant year are: Project Name Local Name Funding Level $ Grant 1985/86 Adelaide CYSS... Skills Maintenance Programme Inc... 4 92,000 Angle Park CYSS... Parks... 4 92,000 Elizabeth Vale CYSS... Elizabeth CYSS... 4 92,000 Mile End CYSS... Thebarton CYSS... 4 92,000 Pooraka CYSS... Ingle Farm CYSS... 4 92,000 Tea Tree Gully CYSS... Avago Youth Employment Programme... 4 92,000 Warradale CYSS... Marion CYSS... 4 92,000 Whyalla CYSS... Buildaskill... 4 92,000 Woodville CYSS... Comskil... 4 92,000 Campbelltown CYSS was downgraded to a Level 4 funding of $92,000 for the 1985/86 grant period. Project and address Funding level Grant Number of unemploy- ment benefit recipients in area (1) Per cent unemploy- ment benefit recipients more than 6 months (1) Number of Project Officer(s) employed (2) Estimated Project Officer salary (2) Number of clerical assistants Estimated salary of clerical assistants (3) Number of sessional staff (4) Range of sessional staff rates of hourly pay (4) $ $ $ $ Adelaide CYSS-Adelaide CYSS, `Skills Maintenance Programme Inc' 5th Floor, 23 Peel Street, Adelaide S.A. 5000 2 72,000 -* -* 3 20,188 14,533 10,499 1 7,841 1 30 Aldinga CYSS-Aldinga CYSS, Aldinga Institute, Aldinga S.A. 5173 1 44,000 219 44.3 1 19,224 1 2,608 2 13 Angle Park CYSS-Angle Park CYSS, `Parks', Parks Community Centre, Cowan Street Angle Park S.A. 5010... 2 72,000 1,301 48.9 3 13,694 13,694 18,258 1 8,607 9 10 Berri CYSS-Berry CYSS, `Riverland CYSS Inc.' Old Drive-In, Sturt Highway, Berri S.A. 5343... 1 44,000 652 44.9 1 19.904 1 7,741 8 12 Birkenhead CYSS-Birkenhead CYSS, `The Garage', 34 Victoria Road, Birkenhead S.A. 5015... 2 72,000 1,483 46.9 3 19,844 19,844 17,483 1 2,347 - - Bowden CYSS-Bowden CYSS, `The Warehouse Inc', 21 Trembath Street, Bowden S.A. 5007... 2 72,000 1,113 49.3 3 15,000 15,000 15,000 - - 5 12.25 Campbelltown CYSS-Campbelltown CYSS, `510 House', 510 Lower North East Road, Campbelltown S.A. 5074... 3 100,000 1,797 44.0 3 17,970 17,970 17,970 1 13,440 14 10 Ceduna CYSS-Ceduna CYSS, 6 McKenzie Street, Ceduna S.A. 5690... 1 44,000 135 49.6 2 11,685 13,798 1 3,130 1 14.50 Christies Beach CYSS-Christies Beach CYSS, `Noarlunga Volunteer Youth Bureau', 34 Beach Road, Christies Beach S.A. 5165... 2 72,000 1,044 3.82 2 18,000 13,869 1 8,305 6 10-12 Eastwood CYSS-Eastwood CYSS, `Action Youth Service Inc.', 95 Glen Osmond Road, Eastwood S.A. 5063... 2 72,000 -* -* 4 17,871 19,254 11,245 11,245 - - 12 10 Elizabeth Vale CYSS-Elizabeth Vale CYSS, `Elizabeth CYSS', 4 Trimmer Road, Elizabeth Vale S.A. 5112... 2 72,000 1,216 50.1 3 18,623 13,364 13,364 - - 5 12-20.75 Gawler CYSS-Gawler CYSS, `Gawler and Districts CYSS', Old Fire Station, 8 Jacob Street, Gawler S.A. 5118... 2 72,000 493 48.8 2 20,047 16,500 1 7,841 2 8-11 Gilles Plains CYSS-Gilles Plains CYSS, `Enfield CYSS or the Corner Project', 14 Blacks Road, Gilles Plains S.A. 5086... 2 72,000 1346 43.8 2 14,723 14,723 - - 8 10 Grange CYSS-Grange CYSS, 4 Charles Sturt Avenue, Grange S.A. 5022... 2 72,000 1487 44.4 3 17,922 16,460 16,460 - - 4 5-25 Kadina CYSS-Kadina CYSS, `The Triangle or the Bakehouse', 7 Waring Street, Kadina S.A. 5554... 1 44,000 299 51.1 2 16,000 7,800 1 4,539 4 7 Mile End CYSS-Mile End CYSS, `Thebarton CYSS, Thebarton Youth Service', 89 Henley Beach Road, Mile End S.A. 5031... 2 72,000 1738 45.2 3 18,200 13,650 13,650 1 8,086 8 10 Munno Para CYSS-Munno Para CYSS, `The Station', 90B Main North Road, Munno Para S.A. 5115... 2 72,000 975 47.7 3 18,571 14,337 7,188 1 8,712 5 10 Murray Bridge CYSS-Murray Bridge CYSS, `Murraylands CYSS Project', 66 Swanport Road, Murray Bridge S.A. 5253... 2 72,000 585 45.3 3 20,600 10,794 9,595 - - 6 10 North Adelaide CYSS-North Adelaide CYSS, `The Village CYSS', 61-83 O'Connell Street, North Adelaide S.A. 5006... 2 72,000 -* -* 3 22,000 16,000 8,607 1 2,951 14 9 Norwood CYSS-Norwood CYSS, `Montrose Avenue Youth Service', 72 Fullarton Road, Norwood S.A. 5067... 3 100,000 1144 44.4 2 23,885 13,146 - - 8 13 Nuriootpa CYSS-Nuriootpa CYSS, `Staehr Street Youth Workshop', 16 Staehr Street, Nuriootpa S.A. 5355... 2 72,000 357 42.5 2 17,388 19,717 - - 6 12-25 Plympton CYSS-Plympton CYSS, 9 Clayton Avenue, Plympton S.A. 5038... 3 100,000 1949 43.5 3 22,777 21,546 18,262 1 7,634 15 15 Pooraka CYSS-Pooraka CYSS, `Paddocks CYSS Inc or Ingle Farm CYSS', 2/96 Research Road, Pooraka S.A. 5095... 2 72,000 1211 36.7 3 19,640 10,211 10,211 - - 6 9 Port Adelaide CYSS-Port Adelaide CYSS,`PUP', 70 Dale Street, Port Adelaide, SA 5015... 3 100,000 1829 48.1 3 22,401 17,880 17,880 - - 9 9-10 Port Lincoln CYSS- Port Lincoln CYSS, 8 King Street, Port Lincoln, SA 5606... 2 72,000 564 45.7 3 7,934 18,532 11,119 1 4,225 4 11.70 Port Pirie CYSS-Port Pirie CYSS, 51 Florence Street, Port Pirie, SA 5540... 2 72,000 553 45.8 2 20,500 17,500 - - 5 10 Salisbury CYSS-Salisbury CYSS, `Self Help at Salisbury', Room G1, Salisbury TAFE, Mary Street, Salisbury, SA 5108... 3 100,000 1161 47.5 3 17,100 17,600 19,800 1 11,753 6 10 Sefton Park CYSS-Sefton Park CYSS, `Prospect CYSS', 545 Regency Road, Sefton Park, SA 5083... 2 72,000 1150 41.9 3 18,304 18,304 10,982 - - 4 10 Tea Tree Gully CYSS-Tea Tree Gully CYSS, `Avago Youth Employment Programme', 2 Haines Road, Tea Tree Gully, SA 5091... 2 72,000 1463 37.9 2 21,000 18,200 - - 2 10 Unley CYSS-Unley CYSS, `OASIS', 74 Edmund Avenue, Unley, SA 5061... 3 100,000 1403 40.0 3 21,212 19,731 17,647 1 2,614 7 12 Victor Harbor CYSS-Victor Harbor CYSS, `Care South Coast CYSS', 10 Crozier Road, Victor Harbor, SA 5211... 1 44,000 182 57.7 3 18,057 9,523 14,285 - - 3 10 Warradale CYSS-Warradale CYSS, `Marion CYSS', Cnr Morphett &Oaklands Roads, Warradale, SA 5046... 2 72,000 1416 39.2 3 18,627 16,416 7,678 1 10,984 11 11 Whyalla CYSS-Whyalla CYSS, `Buildaskill', 24-30 Patterson Street, Whyalla City Plaza, SA 5600... 2 72,000 1185 50.9 3 19,000 9,651 12,833 1 7,831 3 7.50-10 Woodville CYSS-Woodville CYSS, `Comskil', 3 Norman Street, Woodville, SA 5011... 2 72,000 1211 43.9 4 16,553 16,902 8,868 5,321 1 2,347 1 10.29 (1) These figures are from the Department of Social Security and give details of unemployment benefit recipients only, these figures are accurate as at mid Feb 1985. (2) These figures are derived from a survey conducted by the Department of Employment and Industrial Relations in August 1985. (3) These figures are derived by multiplying Clerical Assistants' hourly salaries by the number of hours worked per week by 52.1667 to give an annual salary. (4) Sessional Staff are employed on an ad hoc basis and accurate figures cannot be obtained at this stage. * Because these three projects service the whole metropolitan area, no exact unemployment benefit recipient figures can be supplied. (Question No. 1639) Mr Peter Fisher asked the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice, on 11 September 1985: Does the Minister's Department provide local call access to clients to the district or regional offices of the Department; if not, will the Department consider installing a 008 telephone number so that clients currently without local call access can have equal opportunity to contact the Department for assistance. Mr Willis —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: No, there has been no evidence seen by my Department that there could be an appreciable level of demand for such a service or that the usage would justify the cost that the Department would incur. The Offices of the Commonwealth Employment Service are located throughout the country, and this should allow for the greater majority of call traffic to be at local rates. Experience has shown that the incidence of STD calls from clients is small. The Department does, however, operate arrangements where reverse charge calls from clients concerning services and programs are accepted by State and local offices of the CES. Where there is a likelihood that a client will need to contact the Department from some distance such a client would be advised of this procedure and invited to use it. While such instances are not common they do occur in cases concerning the Relocation Assistance Program and in rural locations where CES Offices cover large geographical areas. In view of the foregoing, the Department does not consider that it is necessary or desirable at this time to introduce toll free calls into its operating system. (Question Nos. 1793-1820) Mr Blunt asked all Ministers, upon notice, on 13 September 1985: (1) What (a) industrial disputes, (b) strikes, (c) work bans or (d) work to rule bans have there been within the Minister's Department or authorities under the Minister's control since March 1983. (2) In each case (a) what was the basis of the dispute, (b) what was its outcome, (c) how many employees were involved and (d) for how long were they involved. Mr Willis —As indicated above, the honourable member asked identical questions of all Ministers. As Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Public Service Industrial Matters, I am responding on behalf of all Ministers, with their concurrence. The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) In its statutory role as the authority responsible for determining salary and terms and conditions of employment for Public Service Act staff, and consistent with the current industrial co-ordination arrangements, the Public Service Board monitors industrial activity only for those Departments and Authorities in statutory relationship with the Board. As the collection and collation of the full range of information sought by the honourable member would impose an unreasonable burden on the resources of departments and authorities, the scope of this answer is limited to such information as is certainly recorded by the Board. The information provided to the honourable member covers the period from March 1983 to mid-October 1985. Since 1 June 1984, when the jurisdiction of the Public Service Arbitrator was subsumed within Division 1A of the Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904, the Board has been advised of industrial disputes in Departments and Authorities in statutory relationship with the Board when a dispute has been formally notified to the Conciliation and Arbitration Commission. In the case of those disputes that do not reach the stage of formal notification, the Board relies on formal and informal advice from Departments and Authorities. On this basis, information is maintained on all industrial disputes in Departments and Authorities in statutory relationship with the Board. This information, in response to the honourable member's question, generally covers the timing and duration of disputes, the types of staff involved, the unions involved, the reasons for the form and location of each dispute and their effects. Given the various forms that industrial disputation can take, it is often not possible precisely to ascertain the numbers of persons involved; for this reason, statistics are not maintained to this level of detail. The information is as set out in the following schedule. Further to the specific information requested by the honourable member, I would also add that there has been a considerable improvement in industrial relations since this government came to power. During our term of Government, the number of working days lost due to industrial disputes has fallen dramatically to, and remained at, its lowest level for 17 years. This improvement has been assisted by several Government initiatives and, given the honourable member's interest in the Commonwealth public sector, I shall mention those initiatives taken by the Government with respect to its own employees. Arbitration and protection rights have been restored through repeal of the Commonwealth Employees (Employment Protection) Act and the `no work as directed, no pay' provisions. Payroll deductions of union dues has been re-instituted and staff-management consultation on, and co-ordination of, occupational health and safety initiatives have been facilitated by the establishment of the Committee on Occupational Health and Safety in Australian Government Employment. In addition, as part of the general reform of the Australian Public Service, provision was made for introduction of industrial democracy and implementation of Equal Employment opportunity programs. Date dispute reported- period Local Unions Location Form of actions ending classification involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute Service-Wide Disputes 15.8.84 CA's and related grades APSA (FDO) Pay claim for Clerical Assistant's and related grades Service wide Stop work action, rolling stoppages Departments affected, especially those with Clerical Administrative counter staff 29.8.84-industrial action suspended, pay survey commenced 21.11.84 Various Departments Clerical ACOA APSA (FDO) In support of anomolies claim NSW, Victoria, SA, WA, ACT Various stopwork meetings. Further stopwork action 10.12.84. Further stopwork on 14.12.84 Disruption to Departments. 10.12.84-Some CES and DSS offices closed. 14.12.84-minimal 14.12.84.-No further industrial action subject to Full Bench decision by 18.1.85 15.1.85 All Departments Clerical ACOA, APSA (FDO) Full Bench rejected pay claim on 10.1.85 All states ACT, NT Bans and limitations on some revenue gathering and handling of Ministerial enquiries Severe impact on revenue collection Stand down clauses inserted 7.2.85. Bans lifted 22.2.85. Matter relisted for hearing 23.1.85 Transport workers in Departments and Authorities TWU Anomalies pay claim ACT only 23.1.85-Stopwork meeting 9.30 a.m. to 11.15 a.m. All driving services ceased for duration of meeting Return to work. Further industrial action threatened 27.2.85 Clerical and others All unions Grading of Broome for District Allowance purposes Broome, WA Ban on inter and intra-departmental communications imposed 19.2.85 Minimal Bans lifted 26.2.85 24.4.85 Clerical and others ACOA, CAA OA, PREIA, MIA Protest at Queensland government legislation Victoria, Queensland Bans on goods and services bound for or entering Queensland on 19.4.85 Delays in processing cargoes and meat assignments Bans lifted 20.4.85 Aboriginal Development Commission 6.6.84 Clerical ACOA APSA (FDO) Staffing levels Queensland Overtime ban Matter resolved Date dispute reported- period Staff Unions Location Form of action ending involved involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute Attorney-General's Department 14.7.83 Legal officers AGLA In support of union demand for continued employment of some temporary staff NSW Ban on handling ministerial correspondence Minimal Conference before DPSA Taylor 14.7.83 7.10.83 Clerical Assistants and Keyboard APSA(FDO) Protest at 3rd Div. staff performing 4th Div. duties. Ergonomic issues relating to VDUs NSW Ban on operation of BORIS data and word processing system Introduction of system delayed Working environment study 28-29.11.83. Ergonomically-designed VDU tables installed on test basis, 11.1.84 20.6.84 Family Court Coun- sellors POA Staffing levels and classifications Victoria, ACT, Qld Rolling stoppages, 24 hour stoppages Delays in counselling Issues discussed at meeting with A-G on 27.6.84. Bans lifted 21.8.85 Court reporters FCU Non-engagement of casual court reporting typists over approved staffing levels SA, NSW Refusal by casual staff to be available when required Some courts not provided with typists. Delay in transcripts Bans lifted 23.8.85. Discussions at Ministerial level 21.9.83 Electrical Trades Staff-Sub-stations Division ETU Interpretation of Determination provision ACT Ban on after-hours work except emergencies, and some paper work Minimal-minor disruptions to electricity supply ACTU became involved. Conference before Deputy Arbitrator Taylor 16.12.83 7.10.83 Electrical Trades Staff ETU Concern over presence of asbestos ACT Ban on pulling cable through pipes Minimal 27.10.83. ACTEA awaiting outcome of TLC and Industrial Board examination of the issue 19.12.84 Storemen FSPU Union claim to staff on independent store ACT Bans on the issue of materials to certain sections Severe disruption to electrical maintenance work 6.2.85 Storemen FSPU Reclassification of 2 stores staff ACT Bans on delivery of stores Minimal Bans lifted 6.2.85 after C& Commission hearing on 5.2.85 Date dispute reported- period Staff Unions Location Form of action ending involved involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute ACT Health Authority 11.8.83 Nurses HEF Protest at staffing levels and alleged intimidation of union members ACT Woden Valley Hospital. Bans on psychiatric ward Minimal Bans lifted 18.8.83 12.10.83 Hospital Employees and Maintenance Staff HEF, BLF, ETU, C &J, P &G, TLC, RANF Protest over the introduction of ACT Mental Health Ordinance. Concern over staffing levels ACT Bans on construction of protective care unit. Bans by maintenance staff in support of HEF. Bans on admission to psychiatric ward from 27.6.84 Some bans lifted 13.7.84, but TLC bans construction work remained in place. All bans lifted 24.8.84. 11.1.84 Staff under Professional and General Staff Award HEF Delay in payment of NWC increase ACT Stopwork meeting held 17.1.84 Minimal Priority given by Authority to process increase 11.1.84 Switchboard Operators HEF Dispute over classification levels ACT Bans on monitoring security equipment and billing patients for telephone calls. Stoppage 23.1.84 and 24.1.84 Minimal. Stoppage led to disruption 24.1.84-Operators reclassified from CA2 to CA3. Return to work 25.1.84 Wardsmen HEF Dispute over Rostering ACT Bans from 18.1.84. Stoppage from 19.1.84 to 24.1.84 Disruption to linen service 24.1.84-return to work. Health Authority to examine rostering arrangements 15.2.84 Nursing Staff RANF Dispute over staffing levels ACT Bans on admissions and non-nursing duties at Nursing Homes. Bans on nursing patients admitted for elective procedures at Royal Canberra &Woden Valley Major disruption to function of Nursing Homes Discussions took place between Authority and RANF 15.2.84 Laundry Staff, Drivers, Boiler Attendants HEF, TWU, FEDFA Use of casual staff, refusal of employee to join union, alleged unsafe working conditions ACT Strike by laundry staff and picketing. TWU bans on movement of linen. FEDFA shut off steam Shut-down of laundry facility Returned to work prior to 22.2.84 22.2.84 Laundry Staff, Drivers, Boiler Attendants HEF, TWU, FEDFA, TLC Payment for time on strike (see last entry) ACT Strike by laundry staff and picketing Shut-down of laundry facility, shortage of linen Private arbitration agreed to on 22.2.84 Date dispute reported- period Staff Unions Location Form of action ending involved involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute 16.3.84 Radiologists AMA Dispute over provisions of Health Insurance Act ACT Provision of emergency services only Minimal 3.4.84-under consideration at Ministerial level 15.1.85 Hospital Auxiliary Staff HEF Demand for 300 additional staff and 30% wage claim ACT Ban on wide range of activities Restricted admissions to hospitals. Disruption to laundry and food services Recruitment of short-term support staff-13.2.85 6.2.85 Nurses RANF Transfer of non-nursing duties ACT Ban on non-nursing duties in ACT Hospitals and Nursing Homes Restricted admission to Royal Canberra Hospital Bans lifted 14.2.85 17.4.85 Hospital Auxiliary Staff HEF Alleged interference by Secretary of Woden Valley Hospital in HEF internal matters ACT Bans on linen supplies to Woden Valley Hospital Minimal Bans lifted 17.4.85 22.5.85 Switchboard Operators HEF Reclassification of switchboard operators ACT Bans imposed 22.5.85 on certain switchboard functions Minimal Bans lifted 28.5.85. HEF expecting early PSB response 5.6.85 Hospital staff HEF Alleged improper behaviour by a member of the nursing staff ACT Bans imposed 31.5.85 on supply of linen to Woden Valley Hospital Significant disruption Bans lifted 12.6.85 before C& Commission 5.6.85 Hospital staff HEF Alleged improper direction given to a wardsman at Royal Canberra Hospital to act as Courier ACT Bans imposed 31.5.85 at RCH on courier duties Nil Matter resolved early August 1985 13.6.85 Therapists POA Pay/reclassification claims ACT Stopwork meeting 12.6.85 Minimal Week ending 26.6.85. POA ceased all industrial action. Review under way 17.7.85 Laundry workers HEF Additional staff at Mitchell Laundry, wage claim of 32% ACT Bans on processing bed linen bags Elective surgery cancelled Bans lifted 18.7.85, elective surgery recommended 23.7.85 7.8.85 Nurses RANF Delays in transfer of reallocation of non-nursing duties ACT Bans imposed on non-nursing duties 7.8.85 Minimal Matter under discussion between RANF and ACTHA from 23.8.85 ACT Schools Authority 3.4.84 Schools assistants APSA (FDO) Protest against new financial procedures and alleged increases in workload ACT Bans on collection and banking of monies. Bans on screen based equipment Significant inconvenience Proposal to set up joint working party-11.4.84. Bans lifted 20.3.85 Ancilliary staff APSA (FDO) Dispute over staffing levels, classifications &allocations ACT Work to rule imposed 14.3.85 Minimal Bans lifted 22.3.85 13.6.85 Teachers ACT Teachers Federation Foreshadowed reductions in staff numbers ACT Schools and TAFE colleges Bans on cooperation with non-government sector and intra-authority administration. Half day stopwork 2.7.85. Rolling stoppages Significant disruption to primary and secondary schools Stoppages, bans etc suspended 13.8.85 pending Government initiated enquiry into ACT school staffing Date dispute reported- period Staff Unions Location Form of action ending involved involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute Australia Council 7.10.83 Clerical ACOA Protest over staffing levels NSW Bans on some clerical functions Minimal-subsequent delays in distribution of funds 23.11.83. ACOA advised all bans to be lifted when new staffing levels confirmed Australian Atomic Energy Commission 28.9.83 Labourers FMWU In support of reclassification claims NSW Ban at Lucas Heights on removal and collection of garbage Potential health hazard 20.10.83-bans lifted 3.4.84 Technical Assistants ADSTE Demands for reclassi- fication NSW Bans on the packaging and despatch of non-medical isotopes Financial loss of $4000 per week Issue resolved after meeting between parties 27.2.85 Maintenance Workers AMFSU Claim for disability allowance on maintenance of sewerage pumps NSW Ban on repairing sewerage pumps Restriction on use of facilities Bans lifted 12.3.85. Site inspected by independent Occupational Health and Safety expert Australian Customs Service 20.6.85 Launch crews COA Pay and conditions for launch crews Ban on operation of new `Minister' class launch Launch commissioned 15.5.85. Has been idle since then. Bans removed 24.6.85. Discussions resumed Australian Electoral Commission 31.10.85 Divisional Returning Officers ACOA Reclassification of Returning Officers and Divisional Clerks NSW Restrictions on overtime Minimal Bans lifted 2.11.85. Terms of reference for classification review agreed to 10.4.85 Clerical staff ACOA, FCU Failure of AEC to meet travel cost of staff-side nominee in Divisional clerks Review NSW Bans on forwarding information to Central Office Minimal 15.5.85-compromise reached. Electoral Commission to pay for staff-side nominee in final phase of Review Date dispute reported- period Staff Unions Location Form of action ending involved involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute Australian Government Publishing Service 28.3.84 Clerical Assistants APSA(FDO) Staffing problems ACT Bans on distribution and sales of Government Gazettes Nil Staff not observing bans Australian National Library 21.7.83 Clerical and others Various Demands for removal of asbestos from National Library ACT TLC picket aimed at preventing goods and services for Library Film despatch prevented, cessation of inter-library loans. National gas supplies cut off Matter resolved September 1983. Ministers met TLC to discuss issue Australian Taxation Office 19.5.83 Data Processing Operators FCU, ACOA, APSA (FDO) Protest over termination of two temporary employees Victoria Bans and limitations on operation of Data Processing equipment Minimal Resolved June 1983 4.8.83 Clerical and Assessing Staff ACOA, FCU In support of demands for cessation of lateral recruitment program South Australia Bans on internal technical reporting-reduced output in salaries and wages assessment section. Stopwork meeting 8.8.83 Delay in assessment of salaries wages tax returns Bans lifted 23.8.83. Union Nominee to be given observer status on selection committee 24.10.84 Clerical Staff at Inspection Stations FCU, ACOA Non-acceptance of the Board's offer on reclassifications Victoria, SA, WA Bans on field inspections PAYE and PPS inspections not being carried out Bans lifted 12.11.84. 364 Class 2/3 positions reclassified to Class 4 31.10.84 Taxtion Office FCU Alleged delay in fixing date of effect for pay claim All States Stopwork meetings. Various work bans imposed Disruption to departmental activities All bans lifted 10.12.84. Anomaly hearing on 11 and 12.12.84 Date dispute reported- period Staff Unions Location Form of action ending involved involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute Department of Aviation 11.1.84 Radio Technical Officers PREI Dispute over classification of maintenance workers in radar areas at major centres NSW Bans on maintenance of secondary surveillance radar, Sydney Airport Delays in processing aircraft Department put proposition to PREI on 7.2.84 20.6.84 Airways Surveys, Examiners of Airmen AFAP Dissatisfaction with progress of log of claims All Capital Cities Stopwork meetings week beginning 18.6.84. Duties relating to B767 banned by Examiners Minimal Log of claims progressed 14.11.84 Airport Fire-fighters FFU In support of restoration of district allowance payments Qld Various bans Ban on training has caused fire-fighting services to be withdrawn from Mackay Airport 29.11.84-final offer made by PSB and accepted by ACTU 13.2.85 Airport Fire-fighters FFU Demands re introduction of composite rates, increased staffing, 38 hour week All States Stopwork meetings of up to 2 hours. Bans on rating review process and fire training Minimal Bans lifted 1.3.85 13.3.85 Fire-fighters FFU Demands about re- accommodation issues Vic. Bans on rating review process and fire training imposed late February 1985 Minimal Bans lifted on 7.3.85 13.3.85 Electrical Tradesmen ETU Demands that review of Electrical Technical Officer establishment at Sydney Airport be completed by 1.3.85 NSW Bans on range of electrical equipment at Sydney Airport Minimal Regional report under consideration. Bans lifted 25.3.85 17.4.85 Fire-fighters FFU Rostering principles for public holidays WA Bans on fire vehicle inspections and maintenance Minimal Bans lifted 19.4.85 3.7.85 Fire-fighters FFU Initially 38 hour week, then manning issue NSW Bans on all fire services from 10 a.m. 1.7.85 No domestic jet flights out of Sydney Bans lifted week ending 10.7.85. Negotiations for 38 hour week Bureau of Meteorology 20.6.84 Observors PREIA Dissatisfaction with new rostering arrangements Qld Observors refusing to work roster as directed Some observations missed Department to consider PREIA proposals. Three man roster set up from 23.7.84 Date dispute reported- period Staff Unions Location Form of action ending involved involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute Canberra TAFE College 3.4.84 Storemen FSPU Staffing shortages and conditions demands ACT Bans on movements of stores. Picket lines in place Minimal Two vacant positions advertised. Negotiations under way for conditions Commonwealth Employment Service 1.5.84 Office Staff ACOA Rejection of Departmental offer re ACOA staffing claim Australia-wide Work bans, stop-work meetings Bans having effect on management and employers requiring trainees 14.6.84-all bans lifted following acceptance of joint review agreement. Government offered to increase staff by 302 19.12.84 Clerical Staff ACOA Demand for public holiday on 27.12.84 NSW Bans on statistics, some telephone contact Minimal Claim refused. APS Public Holiday 31.12.84 Commonwealth Schools Commission 11.9.85 Clerical ACOA Failure by Minister for Finance to agree to Joint Staff Review to overcome alleged staff shortages ACT 24 hour strike 9.9.85 involving 47 persons. From 10.9.85, ban on overtime and work to rule to apply Minimal Bans still continuing week ending 18.9.85 Commonwealth Serum Laboratories Commission 23.5.84 Technical Officers, Technical Assistants APSA (FDO) Disagreement as to date of effect of restructure of a section Vic. Ban on provision of animals to Departments Delays in some research Bans lifted after recommendation from Arbitrator-31.5.84 Date dispute reported- period Staff Unions Location Form of action ending involved involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute Department of Community Services 13.6.85 Therapists POA Pay/reclassification claim NSW, Victoria, SA, Tasmania Various 24 hour stoppages at Rehabilitation Centres Skeleton services provided Week ending 26.6.85. POA ceased all industrial action. Review underway Department of Defence 21.9.83 Technical Officers ADSTE In support of a claim for 36 3/4 hour week Vic Bans on working more than 36 3/4 hours. Bans on overtime at Commonwealth Aircraft Corp. Minimal Matter considered in light of NWC guidelines. Bans lifted 11.11.83 8.8.84 Typists APSA (FDO) Allowance for typists on word processing SA Defence Research Centre-Bans on word processing function Minimal Bans lifted 12.3.85. APSA accepted a departmental proposal regarding a new structure 10.10.84 Technical Officers ADSTE Lack of consultation on proposed reorganisation ACT Work to duty statements-Fleet Maintenance Branch Minimal Department met with ADSTE on 20.11.84 and resolved the matter 13.2.85 APEA Pay claim NSW-also involves Housing and Construction Ban on co-operating with and supervision of technical staff at GAF, DRCS and Sydney Airport Significant production line delays at GAF. Minimal impact at DRCS. Project delays in Sydney Bans lifted 18.2.85 15.5.85 Storemen and Transport Workers FSPU, TWU Support for ACTU sponsored action against Queensland Government NSW-Navy Supply Centre Bans imposed 9.5.85 on despatch of goods to Queensland Minimal Bans lifted 13.5.85 following withdrawal of blockade 21.8.85 Cleaners FMWU Dispute between contractors and FMWU over number of contract cleaners at Campbell Park Offices ACT Strike by contract cleaners at Campbell Offices Offices not cleaned for 3 weeks Contract cleaners resumed work 15.8.85 28.8.85 Typists APSA Alleged unsuitable ergonomic furniture for typists ACT Campbell Offices Bans on typing work for 3 major divisions Delays Matter settled internally week ending 18.9.85 Defence Research Centre 19.10.83 Clerical, Technical ACOA, APSA (FDO), ADSTE, ASE Protest over staff cuts South Australia Bans on overtime and some clerical functions Minimal Review of staffing undertaken despite unions' refusal to join-11.1.84 Date dispute reported- period Staff Unions Location Form of action ending involved involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute Department of Defence Support 9.5.83 Foremen CFA Protest at PSB seeking to have DPSA Taylor refrain from determining allowance Victoria, NSW Bans on overtime, and other bans at Williamstown Naval Dockyard. Subsequently extended to Garden Island Delays in repair/refitting of naval vessels Matter referred to Full Bench C& Commission. In June 1983 industrial action ceased 1.11.83 Keyboard staff APSA Ergonomic defects in working environment Victoria Overtime and work to rule bans Adverse effects on admin- istration Inspections undertaken 11.11.83 13.11.83 Forklift drivers FIA, TWU Dispute over union coverage of fork lift drivers Victoria Bans on provision of supplies and raw materials at Ordnance Factory Conference called 23.11.83 30.l1.83 Foremen CFA Waiver of legal costs by the Commonwealth from a former employee NSW Overtime bans Delays in work program Further action threatened unless settled by 1.12.83. No further reports Department of Education 29.6.83 Clerical Administrative ACOA, APSA, (FDO), POA Protest over facilities in building to be occupied Victoria Work bans on all 1983 work Virtually no work being done in the Victorian Office Bans lifted 1 July 1983. Department agreed to provide additional facilities 14.7.83 TAFE Teachers ACTTF Demands for reduced teaching loads ACT Band 2 TAFE Teachers to work full teaching allocation, but no more than 5 hours administrative duties per week Minimal 5.8.83-Working party established. Bans lifted 28.9.83 TAFE Teachers ACTTF Demands for reduced teaching loads-working party recommendations rejected ACT Stopwork meeting 27.9.83 Before the C& Commission on 4.10.83, and 13-14.10.83 11.4.84 Keyboard staff APSA (FDO) VDU operators seeking 15 minute break from duty every hour, and eyesight tests Bans on the handling of TEAS applications Processing of new applications has ceased Discussions elevated to Federal level APSA (FDO). Bans lifted April 1984 22.8.84 School Ancilliary Staff APSA (FDO) Ending of provision of relief staff to aid ancilliary staff on accounting procedures ACT Bans on all financial and accounting procedures Other staff carrying out banned functions ACT Schools Authority agreed to restore staffing levels for 1984 school year on 3.10.84. Bans lifted 5.10.84 7.11.84 Arbitration Inspectors ACOA, AIA Reclassification of Arbitration Inspectors All States 2.11.84-stopwork action 5.11.84-bans imposed on overtime, collection of statistics, complaint-based inspections Minimal All bans lifted 28.11.84. Before the C& Commission 28.11.84 Date dispute reported- period Staff Unions Location Form of action ending involved involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute Government Printing Office 11.8.83 Printing PKIU Claim for shorter working hours and introduction of new technology ACT Overtime ban and ban on certain computer based editing terminals. Bans reimposed 18.8.83-Overtime ban lifted 19.8.83, but other ban continuing Delays in production Bans lifted 12.8.83. Bans again lifted 2.9.83 18.4.84 Photo-Compositors PKIU Protest against arbitrated decision confirming pay rise previously rejected by PKIU ACT Stop-work meeting 18.4.84 Minimal PKIU to appeal to Full Bench 1.5.85 Printing PKIU Claim for $25 allowance following introduction of different printing system ACT Bans on training on new equipment Minimal Ban lifted 16.5.85. PKIU abandoned claim Department of Health 19.10.83 Processing Centre Staff APSA(FDO) ACOA Protest at conditions of transfer of staff from Health to HIC Victoria Overtime ban and work to rule campaign Backlog of payment of cheques to doctors and private hospitals HIC renegotiated offers of transfer. Bans lifted 15.11.83 23.11.83 Clerical, DPO's APSA(FDO) Protest over classification levels in proposed Pharm pay system SA, WA, NSW Bans on implementation of Pharm pay Pharmaceutical benefits claims delayed in NSW Bans lifted on interstate processing in all States except SA-25.1.84. On 22.2.84 a cease and desist order was issued by DPSA Taylor. Departments to proceed with implementation of Pharm pay 6.2.85 Keyboard APSA(FDO) Increased incidence of RSI Tasmania 6.2.85-ban imposed on use of IBM and Raytheon equipment Existing backlog of Pharmaceutical Benefits to chemists exacerbated Bans lifted 8.2.85. Department and Association to discuss 17.4.85 Clerical ACOA Transfer of function from Health to HIC. -Seeking better provisions ACT Bans on functions associated with transfer imposed 17.4.85 Minimal Bans did not prevent new function commencing at HIC on 1.7.85 Department of Housing and Construction 4.5.83 Plant Operators FEDFA Protest over lack of action on shorter hours and pay matters ACT Lunch-time meeting 2.5.83. No return to work until a.m. 3.5.83 Minimal Normal work resumed 3.5.83 12.10.83 Technical Officers ADSTE Protest over plans to reorganize Special Services Pool in WSSD-workload problems ACT Not actively seeking to work overtime Delay in clearing backlog of approvals for plumbing plans Management not insisting on overtime 16.3.84 Electrician ETU Delays in processing reclassification proposals ACT Bans on maintenance work at sewerage station Minimal Ban lifted 16.3.84 after reclassification approved 25.7.84 Boiler Attendants FEDFA Demand for payment of excess fares and travelling time NSW RGH Concord. Bans on provision of steam to hospital laundry from 3 p.m. 25.7.84 Restrictions on admissions and elective surgery Bans lifted 26.7.84. Resolved by Department Date dispute reported- period Staff Unions Location Form of action ending involved involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute 19.9.84 Metal Workers, Builders Labourers AMFSU, BLF Department let asbestos removal contract to firm which employs Builders Labourers. AMFSU claim it as theirs ACT Rolling strikes, bans on call-outs and overtime Minimal AMFSU bans lifted 25.9.84 10.7.85 Maintenance Staff AMWU Use of contractors for maintenance and removal of asbestos ACT Black ban on work to be done Boiler breakdown and office temperature below acceptable level Bans lifted 9.7.85 Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs 19.5.83 Clerical ACOA Protest over procedures for filling positions NSW Stopwork meeting 13.5.83 Minimal Department responded to ACOA representations 14.7.83 Clerical ACOA Protest over management intransigence in dealing with union representatives Stopped work for 14 hours 12.7.83 Telephone Interpreter Service shut down for 14 hours 18.8.83 Telephone Interpreters ACOA Demand for reclassification and permanency NSW, Victoria, WA 24 hour stoppage 22.8.83. Bans on assisting with requests from Commonwealth Departments and MP's Minimal Bans lifted 26.10.83. Matter before the Aribitrator 5.9.84 Clerical ACOA, APSA (FDO) Demand for increased staffing Victoria, NSW, WA Bans on various reports, ministerials and overtime. Further bans from 26.9.84 on citizenship and migration applications Minimal Bans lifted 4.1.85. 65 extra staff and review of staffing 15.5.85 Clerical ACOA Dissatisfaction re-selection procedures for temporary filling NSW Sydney and Parramatta-strike action 15.5.85-some bans imposed Delays in processing passports Bans lifted 17.5.85 28.8.85 Clerical ACOA Lack of staff resources NSW Ban on processing FOI requests from 20.8.85 Substantial backlong in pro- cessing FOI requests Bans still in place week ending 18.9.85 Industries Assistance Commission 13.6.85 Clerical APSA Rights of staff and terms and conditions in relation to introduction of computers ACT Bans imposed 7.6.85 on all work performed by ACOA members Minimal Bans lifted week ending 17.7.85 Date dispute reported- period Staff Unions Location Form of action ending involved involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute Department of Industry, Technology and Commerce 17.10.84 Customs Officers COA Dissatisfaction of aspects of staff rotation scheme NSW 9 officers refused the Chief Officer's direction to move Minimal Heard by C &A Commission 7.11.84. Parties agreed on measures to resolve dispute 21.11.84 Invoice Examiners ACOA Protest at departmental response to ACOA proposal for revised processing arrangements NSW, Victoria, Qld, WA, SA, Tas. Officers working to rule from 19.11.84 Delays in import process Bans lifted 31.11.84. Proceedings in C &A Commission produced agreement re changes to working arrangements Joint House Department 30.5.84 Catering Staff FLAIEU Demand for details of proposed staff re-organisation ACT Stopwork 29.5.84 for 48 hours Refreshment rooms closed No further action 15.5.85 Security Staff FMWU, APSA (FDO) Concern over staffing levels ACT Stopwork meeting for one hour 10.5.85 Minimal Decision to be taken by management Department of Local Government and Administrative Services 29.6.83 Cleaners FMWU Protest over reduced cleaning requirements under new cleaning contract Victoria Bans on all cleaning under new contract Offices not cleaned Staff involved were private cleaning contractors. Resolved 12 July 1983 11.8.83 Transport and Storage Staff TWU, FSPU Presence of asbestos in Industry House ACT Refusal to remove property in and out of 3rd floor of Industry House Minimal Agreement reached to decontaminate 3rd floor-18.8.83 11.8.83 Storemen FSPU Claim for shorter working hours Victoria 24 hour stoppage at Transport and Storage depots on 22.7.83. Walk off on 11.8.83 and remained out 12.8.83 Minimal Negotiations progressed 30.11.83 Storemen FSPU Support of 38 hour week claim SA, Victoria SA-bans on overtime, issue of new furniture and goods for interstate Vic.-bans on servicing private contractors vehicles 24 hours stoppage 29.11.83 Disruption of interstate movements, delay relocation of 2 departments Negotiations progressed Date dispute reported- period Staff Unions Location Form of action ending involved involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute .2.84 Transport and Storage TWU Local grievances Victoria Bans on driving fire vehicles recently converted to LPG Department discussed with TWU at State level matter resolved the same week 6.3.84 Transport Workers TWU Staffing-Appointment of driver to transport supervisor position A.C.T. Bans on delivery of fuel to depot of Department Minimal-rationing of fuel to Commonwealth cars Bans lifted 22.3.84 6.3.84 Storeman and Packers FSPUA Staffing and use of contractors Victoria Various bans affecting Victorian operations Minimal Bans lifted 23.3.84. Union agreed to dispute settling procedures .7.84 Commonwealth Car Drivers TWU Appointment of ``outsider'' as Transport Supervisor A.C.T. Stopwork from 1 p.m. 4.7.84. Stores and Stores and freight staff stopped from 16.7.84 No cars available Industrial action ceased 30.7.84. Agreement between the PSB, DAS, ACTU and TWU 5.9.84 Clerical Assistants APSA (FDO) Members demanding direct promotion to position occupied on acting basis, and to reclassified positions Victoria Bans on organizing removals for army and airforce personnel Minimal Bans lifted 13.9.84 12.9.84 Clerical Admin. ACOA, APSA (FDO) Staffing arrangements associated with reorg of Transport and Storage Division. Also occupational health and safety over new computer system W.A. Bans imposed on introduction of computer system Minimal Bans lifted 13.9.84 5.12.84 Storemen FSPU Dissatisfaction with response to log of claims Victoria Transport and Storage-bans on removal of Antarctic supplies Victorian Stores area became virtually in-operative Bans lifted 21.1.85 5.12.84 Clerical ACOA Staffing levels N.S.W. Property Directorate-ban on all communication with Central Office Minimal Bans lifted 16.1.85 6.2.85 Furniture Officer CWSA Reclassification of Assistant Furniture Officer A.C.T. Bans imposed 21.12.84 on servicing of air conditioning in selected offices Disruption to air conditioning services Bans lifted 6.2.85 20.2.85 Storeman FSPU Delay in payment resulting from ACOA and APSA dispute Victoria Transport and Storage Division 18.2.85-Bans on use of contractors, container processing, electoral material, issue of fuel Significant impact on operations Bans lifted 27.2.85 15.5.85 Storemen and Transport Workers FSPU, TWU Support for ACTU sponsored action against Queensland government A.C.T. Transport and Storage Division. Bans on goods to Queensland imposed 9.5.85 Minimal Bans lifted 13.5.85 following withdrawal of blockade 5.6.85 Security Service APSA Refusal by Australian Protective Service members at the Mint to operate bundy equipment A.C.T. Ban on operating bundy equipment Minimal Week ending 26.6.85, private contractors replaced APS members Date dispute reported- period Staff Unions Location Form of action ending involved involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute 28.8.85 Clerical APSA Reclassification of certain staff from CA4 to CA5 Victoria Ban on answering telephone calls in Transport and Storage Division. Also work to rule. Bans on vehicles picking up from 9.9.85 Minimal All bans lifted 13.9.85. Department to continue investigating union's claim 4.9.85 Drivers TWU Rejection of anomaly pay claim decision of C& Commission ACT Stop work meeting of 800 members 3.9.85 No buses or Commonwealth cars 2.15 to 6 p.m. 3.9.85 Still not resolved week ending 18.9.85 18.9.85 Storemen FSPU Rejection by PSB of a claim by FSPU for payment for loading and unloading containers Victoria Transport and Storage Division. 4.9.85-bans on handling containers. 9.9.85-bans on contractor vehicles and personal effects Minimal 13.9.85-bans contractor vehicles and personal effects lifted. Ban on containers still in place week ending 18.9.85 Department of Primary Industry 19.10.83 Fish Export Inspectors Meat Inspectors' Association In support of a package of conditions for duty at sea Various Refusal to undertake duties at sea Nil Department negotiated specific interim package 23.11.83 Meat Inspectors MIA Protest over use of disciplinary provisions NSW, SA NSW-24 hour stoppage 21.11.83. SA-24 hour stoppage 23.11.83 22.11.83-Acting Arbitrator recommended that Association desist from further industrial action 15.5.85 Meat Inspectors MIA Support for ACTU sponsored action against Queensland government Queensland Bans imposed 9.5.85 on sealing/unsealing containers and the preparation of documents for meat products arriving/leaving Queensland Some delay experienced Bans lifted 13.5.85 following withdrawal of blockade 5.6.85 Meat Inspectors MIA Picket line at Mudginberri imposed by AMIEU NT Will not cross picket line DPI not paying if do not attend. No meat exported AMIEU lifted picket early September 1985 Department of Social Security 19.5.83 Clerical ACOA Protest over noisy machinery NSW Some bans on processing of cheques Minimal Before DPSA Taylor May 1983 7.10.83 Clerical ACOA, APSA(FDO) Concern over presence of asbestos Victoria Refusal to occupy building from 4-7.10.83 Work resumed on receipt of satisfactory air test results on 8.10.83 9.11.83 Health Employees HEF Demand for 38 hour week Victoria 48 hour strike held from 27.10.83 No further action 28.3.84 Clerical Staff ACOA Staffing levels following delays to assets test Victoria Stopwork meeting 29.3.84. 35 staff refused compulsory temporary transfer Minimal Staff counselled 11.4.84 Storemen APSA(FDO) Issues arising from introduction of Strat plan-classification, occupational health safety NSW Bans on release of stationery and other consumables Commencement of Strat plan in NSW is being delayed 5.12.84-Section 28 Agreement referred to C& Commission for ratification Date dispute reported- period Staff Unions Location Form of action ending involved involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute 30.5.84 Clerical APSA (FDO) ACOA Protest at the Department's decision not to fill 2 vacant positions NSW Bans on issuing of health cards and on proof of identity checks Disruptive Staffing level offer made by Minister. Bans lifted 29.6.84 12.9.84 Clerical Staff ACOA, APSA (FDO) Dissatisfaction with progress on occupational health and safety aspects of Stratplan NSW, Australia-wide from 17.10.84 Bans on use of new equipment. Stopwork action-24 hours on 12.10.84 Delay in implementation of Stratplan Section 28 agreement radified by C &A Commission. Members voted to lift bans 29.11.84 1.5.85 Clerical ACOA, APSA (FDO) Stratplan/Staffing issues NSW, Tasmania Bans on first phase of Stratplan implementation imposed 24.4.85 Stratplan implementation postponed for NSW Bans lifted week ending 13.6.85 1.5.85 Clerical ACOA, APSA (FDO) Staffing levels at Bondi Office NSW Bans on various office procedures imposed 26.4.85 at several offices Significant Bans lifted 17.5.85 following private conference in C &A Commission Special Broadcasting Service 31.7.85 Clerical and Technical APSA, ACOA, ATAEA Demand for prompt action on permanency proposals NSW Some APSA, ACOA and ATAEA members walked off the job 29.7.85. Further 24 hour stoppage 5-6.8.85. Intermittent bans imposed SBS Sydney shut down untill 12.30 a.m. 30.7.85. SBS Sydney shut down 5-6.8.85 All bans lifted week ending 21.8.85 Department of Territories 23.3.83 Custodial Officers APSA (FDO) Dissatisfaction over staffing limits ACT Bans on overtime and admission of any new female detainees Detainees locked in cabins at night Departmental review of staffing levels. Bans lifted 6.4.83. 29.6.83 Plant Operators FEDFA Union claim for air-conditioning of new plant and protective clothing ACT Ban on operation of new bulldozer, forestry work, refuelling at tips Delays in burials, and rubbish tips closed for one day Bans lifted 14 July 1983 24.8.83 Parking Inspectors APSA Reduction in overtime allowance ACT Ban on overtime and writing parking notices in Civic Loss of revenue Bans lifted 10.10.83. Negotiations continuing 12.10.83 Technical Officers in building inspection positions ADSTE Protest over staffing levels ACT Ban on final inspection of new houses Buyers unable to move legally into new houses Management investigating delay and possibility of relief staffing 20.6.84 Drivers, Street Cleaners TWU, AWU, FEDFA Dissatisfaction with Staffing levels ACT Bans on collection of garbage and cleaning in selected areas Waste not being removed Joint working party established-draft report produced. Bans lifted in some areas 12.7.84. All bans lifted 3.10.84 20.6.84 Qantas House Staff ACOA Asbestos fibres found in air of building ACT Stopwork for afternoon of 20.6.84 Asbestos Advisory Committee contacted 6.2.85 Parking Inspectors APSA Pay claim ACT Bans on issue of infringement notices Minimal Bans lifted 8.2.85. Consultation on reorganisation 6.2.85 Plant Operators FEDFA Claim re community facilities at Cotter Settlement ACT Ban on all work. Are attending for Bush Fire Council stand by only Minimal in view of larger commitment to BFC Bans lifted 27.2.85 27.3.85 Prison Officers APSA Dispute over manning levels and breaks between shifts ACT Belconnen Remand Centre 9 hour break between shifts. Locking up detainees if staff deemed insufficient Detainees locked up more than usual Bans lifted 4.4.85 26.6.85 Tip Attendants FEDFA Complaints re supervisors ACT tips (1)25.6.85-ban on co-operation with supervisors (2) Stopwork from 31.7.85 (1) Limited (2) Potentially extensive Bans lifted week ending 7.8.85 Date dispute reported- period Staff Unions Location Form of action ending involved involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute 17.7.85 Custodial Officers APSA (FDO) Staffing at Belconnen Remand Centre ACT Bans on co-operation with Superintendent imposed 15.7.85. Indefinite strike commenced 12.8.85 Detainees locked up for longer periods. Staff not performing normal duties. APSA (FDO) members resigned and joined HEF. HEF subsequently served log of claims for Custodial Officers. Remand Centre closed 21.8.85 Superintendent deployed elsewhere during week ending 24.7.85. Staff resumed work 31.8.85 4.9.85 Drivers TWU Rejection of anomaly-pay claim decision of C &A Commission ACT Stopwork meeting of 800 members 3.9.85. From 9.9.85 ban on articulated buses No buses or Commonwealth cars 2.15 to 6pm 3.9.85. Some disruption to scheduled bus services All bans lifted 4.10.85 pending further discussions. Department of Trade 7.6.84 Fourth Division Staff APSA Preference for unionists-presence of non-unionists Victoria Bans placed on working with non-unionists All bans lifted 26.6.84 9.12.84 Clerical Staff APSA (FDO) ACOA Classification and related issues Australia Wide Bans on the introduction of an automated Australian Product Services Information System Old system has ceased to operate and the data base is quickly getting out of date Bans lifted 21.2.85-classify positions at CA5 for 12 months and review. 1.8.85 Clerical Staff APSA Dealings with South Africa ACT, Victoria Bans on companies dealing with South Africa Minimal-some mail and cheques held up All bans lifted 9.10.85 7.10.83 Training Staff ACOA Associated with plans to restructure staffing at Clyde Cameron College Albury and State Capitals Bans on working with outside staff, staff from State centres working at College and College staff working on inadequately staffed courses Some courses cancelled Bans lifted 12.10.83 Date dispute reported- period Staff Unions Location Form of action ending involved involved Reason for dispute of dispute undertaken Effects Resolution of dispute Department of Veterans Affairs 20.4.83 Nurses RANF Claim for pay increase Victoria Bans on non-nursing duties and elective admissions Minimal Bans lifted 4.5.83. To proceed to arbitration 9.11.83 Health Employees HEF Demand for 38 hour week Victoria, NSW Stopwork meeting No further industrial action 11.1.84 Pathologists ACT MOA RDMOA CMOA Dispute over right of private practice NSW, Qld, SA, WA Repatriation Hospitals: bans on filling out autopsy reports, paperwork. Working 36 3/4 hour week Some delay in processing claims 3.4.84-general issue under consideration at Ministerial level. All industrial action ceased 12.7.85 1.2.84 Domestic, Kitchen and Nursing Staff HEF Dispute over timing of payment for employees rostered off on pay day under 38 hour week agreement NSW Concord Repat. 24 hour stoppage from 11.30 a.m. 31.1.84 Serious disruption to Hospital. Volunteer workers utilised Negotiations between Department of HEF. Matter resolved after discussions. 16.4.84 Nurses RANF Staffing shortages Tas. Repatriation Hospital Nurses refusing to admit new patients once wards 85% full Minimal Discussions between Department and RANF. Department explained difficulties with AOSL. Bans lifted same week. 16.5.84 Resident Medical Officer RDMOA Claim for increased payments for out of hours duty. Response wanted by 4.6.84 NSW, Qld, Vic, SA Repatriation Hospitals Ban on out of hours duty and admission of patients out of hours Patients not being admitted out of hours 12.6.84-all bans lifted. Matter referred to Full Bench pursuant to NWC principles 30.5.84 Radiographers POA Dissatisfaction with classification structure and pay NSW Other States Concord (NSW) Stopwork meeting 25.5.84. One week strike from 5.6.84. Other States: Bans on clerical duties All bans lifted 7.6.84. Parties to confer 27.6.84 Clerks ACOA Dispute over use of VDU's-eyesight testing, etc. NSW Ban imposed on implementation of ``Claim Management System'' Implementation of system deferred Bans lifted 17.8.84. Eyesight testing to be considered 8.8.84 Hospital Manual Employees HEF Union is seeking allowance for handling nauseous material Victoria RGH Heidelberg: Bans on handling nauseous material Minimal Bans lifted 9.8.84 26.9.84 Data Processing Operators APSA (FDO) Demand for shorter timetable for introduction of new computer system NSW Defence Services Homes Corporation-bans on operation of computer Detrimental effect on running corporation as financial institution Bans lifted 2.10.84. Agreement reached with Department on accommodation 7.11.84 Clerical Staff APSA (FDO) Staffing levels Qld RGH Greenslopes Bans from 5.11.84 on: reimbursement of patients' fares outside diagnostic and consultative appointments transport for review appointments Minimal Department recommended 2 additional staff and a review of staffing structure. Bans lifted week ending 14.11.84 14.11.84 Nursing Staff RANF Salary disparity between Commonwealth and State rates Victoria RGH Heidelberg Bans on most elective admissions and overtime. 13.12.84-Bans on admission imposed at McLeod One ward closed. Patients admitted to State Hospitals Bans lifted 19.11.84. RANF to pursue claim through Anomalies Conference 17.12.84-bans lifted to allow Anomalies Conference on 20.12.84 14.11.84 Nursing Staff RANF Demand for increased staffing Tasmania RGH Hobart Bans from 14.11.84 on: overtime admissions where bed occupancy exceeds 75% Refusal to defer taking accrued days off Minimal 28.11.84-bans lifted-additional staff to be employed, and review undertaken 15.1.85 Orderly Supervisors HEF Reclassifications sought by staff involved SA Daw Park RGH Bans on clerical duties after hours Minimal Dispute resolved after negotiation 29.1.85 17.4.85 Nurses RANF Failure to implement matched pay rates Victoria RGH-Heidelberg Bans imposed 11.4.85 on admissions and withdrawal of selected staff Minimal Bans lifted 17.4.85. Matter relisted to Anomalies Conference on 18.4.85 13.6.85 Therapists POA Pay/reclassification claim NSW, Qld, SA, Victoria, Tas. Various 24 hour stoppages at Repatriation hospitals Skeleton services provided Week ending 26.6.85. POA ceased all industrial action. Review under way (Question No. 1840) Mr Mildren asked the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice, on 16 September 1985: (1) How many Community Employment Program (CEP) project applications have been (a) received and (b) approved in the Electoral Division of Ballarat in (i) 1983-84 and (ii) 1984-85. (2) What CEP (a) projects, (b) jobs and (c) funds were allocated to (i) the City of Ararat, Vic, (ii) the City of Ballarat and (iii) the Electoral Division of Ballarat, in each of those years. Mr Willis —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) (i) 196. (ii) 54. (b) (i) 65. (ii) 56. Note: Approvals in 1984-85 exceeded applications received in that year due to a carry over of applications received in 1983-84 and considered in 1984-85. (2) Allocations of CEP funds in Victoria were made on the basis of regional consultative committee areas covered by several local government authorities. These allocations were notional only and served as a guide to the Victorian Consultative Committee when deciding on priorities for approving projects. Available information relates to project approvals. (a) (b) and (c) Details of projects approved in the City of Ararat, the City of Ballarat and the Electoral Division of Ballarat are given in the following table: Sponsor Project Jobs Created CEP Grant Total $ $ (i) City of Ararat: 1983-84 Ararat Urban Fire Brigade... Training Complex Building 4 20,122 29,622 City of Ararat... Kerb and Chanelling Works 5 51,310 73,300 City of Ararat... Greenhill Lake Development 11 131,573 199,332 Office of Correction... General Construction Work 4 53,098 106,284 1984-85 Ararat Harness Racing Club... Track Extension 8 65,014 105,482 Ararat Cemetery Trust... Extension of Lawn Cemetery 5 16,377 21,277 City of Ararat... Improvement to Water Supply 12 125,895 179,850 Shire of Daylesford and Glenlyon... Maintenance of Local Roads 2 8,273 11,725 City of Ararat... Kerb and Channelling Works 7 103,065 147,236 City of Ararat... Kerb and Channelling Works 8 88,920 118,896 City of Ararat... City Tennis Club Fencing 7 67,149 86,602 City of Ararat... Administrative Officer 1 9,072 11,703 City of Ararat... Youth Employment Training Scheme 3 20,855 25,471 Health Commission of Victoria/Ararat Mental Hospital... Panoramic Vista Appreciation and Recreation Area 6 45,851 69,471 TOTAL... 83 806,574 1,186,251 (ii) City of Ballarat: 1983-84 Mt Pleasant Primary School... Library Assistance-Audio Visual Aids 1 14,625 14,625 Mt Clear Technical High School Council... Secondary Integration Program Assistant 1 13,262 13,262 Ballarat Childrens Homes... Peer Support Worker 1 13,157 19,432 Citizens Advice Bureau... Implementation McIntyre Filing System 2 25,797 35,448 Lisa Lodge-Hayeslee Committee... Lisa Manufacturing Company 10 156,257 198,583 City of Ballarat... Community Changing Pavilions 10 145,020 213,320 City of Ballarat... Home Energy Advisory and Retrofitting Service 10 261,207 301,707 Dept. of Crown Lands and Survey... Records Update 1 10,000 14,000 Black Hill Primary School... School and Community Assistance Program 3 18,892 18,892 1984-85 Ballarat District Community Fund... Community Fund Staff 2 37,887 43,403 School of Mines and Industries Ballarat Ltd... Historical Gardens Restoration 4 48,954 67,154 Ballarat General Cemeteries... Beautification of Historical Memorial Areas 2 14,106 19,354 Four Company Theatre in Education/Commerce Team... Community Theatre Training Program 5 83,552 100,361 Australian Trust for Conservation Volunteers... Community Involvement 50 49,126 616,703 City of Ballarat... Construction of Bicycle Path 6 46,837 66,910 City of Ballarat... Youth Employment Training Scheme 210 82,845 103,556 TOTAL... 118 1,463,524 1,846,710 (iii) Electoral Division of Ballarat: 1983-84 Ballarat Community Education Centre... Inter-Link Project 3 76,541 99,841 Australian Trust for Conservation Volunteers... ATCV Regional Development Project 13 241,486 241,486 Ballarat Squash Association... Squash Viewing Stadium 5 62,017 88,566 Ararat Urban Fire Brigade... Training Complex Building 4 20,122 29,622 Sebastopol Community... Upgrading and Development 4 67,387 67,907 Hummfray Street State School Council... After School and Holiday Program 4 33,380 47,037 Mt Pleasant Primary School Council... Library Assistance Audio Visual Aids 1 14,625 14,625 Consumer Credit Legal Service Co-op Ltd... Consumer Rights Education Project 4 56,820 57,820 Victorian School for Deaf Children... Fund Raising, Sales, and Clerical Assistance 1 6,816 9,574 Mt Clear Technical High School Council... Secondary Integration Program Assistant 1 13,262 13,262 Ballarat and Districts Aboriginal Co-operative... Cultural Awareness and Education Program 6 183,323 183,323 Ballarat Community FM Radio Co-op Society... Community Radio Development 4 81,049 101,149 Ballarat Childrens Homes... Peer Support Worker 1 13,157 19,432 Ballarat Regional Alcohol and Drug Dependence Assoc.... Allied Health Aide 1 16,953 16,953 Citizens Advice Bureau... Implementation McIntyre Filing System 2 25,797 35,448 Lisa Lodge-Hayeslee Committee... Lisa Manufacturing Company 10 156,257 198,583 City of Ararat... Kerb and Channelling Works 5 51,310 73,300 Shire of Ararat... Bridge and Culvert 7 123,540 165,087 Shire of Creswick... Pavement Maintenance 2 15,460 22,100 Shire of Bungaree... Road Maintenance 2 30,000 48,078 Shire of Creswick... Maintenance Works on Local Roads 3 26,600 38,600 Shire of Ripon... Carngham Streatham Road Widening Existing Pavement 2 40,600 58,000 Shire of Mortlake... Floodways Drainage and Erosion Control 8 67,474 71,474 Shire of Leigh... JOLOR Project 5 35,280 39,000 Shire of Buninyong... Road Works and Maintenance Program 3 26,600 39,000 Shire of Talbot and Clunes... Roadside and Bridge Improvement 2 34,180 38,000 Shire of Lexton... Refurbishment of Road Furniture 7 33,880 37,000 Borough of Sebastopol... JOLOR Program 2 23,299 33,199 Shire of Hampden... Bridge and Road Maintenance 4 43,064 50,120 Shire of Ballarat... Local Road Project 3 67,400 67,400 Shire of Greville... Local Road Maintenance 2 33,860 37,000 City of Ararat... Green Hill Lake Development 11 131,573 199,332 City of Ballarat... Community Changing Pavillions 10 145,020 213,320 Shire of Ripon... Various Community Projects 6 86,785 86,785 Shire of Creswick... Urban and Rural Tree-Planting 11 97,690 111,390 Shire of Talbot &Clune... Restoration and Development of Crown Reserves 6 70,181 85,562 Shire of Ararat... Construction of Small Bridges and Culverts 4 66,260 84,818 Shire of Ballarat... School Cluster Outdoor Constructions 4 51,445 70,867 Shire of Mortlake... Roadside Clearing and Development 4 33,709 38,369 Shire of Mortlake... Lake Bola Foreshore Works/Beautification 5 78,856 87,971 Shire of Ballarat... Aviation Museum 5 68,032 73,132 Borough of Sebastopol... Development of Passive Park 3 23,676 32,976 Shire of Buninyong... Landscape and Amenities Program 3 14,200 18,395 City of Ballarat... Home Energy Advisory and Retrofitting Service 10 261,207 301,707 Department of Youth, Sport and Recreation... Sports Performance Units 2 40,014 56,704 Forests Commission of Victoria... Construct Forestry Training Centre Creswick 7 152,180 165,180 Ministry for Conservation... Biological Data Base Development 8 159,032 228,132 Ministry of Employment and Training... Information Management Skills 16 311,200 417,200 Office of Corrections... General Construction Work 4 53,098 106,284 Department of Community Welfare Services... Provision of Skills to Institutional Detainees 4 41,335 61,476 Department of Community Welfare Services... Child and Youth Residential Care Workers 15 172,026 222,967 Department of Crown Lands and Survey... Records Update 1 10,000 14,000 Department of Crown Lands and Survey... Records Management 7 107,441 157,012 Department of Education Central Highlands Wimmera Region... Clerical Assistant Program 52 199,200 199,200 Black Hill Primary School... School and Community Assistance Program 3 18,892 18,892 Beaufort Waterworks Trust... Mains Replacement 10 215,000 308,000 Shire of Ararat... Willaura Water Supply Pipeline Replacement 8 103,600 148,000 Bungaree and Wallace Waterworks Trust... Water Supply Improvment 5 48,000 68,000 Lexton Waterworks Trust... Amphitheatre Supply and Reticulation 4 88,700 126,700 Mortlake Waterworks Board... Stage 1 Reticulation Upgrading 6 67,000 96,600 Mortlake Waterworks Board... Rising Main Works in Mount Shadwell Storage 7 119,770 171,100 Skipton Waterworks Trust... Service Pipeline Duplication 5 60,200 86,000 Shire of Creswick Waterboard... Waterworks Replacements and Improvements 2 17,500 25,000 Shire of Creswick/Water Supply District... Dean Reservoir Fencing 2 8,300 11,900 Shire of Ararat Waterworks Trust... Willaura Water Supply Pipeline replacement Stage 2 8 95,617 136,595 1984/85 Ararat Harness Racing Club... Harness Club Track Extension 8 65,014 105,482 Black Hill Primary School Co-sponsors... School and Community Assistance Program 3 19,532 23,472 Ballarat District Community Fund... Community Fund Staff 2 37,887 43,403 School of Mines and Industries Ballarat Ltd... Historical Garden Restoration 4 48,954 67,154 Shire of Ballarat... Youth Club Extension Renovation 3 61,206 65,772 Ballarat General Cemeteries... Beautification of Historical Memories Areas 2 14,106 19,354 Four Company Theatre in Education/Commerce Team... Community Theatre Training Program 5 83,552 100,361 Central Highlands Regional Library Service... Library Computer File Creation 8 70,845 95,165 Central Highlands Regional Library Service... Ararat History Research 4 23,768 33,914 Ballarat Special School Council... Disabled Youth Work Orientation Program 2 45,232 55,832 Ballarat Diocesan Family Service... Family Service Unemployment Program 12 140,083 178,670 Ballarat Tramway Preservation Society Ltd... Ballarat Tramway Museum and Restoration Project 3 35,291 45,771 Amberley Christian Brothers Youth Renewal Centre... ``Amberley'' Skills and Training Project 4 50,368 59,582 Salvation Army Western Vic. Division... Salvage and Recycling Program 10 88,422 113,235 Ballarat Children's Homes... Child Care Workers Project 4 34,595 46,341 Ballarat Historical Park Association... Criterion Store-Costume Manu- facture 4 39,663 54,144 Ararat Cemetery Trust... Extension of Lawn Cemetery 5 16,377 21,227 School of Mines and Industries Ballarat Ltd... Courthouse Community Theatre Restoration 10 110,060 163,461 City of Ararat... Improvements to Water Supply 12 125,895 179,850 Mount Clear Technical High School... Mount Clear Video Maker 1 23,286 31,249 Shire of Daylesford and Glenlyon... Maintenance of Local Roads 2 8,273 11,725 Shire of Lexton... Roadside Furniture Upgrading 2 9,814 13,514 Shire of Mortlake... Floodways Drainage and Erosion Control... 5 39,757 78,373 City of Hamilton... Hamilton JOLOR Programme 5 55,641 69,551 City of Ararat... Kerb and Chanelling Works on Local Roads Stage 2 7 103,065 147,236 Shire of Creswick... Maintenance Works on Local Roads 2 20,259 27,452 Shire of Ballan... JOLOR Programme 1984/85 3 38,400 48,000 City of Ararat... Kerb and Channelling Works on Local Roads 8 88,920 118,896 Shire of Buninyong... JOLOR 85 4 43,863 64,623 Borough of Sebastopol... Jobs on Local Roads 3 32,777 40,970 Shire of Bannockburn... Local Road Improvement 4 39,955 50,033 Shire of Ballarat... JOLOR Stage II 15 160,000 200,000 Borough of Sebastopol... Construction of Underground Drainage 8 132,048 188,640 Shire of Lexton... Evansford Community Centre Renovations 2 12,550 16,000 Shire of Leigh... Rokewood Public Golf Course 5 57,778 82,270 Shire of Grenville... Recreation Facilities Maintenance 6 61,181 79,401 City of Ballarat... Data Base Implementation 5 51.765 73,161 City of Ballarat... Lake Esmond Botanical Gardens 10 186,233 265,120 Shire of Buninyong... Administrative Officer 1 12,200 17,800 Shire of Creswick... Maintenance of Urban and Rural Trees 2 15,843 21,782 Shire of Creswick... Dean Reservoir Fencing Stage 3 2 15,643 20,116 City of Ballarat... Alterations &Extension to Munici- pal Saleyard 10 182,440 237,516 City of Ararat... City Tennis Club Fencing 7 67,149 86,602 City of Ararat... Administrative Officer 1 9,072 11,703 City of Ararat... Youth Employment Training Scheme 3 20,855 25,471 Borough of Sebastopol... Youth Employment Training Scheme 3 25,587 31,983 Shire of Ararat... Youth Employment Training Scheme 2 19,163 21,079 Shire of Creswick... Youth Employment Training Scheme 1 8,470 10,719 Shire of Grenville... Youth Employment Training Scheme 3 23,274 25,860 Shire of Bungaree... Youth Employment Training Scheme 1 7,065 7,850 Shire of Ripon... Youth Employment Training Scheme 2 19,090 21,000 Shire of Ballarat... Youth Employment Training Scheme 7 57,932 72,415 Shire of Leigh... Youth Employment Training Scheme 2 16,018 17,798 Shire of Buninyong... Youth Employment Training Scheme 3 17,231 19,146 Health Commission of Victoria/Ararat Mental Hospital... Vista Appreciation and Recreation Area 6 45,851 69,471 TOTAL... 637 7,777,576 10,069,317 (Question No. 1871) Mr Downer asked the Minister assisting the Prime Minister for the Bicentennial, upon notice, on 17 September 1985: (1) How many people are employed in the Adelaide office of the Australian Bicentennial Authority (ABA). (2) What is the ABA budget for South Australia for 1985-86. (3) What amounts were spent from the ABA budget for South Australia for (a) entertainment (excluding beverages), (b) beverage supplies, (c) intrastate travel, (d) interstate travel, (e) international travel, (f) printing, (g) office expenses, (h) vehicle purchase and maintenance, (i) ABA board meetings, (j) radio, television or newspaper advertising, (k) postage, (l) telegrams and telexes, (m) local telephone calls, (n) STD telephone calls and (o) international telephone calls in (i) 1983-84 and (ii) 1984-85. (4) What officers from Adelaide travelled on official ABA business during 1984-85 and to where did they travel. (5) Were any international telephone calls made from the ABA Adelaide office; if so, (a) what was the purpose of each call, (b) to whom was each call made and (c) to which country was each call made. (6) Which local government authorities in South Australia have applied for ABA assistance for projects in 1988. (7) Which South Australian projects have been confirmed as official ABA projects for 1988. (8) What remuneration is paid to members of the ABA Board in South Australia. (9) What travelling allowance is paid to officers on official ABA work in South Australia. (10) How many vehicles are maintained by the Adelaide office of the ABA. (11) Which officer approves use of the vehicles. (12) Have any of the vehicles been used for private purposes; if so, under what circumstances. (13) Has any (a) food or (b) beverage been supplied to any officer or member of the ABA Adelaide office or Board for private use; if so, under what circumstances. (14) Has any officer of the ABA Adelaide office or any member of the ABA Adelaide Board used the (a) telephone, (b) telex, (c) telegram, (d) postage, (e) printing or (f) office facilities for their own private purposes; if so, under what circumstances. (15) What amount was reimbursed to the ABA Adelaide office for private use of (a) telephone, (b) telex, (c) telegram, (d) postage, (e) printing, (f) entertainment and (g) beverage facilities of the Adelaide office in (i) 1983-84 and (ii) 1984-85. (16) What procedures have been adopted in the ABA Adelaide office to ensure proper accounting of expenses incurred by a ABA officers for (a) entertainment, (b) beverage purchases, (c) travel, (d) use of public transport or taxi cabs, (e) STD telephone calls, (f) international telephone calls, (g) food purchases and (h) accommodation. Mr Cohen —The answer to the honourable member's question, based on advice from the Australian Bicentennial Authority, is as follows; (1) There were five staff members as at 19 September 1985. (2) The budget estimate for South Australia in 1985-86 is $293,810. This expenditure is shared 50/50 between the Commonwealth and South Australian Governments. (3) Expenditure on Specific Items: 1983-84 $ 1984-85 $ (a) entertainment (see Note 1)... 3,004.17 4,430.29 (b) beverage supplies (see Note 2)... . . . . (c) intrastate travel... 3,103.70 3,225.88 (d) interstate travel... . . . . (e) international travel... . . . . (f) printinng... 606.50 675.94 (g) office expenses (see Note 2)... 26,074.76 130,432.95* (h) vehicle purchase/maintenance... 2,660.56 3,363.90 (i) ABA board meetings... . . . . (j) advertising... 80.30 1,306.70 (k) postage... 1,357.80 1,538.46 (l) telegrams, telexes... 9.29 5.55 (m) local telephone calls... 2,621.85 3,343.75 (n) STD telephone calls (see Note 3)... 104.20 176.30 (o) international telephone calls... . . . . Total... 39,623.13 148,499.62 (* includes computer purchase) Notes: (1) Expenditure on beverage supplies was paid by credit card and is not identifiable from entertainment expenditure. This item also includes costs of promotional give-aways. (2) Office Expenses represents the balance of Administrative Expenditure not covered by other headings and includes stationery, photography, hire and maintenance of office machines/equipment, telephone rental, office rent, electricity, cleaning, office set-up, purchase of computer equipment, publicity, freight, insurance, parking, office machines, furniture and fittings, and plant and equipment. (3) represents `Booked Trunk Calls'-the balance of STD telephone calls is included in local telephone calls, being ``Metered Telephone Calls'' on the accounts paid. (4) (a) Executive Director Sydney (3)-Executive Directors Conferences Darwin (see Note (1)) Tumby Bay Coober Pedy Cummins Whyalla Port Lincoln Port Augusta (2) Wudinna Ceduna Eliston Streaky Bay Kimba Kingston SE Mount Gambier Robe Murray Bridge Karoonda Parina Renmark McLaren Vale Goolwa Victor Harbour Frequent visits to Local Government Authorities within Adelaide metropolitan area. Frequent speaking engagements in Adelaide metropolitan area. (b) Project Officer-Community Liaison Munno Para Mount Benson Port McDonnell Gumeracha (2) Owen (2) Hamely Bridge (2) Balaklava (2) Port Wakefield (2) Port Broughton (2) Kadina (2) Laura Mannum Barmera (2) Berri Loxton (2) Renmark (2) Paringa (2) Mount Barker Jamestown Goolwa Wallaroo Moonta Bute Elizabeth Crystal Brook Gladstone Georgetown Melrose Port Pirie (2) Mallala Redhill Clare Blyth Brinkworth Spalding Saddleworth Riverton Light Gawler (2) Tailem Bend Peake Lameroo Naracoorte Meningie Murray Bridge Mount Pleasant Angaston Tanunda Lyndoch Truro Blanchtown Waikerie Parina Morgan Eudunda Robertstown Kapunda Hallett Sydney (1 trip representing Executive Director) (c) Computer/Word Processing Supervisor Sydney (attended special Honeywell Computer/Word Processing Course). Notes: (1) Executive Director met in Darwin with NT Council of ABA and representatives of the National Trust, the History Trust and the Department of Environment and Planning to discuss a Bi-state Bicentennial Project involving the restoration of parts of the Overland Telegraph Line. (2) Interstate travel funded from the National Office budget. (5) One international telephone call was made by the Executive Director and the Project Officer-Program Development. See also Questions 14 and 15 which record payment details. (6) 125 Local Government Authorities have applied for assistance from the ABA. Decisions on allocation of funds have not yet been finalised. Each Local Government area has been informed of their eligibility for Local Government Assistance Grants. (7) The following projects have been confirmed: (a) River Murray Interpretive Centre and Riverboat Museum at Goolwa. (b) Port Augusta Outback Interpretive Centre. (8) Board members are not paid. They are eligible for Directors' fees and travelling allowance rates as prescribed under the Remuneration Tribunals Act 1973, the current rates being- Directors' fees-$211 per sitting day Travelling Allowance-$125 per day (capital city) $95 per day (other). Mr Alan McGregor (Chairman) has not claimed for Directors fees or travelling allowance (actual costs of travel to Board meetings and accommodation are paid by the Authority). (9) Travelling allowances are not paid to ABA officers. Rather accommodation and meal charges and verifieda out of pocket expenses may be paid by the Authority. Note: (1) Verified out of pocket expenses relate to the occasional reimbursement for a taxi fare when an official visits a country centre, or for telephone calls to the Adelaide office. (10 One Ford sedan. (11) Executive Director. (12) The Executive Director is provided with a company car for which the Authority bears all operating costs. The vehicle is primarily for offical purposes. During periods of recreation leave taken by the Executive Director, the vehicle remains at the South Australian office for use by Authority staff on official duty. (13) No. (14) One international telephone call each by the Executive Director and the Project Officer-Program Development. (15) Personal cheques for $17.92 and $11.04 respectively were forwarded to the Authority's National Office together with the Telecom Australia accounts which recorded the charges. (16) The Adelaide office operates in accordance with the prescribed delegations and accounting procedures established by the Authority to comply with the requirements of the Companies Code and the Commonwealth Auditor-General. (Question No. 1905) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 19 September 1985: (1) What was the cost of courier service to his Department and authorities under his control in 1984-85. (2) What (a) courier services were employed and (b) amount was paid to each courier service. (3) What is the estimated cost of courier services in 1985-86. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) In 1984-85 the cost of courier services was $1,458,321. (2) (a) The courier services employed were, and (b) the amount paid to each courier service was: $ Zip Cars... 59,614.00 Comet... 325,213.55 Security Express... 68,055.00 Sky Road... 293,166.41 Avant... 2,222.00 TAA... 15,135.10 Kwikasair... 18,372.25 Golden Messenger... 2,068.50 IPEC... 81,526.73 Jetspress... 2,630.00 Australia Post... 279,668.00 Courier Australia... 117,021.16 Fasta Courier... 14.20 Western Courier... 2,645.70 TNT... 50,491.99 RT &RJ Robson... 1,000.00 Wards... 17,270.00 Holbrook... 4,700.00 Ansett Freight... 3,160.00 Transurity ... 17,200.00 Country Courier... 97,146.00 (3) The estimated cost of courier services in 1985-86 is $2,097,000. (Question No. 2107) Mr Robert Brown asked the Attorney- General, upon notice, on 9 October 1985: (1) Are people without authority to remain in Australia, or who have been refused permanent residency in Australia, able to obtain legal aid to put their case to the Federal Court. (2) How many people who have been refused permanent residency have taken advantage of legal aid in each of the years 1980-1981 to 1984-1985. (3) Under what conditions have they been able to take advantage of legal aid. (4) What has been the cost in each instance for their legal representation. Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The basis of eligibility to apply for legal aid from all major legal aid agencies in Australia, that is, State legal aid commissions and the Australian Legal Aid Office, is involvement in a matter arising under Australian law and not nationality or residence. Therefore, as the Parliament has enacted laws which provide legal mechanisms, which include proceedings in the Federal Court of Australia, whereby persons alleged to be prohibited non-citizens can have decisions regarding, or arising out of, their status reviewed, such persons can obtain legal aid for the purpose of exercising their rights under those laws, provided they are eligible under the criteria relating to means and merit applied by the legal aid agency in question and subject to the appropriate conditions imposed by the legal aid agency in question according to the circumstances of the case. (2) This information is not available, because statistics currently kept by the legal aid agencies and collected by the Commonwealth do not enable matters involving residency status to be specifically identified. However, the Attorney-General's Department has recently asked all major legal aid agencies to participate in a survey, to be undertaken in respect of a defined period in the near future, of legal aid applications from persons alleged to be prohibited non-citizens in respect of matters concerning their status. This survey is designed to provide the Department with statistical information regarding the numbers, nature and cost of matters in which legal aid is granted for such cases. However, it should be emphasised that, in view of both the legislative protection of the confidentiality of information regarding individual clients of State legal aid commissions and the policy of protecting confidentiality in relation to clients of the Australian Legal Aid Office, the survey will provide information for statistical purposes only and will not involve identification of individual cases. (3) See answer to (1) above. (4) See answer to (2) above. (Question No. 2108) Mr Robert Brown asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 9 October 1985: (1) Are people who are not citizens of Australia or are without resident status and without authority to remain in Australia, eligible for unemployment benefits or other forms of social security; if so, under what conditions. (2) What are the relevant sections of the Social Security Act. (3) How many of these people have been eligible for benefits in each of the years 1980-81 to 1984-85. (4) What category of pension have they received and what has been the cost in each instance. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Apart from minor exceptions in relation to family allowance and family income supplement, citizenship is not a prerequisite for any form of social security. However, all forms of assistance other than special benefits have as a prerequisite specified conditions of residence in Australia (or corresponding residence under a reciprocal agreement). Legal advice has indicated that `residence' for the purpose of the Social Security Act means legal residence, so that prohibited non-citizens (persons without authority to remain in Australia) are not generally entitled to receive social security assistance. However, in certain unusual circumstances special benefit may be paid, eg. where a prohibited non-citizen has applied for regularisation of residence status and is in hardship. (2) The provisions of the Social Security Act which contain the principal residence requirements for the various payments are as follows: Unemployment Benefit... Paragraph 107 (1) (b) Sickness Benefit... Paragraph 108 (1) (b) Age Pension... Paragraph 21 (1) (b) Invalid Pension... Sections 24 and 25 Wife's Pension... Sub-section 31 (1) Spouse Carer's Pension... Sub-section 33 (1) Widows Pension... Sub-section 60 (1) Supporting Parents' Benefit... Section 83AAC Family Income Supplement... Sub-section 85 (2) Family Allowance... Sub-section 96 (1) Mobility Allowance... Sub-section 133RB (2) (3) and (4) This information is not available. (Question No. 2127) Mr Jull asked the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Bicentenary, upon notice, on 10 October 1985: (1) What projects have been submitted to the Australian Bicentennial Authority (ABA) for consideration by the Logan City Council and which of these projects have been approved. (2) What is (a) the ABA's and (b) the Logan City Council's financial contribution to each project. (3) How many people are expected to be employed on each project. Mr Cohen —The answer to the honourable member's question, based on advise from the Australian Bicentennial Authority, is as follows: (1) Six applications have been submitted to the Australian Bicentennial Authority by the Logan City Council which could be considered under the Commonwealth-funded program for local and regional projects within the National Program for the Bicentenary. None has yet been approved. They are as follows: Bicentennial Sports Festival Week Logan City Pioneer Park Museum Bicentennial Youth Festival Bicentennial Art Portfolio Bicentennial Eisteddfod Special Interest Groups Expo (2) Not applicable. (3) The number of people to be employed would vary according to the level of funding obtained. (Question No. 2128) Mr Jull asked the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Bicentenary, upon notice, on 10 October 1985: (1) How many applications have been made to the Australian Bicentennial Authority (ABA) for projects seeking assistance within the Electoral Division of Fadden. (2) By whom and for what purpose was each of the applications made. (3) How many of these applications have been approved and what is the ABA's contribution to each project. Mr Cohen —The answer to the honourable member's question, based on advice from the Australian Bicentennial Authority, is as follows: (1), (2) and (3): The Commonwealth Government has provided $166m at 1982 prices to the Authority for the development of a program of National and International events. Certain provision has been made within that program for funding of events centred on a local community. In the main these funds are being devolved to State Councils of the Authority. Nomination of projects is vested in these Councils. The devolved funds for Queensland are: $ Heritage Program... 500,000 Environment Program... 360,000 Sport and Recreation... 300,000 Multicultural Events... 150,000 Commissionings... 200,000 Community Arts... 260,000 Total... 1,770,000 Detailed information on applications to the Australian Bicentennial Authority according to individual electorates in Queensland is not readily available. However, the ABA has advised that six applications from the Logan City Council, within the Fadden Electoral Division, have been submitted to the Queensland State Council of the Authority for possible funding under the above programs. These applications are for the following purposes: Bicentennial Sports Festival Week Logan City Pioneer Park Museum Bicentennial Youth Festival Bicentennial Art Portfolio Bicentennial Eisteddfod Special Interest Groups Expo None of these projects has yet been approved. In addition, applications for Bicentennial funding have been received for other activities in the Brisbane area, including proposals by the Brisbane City Council, and these may incorporate projects within the Fadden electorate. Local Government authorities are also eligible for funding under the Commonwealth Local Government Initiative Grants Program. Each local Government Authority is eligible to receive a grant of $2,000 plus $1 per capita to be matched on a dollar for dollar basis. Brisbane City and Logan City, the two Local Government Authorities in the electorate of Fadden, are eligible for grants of $742,200 and $102,000 respectively. This funding is additional to that being provided by the State Government for its own Bicentennial program. (Question No. 2174) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice, on 11 October 1985: (1) What schemes does his Department operate to encourage employment by subsidising employees' wages or making a direct cash payment to an employer and when was each scheme implemented. (2) How many individuals have participated in each State and what were the sums paid under each scheme for each financial year since the schemes were implemented. (3) Has his Department undertaken an evaluation of the effectiveness of these schemes; if so, will he table in the House a copy of this evaluation. Mr Willis —The answer to the honourable member's question, as at November 1985, is: (1) My Department operates the following employment subsidy programs which can involve as part of their provisions subsidising employees wages or direct payments to employers for purposes of training and work experience. APPROVALS UNDER SELECTED DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS PROGRAMS, 1984/85 Program N.S.W. Vic. Qld S.A. W.A. Tas. N.T. A.C.T. National Commonwealth Rebate for Apprentice Full-Time Training (CRAFT) Technical Education Rebate... 26,183 24,137 10,113 6,080 7,157 2,371 529 744 77,314 Off-the-Job Training Rebate... 1,486 1,860 1,969 565 477 130 50 2 6,539 Pre-vocational Graduate Employment Rebate... 224 40 387 40 80 40 3 2 816 Special Additional Employment Incentive... 2,246 3,905 1,649 1,013 873 341 191 163 10,381 Additional incentive for women employed as apprentices 573 10,957 Group One Year Apprentice Scheme (GOYAS)... 13 50 34 28 . . . . 24 . . 149 Group Apprenticeship Support Program (GASP)... 588 562 321 196 221 32 82 27 2,032 Special Trade Training Program-Mature Age Component (STTP)... 50 . . 21 . . 70 . . . . . . 141 Special Assistance Program (SAP)... 802 609 744 125 213 222 11 . . 2,726 Experimental Training Project (ETP)... 89 94 108 158 122 24 0 35 630 Skills in Demand (SID) Program... 84 7 174 129 119 . . 29 11 553 General Training Assistance (GTA)-On-the-Job... 368 527 204 41 79 10 6 2 1,237 Special Youth Employment Training Program (SYETP)... 20,164 16,213 12,531 6,986 8,559 2,731 445 1,245 68,874 Training for Aboriginals Program (TAP)... 2,292 418 2,985 567 1,378 129 750 140 8,669 Training Program for the Disabled... 1,264 1,334 820 384 576 100 68 97 4,643 Labour Force Program for Special Needs Job-seekers... 800 786 297 140 83 43 15 26 2,190 Adult Wage Subsidy Scheme (AWSS)... 4,738 3,008 2,840 1,218 1,861 479 85 109 14,338 Program Date implemented Commonwealth Rebate for Apprentice Full-Time Training (CRAFT)- Technical Education Rebate... January 1977 Off-the-Job Training Rebate... January 1977 Pre-vocational Graduate Employment Rebate... January 1984 Special Additional Employment Incentive... March 1984 Group One Year Apprentice Scheme (GOYAS)... January 1975 Group Apprenticeship Support Program (GASP)... January 1981 Special Trade Training Program (STTP) Mature Age Component... June 1980 Special Assistance Program (SAP)... December 1981 Experimental Training Projects Program (ETP)... August 1982 Skills in Demand (SID) Program... September 1980 General Training Assistance (GTA) On-the-Job (OTJ)... October 1974 Special Youth Employment Training Program... October 1976 Training for Aboriginals Program (TAP)... 1970 Training Program for the Disabled... December 1980 Labour Force Program for Special Needs Job Seekers... December 1980 Adult Wage Subsidy Scheme (AWSS)... March 1983 Details of the programs are contained in the publication `Department of Employment and Industrial Relations Programs 1985-86' released in August 1985. Payments under the Australian Traineeship System which will become operational in 1985-86 are not included. The Community Employment Program (CEP) which is intended to provide worthwhile short-term work experience to disadvantaged unemployed people, with the aim of improving their employment prospects in the general labour market, was not considered to fall within the ambit of the honourable member's question. (2) In the circumstances, I am not prepared to request the considerable time and resources which would be involved in order to seek to identify and draw together the information the honourable member has requested. The following tables provide the number of apporovals under programs listed in (1) in each State for 1984-85 and the national expenditure under those programs for 1984-85. EXPENDITURE ON SELECTED DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS PROGRAMS, 1984-85 Commonwealth Rebate for Apprentice Full-Time Training (CRAFT)- Technical Education Rebate... 65,105.0 Off-the-Job Training Rebate... 11,616,.0 Pre-vocational Graduate Employment Rebate... 615.0 Special Additional Employment Incentive... 16,479.0 Group One Year Apprentice Scheme (GOYAS)... 1,824.0 Group Apprenticeship Support Program (GASP)... 671.0 Special Trade Training Program (STTP) Mature Age Component... 116.496 Special Assistance Program (SAP)... 5,391.0 Experimental Training Projects Program (ETP)... 1,807.0 Skills in Demand (SID) Program... 3,092.0 General Training Assistance (GTA) On-the-Job (OTJ)... 848.0 Special Youth Employment Training Program (SYETP)... 97,673.0 Training for Aboriginals Program (TAP)... 46,571.6 Training Program for the Disabled... 9,234.0 Labour Force Program for Special Needs Job-seekers... 2,333.0 Adult Wage Subsidy Scheme (AWSS)... 35,134.0 (3) A number of evaluation studies of the programs have been undertaken by the Bureau of Labour Market Research (BLMR) and prior to that by the Department of Employment and Youth Affairs (DEYA). The available reports arising from these studies are listed below under the relevant program heading. Commonwealth Rebate for Apprentice Full-Time Training (CRAFT): L Krbavac (1984) Evaluation of the 1980 $1000 Cash Rebate Scheme For Apprentices, BLMR Working Paper No 48, Canberra. General Training Assistance (GTA)-On-the-Job: BLMR, The National Employment and Training System (NEAT), an Evaluation 1984. Fisher, N W F and Scherer, P A: Research on Commonwealth Employment and Training Programs and Services. BLMR Workshop on Recent Labour Market Research, 1983. Special Youth Employment Training Program (SYETP): BLMR (1983), Employment and Training Programs for Young People: Analysis of Assistance. Research Report No 2, AGPS, Canberra. Department of Employment &Youth Affairs (1980a), Special Youth Employment Training Program: Employer Study, Melbourne. Department of Employment &Youth Affairs (1980b), SYETP in the Private Sector: Follow-up Survey of April 1979 Placements, Melbourne. Department of Employment &Youth Affairs (1980c), Training and Work Experience in Commonwealth Establishments, A Study of the Initial 1,000 Trainees. Melbourne Hoy, M (1983), Review of Five Years Operation of SYETP, BLMR Conference Paper No 18, Canberra. Stretton, A (1982), The Short-term Impact on Participants of Selected Youth Employment and Training Programs, BLMR Working Paper No 15, Canberra. Hoy, M and Ryan C A (1984). Participating Employer's Responses to the SYEPT Wage Subsidy Scheme, BLMR Working Paper No 40, Canberra. Ginpil, S and Hoy, M (1984). Some Factors Affecting the Completion Rates for Young People Under Wage Subsidy, BLMR Working Paper No 46, Canberra. Vella, F and MacKay, K (1984). Factors Affecting the Number of Persons Commencing Employment under the SYEPT Scheme, BLMR Working Paper No 47, Canberra. Baker, S (1984). A Comparative Evaluation of the Impact on Participants of Selected Youth Labour Force Programs, BLMR Working Paper No 50, Canberra. Training for Aboriginals Program (TAP): DEYA, National Employment Strategy for Aboriginals: Preliminary Study of NEAT Public Sector Training for Aboriginals, 1980. It is not appropriate to table all these reports, but copies of the evaluation studies will be made available directly to the honourable member. (Question No. 2179) Dr Klugman asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 11 October 1985: (1) What amount was awarded to applicants under the Australian Capital Territory Criminal Injuries Compensation Ordinance 1983 in 1984-1985. (2) What part of this is expected to be paid by (a) the Commonwealth and (b) the person committing the injury. (3) In the case of policemen injured in the execution of their duty, are the awards additional to their entitlement under the Compensation (Commonwealth Government Employees) Act 1971. Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The total amount awarded was $248,429.31. (2) The Commonwealth pays the compensation awarded. However, if the injured person subsequently recovers damages in respect of his or her injuries, whether in the Territory or elsewhere, he or she is required to reimburse the Commonwealth up to a maximum sum equal to the amount awarded under the Ordinance. (3) No, the awarding of compensation is not additional to a policeman's entitlement to compensation under the Compensation (Commonwealth Government Employees) Act 1971. Should a policeman receive compensation under the Act he is required, as is the case with any person receiving damages for injuries inflicted as a result of criminal conduct, to refund to the Commonwealth the amount of compensation received up to a maximum equal to the amount awarded under the Ordinance. (Question No. 2200) Mr Maher asked the Minister for Aviation, upon notice, on 14 October 1985: (1) How many helicopter flights passed over the suburbs of Drummoyne and Chiswick, within the Electoral Division of Lowe, in (a) June, (b) July, (c) August and (d) September, 1985. (2) How many of these flight were classified as joy flights. (3) Is action being taken to restrict unnecessary helicopter movements over these suburbs. Mr Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Since these helicopter flights are conducted outside controlled airspace and without the direct knowledge of Airways Operations' staff, no statistical records of the number of flights are kept by my Department. (2) The same applies to joy flights-no records are kept. I am informed that joy flights originating from Piers 22/23 Pyrmont have now ceased. However, previous flights always operated within the transit lanes to the east of the Darling Harbour and Pyrmont areas and not over the Drummoyne area. (3) No. My Department is not in a position to determine what are necessary or unnecessary helicopter movements. Action has been taken, and continues to be taken to remind operators of their responsibilities to conduct flights strictly within the designated lanes. (Question No. 2237) Mr Lloyd asked the Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: (1) Who appointed Mr Neil Batt to mediate in an industrial dispute threatening a $200 million sale of light railway vechicles to Hong Kong. (2) Does Mr Batt have the power to settle the dispute caused by the 4 unions without reference to the Arbitration Commission. (3) Is the unions' wage claim outside the Government-trade union accord. (4) If the appointment was by the Federal Government for the purpose of protecting exports, why has similar action not been taken when agricultural exports have been similary threatened. Mr Willis —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Mr Batt was appointed by the Commonwealth Minister for Trade and the Victorian Minister for Transport following agreement with the company and the relevant unions. (2) Mr Batt's role in this matter is to assist in the negotiation of an industrial agreement between the company and the unions. This agreement is to provide for industrial relations stability in return for job security. The agreement will facilitate the signing of a contract in relation to the Hong Kong light rail projects. Mr Batt will also assist in the resolution of any local issues which arise in the operation of the agreement. (3) As part of the agreement reached between the company, the unions and the Australian Council of Trade Unions, any wages claims are to be dealt with by the Australian Conciliation and Arbitration Commission in accordance with the National Wage Fixing Principles of September 1983. (4) This is a matter of Government policy to be decided upon from time to time in light of the circumstances prevailing. (Question No. 2248) Mr Connolly asked the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: (1) Was Inada Holdings established by the Aboriginal Development Commission in March 1984. (2) Is this firm experiencing financial difficulties; if so, what is the current situation of their accounts. (3) Is Inada Holdings divesting itself or staff, outlets and commitments. (4) Are the accounts of Inada Holdings examined by the Auditor-General. (5) When was the last annual report of the Company lodged with the Aboriginal Development Commission. Mr Holding —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: I have been advised by the Aboriginal Development Commission where appropriate. (1) Inada Holdings Pty Ltd was a shelf company purchased by the Aboriginal Development Commission (ADC) in March 1984 and subsequently became an operating company. (2) to (3) Inada Holdings is a proprietary Company and as such is covered by the provisions of the Companies Act 1981. The information sought by the Honourable Member in these parts of his question is clearly of a nature considered to be commercial-in-confidence. I am seeking therefore the assistance of the General Manager of the ADC and the General Manager of Inada Holdings to provide the Honourable Member with a briefing on these matters on a confidential basis. (4) No. (5) Inada Holdings Pty Ltd is incorporated under the Companies Act 1981 which requires lodgement of its Annual Report with the Corporate Affairs Commission in Canberra not the Aboriginal Development Commission; Inada has so lodged its Annual Report. (Question No. 2253) Mr Maher asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: (1) Which civil marriage celebrants operate within a 5 kilometre radius of Five Dock, New South Wales. (2) What are their workload statistics. Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) The following civil marriage celebrants currently reside within a 5 kilometre radius of Five Dock. The number of marriages solemnized by each celebrant for the period 1 January to 30 September 1985 is also shown. Name and address Marriages solemnized 1 Jan. to 30 Sept. 1985 Mrs J. E. Fuller, 12 Richards Avenue, Drummoyne... 355 Mr R. W. Platt, 199 Beattie Street, Balmain... 68 Mr R. Cohn, 56 White Street, Lilyfield... 16 Mr G. Mezher, OAM, 70 Sloane Street, Haberfield... 35 Mr E. Aaron, 24 Bishop Street, Petersham... 64 Mrs L. E. Vassall, 4 Austin Avenue, Croydon... 10 Mrs R. Chong, MBE, 2 Angelo Street, Burwood... 30 Mr P. O'Neill, 21 Gipps Street, Concord... 10 Mrs M. C. Ryan, 47 Beresford Road, Strathfield... Nil Mr M. B. Moroney, 7 Hyde Brae Street, Strathfield... 47 (Question No. 2342) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) What was the expenditure by the Minister's Department and authorities under the Minister's control on advertising (other than classified newspaper advertising) by individual subject or program in (a) 1983-84 and (b) 1984-85. (2) Who (a) initiated and (b) conducted each campaign. (3) Why was each campaign necessary. (4) What was the basis of remuneration for each campaign. (5) Was the assistance of the (a) Information Co-ordination Branch or (b) Australian Government Advertising Service obtained. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a)- 1983-84 Subject/program $ Introduction of Family Income Supplement 560,383 Budget changes 1983... 6,500 (b)- May 1985 pension and benefit rate changes 31,189 Introduction of special `first point of contact' leaflet, `Perhaps Social Security can help You'... 45,000 Introduction of the income and assets test... 104,995 Conversion to direct deposit... 70,579 (2) (a) and (b) Departmental officers. (3) The Government's policy is that all Australians have a right to equal access of information. The role of Government information programs, including advertising campaigns, is to inform Australians in the most efficient and cost effective manner of their rights, duties, obligations and responsibilities and matters deemed of national importance. The necessity of an advertising campaign, such as those listed above, is determined according to these criteria. (4) The basis for the remuneration was in accordance with relevant Commonwealth Treasury Regulations and procedures of the Information Co-ordination Branch and Australian Government Advertising Service. (5) (a) and (b) Yes. (Question No. 2369) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: What action has been taken by the Government to implement the recommendations of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs in its report on the effect of asbestos mining on the Baryulgil community? Mr Holding —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Discussions have been held with appropriate Commonwealth and State Government departments and agencies on the recommendations with a view to the Government making a formal response to Parliament as soon as possible. (Question No. 2370) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: What action has he taken to investigate the principle of a Treaty of Commitment, similar to those negotiated on other continents, to set out the legal and cultural relationships between the Aboriginal and Islander peoples and the Western Australian community. Mr Holding —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Any Treaty of Commitment between Aboriginal and Islander peoples and the Western Australian community is a matter for Western Australia. The Senate Standing Committee on Constitutional and Legal Affairs examined the feasibility of a compact or Makarratta between the Commonwealth Government and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The Committee tabled its report entitled `Two Hundred Years Later . . .' on 13 September 1983. The Government's position on the Makarratta is outlined in its response to that Parliamentary Committee Report in Hansard of 31 May 1985 (page 2961). (Question No. 2371) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: What action is being taken in response to the report of the Harkins Inquiry into Aboriginal and Islanders Legal Services. Mr Holding —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Mr Harkins submitted the report on his Inquiry into Aboriginal Legal Aid on 8 November. The report runs to over 1,300 pages and makes 179 recommendations. The report is being examined in my Department. (Question No. 2390) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) Is it a fact that there is conflict between the policies of the South African United Democratic Front Organisation and of Chief Buthelezi's Inkatha movement? If so, in what respects are the objectives of the Inkatha movement in conflict with those of the United Democratic Front. (2) Has the Government adopted a policy towards the objectives of the Inkatha movement? Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes, there are differences between the policies of the UDF and Inkatha. While both are working towards the dismantling of apartheid, the means by which each group seeks to achieve this objective is different. Inkatha has chosen participation in the South African government-created system of homelands. On the other hand, the UDF, which was specifically founded to oppose the new South African constitution, is opposed to any participation in the apartheid system. Inkatha opposes the use of mandatory economic sanctions against South Africa, whereas the UDF has repeatedly called for their introduction. (2) The Australian Government has not adopted a specific policy towards the objectives of the Inkatha. The Government shares the common objective of Inkatha and the UDF to work for the dismantling of the apartheid system. The form of Government in South Africa is a matter for consultation and agreement among all South Africans, irrespective of race. (Question No. 2409) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 13 November 1985: (1) Is it proposed to apply the assets test to pensioners who become eligible for Australian social security benefits under the new arrangements for reciprocal social security agreements announced in his press release of 7 November 1985; if so, (a) what procedures will be used to (i) calculate, (ii) verify and (iii) review the value of pensioner's assets held overseas and (b) will any allowance be made for fluctuations in exchange rates. (2) What are his Department's projections of (a) the number of people who will become eligible for Australian social security under the new arrangements and (b) the cost of the new arrangements broken down by (i) country of residence, (ii) type of pension, and (iii) the percentage of pensioners who will become eligible for full and part pensions. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes, the assets test will apply to people who become eligible for Australian social security benefits under any new reciprocal social security agreement in the same way as it now applies to people who become eligible under the existing agreements and under the Social Security Act. (a) The procedures used to calculate, verify and review the value of pensioners' assets held overseas will be the same as those which apply for pensioners who have assets in Australia. However, a typical reciprocal agreement does include provisions for administrative assistance and it may be possible that some future agreement countries would be prepared to assist in the application of the Australian assets test. This would be a matter for negotiation. (b) Overseas assets, like overseas income are generally valued in the currency of the country concerned and social security agreements frequently include provisions governing the method for valuing one currency in terms of the currency of another. Where there are no such provisions, the relevant exchange rate is used which applies at the time the entitlement is determined or reviewed. (2) (a) and (b) It is not possible to estimate accurately the total number of people who will benefit under reciprocal agreements. In the future, the number of agreements Australia might enter into, the number of people who chose to leave Australia to live abroad and the number of people who might be selected for migration to Australia will all have a bearing on the number of people who might benefit once a network of agreements is in place. However, all those people now in Australia who spent part of their lives overseas and contributed to foreign social security systems, and those people who spent part of their working life in Australia and are now overseas, are potential beneficiaries under reciprocity arrangements. My Department estimates this would be well over a million people. It is possible to estimate the number of people who will benefit under a specific agreement while it is being negotiated. Such estimates are essential to the negotiation process to enable each Government to assess the cost implications of the agreement concerned. (Question No. 2411) Mr Ewen Cameron asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 13 November 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether the New South Wales Parliament enacted a Contracts Review Act on 24 April 1980. (2) Have proposals for a Commonwealth Contract Review Act been submitted to him or his predecessors; if so, why has the legislation not been introduced in Parliament. (3) Will he consider the introduction of a Contracts Review Act in order to safeguard consumers from unconscionable contracts. Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The Contracts Review Act 1980 (New South Wales) was assented to on 15 April 1980 and commenced operation on 24 April 1980. (2) and (3) In February 1984 a Green Paper entitled `The Trade Practices Act-Proposals for Change' was released by the then Attorney-General, Senator Gareth Evans, the then Minister for Home Affairs and Environment, Mr Cohen, and the then Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, Mr Willis. The Green Paper included a proposal to insert a provision in the Trade Practices Act 1974 to prohibit unconscionable conduct in relation to a contract or proposed contract. Public comment on the Green Paper was invited. On 9 October 1985 I introduced into the House of Representatives the Trade Practices Amendment Bill 1985, which included many of the proposals contained in the Green Paper, including the `unconscionable conduct' provision (proposed new section 52A of the Trade Practices Act). In the light of public comment received on the Green Paper proposal, the Government decided to restrict the application of the new provision to unconscionable conduct in respect of consumer transactions. As the proposed new section 52A stands, it will protect consumers from unconscionable conduct in their dealings with corporations. The section is designed to cover conduct which, while it may not be false or misleading, is nevertheless unconscionable in all the circumstances. The Office of Consumer Affairs in my Department will be monitoring the operation of the provision to see if it is having the desired effect. There are some differences between the New South Wales Contracts Review Act and the new section 52A, though generally speaking they cover the same type of conduct. Section 7 of the Contracts Review Act provides that, where the Court finds a contract or provision of a contract to have been unjust, the Court may grant relief. However, by virtue of section 6, relief can only be granted in respect of non-business contracts made by the complainant or to contracts made for the purpose of a farming undertaking, and in any case relief cannot be granted to a corporation. Because of constitutional limitations, Part V of the Trade Practices Act is generally limited to the conduct of corporations. Section 52A will prohibit corporations engaging in unconscionable conduct in connection with the supply or possible supply of goods or services to a person. The section is not limited to unjust provisions in contracts, but extends to any conduct in connection with a supply or possible supply. Further, relief can be granted to anyone (including corporations), but only in respect of the supply or possible supply of consumer-type goods or services, ie goods or services of a kind ordinarily acquired for personal, domestic or household use. The types of remedies available under the Contracts Review Act and section 52A are basically the same. However, if the Trade Practices Amendment Bill is passed, the Trade Practices Commission will be empowered to take representative actions on behalf of aggrieved consumers for breaches of Part V of the Act, including section 52A, rather than consumers having to institute individual actions to obtain redress. The Trade Practices Amendment Bill was passed by the House of Representatives on 19 November 1985. (Question No. 2413) Dr Klugman asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 14 November 1985: (1) What is the rate of (a) unemployment and (b) sickness benefits for each category of beneficiary in Australia. (2) Is he able to give comparable rates for New Zealand. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) Unemployment benefit rates in Australia ($ per week) from November 1985: Unmarried, no dependants 16-17 years... 50.00 18-20 years... 88.20 21 or more years... 91.45 Unmarried, with one dependant child+... 123.90 Married couple (combined)*... 163.30 (b) Sickness benefit rates in Australia ($ per week) as at November 1985: Unmarried, no dependants 16-17 years... 50.00 18 or more years... 97.90 Unmarried, with one dependant child+... 123.90 Married couple (combined)*... 163.30 + Increased by $16 for each additional child. * Increased by $16 for each child. (2) (a) Unemployment benefit rates in New Zealand ($ per week) from July 1985. Gross Rate Net Rate* Unmarried, no children Under 20 years... 87.03 ($A72.86) 77.14 ($A64.58) 20 or over... 109.49 ($A91.66) 97.03 ($A81.23) Unmarried, one child**... 176.48 ($A147.74) Married no dependant child... 182.48 ($A152.77) 147.63 ($A123.59) one dependant child**... 192.48 ($A161.14) (b) Sickness benefit rates in New Zealand ($ per week) from July 1985: Unmarried Under 18 years... 87.03 ($A72.86) 18 or over... 109.49 ($A91.66) with one dependant child**... 176.48 ($A147.74) Married no dependant child... 182.48 ($A152.77) one dependant child**... 192.48 ($A161.14) * The net (after-tax) rate is quoted since unemployment benefit is automatically subject to tax at source (except where child supplement is being paid, in which case the total benefit payment is exempt). ** Increased by $10 ($A8.37) a week for each subsequent child. The exchange rate used is $A1=$NZ1.1945 (26 November 1985). (Question No. 2425) Mr Andrew asked the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 14 November 1985: Did he issue a news release entitled `Federal Authorities Act on Adulterated Austrian Wine' on 7 August 1985 which concluded that further information would be issued as soon as results were available; if so, (a) is there any further information and (b) when will he make it available. Dr Blewett —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Yes, a news release on 7 August 1985 did make reference to further information being issued when available. My Department has been active in collecting data and collating and dispatching these data to concerned organisations, particularly State and Territory Health authorities, Australian Customs, and also the Departments of Primary Industry and Trade. This information has been freely available to any person requesting it. The information available was revised as recently as 20 November and comes in the form of three lists: 1. Information provided by the Governments of Austria and the Federal Republic of Germany on contaminated wines; 2. A list of wines shown, by Australian analysis, to contain diethylene glycol; and 3. A list of wines shown, by Australian analysis, to be free from diethylene glycol. My Department has been in close liaison with New Zealand and has shared analytical results with them, as well as distributing their analytical results to relevant regulatory authorities. Arrangements have also been made to share analytical results with the USA. I will be happy to arrange for this information to be provided to the honourable member. (Question No. 2433) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 15 November 1985: (1) Did resolutions censuring Israel come before the recent United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation Conference held in Sofia, Bulgaria; if so (a) what was the content of the resolutions and (b) what stand did Australia take. (2) What (a) instructions and (b) powers of interpretation were given to the Australian Ambassador for voting on the resolutions. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) (a) The 23rd session of the General Conference of United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation passed three resolutions concerning territories occupied by Israel since 1967: The Cultural Heritage and the Cultural Identity of the Palestinian People. Jerusalem and the Application of 22C/Resolution 11.8. Implementation of 22C/Resolution 23 concerning Educational and Cultural Institutions in the Occupied Arab Territories. (b) These resolutions were drafted in more moderate language than in previous years. As a result of debates and discussions, the resolutions were amended to meet broad Australian concerns. In plenary session of the Conference, the three resolutions were carried by consensus. In the commissions of the Conference, voting was as follows: On the Palestinian People: carried by consensus. On Jerusalem: 90 in favour-2 against (Israel, Costa Rica)-3 abstentions (PNG, Switzerland, Zaire). On the Occupied Arab Territories: 69 in favour-1 against (Israel)-4 abstentions (Burma, Ghana, Switzerland, Venezuela). (2) (a) Australia's objective was to seek agreement on the various resolutions. The delegation was asked to maintain close contact with other delegations and with Canberra. It was to oppose the inclusion of errors of fact, unacceptable or unbalanced formulations, and extreme or inflammatory references to Israel. It was to work for more accurate and balanced descriptions of the situation. (b) It is necessary at international conferences for Australia's representatives to have an appropriate degree of discretion, so that they can react to fast-moving situations and developments that occur without notice. It is expected that delegations will maintain as close as possible a contact with Canberra in regard to difficult questions. In the case of the UNESCO conference necessary contact was maintained between the delegation in Sofia, and Canberra. Texts of the three resolutions are as follows: THE CULTURAL HERITAGE AND THE CULTURAL IDENTITY OF THE PALESTINIAN PEOPLE The General Conference, Recalling the importance that the Consitution of Unesco attaches to respect of all cultures and to their preservation and protection, Recalling in this connection Article 1 of the Declaration of the Principles of International Cultural Co-operation, adopted at its fourteenth session, stating that `Each culture has a dignity and value which must be respected and preserved', that `Every people has the right and duty to develop its culture', and that `All cultures form part of the common heritage belonging to all mankind'. Recalling Resolution No. 3 of the Intergovernmental Conference on the Institutional, Administrative and Financial Aspects of Cultural Policies (Venice, 1970), recommending that any State occupying the territory of another people should fully respect, protect and preserve the cultural property and heritage of that people, and that such occupation should end as soon as possible. Considering that cultural identity is the very essence of a people's destiny and the living core of its culture. Noting with satisfaction the efforts made by Unesco to safeguard the Palestinian heritage, in pursuance inter alia of the following instruments: Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (1954); Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property (1970); Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972). Invites the Director-General to see to it that Unesco: 1. continues its action for the preservation of the cultural identity of the Palestinian people and the safeguarding of its heritage; 2. contines its action for the preservation of the Palestininan cultural heritage in the occupied territories; 3. ensures the protection and promotion of the Palestinian cultural institutions; 4. undertakes a study on the identity of the Palestinian people in its various aspects (origin, historical development, present state), it being understood that this study will be financed by means of extra-budgetary funds. JERUSALEM AND THE APPLICATION OF 2CC/RESOLUTION 11.8 The General Conference, 1. Recalling the provisions of the Constitution of UNESCO relating to the conservation and protection of and respect for the natural heritage and cultural property, especially property of outstanding universal value, 2. Recalling the Hague Convention and Protocol of 1954 concerning the protection of cultural property in the event of armed conflict, 3. Recalling that the conventions, recommendations and resolutions that have been adopted by the international community on behalf of natural heritage and cultural property demonstrate the importance for humanity of safeguarding such property, 4. Considering that it is of importance to the entire international community that the natural and cultural heritage should be protected, 5. Considering the unique role of the City of Jerusalem in the history of humanity as a holy city for the three monoetheistic religions that share the same philosophical, ethical and religious values, which are fundamental for more than two thousand million people in all the continents of the world, 6. Considering that the entire city and its heritage of monuments still bear living witness to this exceptional role, 7. Considering that it is the eternal vocation of Jerusalem to promote peace and understanding among men, in accordance with the message that was delivered there, 8. Recalls that it is for that reason that the city of Jerusalem has been recognised as of universal importance by being included in the World Heritage List, 9. Recalls that the Israeli military occupation and the present status of the city entail dangers for the safeguarding of its essential vocation, 10. Recalls and reaffirms the previous resolutions of the General Conference which seek to ensure the safeguarding of all the spiritual, cultural, historical and other values of the Holy City, 11. Deplores assaults and attempted assaults on the holy places, which constitute a grave derogation from the ecumenical vocation of the city, 12. Deplores the works carried out in the old holy city, which have imperilled important historical monuments which bear witness to the cultural identity of the indigenous people, 13. Recomends that all member states combine their efforts to ensure the total and effective safeguarding of the occupied holy city and the preservation and restoration of the historic substance of the city and its heritage of monuments belonging to all religions. 14. Draws the attention of the international community more particularly to the state of degradation of a large part of the Islamic culture and religious heritage and urges member states to support the efforts of the Waab the owner of the heritage by making voluntary contributions to the financing of safeguarding operations. 15. Thanks the Director-General for everything he has done in this report and requests him to assist by appropriate means in implementing this resolution, in accordance with the conclusions of Professor Lemaire's report set out in document 23C/15, 16. Decides to include this question in the Agenda of the Twenty-Fourth Session of the General Conference, with a view to taking such decisions as may be required by the situation obtaining at that time. IMPLEMENTATION OF 22C/RESOLUTION 23 CONCERNING EDUCATION AND CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS IN THE OCCUPIED ARAB TERRITORIES The General Conference, 1. Recalling the Geneva Convention (1949) relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war and the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (The Hague Convention, 1954), 2. Affirming that everyone has the right to education (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 26, paragraph 1) and that this right is not limited to primary and secondary education but also applies to higher education (International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Article 13, paragraph 2), 3. Considering that higher educational institutions should be free communities of intellectuals and students enjoying universally recognized university freedoms, 4. Considering that the existence and free functioning of these institutions are fundamental and essential elements in the affirmation and consolidation of the cultural identity of the Palestinian people, 5. Expressing its keen desire to see the inhabitants of the occupied territories enjoy the fundamental right to receive an education adapted to their needs and their cultural identity like all other peoples, 6. Noting with grave concern, after consideration of the report of the Director-General contained in documents 23 C/22 and Add. 2 that the Israeli occupation authorities are continuing to obstruct the normal functioning of educational institutions, UNRWA/Unesco training centres, universities, institutes for advanced studies and cultural institutions, 7. Reaffirms all the resolutions and decisions adopted by the General Conference and by the Executive Board concerning the educational and cultural institutions in the occupied Arab territories; 8. Deplores the obstruction and repression practised by the occupation authorities against educational and cultural institutions in the Palestinian territories and other occupied Arab territories, which could threaten the very existence of those institutions; 9. Asks the occupation authorities to respect the Geneva and Hague Conventions, by cancelling all the measures taken, all of the acts committed and all of the military orders issued against educational and cultural institutions, and to preserve the academic freedoms of the universities and other educational and cultural institutions so that they may conduct their activities without let or hindrance; 10. Warmly thanks the Director-General for his continuing efforts to enable Unesco to keep a watch on the functioning of educational and cultural institutions in the occupied Arab territories and on the implementation of the resolutions and decisions of Unesco relating to these institutions; 11. Invites the Director-General to appoint a leading academic personality with responsibility for conducting a comprehensive study of the conditions in which academic freedoms are guaranteed and exercised in the occupied Arab territories, the said mission to gather the necessary information in the occupied territories, hear testimony at the Headquarters of the Organisation and prepare a report to be submitted when completed, to the Executive Board for consideration at a future session; 12. Decides to place this question on the agenda of its twenty-fourth session, with a view to ascertaining the development of the situation in those territories. (Question No. 2434) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 15 November: (1) What was the purpose of the recent visit to Australia by the Czechoslovakian Foreign Minister, Bohuslav Chnoupek. (2) For what period was he in Australia. (3) Which Government officials did he meet and for what reason. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The visit by Mr Chnoupek was part of the normal exchange of visits between Australia and other countries. The visit was a valuable opportunity for an exchange of views on bilateral relations and current international issues. It was the first visit by a Foreign Minister of Czechoslovakia to Australia. Mr Chnoupek also visited Indonesia and New Zealand. (2) 9-13 November. (3) Mr Chnoupek called on myself, and we discussed international issues, concentrating on disarmament, and bilateral relations; including exchanges between the two countries, trade, and family reunions. Mr Chnoupek had the opportunity for more informal discussions at dinner with other Ministers and members of the Parliament. Mr Chnoupek also called on the Opposition Spokesman on Foreign Affairs and made a courtesy call on His Excellency the Governor-General. Mr Chnoupek did not have any formal meetings with Government officials, but discussions were held by members of his party with officials of the Departments of Foreign Affairs, Prime Minister and Cabinet and Immigration and Ethnic Affairs. Again, these discussions concentrated on international issues and bilateral relations, including questions of concern to members of the Czechoslovak community in Australia. (Question No. 2458) Mr Beale asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, upon notice, on 18 November 1985: What was the value of tenders won by his Department in (a) 1983-84 and (b) 1984-85. Mr West —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) Nil. (b) Nil. (Question No. 2462) Mr Beale asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, upon notice, on 18 November 1985: How many people qualified for the first home owners scheme in the period Janurary to June in (a) 1984 and (b) 1985. Mr West —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) January 1984 to June 1984-48,294 applications approved. (b) January 1985 to June 1985-42,614 applications approved. (Question No. 2468) Mr Beale asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, upon notice, on 18 November 1985: How many First Home Owners Scheme applications were (a) received and (b) rejected in (i) 1983-84, (ii) 1984-85 and (iii) in the period 1 July to 30 September 1985 and what was the average number waiting to be processed over those 3 periods. Mr West —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Period (a) Received (b) Rejected Applications* in process (i) 1983-84... 91,045 1,523 21,168 (ii) 1984-85... 90,261 7,572 31,873 (iii) 1 July to 30 September 1985... 13,382 2,848 23,511 * Approximately 75 per cent of the applications in process were awaiting additional information from the applicant. (Question Nos 2469-2496) Mr Hodges asked all Ministers, upon notice, on 18 November 1985: What are the (a) names, (b) former relevant affiliations and (c) the positions occupied as appointees of (i) former elected representatives from the 3 levels of government, (ii) trade unionists, (iii) businessmen, and (iv) other appointees, who have been appointed to overseas posts, statutory bodies, inquiries and advisory committees etc., under the Minister's control since March 1983. Mr Willis —As indicated above, the honour- able member asked identical questions of all Ministers. With their concurrence, the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Public Service Matters has provided the following answer on behalf of all Ministers: It has been the practice of successive governments not to authorise the expenditure of time and money involved in answering questions which seek an unreasonable amount of generalised information. It is not intended to depart from that practice. However, if the honourable member wishes to seek information concerning members of any particular overseas post, statutory body, inquiry, advisory body or other body under any Minister's control since March 1983, that Minister would provide the necessary information to him. I would note, however, that notwithstanding that present and former affiliations of individuals are, in some respects, a matter of public record, in other cases they are of a personal and private nature. In these cases, it would not be intended to depart from the practice of not disclosing information relating to the personal affairs of individuals, where such would be unreasonable. (Question No. 2506) Mr Ruddock asked the Special Minister of State, upon notice, on 18 November 1985: (1) Does the Minister's Department, or any statutory authority responsible to the Minister, provide grants to organisations operating in the Australian Capital Territory. (2) Do such grants have a requirement that any organisation so funded be registered under the Australian Capital Territory Associations Incorporation Ordinance 1953; if so, what steps are taken by the Minister's Department to ensure that the funded organisation has complied with the Ordinance before any grant is made. (3) Does the Minister's Department or statutory authority carry out a search of the register at the Australian Capital Territory Corporate Affairs Commission. (4) If the search discloses a failure to comply with the Australian Capital Territory Associations Incorporation Ordinance, what steps are taken to ensure that the matter is remedied by those responsible for administration of the Ordinance, or the incorporated association. (5) Have all incorporated associations within the Australian Capital Territory funded by the Minister's Department or statutory authority complied with the Ordinance requirements for lodging particulars of financial affairs and balance sheets annually. Mr Young —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. The Australian Capital Territory Group of the Royal Australian Institute of Public Administration received a grant of $4,000 for the financial year 1985-86 under the Grants-in-Aid Scheme. (2) No. (3) No. (4) Not applicable. (5) Not applicable. (Question No. 2513) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, upon notice, on 18 November 1985: (1) Does the Minister's Department, or any statutory authority responsible to the Minister, provide grants to organisations operating in the Australian Capital Territory. (2) Do such grants have a requirement that any organisation so funded be registered under the ACT Associations Incorporation Ordinance 1953; if so, what steps are taken by the Minister's Department to ensure that the funded organisation has complied with the Ordinance before any grant is made. (3) Does the Minister's Department or statutory authority carry out a search of the register at the ACT Corporate Affairs Commission. (4) If the search discloses a failure to comply with the ACT Associations Incorporation Ordinance, what steps are taken to ensure that the matter is remedied by those responsible for administration of the Ordinance, or the incorporated association. (5) Have all incorporated associations within the ACT funded by the Minister's Department or statutory authority complied with the Ordinance requirements for lodging particulars of financial affairs and balance sheets annually. Mr West —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Neither the Department of Housing and Construction nor the statutory authorities responsible to me (i.e. the Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation and Housing Loans Insurance Corporation) provide grants to organisations operating in the ACT. (2 to 5) Not applicable. (Question No. 2541) Mr Leo McLeay asked the Minister for Housing and Construction, upon notice, on 19 November 1985: What is the procedure used in the Minister's office to respond to petitions referred by the House of Representatives. Mr West —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Petitions received in my office are given close consideration and every effort is made to reply to the organiser of the petition where known. (Question No. 2554) Mr Leo McLeay asked the Minister representing the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, upon notice, on 19 November 1985: What is the procedure used in the Minister's office to respond to petitions referred by the House of Representatives. Mr Holding —The Minister for Veterans' Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: Petitions referred by the House of Representatives on issues which are relevant to my portfolio are handled by my ministerial staff who provide a response where necessary in sympathetic and helpful terms. My Department also receives copies of petitions. (Question No. 2563) Mr Simmons asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 19 November 1985: What were the reasons for the rejection of legal aid to Mr Ian McLean in his case against Burns Philp in the matter of the sale of the Balanced Property Trust Building `Shangri-la' to Theo Morris. Mr Lionel Bowen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The information sought cannot be supplied in this case without disclosing details of any dealings of Mr McLean with the Australian Legal Aid Office. Since the Australian Legal Aid Office was established it has been a major concern of successive Attorneys-General that persons who have applied for assistance from, or to whom assistance is provided by, the Office should have the same privileges arising from the relationship between solicitor and client as they would have if dealing with private practitioners. In these circumstances it would be improper for me to provide a more detailed answer. (Question No. 2676) Mr Hawker asked the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 25 November 1985: (1) How many people have applied for assistance through the Pensions Loans Scheme in each State and Territory since the introduction of the pensions assets test. (2) What is the current rate of interest applicable to the Scheme. Mr Howe —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) A total of 31 applications have been received, of which 9 were subsequently withdrawn. Effective numbers for each State and Territory are as follows- New South Wales... 4 Victoria... 5 Queensland... 7 South Australia... 1 Western Australia... 4 Tasmania... 1 Northern Territory... - Australian Capital Territory... - Australia... 22 (2) 10 per cent per annum simple interest. (Question No. 2691) Mr Ruddock asked the Special Minister of State, upon notice, on 25 November 1985: (1) Has the Minister's attention been drawn to an advertisement in the Australian of 30 October 1985 in support of the Builders Labourers Federation, in which it was stated that the advertisement was supported by the (a) Abortion Counselling Service, (b) Administrative Clerical Officers Association Rank and File Committee in Defence of Trade Union Rights, (c) ACT Shelter, (d) ACT Squatters Union, (e) ACT Youth Accommodation Group, (f) ACT Youth Forum, (g) Beryl Women's Refuge, (h) Campaign against Repression in the Pacific Area, (i) Canberra &South East Region Environment Centre, (j) Canberra Youth Refuge, (k) Chile Solidarity Committee, (1) Committee for Human Rights and Democracy in Turkey, (m) Committee in Solidarity with Central America, (n) Interchange Community Youth Support Scheme, (o) Jobless Action, (p) Jobline, (q) National Landrights Now Committee, (r) Photo Access, (s) Philippine Action Support Group, (t) Rape Crisis Centre, (u) Reachout, (v) Schools Against the Bomb, (w) Southern Africa Support Campaign of Australia, (x) Soweto Mobilisation Committee, (y) Students Against Apartheid, (z) Staff of Public Radio 2XX, (za) Toora-Single Women's Shelter, (zb) Women Against Racism and (zc) Trade Union Rights Committee. (2) Do any of the listed organisations receive financial support or grants from the Minister's Department or any statutory authority responsible to the Minister. (3) If so, has the Minister's Department or statutory authority received or searched the Australian Capital Territory Corporate Affairs Commission register for annual financial accounts and balance sheets of each organisation receiving funds. (4) Is each grant conditional upon (a) the submission of audited annual accounts and balance sheets and (b) a commitment to use the funds for the purpose for which the grants was made. (5) Does each grant permit use of funds contributed for political advertisements; if not, what checks have been made or will be made to ensure that the advertisement was not paid for from grant funds. (6) Has each organisation receiving funds evidenced a capacity to raise money either in the past or in the year in question for its own purposes. (7) Have further applications for financial support been received or are they likely to be received from each organisation; if so, will a check be made to ensure that the conditions of earlier grants have been honoured. Mr Young —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. (2) No. (3) Not applicable. (4) Not applicable. (5) Not applicable. (6) Not applicable. (7) Not applicable. (Question No. 2710) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 25 November 1985: (1) Has the Minister's attention been drawn to an advertisement in the Australian of 30 October 1985 in support of the Builders Labourers Federation, in which it was stated that the advertisement was supported the (a) Abortion Counselling Service, (b) Administrative and Clerical Officers Association Rank and File Committee in Defence of Trade Union Rights, (c) ACT Shelter, (d) ACT Squatters Union, (e) ACT Youth Accommodation Group, (f) ACT Youth Forum, (g) Beryl Women's Refuge, (h) Campaign against Repression in the Pacific Area, (i) Canberra &South East Region Environment Centre, (j) Canberra Youth Refuge, (k) Chile Solidarity Committee, (l) Committee for Human Rights and Democracy in Turkey, (m) Committee in Solidarity with Central America, (n) Interchange Community Youth Support Scheme, (o) Jobless Action, (p) Jobline, (q) National Landrights Now Committee, (r) Photo Access, (s) Philippine Action Support Group, (t) Rape Crisis Centre, (u) Reachout, (v) Schools Against the Bomb, (w) South Africa Support Campaign of Australia, (x) Soweto Mobilisation Committee, (y) Students Against Apartheid, (z) Staff of Public Radio 2XX, (za) Toora-Single Women's Shelter, (zb) Women Against Racism and (zc) Trade Union Rights Committee. (2) Do any of the listed organisations receive financial support or grants from the Minister's Department or any statutory authority responsible to the Minister. (3) If so, has the Minister's Department or statutory authority received or searched the ACT Corporate Affairs Commission register for annual financial accounts and balance sheets of each organisation receiving funds. (4) Is each grant conditional upon (a) the submission of audited annual accounts and balance sheets and (b) a commitment to use the funds for the purpose for which the grant was made. (5) Does each grant permit use of funds contributed for political advertisements; if not, what checks have been made or will be made to ensure that the advertisement was not paid from grant funds. (6) Has each organisation receiving funds evidenced a capacity to raise money either in the past or in the year in question for its own purposes. (7) Have further applications for financial support been received or are likely to be received from each organisation; if so, will a check be made to ensure that the conditions of earlier grants have been honoured. Mr Holding —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. (2) No. (3)-(6) Not applicable. (7) No. Mr Lionel Bowen —On 16 October 1985 (Hansard, page 2144) Mr Ronald Edwards asked the following question, without notice: My question is directed to the Attorney-General in his capacity as Minister responsible for consumer affairs. My question relates to an article in yesterday's edition of the Canberra Times, headed `Tarago now safer'. The article states that Toyota is upgrading the safety standards of Toyota Tarago vans. The question at stake is whether previous Toyota Tarago editions may not have been safe in terms of their passenger safety. I note also that there is such a vehicle in the Commonwealth car fleet. Can the Minister advise the House on the current state of discussions in this respect? The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Office of Road Safety in the Department of Transport has advised that until 1985, the Toyota Tarago, like most other models of passenger vans, was classified for vehicle certification purposes as a multi-purpose passenger vehicle. The Australian Design Rules (ADRs) applicable to this category of vehicle reflected the commercial vehicle origins of these vans and were, in some areas, less stringent than the requirements for conventional passenger cars. Following evidence of an increase in the use of these vehicles as a means of family transport, Ministers of the Australian Transport Advisory Council (ATAC) requested a review of the design rules applicable to them. Subsequently, in February 1984, ATAC endorsed a package of safety measures aimed at bringing the present level of safety provided by these vehicles up to the same general level provided by passenger cars. This package introduced a new category of forward-control passenger vehicles and, over the next few years, an increasing number of passenger car ADRs will be applied to this category. However the differences in design between vans and passenger cars is such that not all passenger car rules will be directly applicable. I am advised that work is under way to develop new standards for these vehicles in the areas of braking and frontal impact protection. A test program is currently being carried out by the Office of Road Safety to determine which standards for frontal impact protection will be most effective in improving occupant safety. The Office of Road Safety has advised that until the results of its test program have been analysed, it will not be in a position to determine whether passenger car barrier crash test requirements are the most effective means of preventing injuries in forward control vehicles. The Toyota Tarago, and all other passenger vans, meet the safety standards applying at the time they were manufactured. The press statement `Tarago now safer' is a reference to the manufacturer's claim that the frontal impact performance of the Tarago passes a passenger car barrier crash test, which is in excess of the requirement for vans. I understand that this information is correct. (Question No. 1293) Mr Ruddock asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, upon notice, on 23 May 1985. (1) Does the Minister's Department or any statutory authority for which the Minister is responsible have in place a program under which organisations may apply for funding; if so, what are they. (2) Has the Minister's attention be drawn to an information paper entitled `Issues in 1984-85 Grant in Aid (GIA) Assessment' distributed by the Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, in particular the suggestion that large and established ethnic community organisations who in the past have received support from the Grant In Aid Program of the Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs are now expected to apply for funding from main stream sources. (3) What special provision has been made to ensure that in consideration of applications, appropriate and sensitive consideration is given to the special needs of migrant organisations and their so-called established ethnic organisations are placed in a position to compete equitably for any funds made available under programs through the Minister's Department or related agency. Mr Dawkins —The Minister for Education has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question. (1) Yes. The programs are: Grants-in-Aid Scheme, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) Program, Commonwealth Schools Commission (CSC) Multicultural Education Program, CSC Ethnic Schools Program, CSC Projects of National Significance Program, CSC Professional Development Program, Commonwealth Tertiary Education Commission (CTEC), Equity Program, CTEC administered States Grants (Tertiary Education Assistance) Act, CTEC Evaluation and Investigation Program, CTEC Participation and Equity Program. (2) Yes. (3) A number of the programs listed in the reply to (1) above make specific provision for consideration of the special needs of migrants and the involvement of migrant groups and ethnic organisations. This provision includes funding for education authorities and schools to help them respond to the multicultural nature of Australian society, assistance for non-profit and volunteer ethnic organisations to maintain students' mother tongue through instruction in a community language other than English, special assistance in study skills and bridging courses for migrants and students from ethnic groups with deficiencies in their academic preparation and funding through CTEC for adult education programs conducted by non-government agencies which are specifically designed for migrants. Other programs, while not concerned specifically with the needs of migrants, provide assistance on an equitable basis for eligible community organisations which may include migrant and ethnic organisations. (Question No. 1420) Mr Rocher asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 20 August 1985: (1) Why has Australia supported the conversion of the United Nations Industrial Development Organisation (UNIDO) from its status as an autonomous organisation into a specialised agency of the United Nations. (2) What regular budgetary support has Australia contributed to UNIDO since 1967. (3) Has Australia contributed to any UNIDO special projects in addition to any regular budgetary support; if so, (a) to which countries, (b) when and (c) for what projects. (4) Does Australia have an input into the direction of the expenditure of the funds it subscribes to UNIDO; if not, why not. (5) Will UNIDO's new status as a specialised agency alter Australia's influence over the use of funds it subscribes. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) In 1975 the Second General Conference of the United Nations Industrial Development Organisation adopted the so-called `Lima Declaration'. In that Declaration the Conference outlined new programs of work for the organisation and expressed the view that to achieve its new goals the scope and functions of UNIDO needed to be extended and its organisational machinery strengthened. Hence the Conference recommended to the United Nations General Assembly that UNIDO should be converted into a specialised agency. Australia participated in the Lima Conference and supported the `Lima Declaration', albeit with a number of reservations. A major benefit of the conversion to specialised agency status is that UNIDO's new constitutional arrangements will allow closer direct supervision and scrutiny of the Organisation's activities by member countries. Such closer scrutiny will include UNIDO's budget and programs, both of particular interest to Australia. The new arrangements are expected to improve the efficiency of UNIDO's program delivery. (2) Since its creation in 1967, UNIDO's regular budget has been funded by the United Nations. Accordingly, Australia has not contributed directly to UNIDO's regular budget but has, instead, contributed indirectly through contributions to the United Nations. During this period the Australian contribution to the UN has varied considerably but has tended to be between 1 per cent and 2 per cent of the UN's regular budget. When, on 1 January 1986, UNIDO ceases to exist as an organ of the UN General Assembly it will no longer be funded by the United Nations. UNIDO's regular budget for the biennium 1986-87 is expected to be about US$94m and Australia's assessed share of this is presently expected to be 1.66 per cent, i.e. about US$780,000 per annum. (3) Apart from regular budgetary support, Australia has contributed to the United Nations Industrial Development Fund (UNIDF) since its establishment in 1981. Our contributions to the UNIDF have been: 1981-82... $350,000 1982-83... $385,000 1983-84... $150,000 1984-85... $200,000 1985-86... $200,000 By virtue of this contribution, Australia has been involved in a wide range of UNIDF projects since 1981: seven workshops have been held: cement and concrete products; building materials; waste heat recovery; timber engineering; solar desalination; selective solar absorbing surfaces technology; and energy management. These workshops have been attended by over 130 overseas participants from some 40 countries, mainly from the Asia-Pacific region. other UNIDF projects have included the establishment of a mini-hydro plant in the Solomons; the development of a compost management plant in China; the preparation of a manual on rice husk ash cement; and research into the blending of alcohols with diesel fuel. The selection of all projects funded by Australia's contributions to the UNIDF has been subject to Australian approval. (4) Australia is not, at present, a member of UNIDO's Program and Budget Committee. Australia is, however, a member of the Industrial Development Board and participates in UNIDO's General Conference. Through these and other UNIDO forums Australia is able to express its views on all issues affecting UNIDO, including budgetary questions. (5) Under the Constitution of UNIDO as a specialised agency, member countries are able more carefully to scrutinise UNIDO's programs and budgets and to determine its activities and priorities. Accordingly, it is expected that Australia will have a greater influence over UNIDO's budget than has been the case in the past. (Question No. 1425) Dr Klugman asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, upon notice, on 20 August 1985: (1) Who are the members of the Australian National Commission for the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation. (2) When was the Commission established. (3) Who publishes the Australian National Commission for UNESCO newsletter. (4) When did this publication commence. (5) What is the cost of (a) publication and (b) distribution. Mr Dawkins —The Minister for Education has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question. (1) The members of the Australian National Commission for UNESCO are: *Professor Ken McKinnon (Chairperson), Vice-Chancsellor, University of Wollongong. *Professor Nancy F. Millis, MBE (Vice-Chairperson), Department of Microbiology, University of Melbourne. Professor Jonathon Anderson, Professor of Education, Flinders University of South Australia. Dr Joe T. Baker, OBE, Director, Sir George Fisher Centre for Tropical Marine Studies, James Cook University of North Queensland. Mr Peter Shack, MP, Opposition Spokesman on Education. Professor Bruce Bennett, Associate Professor, Centre for Studies in Australian Literature, Department of English, The University of Western Australia. Mr Max Bourke, First Assistant Secretary, Commonwealth Dept. of Arts, Heritage and Environment. Mr Peter Buckskin, Chairperson, Aboriginal Education Consultative Committee, Office of S.A. Minister for Education. *Mr John Cameron, private citizen, former General Manager, Australia Council, Killara, N.S.W. Ms Patricia J. Caswell, Industrial Officer, Victorian Trades Hall Council. Professor James Crawford, Professor of Law, University of Adelaide. *Dr Patricia Edgar, Director, Australian Children's Television Foundation. Ms Sandra Forbes, Director, Australian Book Publishers Association. Ms Jane Ford, Freelance Journalist in Science matters, O'Connor, A.C.T. Ms Susan Harvey, Information Officer, CILES, c/o CSIRO. Mr Colin Hollis, MP, Member for Throsby. Professor Diana Howlett, Department of Geography, Faculty of Arts, Australian National University. Mr Keith Jackson, Controller of Corporate Relations, Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Dr Phillip W. Jones, Lecturer in International and Development Education, University of Sydney. Mr Doug Keeley, Assistant Secretary, Commonwealth Department of Science. Ms Diana Killen, Manager Library Systems, ACI Computer Services. *Mr Joe Lo Bianco, Chairperson, Ministerial Advisory Committee on Multicultural and Migrant Education, Victorian Government. *Dr Don McMichael, CBE, Director, Museum of Australia. Miss Jean Miller, Assistant Secretary, International Education Branch, Commonwealth Department of Education. Mr H. Charles Mott, Assistant Secretary, International Organisations and Humanitarian Affairs Branch, Department of Foreign Affairs. Ms May L. O'Brien, BEM, Acting Superintendent, Aboriginal Education Branch, Western Australian Department of Education. Dr Peter Reeves, Associate Director, Division of Arts, Education and Social Sciences, Western Australian Institute of Technology. Ms Margaret Rich, Director, Ballarat Fine Art Gallery. *Professor Leonie Sandercock, Professor of Urban Studies, Centre for Environmental and Urban Studies, Macquarie University. *Dr Norman R. Sheridan, Reader in Mechanical Engineering, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Queensland. *Mr John Steinle, Director-General, South Australian Department of Education. Dr Jane Thynn, Arts Consultant, Melbourne. *Mrs Margaret Trask, AM, private citizen, former Head of the School of Library and Information Studies, Kuring-gai College of Advanced Education. Ms Sally White, Journalist, The Age, Melbourne. Mr Kim Williams, Chief Executive, Australian Film Commission. Mr Robyn Williams, Executive Producer, Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Mr Eric Willmot, AM, Deputy Secretary, Commonwealth Department of Aboriginal Affairs. *Mr L. Gratton Wilson, AO, private citizen, former Executive Secretary, CSIRO, Cook, A.C.T. *Dr Ken Wiltshire, Associate Professor, Department of Government, University of Queensland. Ms Margaret Young, Senior Lecturer, Special Education, University of Tasmania. * Executive Member. (2) The National Commission began as the National Co-ordinating Committee established in 1947, following Australia's decision to become a member of UNESCO in 1946. (3) The Australian National Commission for UNESCO Newsletter is prepared by the Commission's Secretariat and published by the Australian Government Publishing Service. (4) The publication commenced in August 1984. (5) The cost of publication and distribution per issue is $2,950 and $2,130 respectively. (Question No. 1563) Mr Tuckey asked the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Public Service Matters, upon notice, on 23 August 1985: (1) Is it a fact that the executive development scheme is a personnel exchange scheme arranged between Australia's top 150 corporations and the Australian Government for executives to gain experience in other associated positions. (2) Who pays the wages or salary and costs of the transferred employee during the exchange period. (3) Is it a fact that a Government architect, Ms Abigail Butler, is presently on transfer to Sydney radio station 2KY as a research assistant. (4) Is it a fact that Ms Butler is assisting Ms Ita Buttrose; if so, how does the research relate to Ms Buttrose's employment at 2KY. (5) What salary range is applicable to a person of Ms Butler's public service grading. (6) Is he able to say whether (a) 2KY is one of the top 150 corporations in Australia; if not, what level of corporation is it and (b) the ownership of 2KY is controlled by the New South Wales Trades and Labour Council or other trade union interests. (7) What benefits are expected to result from the transfer for (a) the development of Ms Butler's architectural skills and (b) for her future performance as a public servant. Mr Willis —The Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Public Service Matters has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) No. The executive development scheme is a management development program of 12 months' duration conducted by the Public Service Board for senior clerical administrative and professional staff in the Australian Public Service. The executive development scheme provides an integrated program of coursework and work placement experience. While the majority of work placements are arranged within the APS, some EDS participants undertake placements in the private sector or in state or local government organisations. (2) The salaries and placement costs of an executive development scheme participant are met by that participant's home department. (3) No. Ms Butler, a Government architect, is a participant in the 1985 intake of the executive development scheme and is currently on a work placement as a personal assistant to Ms Ita Buttrose. (4) Yes. Under the executive development scheme, participants are sometimes placed as personal assistants to senior public and private sector executives. Such placements have proved valuable in providing them with insights into senior management styles and the issues confronting executives in organisations different from those with which they are familiar. Ms Buttrose was approached by an officer of the Public Service Board in her capacity as a leading executive in the communications industry and asked to accept and supervise Ms Butler as her personal assistant during a work placement. This request was independent of Ms Buttrose's involvement with any particular company. At the time the placement was negotiated, Ms Buttrose was not in fact with radio station 2KY. (5) Ms Butler's public service classification is Project Manager Class 2. The salary range for this designation is $35,759-$38,009. (6) (a) The ranking of 2KY is not immediately available, and is not relevant in view of (1), (3) and (4) above; (b) Yes. 2KY is owned by the New South Wales Trades and Labour Council. (7) (a) Ms Butler's work placement with Ms Buttrose under the executive development scheme is not intended to develop her existing architectural skills but rather her management capabilities, as discussed in (b) below; (b) The aim of the executive development scheme is to equip potential senior public servants with the knowledge, experience and skills necessary to help them meet the challenges of senior management in the Australian Public Service. Ms Butler's placement is providing her with a greater understanding of the role of the media, experience in dealing with issues of direct community concern, exposure to executive decision-making in the private sector and research experience in assisting Ms Buttrose in her work with the AIDS Advisory Committee. These experiences are expected to enhance her future performance as a public servant. (Question No. 1589) Mr Smith asked the Minister for Science, upon notice, on Friday 23 August 1985: (1) Will the Minister provide details of all expenditure within his Department in 1984-85 for compensation and legal expenses as outlined in Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 1985-86. (2) What was the (a) amount and (b) nature of the expenditure in each case for (i) compensation and (ii) legal expenses. (3) What was the name of each recipient of payment for legal expenses. Mr Barry Jones —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: 1 to 3 (i) Compensation-Expenditure by my Department in 1984-85 totalled $570,990. For the most part this covered regular ongoing and lump sum payments amounting to $482,919 made to 38 former employees in accordance with determinations of the Commissioner for Employees Compensation. The balance of expenditure ($88,071) covered: (a) payments to medical practitioners, chemists, hospitals etc. ($87,647) relating to Employee Compensation Determinations in respect of 198 officers and comprising 696 individual transactions, and (b) payments relating to damage to personal property ($424) in respect of 14 officers and comprising 14 individual transactions. (ii) Legal Expenses. Amount Recipient Service $ 6,000 E. Reinboth, Solici- tor, Adelaide Solicitor fees for compensation case 3,350 D. Shavin, Melbourne Payment to counsel and/or legal practitioners in relation to patent and trade mark court cases. 2,860 Pamela Coward &Associates, Canberra Agreed legal costs payable to applicant in relation to compensation case. 1,685 S. Crennan, Melbourne Payment to counsel and/or legal practitioners in relation to patent and trade mark court cases. 930 Westworth Cham- bers, Sydney Payment to counsel and/or legal practitioners in relation to patent and trade mark court cases. 865 F. Nelson, QC, Adelaide Fee for brief in relation to compensation case 525 J. J. Garnsey, Sydney Payment to counsel and/or legal practitioners in relation to patent and trade mark court cases. 410 M. J. Donoghue, Sydney Payment to counsel and/or legal practitioners in relation to patent and trade mark court cases. 35 Australian Government Solicitor, Canberra Court costs 11 State Law Department, Melbourne Transcript (Question No. 1635) Mr Milton asked the Minister representing the Minister for Resources and Energy, upon notice, on 11 September 1985: Can he indicate (a) whether the Australian Atomic Energy Commission proposes to (i) decommission the HIFAR at Lucas Heights, New South Wales, or (ii) replace the HIFAR reactor; if so, what is the planned location of the replacement, and (b) whether any studies have been undertaken in Australia to investigate the desirability of using a cyclotron to produce medical radioisotopes for use in Australia; if so, what is the proposed location for a cyclotron. Mr Barry Jones —The Minister for Resources and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (a) (i) The Government currently has no plans to decommission the HIFAR reactor at the Australian Atomic Energy Commission (AAEC) Research Establishment at Lucas Heights. HIFAR has operated with an excellent safety record since it was commissioned in the late 1950s and is currently undergoing a program of refurbishment to ensure its continued safe operation into the 1990s. (ii) In recognition of the fact that in the longer term there will be a limit to HIFAR's operational life, the AAEC has been examining options for the eventual replacement of HIFAR. However, the Government has made no decision on the possible replacement of HIFAR or the location of any replacement reactor. (b) The possible establishment of a cyclotron to produce medical radioisotopes for use in Australia has been the subject of several studies over the last two decades. In September 1984, the Minister for Health established a Medical Cyclotron Committee to examine the need for a national medical cyclotron facility. This Committee recently presented its report, and the Government will now consider the issue further. Both the Medical Cyclotron Committee and the National Health and Medical Research Council have recommended that the Royal Prince Alfred Hospital in Sydney would be the appropriate location for a national cyclotron facility in Australia. It should be noted that in general cyclotrons produce neutron-deficient radioisotopes which complement the neutron-rich radioisotopes produced in nuclear reactors. If a cyclotron were to be established in Australia, it would ensure the availability of short-lived cyclotron-produced radioisotopes which cannot be imported. It would not make the HIFAR reactor redundant as both a cyclotron and reactor would be required to ensure availability of the complete range of radioisotopes used in nuclear medicine. (Question No. 1649) Mr Peter Fisher asked the Minister for Arts, Heritage and Environment, upon notice, on 11 September 1985: Does the Minister's Department provide local call access to clients to the district or regional offices of the Department; if not, will the Department consider installing a 008 telephone number so that clients currently without local call access can have equal opportunity to contact the Department for assistance. Mr Cohen —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Department of Arts, Heritage and Environment is based in Canberra and, with the exception of the Australian Archives which has a network of State offices, has only two small specialised offices in Sydney. The Department does not routinely make special arrangements for telephone access for the public. On a number of occasions where special provisions have been considered necessary the Department has provided toll free (008) telephone access for specific services: for example, a service is currently available for people wishing to make enquiries on procedures for nominating chemical substances for the Australian Inventory of Chemical Substances being compiled by the Department. While toll free telephone access in cases of this sort is appropriate and cost effective, I consider that provision of such a service by my Department for general enquiry purposes would not be warranted. (Question No. 1848) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 August 1985: Has his attention been drawn to a proposal put forward by the United Nations Association of Australia to have 1989 declared by the United Nations General Assembly as the International Year for Repairing the Earth; if so, what action does he propose to take on this proposal. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Yes. The United Nations Association of Australia wrote to me on 30 August 1985 seeking support for its proposal. My department replied on 1 October 1985, drawing attention to the United Nations guidelines for international years and anniversaries, which set out the criteria and procedures of the United Nations with regard to international years, and asking that the United Nations Association take account of these guidelines in preparing a submission on the subject. I am awaiting receipt of that submission before considering further action. (Question No. 1998) Mr Lloyd asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 8 October 1985: What degree of control does he or his Department exercise in relation to priorities of expenditure on individual State, Local and arterial roads. Mr Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: For Federal funding purposes roads are classified as National, arterial or local under both the Australian Bicentennial Road Development (ABRD) Program and the Australian Land Transport Program (ALTP). The principal controls exercised by the Federal Government over each road category under both programs are- National (comprising National Highways and Developmental Roads) The Federal Government has accepted full responsibility for funding approved works on national roads. The Minister for Transport determines the priority for carrying out works after consultation with the State. The Minister for Transport has power to transfer funds, where a State proposes, from the arterial (and also under ALTP from the local) category to national roads and/or road safety and land transport research. The Minister for Transport may request particulars of projects or programs that he considers should be submitted in accordance with the request. Arterial (Rural and Urban) Each State Government determines its priorities of individual projects for both programs. These priorities are then submitted to the Minister for Transport for approval. Projects are assessed against the Federal Government's objectives for arterial roads. Under ABRD States are also able to propose a transfer of funds between rural and urban arterial categories. The Minister for Transport may request particulars of projects or programs that he considers should be submitted in accordance with the request. Local State Ministers are required to submit principles for the distribution of local roads funds between local government bodies and government authorities. The Minister for Transport may approve those principles, vary those principles or determine principles where the State Minister has not proposed principles. In practice the Minister for Transport looks to State Ministers to establish those principles in consultation with its local government association. Under ABRD local government nominates projects which the State Government may submit for the approval of the Minister for Transport. (Question No. 2044) Mr Mildren asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, upon notice, on 9 October 1985: (1) What funds have been allocated annually for the participation and equity program to schools in the Electoral Division of Ballarat. (2) Which schools have received funding under this program and what was (a) the amount of each grant and (b) the grant used for by each school. Mr Dawkins —The Minister for Education has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) Funds allocated for the Participation and Equity Program to schools in the Electoral Division of Ballarat are: 1984 1985 Government... 70,000 190,000 Non-government... 65,775 39,440 Total... 135,775 229,440 (2) The following schools received funding under the program: Government-1984 and 1985 Ballarat East High School Ballarat North Technical School Mt Clear Technical High School Wendouree Higher Technical School Sebastopol Technical School Each of these schools received a grant of $14,000 in 1984, and $30,000 in 1985 for the development of new school organisations and curriculum practices. Two of these schools are involved in schools resource programs, a Victorian PEP initiative. In this groups of schools work together to develop an issue in secondary education, document their findings and disseminate them through in-service education and publications. Ballarat North and Wendouree Higher Technical Schools each received an additional $20,000 (approximately) for involvement in a schools resource program. The grants provide schools with additional time release in a cluster arrangement of sharing programs, expenses, administration and dissemination. Ballarat North is working on Year 12 programs and Wendouree is involved in Aboriginal studies. $ Non-government-1984 Marion College, Ararat-... 21,930 Equipment to broaden and develop curriculum $18,930 Resources to broaden and develop the curriculum in the areas of manual arts, environmental, agricultural and business studies and media studies $3,000 Ballarat and Queens Anglican Grammar School, Wendouree-... 10,092 School to work employment course $9,770 Supplementation of salary costs $322 Sacred Heart Senior School `St Martin's in the Pines', Mt Clear-... 4,456 Craft program and market garden Sacred Heart College, Ballarat East-... 4,500 Planning activities St Paul's Technical School, Ballarat-... 3,890 Planning activities Loreto College, Ballarat-... 20,907 Review years 7-10; re-examine commercial section $20,240 Supplementation of salary costs $667 Non-government-1985 Sacred Heart College, Ballarat... 22,060 Planning group for school improvement St Paul's Technical School, Ballarat... 17,380 Language Program Co-ordination, Manual Arts Development Co-ordinator (Question No. 2054) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 9 October 1985: (1) What amounts have been paid to Mr Phillip Adams and Mr Rod Cameron, their companies, or principals of their companies, for services rendered to the Minister's Department or authorities under the Minister's control and for what purposes in each case. (2) What amounts have been paid to each of these people or companies for (a) travel allowance, (b) air fares, (c) accommodation costs, (d) hire care expenses and (e) any other expenses incurred. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The Department of Foreign Affairs including authorities under its control, has paid two amounts totalling $65,387.17 to Monahan Dayman Adams Pty Ltd for publicising new passport procedures. An amount of $35,094 was paid to the same company for research and development of a communications campaign for the International Year of Peace. (2) Nil. (Question No. 2191) Mr Lloyd asked the Minister for Aviation, upon notice, on 14 October 1985: (1) Does his Department require airline companies occupying premises at departmental aerodromes to pay a lease equivalent to local government rates; if not, what are the criteria for leasing. (2) Have any of the airlines refused to make a payment, in whole or in part. Mr Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes, Airlines companies are required to pay a charge, equivalent to local government rates, subject to certification by the Department of Local Government and Administrative Services as to reasonableness, in accordance with Finance Directions. (2) Yes. Trans Australia Airlines is paying 50 per cent of rates levied on Commonwealth airports, pending review of requirements under Finance Directions. (Question No. 2231) Mr Staples asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: (1) Has the Minister's attention been drawn to the book entitled Secrecy and Democracy-The Central Intelligence Agency in Transition by former Director, Stansfield Turner, in which the author recommends an Open Skies Agency to publish results of America's reconnaissance satellites, the result of which is claimed to reduce the danger of war by minunderstanding, to forecast world food supplies, floods and soil and mineral prospects. (2) Will he promote this proposal in view of Australia's joint sovereignty over the principal reconnaissance data receiving stations, the peaceful objectives of President Eisenhower's 1955 Open Skies proposal and the current United Nations investigation of an international satellite monitoring agency first proposed by France in 1978. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) No. I would say, however, that I am fully aware of the very important role played, on the one hand, by reconnaissance satellites in strengthening the stability of the global military balance and in the verification of arms control agreements and, on the other hand, by a generally distinct group of satellites, in performing civil functions of the kind mentioned. (2) The Government considers greater transparency with regard to military activities to be very important to the prospects for arms control over the longer term both for its general confidence building effects and, more particularly, to allow assured and effective verification of compliance with progressively more ambitious arms control and disarmament agreements. For these reasons, the Government attaches particular importance to protecting satellites (and their ground stations) from attack and to the principle enshrined in the SALT I accords (and elsewhere) of non-interference with national technical means of verification which is the contemporary equivalent of the `open skies' proposal. Similarly, the Government supports the concept of an international satellite monitoring agency (ISMA) as a desirable, longer term arms control measure, particularly as one component of a more comprehensive international arms control verification regime that would command the confidence of the major powers. The Government believes that this concept will have to be further developed in a number of important ways before the Government would be in a position to consider whether any of the Australia-United States joint defence facilities could have a role in the concept. (Question No. 2241) Mr Lloyd asked the Minister for Transport, upon notice, on 16 October 1985: (1) Which States require or allow separate registration fees to be paid for a prime mover and a trailer. (2) What is being done to achieve uniformity between the States and Territories on this matter. (3) Is the present situation likely to impede the implementation of the inter-State road transport legislation. Mr Peter Morris —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) I am advised that in the States of Queensland, Western Australia and Tasmania the prime mover and trailer are registered separately. New South Wales, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory allow a prime mover and trailer to be either registered separately or as a single unit. In South Australia the prime mover and first trailer are registered as a single unit, while any additional trailers are registered separately. In Victoria the prime mover and trailer are registered as a single unit. (2) The Federal interstate road transport legislation provides for the prime mover and trailer to be registered separately and it is expected that this provision will encourage a greater degree of uniformity between the States and Territories. (3) No. (Question No. 2258) Mr Maher asked the Minister of Health, upon notice, on 17 October 1985: (1) How many cases of leprosy were notified in each State and Territory in (a) 1982, (b) 1983 and (c) 1984. (2) What was the incidence of other notifiable diseases in each State and Territory in each year. Dr Blewett —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The number of Leprosy cases notified to my Department by each State and Territory are set out below: NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT TOTAL 1982... 11 3 9 1 14 . . 8 . . 46 1983... 14 7 16 4 17 1 2 1 62 1984... 7 5 5 3 2 . . 4 2 28 (2) The number of other notifiable diseases recorded in each State and Territory for 1982, 1983 and 1984 are attached. NOTIFIABLE DISEASES REPORTED IN AUSTRALIA Disease NSW VIC QLD SA WA TAS NT ACT Total 1 January 1982 to 31 December 1982 Amoebiasis... 6 1 14 10 . . . . 1 1 33 Ankylostomiasis... 1 . . 13 3 . . . . 93 . . 110 Anthrax... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Arbovirus infection... 22 18 164 17 . . . . . . . . 221 Brucellosis... 16 2 1 8 . . . . 1 . . 28 Campylobacter infections... 151 N.N. N.N. 515 N.N. N.N. 19 N.N. 685 Chancroid... 1 . . 7 N.N. 1 N.N. 1 . . 10 Cholera... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Congenital rubella syndrome... N.N. N.N. N.N. . . N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. . . Diphtheria... . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 2 Donevanosis... . . N.N. 82 N.N. 8 N.N. 42 . . 132 Giardiasis... 51 N.N. N.N. 565 N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. 616 Genital herpes... 1 783 N.N. N.N. 291 N.N. N.N. 22 N.N. 2 096 Gonococcal opthalmia neonatorum... . . N.N. . . . . N.N. N.N. 1 N.N. 1 Gonorrhoea... 4 652 3 381 1 360 887 1 420 117 839 149 12 805 Hepatitis A (infectious)... 215 320 227 136 64 29 34 21 1 046 Hepatitis B (serum)... 174 307 81 114 20 . . 15 14 725 Hepatitis-unspecified... 181 N.N. . . 4 70 N.N. 17 5 277 Hydatid disease... 2 2 1 2 . . 2 . . 3 12 Lassa Fever... N.N. . . N.N. . . . . N.N. N.N. N.N. . . Legionnaires disease... 2 . . N.N. 15 N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. 17 Leprosy... . . 3 9 1 14 . . 8 . . 46 Leptospirosis... 57 32 28 7 5 6 . . . . 135 Lymphogranuloma venereum... . . N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. 1 . . 1 Malaria... 142 92 219 39 20 1 15 20 548 Marburg Disease... N.N. . . N.N. . . . . N.N. N.N. N.N. . . Meningococcal infections... 12 7 . . 15 1 N.N. . . 4 39 Non-specific urethritis... 5 473 N.N. N.N. 1 193 N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. 6 666 Ornithosis... . . 3 . . 5 . . 1 . . 1 10 Pertussis (whooping cough)... 39 204 N.N. 31 N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. 274 Plague... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Poliomyelitis... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q. fever... 155 5 134 50 N.N. . . N.N. . . 344 Rabies... N.N. N.N. N.N. . . . . N.N. N.N. N.N. . . Salmonella infections... 441 222 419 333 97 42 267 45 1 866 Shigella infections... 40 23 87 30 87 3 165 2 437 Smallpox... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Syphilis... 1 691 262 514 109 222 1 410 2 3 211 Tetanus... . . 6 1 5 . . . . . . . . 12 Trachoma... N.N. N.N. 1 . . N.N. N.N. . . . . 1 Tuberculosis (all forms)... 459 414 195 110 136 . . 28 21 1 363 Typhoid fever... . . 3 2 . . 2 . . . . 1 8 Typhus (all forms)... 1 . . 9 . . 1 . . . . . . 11 Vibrio parahaemolyticus infections... N.N. N.N. N.N. . . N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. . . Yellow fever... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yersinia enterocolitica infections... 1 N.N. N.N. 1 N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. 2 1 January 1983 to 31 December 1984 Amoebiasis... 6 . . 19 26 3 . . 2 1 57 Ankylostomiasis... N.N. . . 10 77 1 . . . . . . 88 Anthrax... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Arbovirus infection... 22 . . . . 9 . . . . 2 . . 33 Brucellosis... 10 1 2 1 1 . . 1 . . 36 Campylobacter infections... 582 N.N. N.N. 920 N.N. N.N. 14 N.N. 1 516 Chancroid... 1 . . 4 N.N. 7 N.N. 1 . . 13 Cholera... . . 1 3 . . . . . . . . . . 4 Congenital rubella syndrome... N.N. N.N. N.N. . . N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. . . Diphtheria .... . 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Donovanosis... . . N.N. 53 N.N. 32 N.N. 22 . . 107 Giardiasis... 216 N.N. N.N. 714 N.N. N.N. N.N. 1 931 Genital herpes... 1 286 N.N. 652 N.N. N.N. N.N. 17 N.N. 1 955 Gonococcal ophthalmia neo- natorum... 2 N.N. . . . . N.N. N.N. 12 N.N. 14 Gonorrhoea... 3 284 2 147 1 426 834 1 729 107 780 69 10 646 Hepatitis A (infectious)... 205 260 152 153 57 20 123 21 991 Hepatitis B (Serum)... 309 334 145 107 15 7 14 12 943 Hepatitis-unspecified... 160 N.N. . . 7 98 N.N. 39 4 308 Hydatid disease... 2 . . 2 1 . . 3 . . 2 10 Lassa Fever... N.N. . . N.N. . . . . N.N. N.N. N.N. . . Legionnaires disease... 4 8 N.N. 9 N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. 21 Leprosy... 14 7 16 4 17 1 2 1 62 Leptospirosis... 32 94 88 17 9 2 . . . . 242 Lymphogranuloma... 6 N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. 2 . . 8 Malaria... 146 80 223 43 33 2 27 16 570 Marburg Disease... N.N. . . N.N. . . . . N.N. N.N. N.N. . . Meningococcal infections... 30 5 . . 17 2 N.N. 5 . . 59 Non-specific urethritis... 4 505 N.N. N.N. 1 200 N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. 5 705 Ornithosis... 1 5 1 9 . . 3 . . . . 19 Pertussis (whooping cough)... 137 152 N.N. 38 N.N. N.N. 5 N.N. 332 Plague... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Poliomyelitis... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q. fever... 66 8 125 8 N.N. . . 1 . . 208 Rabies... N.N. N.N. N.N. . . . . N.N. N.N. N.N. . . Salmonella infections... 1 178 258 447 478 93 110 373 52 2 989 Shigella infections... 65 . . 74 72 89 8 257 2 567 Smallpox... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Syphilis... 1 906 174 388 107 287 3 681 10 3 556 Tetanus... . . 2 6 1 . . 1 . . . . 10 Trachoma... N.N. N.N. 5 . . N.N. N.N. . . . . 5 Tuberculosis (all forms)... 408 296 159 129 151 . . 44 31 1 218 Typhoid fever... 13 1 6 1 . . . . . . 1 22 Typhus (all forms)... . . 1 20 . . . . . . . . . . 21 Vibrio parahaemolytic in- fections... N.N. N.N. N.N. . . N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. . . Yellow Fever... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yersinia enterocolitica in- fections... N.N. N.N. N.N. 2 N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. 2 1 January 1984 to 31 December 1984 Ameobiasis... 13 . . 4 20 7 . . 1 1 46 Ankylostomiasis... 2 . . 5 66 2 . . . . . . 75 Anthrax... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Arbovirus infection... 805 161 472 136 2 . . . . 1 1 577 Brucellosis... 5 1 7 . . 1 . . 1 . . 15 Campylobacter infections... 554 N.N. N.N. 1 226 . . N.N. 19 N.N. 1 799 Chancroid... 5 . . 2 N.N. 6 N.N. 1 . . 14 Cholera... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Congenital rubella syndrome... 1 N.N. N.N. . . N.N N.N. N.N. N.N. 1 Diptheria... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Donovanosis... . . N.N. 42 N.N. 105 N.N. 54 . . 201 Giardiasis... 279 N.N. N.N. 746 N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. 1 025 Genital herpes... 790 N.N. 429 87 N.N. N.N. 18 6 1 330 Gonococcal ophthalmia neonatorum... . . N.N. . . 1 N.N. N.N. 8 N.N. 9 Gonorrhoea... 2 685 1 533 1 518 726 1 434 42 827 129 8 894 Hepatitis A (infectious)... 131 140 252 68 38 10 22 13 674 Hepatitis B (serum)... 522 188 442 199 155 10 20 23 1 559 Hepatitis-unspecified... 74 10 . . 15 28 N.N. 7 . . 134 Hydatid disease... 5 . . 1 . . 1 . . . . 2 9 Lassa Fever... . . . . N.N. . . . . N.N. N.N. N.N. . . Legionnaires disease... 7 4 N.N. 2 N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. 13 Leprosy... 7 5 5 3 2 . . 4 2 28 Leptospirosis... 46 36 118 14 8 5 . . . . 227 Lymphogranuloma venereum... 1 N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. 1 . . 2 Malaria... 113 66 330 54 34 9 15 19 640 Marburg disease... . . . . N.N. . . . . N.N. N.N. N.N. . . Meningococcal infections... 18 7 . . 24 6 N.N. 3 1 59 Non-specific urethritis... 3 635 N.N. N.N. 1 186 N.N. N.N. 17 N.N. 4 838 Ornithosis... . . 7 2 22 10 . . . . 1 42 Pertussis (whooping cough)... 117 47 N.N. 96 N.N. N.N. 1 N.N. 261 Plague... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Poliomyelitis... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Q. fever... 108 . . 131 14 N.N. . . N.N. . . 262 Rabies... . . N.N. N.N. . . . . N.N. N.N. N.N. . . Salmonella infections... 659 170 337 346 113 79 355 33 2 092 Shigella infections... 115 20 64 38 55 2 125 1 420 Smallpox... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Syphilis... 1 489 174 358 127 204 2 952 17 3 323 Tetanus... 4 . . 1 2 . . . . . . . . 7 Trachoma... . . N.N. . . . . N.N. N.N. 4 . . 4 Tuberculosis (all forms)... 510 298 177 82 134 11 65 22 1 299 Typhoid fever... 28 7 12 . . 2 . . . . 1 50 Typhus (all forms)... 1 . . 6 1 . . . . . . . . 8 Vibrio parahaemolyticus infections... 8 N.N. N.N. 1 N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. 9 Yellow fever... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Yersina enterocolitica infections... 7 N.N. N.N. 1 N.N. N.N. N.N. N.N. 8 N.N.-not notifiable. (Question No. 2290) Mr Staples asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether any cities in the United States of America do not allow nuclear-powered and/or nuclear-armed ships of the United States Navy or other navies to use their port facilities; if so, which cities. (2) Is he able to say (a) what regulations and exclusions are applied to the United States Navy under these circumstances and (b) when the exclusions were implemented. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) Information available from the US Government indicates that: Legally any United States Navy ship can visit any United States port at any time. There are many ports, and places in ports, in the United States of America as elsewhere that are not visited by the United States Navy for a variety of reasons, including such considerations as pier-side facilities and services, depth of water, and navigational conditions. There are no instances where a planned visit to a United States port by nuclear-powered warships, United States or foreign, has been cancelled or denied by port or other local civil authorities. There have been a few instances where municipal bodies have passed ordinancies or resolutions prohibiting nuclear material within port areas. However, port visits by warships are under the jurisdiction of the United States Government and are not affected by local action. (Question No. 2291) Mr Ruddock asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) Did Mr E. J. Azzopardi write to him on 9 September 1983 making certain allegations. (2) Did Mr Graham Evans reply on his behalf on 20 October 1983 simply noting the correspondence. (3) Did the allegations raise any matter or matters which might consitute an offence under State or Commonwealth law; if so, what action was taken to (a) inform the relevent State Government or its authorities and (b) investigate the complaint and refer it to the Director of Public Prosecutions. Mr Hawke —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. (2) Yes. (3) Matters relating to the affairs of the Parramatta Police Citizens Boy's Club were already the subject of State prosecution action at the time of Mr Evans' reply. (Question No. 2356) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) What was the outcome of the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Living Marine Resources recently held in Hobart? (2) Did Australia play a role as a world leader in Antarctic conservation at the meeting and what was the reponse of other nations to the Australian initiative? Mr Hayden —the answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) the recent fourth meeting of the Commission established by the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR), held in Hobart in September, continued progress towards conserving the living resources of the Antarctic. Last year's meeting had prohibited fishing in waters adjacent to the island of South Georgia for other than scientific purposes. This year's meeting adopted a further binding conservation measure prohibiting any directed fishing for the depleted species of Antarctic Cod (Notothenia Rossii) in the South Georgia area. Members of the Commission were also requested to limit the by-catch or incidential catch of Antarctic Cod in fishing operations directed at other species in the South Georgia area to 300 tonnes, and to refrain from directed fishing for Antarctic Cod in the Antarcric Peninsula, South Orkneys and Kerguelen areas. (2) Australia played a leading role at the meeting proposing total closure of the fishing around South Georgia, and in areas adjacent to the Antarctic Peninsula and South Orkeys, pending detailed analysis of the state of the fishing stocks in these areas. Australia also proposed a species closure for Antartic Cod in the Kerguelen and Heard Island areas. These closures were resisted by a number of major fishing nations operating in the area. These countries took the view that closure of fisheries should only occur once data establishing the threat to fish stocks was clearly available. Ways of obtaining accurate data are still being developed by the Commission. Australia has taken the view that, in the absence of data, the fisheries should be closed so as to minimise the threat to depleted fish stocks. The Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources clearly establishes the need for a conservationist approach to the marine living resources of the Antarctic. That approach is based on an a unique conservation principle of protection for the entire ecosystem and not just a single species. Australia's policy in CCAMLR has been concerned to ensure that conservation measures adopted by the Commission reflect the ecosystem approach. To this end Australia has formally placed on the agenda for next year's meeting (Hobart, September) a major item structured towards defining a conservation and management strategy for Antarctic marine living resources. We consider this kind of discussion essential to guarantee an effective CCAMLR regime. (Question No. 2357) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) Has the Australian Development Assistance Bureau donated books to South Pacific nations which have been considered unsuitable for use in Australian schools because they are out of step with Australian teaching methods. (2) What are the details of any aid of this type including (a) the nature of the publications and (b) the locations to which they were sent. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Earlier this year the New South Wales Government Printer suggested that a large quantity of primary school reading books declared out of date by the New South Wales Education Department might be suitable for use by schools in South Pacific countries. The books have been evaluated by a panel of education specialists which contained Pacific country representation. Four titles were regarded as having no harmful material and possibly suitable for use in schools, where if necessary they could be accompanied by teachers' explanations. The rest were rejected. No request has been received to date from any South Pacific island country for these books and none as yet have been offered for donation. There is no intention that these books form any part of Australia's official aid program. (Question No. 2358) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: What action does he propose to take in respect of the proposal by the United Nations Association of Australia for the United Nations General Assembly to declare 1989 as the International Year for Repairing the Earth. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Please see my answer to question No. 1848. (Question No. 2359) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the following question, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: Is he able to say how many (a) Rotary exchange students and (b) South African Rotary exchange students are currently in Australia. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: There are five Rotary Districts in southern Africa, three of which are located within the Republic of South Africa; one district includes parts of South Africa as well as Zimbabwe, Malawi, Swaziland and Botswana and one district includes Lesotho in addition to parts of South Africa. I am therefore not able to say exactly how many students came from or went to South Africa as distinct from southern Africa. Nevertheless I understand that some 58 Australian Rotary exchange students visited southern Africa in 1985 and some 64 Rotary exchange students visited Australia from southern Africa in 1985. (Question No. 2361) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Resources and Energy, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: (1) How many spent fuel rods are to be removed from storage at the Australian Atomic Energy Commission at Lucas Heights, New South Wales. (2) When will the rods be removed and by what means will they be transported to their final destination. (3) Who will be responsible for the transportation of the rods. Mr Barry Jones —The Minister for Resources and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: (1) No decision has yet been made by the Government to remove any of the spent fuel elements currently stored at the Australian Atomic Energy Commission Research Establishment at Lucas Heights. However, the Government has the matter under consideration and the AAEC has been authorised to invite tenders from specialist nuclear transport companies for the transport of 450 of the spent fuel elements containing uranium of United States origin to the United States for reprocessing. (2) and (3) Specific details of transport arrangements to apply would not be finalised until after a contract for the transport of the fuel was let. If the Government approves the removal of the spent fuel it would be transported in specially designed and shielded transportation flasks, which would be certified to meet international safety standards. The flasks would be transported by road from Lucas Heights to whichever port was chosen, and loaded for shipment by sea to the United States. The first movements of fuel would not take place until 1986. (Question No. 2362) Mr Tickner asked the Minister representing the Minister for Resources and Energy, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: What is the estimated life of the high flux Australian nuclear reactor at the Australian Atomic Energy Commission at Lucas Heights, New South Wales. Mr Barry Jones —The Minister for Resources and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: It is not possible to determine a precise operating life for the HIFAR reactor. HIFAR is currently undergoing a program of refurbishment designed to enable it to continue to be operated safely at least into the 1990s. There is no indication of any deterioration in any critical components of HIFAR which would prevent the reactor being operated beyond that time, provided necessary maintenance of the reactor is continued. It might be noted that other reactors of the same class as HIFAR, located in the United Kingdom, Denmark and Federal Republic of Germany, are continuing to operate and no technical limitations to the life of these reactors have yet arisen. (Question No. 2386) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: Are there any proposals or submissions for the provision of government assistance to the Australian Students International Network; if so, what is the (a) extent and (b) reason for funding the activities of this organisation. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: From advice received from my Department and the Department of the Special Minister of State, I an unaware of any current proposals or submissions for Government assistance to the Australian Students International Network. Some Government assistance has already been provided to this organisation and, in this regard, I refer the honourable member to my answer to his question on notice No. 2381. (Question No. 2388) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: Has the Australian Ambassador to United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation presented any proposals for the reform of the organisation; if so, what is the nature of the proposals. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Ambassador and counsellors in Australia's Permanent Delegation to UNESCO have taken an active part in the proceedings of the Information Group, comprising the OECD members in UNESCO. Throughout 1984 and 1985 the group has discussed reform proposals for UNESCO, usually at weekly meetings. The meetings are held in private and it is not customary for governments to state publicly what their representatives have said in such meetings. Australia's Permanent Delegation also dicusses UNESCO's budget, administration, and the cost-effectiveness of UNESCO programs in the Geneva Group, comprising the OECD members which contribute more than one per cent of the budget. In April 1984 Australia was chosen as a member of a sub-committee of the Geneva Group which set out to avoid the disputes and divisions described in the budget section of the report of the Australian Delegation to the General Conference in 1983. In 1985 the UNESCO conference unanimously endorsed Executive Board decisions in favour of: (a) zero real growth in the budget for 1986-87, (b) no increase in member states' contributions as a result of the withdrawal of the United States, and (c) greater clarity in presentation of the budget, all of which have been major preoccupations of the Geneva Group and member states which have criticised UNESCO. In a public address to the General Council of the United Nations Association of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in London on 13 April 1985, Ambassador Whitlam made suggestions, in the context of the 40th anniversary of the United Nations, to rejuvenate the four largest specialised agencies-ILO, UNESCO, WHO and FAO. He noted specifically reducing the size of their executive bodies, limiting the tenure of their directors-general, revising their financial regulations and holding their conferences at their established headquarters. The address has had a wide circulation and was available to members of the Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee of the Australian Senate and the Foreign Affairs Committee of the British House of Commons in preparing their reports on UNESCO. The Department of Foreign Affairs is actively pursuing Ambassador Whitlam's proposals on the tenure of directors-general and the location of the conferences of the specialised agencies. During consultation in Canberra in January 1985 Ambassador Whitlam urged the Department of Finance to increase the efficiency of the specialised agencies and to set an example to other major contributors by paying Australia's assessed contributions promptly and in full at the beginning of the calendar year for which they are due. The budget in August 1985 implemented this suggestion. Further detail was provided in the answer of my colleague, the Minister for Finance, to Question No. 2138. In his speech in the general policy debate at the General Conference of UNESCO in Sofia in October, the Ambassador commended the regulations of ITU, which charges interest on late contributions. As a result the conference augmented its stock appeal for prompt payment by requesting the Director-General `to study the feasibility of providing positive incentives to member states to pay their contributions promptly as well as possible measures to achieve such a policy objective, including where appropriate amendments to the financial regulations'. In June 1985 Ambassador Whitlam persuaded the Executive Board of UNESCO to recommend to the General Conference that the number of board seats for Group I (Western Europe and North America) should be reduced from ten to nine and the number of board seats for Group IV (Asia and the Pacific) should be increased from eight to nine. The conference adopted the recommendation in October. The equalisation of seats will take effect at the General Conference in 1987, when Australia and New Zealand will be transferred from Group I to Group IV. Ambassador Whitlam has been particularly active in mobilising support among the representatives of Commonwealth countries in Paris and London for the rejuvenation and universality of UNESCO. The Canadian Minister for External Affairs asked him to undertake a speaking tour in the first week of September 1985 and estimates that he reached two million readers and listeners. Australia was elected to the Executive Board of UNESCO in the person of Ambassador Whitlam at Sofia. At the first meeting of the reconstituted Board the Ambassador was elected as a member of an 18-member special committee established to pursue reforms in UNESCO. Australia and Mr Whitlam will therefore remain closely involved in the reform process underway in UNESCO. (Question No. 2389) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 12 November 1985: What is the (a) extent and (b) nature of Government overseas aid to Angola in 1985. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable members' question is as follows: The Australian Government has not provided any aid directly, to the Government of Angola so far in 1985. However, 2,420 tonnes of rice were made available to the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation World Food Program for use in Angola. The rice was valued at almost $900,000. Aid through other multi lateral programs cannot be separately identified. (Question No. 2404) Mr Milton asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 13 November 1985: Has his attention been drawn to statements reported in the Sunday Telegraph of 6 October 1985, by the Israeli Consul-General in Sydney, Mr Alex Ganor, that (a) Israel will track down the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), wherever it is, if it continues to kill Israelis and (b) the long hand of Israel would go anywhere. (2) Has his attention been drawn to (a) the number of PLO officials in western Europe who have been assassinated by Israeli intelligence and (b) the bombing of PLO headquarters in both Tunis and Beirut; if so, is he concerned that Palestinians in Australia, particularly the personnel of the Palestine Information Office, may be under threat. (3) What steps has the Government taken to ensure Mr Ganor's threats are not carried out in Australia. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes, my attention has been drawn to the newspaper article. (2) My attention has been drawn also to reports that a number of PLO officials have died violently in western Europe. I am not however aware of any conclusive evidence as to who was responsible for these incidents. I am aware of the bombing of PLO offices in Tunis and in Lebanon. The Australian Government deplored the violation of Tunisian sovereignty which occurred as a result of the attack by the Israeli airforce over Tunis on 1 October and voted in favour of United Nations Security Council Resolution 573 which condemned the incident. (2) and (3) Australia has an effective national counter terrorist capability, developed through co-operation between Federal and State governments, and a national anti terrorist plan has been prepared to ensure a co-ordinated response to an incident and to provide for effective crisis management should that circumstance ever arise. That capability is available for the protection of all residents of Australia. (Question No. 2445) Mr Coleman asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 18 November 1985: (1) Did the Government receive any requests or recommendations for financial assistance for non- government youth organisations in (a) Papua New Guinea and (b) the Solomon Islands, to send delegates to a conference of young political leaders held in Jamaica in April 1985 for International Youth Year. Were the requests or recommendations agreed to; if not, why not. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) According to advice from my Department and from the Office of Youth Affairs, the Government has not received any requests or recommendations for financial assistance of the type referred to in the question. (Question No. 2537) Mr Leo McLeay asked the Minister representing the Minister for Education, upon notice, on 19 November 1985: What is the procedure used in the Minister's office to respond to petitions referred by the House of Representatives. Mr Dawkins —The Minister for Education has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: The Minister's office takes note of the petition and ensures that the views of petitioners are brought to the Minister's notice. The petition is then referred to the Department of Education and other portfolio agencies where it is circulated to relevant areas for information and any necessary action. (Question No. 2548) Mr Leo McLeay asked the Minister for Health, upon notice, on 19 November 1985: What is the procedure used in the Minister's office to respond to petitions referred by the House of Representatives. Dr Blewett —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Petitions are circulated in my office and then forwarded to the relevant authority in my portfolio for information and attention, if necessary. (Question No. 2558) Dr Klugman asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 November 1985: Is he able to say which United Nations member states have hereditary monarchies and which of those have democratic parliaments. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The following member states of the United Nations may be classified as hereditary monarchies in that their political system includes a hereditary ruler as head of state: Antigua and Barbuda, Australia, Bahamas, Bahrain, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bhutan, Brunei, Canada, Denmark, Dominica, Fiji, Grenada, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Lesotho, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mauritius, Morocco, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Papua New Guinea, Qatar, Saint Christopher and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Saudi Arabia, Solomon Islands, Spain, Swaziland, Sweden, Thailand, United Kingdom. While it is evident that most of these states have some form of representative institutions it is not particularly fruitful to attempt to characterise them as having democratic parliaments or otherwise, given the variety of situations applying in the countries and the subjective interpretations that may be given to the word democratic. (Question No. 2561) Mr MacKellar asked the Minister for Science, upon notice, on 19 November 1985: (1) Did the Anglo-Australian Telescope Board (AAT) meeting in September 1985 have before it a proposal from Britain's Science and Engineering Research Council (SERC) to cut by half the funds it assigns to the AAT and the United Kingdom Schmidt Telescope, both of which are located in New South Wales; if so, was the proposal considered by the AAT Board. (2) Are the 2 telescopes in question managed by a treaty between the Australian and United Kingdom Governments. (3) Can the SERC propose a reduction in funding for these telescopes on behalf of the United Kingdom Government. (4) If the United Kingdom Government were to reduce its funding to the 2 telescopes, would this have an adverse effect on Australia's astronomy program. (5) What decision has the AAT Board taken in regard to this matter. (6) When does the AAT Board next meet. Mr Barry Jones —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The AAT Board has no formal proposal from the United Kingdom Science and Engineering Research Council (SERC) on this matter. The Board did, however, discuss the decision of the SERC to reduce the funds allocated to all southern hemisphere astronomy activities by more than 50 per cent. The SERC has been forced into this position by overall budget constraints. (2) The Board operates the Anglo-Australian Telescope at Siding Spring Mountain under the authority of the Anglo-Australian Telescope Agreement, 1969. The Governments of Australia and the United Kingdom equally share the telescope's operational expenses and astronomers from the two countries share the telescope's observing time. Neither of the contracting parties to the inter-governmental agreement, which remains in force until at least 1996, can unilaterally withdraw from it. The United Kingdom Schmidt Telescope is a separate British facility on Siding Spring Mountain operated by the Royal Observatory Edinburgh on behalf of the SERC. (3) The SERC can make recommendations and proposals to the Secretary of State for Education and Science, who has not yet taken a position on the Anglo-Australian Telescope. (4) If the United Kingdom Government were to reduce its funding to the Anglo-Australian Telescope, the Australian astronomy program would be adversely affected. If funds were reduced to a level where the telescope could not operate effectively, Australian astronomers would lose access to one of the best 4-metre class telescopes in the world. (5) The Board wrote to the SERC Chairman on 27 September 1985 and expressed its concern at the SERC decision. It drew his attention to the fact that the Board is collectively responsible to two Governments and that the AAT Agreement requires the costs of operating the telescope to be agreed by the Board and shared equally by Australia and the United Kingdom. The Board does not advocate a reduction of the telescope's current level of funding and has advised the SERC accordingly. (6) The Board next meets between 7-11 April 1986 in Australia. (Question No. 2604) Mr Hunt asked the Special Minister of State, upon notice, on 20 November 1985: Which questions placed on notice within the last (a) month, (b) 6 weeks, (c) 2 months, (d) 3 months, (e) 4 months and (f) 6 months to 19 November 1985 had not received a final answer at that date. Mr Young —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) Questions 2304, 2332, 2424, 2475, 2506 and 2534. (b) Questions 2028, 2052, 2285 and (a) above. (c) (a) and (b) above. (d) Questions 1438, 1397, 1494, 1597, 1863 and (a), (b), (c) above. (e) all of the above. (f) all of the above. (Question No. 2608) Mr Hunt asked the Minister representing the Minister for Resources and Energy, upon notice, on 20 November 1985: Which questions placed on notice within the last (a) month, (b) 6 weeks, (c) 2 months, (d) 3 months, (e) 4 months and (f) 6 months to 19 November 1985 had not received a final answer at that date. Mr Barry Jones —The Minister for Resources and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: Answers to the following questions placed on notice in the time frames listed, had not been incorporated in Hansard at 19 November 1985: (a) 19 October 1985 to 19 November 1985-2293, 2308, 2336, 2360, 2361, 2362, 2363, 2510 and 2538. (b) 8 October 1985 to 18 October 1985-1986, 2056, 2131 and 2216. (c) 19 September to 7 October 1985-Nil. (d) 19 August 1985 to 18 September 1985-1442, 1470 and 1635. (e) 19 July 1985 to 18 August 1985-Nil. (f) 19 May 1985 to 18 July 1985-Nil. (Question No. 2619) Mr Hunt asked the Minister for Science, upon notice, on 20 November 1985: Which questions placed on notice within the last (a) month, (b) 6 weeks (c) 2 months, (d) 3 months, (e) 4 months and (f) 6 months to 19 November 1985 had not received a final answer at that date. Mr Barry Jones —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) Nos 2319, 2347, 2375, 2490, 2520, 2549 and 2561. (b) Nos 2043 and 2247. (c) Nil. (d) Nos 1481, 1589 and 1887. (e) Nil. (f) Nil. (Question No. 2670) Mr Hollis asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 21 November 1985: Is he able to say on what dates the United States of America (a) left and (b) rejoined the International Labour Organisation. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The United States (a) withdrew from the International Labour Organisation on 6 November 1977 and (b) rejoined the organisation on 18 February 1980. (Question No. 2672) Mr Hollis asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 21 November 1985: (1) Is he able to say whether the Minister for Education stated in her address to the General Conference of United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation on 27 October 1983 that the Government proposed to become a party to the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property. (2) What steps has Australia taken to become a party to the Convention. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. (2) The Protection of Movable Cultural Heritage Bill 1985 was introduced into the House of Representatives on 27 November 1985. When the Bill becomes law, Australia will be able to become a party to the Convention. (Question No. 2673) Mr Hollis asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 21 November 1985: (1) Is Australia a party to the 1983 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation Regional Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Diplomas and Degrees in Higher Education in Asia and the Pacific; if so, when did it become a party to the Convention. (2) Is it a fact that the 1979 UNESCO Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Diplomas and Degrees concerning Higher Education in the States belonging to the Europe Region permits other states outside the Europe Region to accede to it when the Convention has been ratified by at least 20 of the states of the Europe Region. (3) Is he able to say when the 20th state of the Europe Region ratified the 1979 Convention. (4) What steps has Australia taken to accede to the 1979 Convention. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. Australia accepted the Convention on 23 September 1985 and it entered into force one month later for Australia. (2) Yes. Article 16 of the Convention provides that a non-European State may be authorised to accede, upon approval of its request to do so by at least two thirds of the Contracting States, once at least 20 European States are parties. (3) Yes: 19 March 1985. (4) The question of Australia becoming a party to the Convention is under consideration by the Department of Education. (Question No. 2718) Mr Maher asked the Special Minister of State, upon notice, on 26 November 1985: Which foreign (a) governments and (b) agencies are clients of companies or persons listed under the Lobbyists Registration Scheme. Mr Young —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Under the guidelines governing the Lobbyists Registration Scheme, details of clients are provided to the Government by lobbyists on a confidential basis. Public disclosure of the requested information would breach that confidentiality. (Question No. 2765) Mr Blunt asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 27 November 1985: (1) Is his Department producing a video on the subject of peace and disarmament; if so, what is the cost. (2) Are any consultants, agencies or non-departmental employees being engaged for the project; if so (a) why and (b) what amount are they being paid. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) My Department is funding production of a video on the subject of Australia's role in disarmament and arms control. The video will be available to schools, tertiary education institutions and non-governmental organisations. It will also serve as a visual aid to Departmental speakers on the subject. It is part of the Department of Foreign Affairs' contribution to the International Year of Peace. The cost of the video will be $80,000-$100,000. It will be approximately 48 minutes in length. (2) The video is being produced by Film Australia in close consultation with officers from the various branches of the Department of Foreign Affairs that deal with disarmament and arms control issues. (a) Government guidelines provide that Film Australia be given the first option of producing or supervising the production of a departmental video if it is aimed at informing or instructing any section of the public or if its production will require the use of professional contractors or consultants, or if the estimated direct cost, including in-house labour costs, will be more than $5,000. Film Australia, following an approach by the Department of Foreign Affairs, expressed interest in producing the film for the Department. (b) Film Australia will be paid up to the amount of $100,000 for producing the video. (Question No. 2825) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 29 November 1985: What percentage of domestic air travel undertaken by representatives of the Minister's Department is undertaken on: (a) Trans Australia Airways (b) Ansett and its airline subsidiaries (c) East-West Airlines (d) Commuter aircraft, and (e) Charter aircraft. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (a) Trans Australia Airline-51.04 per cent. Air Queensland-0.29 per cent. (b) 43.96 per cent (including subsidiary Air New South Wales-0.76 per cent. (c) 3.83 per cent. (d) 0.63 per cent. (e) 0.25 per cent. (Question No. 2890) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 November 1985: (1) Does the Government allocate the equivalent of 0.1 per cent of defence spending for work on arms control and disarmament; if not, what is the estimated level of spending in this area in 1985-86. (2) To what projects and initiatives is the expenditure in this area allocated for 1985-86. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) and (2) The Government's effort directed at disarmament and arms control is but one of the many functions of the Department of Foreign Affairs and many other organs of Government. It is not possible to identify with any accuracy what percentage of the Public Service's overall expenditure can be attributed to disarmament and arms control functions. However, it is clear from some readily identifiable specific disarmament and arms control related costs that the Government has allocated at least the equivalent of 0.1 per cent of defence spending for work on arms control and disarmament in 1985-86. The Defence outlay for 1985-86 is $6,535.4m and 0.1 per cent is therefore $6,535,400. Readily identifiable disarmament and arms control costs are as follows: Estimated cost of maintaining the Ambassador for Disarmament and his staff in Geneva.... $707,945 Salaries of the staff of the Disarmament and Arms Control Branch, the Peace and Disarmament Branch, the Nuclear Policy Branch and immediate support staff, and one diplomatic officer in New York who is engaged full-time on disarmament work and the Special Disarmament Adviser... $903,721 Estimated costs associated with travel to international conferences dealing with such issues as the SPNFZ, chemical weapons, nuclear non-proliferation; bilateral consultations with other Governments; and travel within Australia... $400,000 Australian contributions to: World Disarmament Campaign... $30,000 United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research... $20,000 Peace Research Centre (ANU)... $263,600 IAEA General Budget... $1,947,000 IAEA Nuclear Safeguards Assistance Program... $213,000 Running costs of the NPT 3rd Review Conference... $30,272 (est.) International Year of Peace activities... $2,007,000 Funds to upgrade equipment at the Materials Research Laboratory for use in investigating allegations of the use of chemical weapons... $105,000 Cost of the SPNFZ Working Group... $120,000 Funds expended by the Bureau of Mineral Resources for upgrading Australia's seismic detection capabilities and preparatory work for Australian participation in a global seismic network for verifying a comprehensive test ban treaty... $470,000 $7,216,938 The above figures do not take into account Australia's contribution to the United Nations budget which for 1985-86 is estimated at $14.25m. Clearly a proportion of this contribution should be considered as being expended on work related to disarmament and arms control. (Question No. 2891) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 29 November 1985: (1) Has any action been taken by the Government to promote actively the development of a zone of peace and a nuclear free zone in the Indian Ocean. (2) Is he able to say which Indian Ocean countries (a) support and (b) oppose the development of such a zone. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Yes. Australia has been a member of the United Nations Committee on the Indian Ocean since its formation in 1972. Australia is currently a Vice-Chairman of the Committee. The objective of the Committee is to see convened as soon as possible an international conference to examine the establishment of an Indian Ocean Zone of Peace, in accordance with UN Resolution 2832 (xxvi) adopted on 16 December 1971, embodying the Declaration of the Indian Ocean as a Zone of Peace. In a statement issued on 29 November 1984 following the adoption of a resolution on the Indian Ocean Zone of Peace proposal, I said that the Government ``had always made clear its support for the concept of an Indian Ocean Zone of Peace, in line with Labor Party policy and its commitment to peace and disarmament''. Preparatory work for a conference on the Zone of Peace has not, however, advanced sufficiently for a final decision to be taken on the date for the convening of the conference. (2) Most, if not all, Indian Ocean littoral states have signified support for the ideal of an Indian Ocean Zone of Peace. I am not aware of any Indian Ocean state which has opposed the Zone of Peace. (Question No. 2892) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 29 November 1985: Has action been taken to express support for the establishment of an international satellite monitoring agency for use by the United Nations; if so, what are the details. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Government supports the concept of an International Satellite Monitoring Agency (ISMA) which was first proposed by France in 1978 at the first special session on disarmament of the General Assembly. The Government considers the concept of an ISMA a desirable arms control measure in terms of its potential confidence-building, verification and transparency objectives. In supporting the concept, Australia voted in favour of the resolution at the 1978 United Nations General Assembly which requested the Secretary-General of the United Nations to obtain the views of Member States on the question and appoint a group of qualified governmental experts to study the technical, legal and financial implications of establishing such an agency. Pursuant to the resolution the Secretary-General submitted to the General Assembly at its thirty-fourth session a report containing the conclusions of the group of experts. A subsequent resolution was adopted which requested the Secretary-General to carry out an in-depth study on the subject and to submit thereon a comprehensive report in time for the 1982 General Assembly. Australia supported this resolution also. At the 1982 Session of the United Nations General Assembly, Australia voted in favour of a resolution tabled by France which took note of the Secretary-General's report and study on the technical, legal and financial implications of establishing an international satellite monitoring agency, sought the publication of the study as a United Nations document and requested the Secretary-General to report to the 1983 United Nations General Assembly session on the practical modalities for implementing the conclusions of the report. In 1983 the Secretary-General tabled in the General Assembly this third report on the proposal of an ISMA. There has been no further movement within the United Nations towards the establishment of an ISMA and the subject was not on the Agenda for this year's General Assembly. As it is doubtful that an effective ISMA could be established in the near future, some caution is required at this stage in the terms and level of Australian support. It is clear that there is considerable room for more work to be done in refining the scope of the proposals, reviewing the feasibility and potential contribution of the proposed technical and organisational systems, assessing the likely requirements including manpower and equipment costs that would be involved in establishing a comprehensive international verification system, incorporating a satellite monitoring capability and addressing the political issues which are raised. Australia considers effective verification to be crucial to the monitoring of arms control agreements and implementation of disarmament measures. The Government will continue to follow closely and aim to support the developments of an ISMA which could lead to the establishment of a reliable and effective satellite monitoring system. (Question No. 2893) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 29 November 1985: (1) Is it a fact that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards do not require that an International Atomic Energy Agency inspector be placed on site at each reactor, enrichment and reprocessing plant covered by the IAEA for the purpose of personally supervising the implementation of IAEA full scope safeguards. (2) Did the Australian Government argue for the placement of inspectors at the 1985 Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference. (3) Was it agreed at the 1985 NPT Review Conference that no NPT member States shall supply nuclear materials, equipment and technology to any non-nuclear weapons State which is not a party to the NPT and which does not accept full scope safeguards under the NPT. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The IAEA safeguards system and inspection schedules, including frequency of inspection, have been carefully developed, taking into account the nature, number and operating patterns of nuclear facilities in a particular country and the nature and quantities of material covered under each safeguards agreement and facility attachment, so as to enable timely detection of any diversion of significant quantities of nuclear material covered under the agreements. So-called bulk handling facilities, such as enrichment and reprocessing plants, require a greater inspection effort, as much of the nuclear material is normally moved and processed in the form of liquids, gases, powders or in large numbers of identical items such as pellets. These items require a continuous inspection effort. The IAEA does not necessarily consider however that continuous stationing of inspectors at all facilities is necessary to achieve its inspection goals and the objective of timely detection of diversion. Given the number of facilities in Canada and Japan, the IAEA has established field inspection offices in those countries to assist in attaining inspection goals. The proximity of the numerous European facilities to the IAEA headquarters in Vienna does not necessitate similar arrangements in Europe. (2) At the Third NPT Review Conference, the Australian Delegation pressed for the intensification of IAEA safeguards coverage in both non-nuclear weapon States and in nuclear weapon States. It also drew attention to the need for safeguarding techniques to be updated to take account of technological developments, and for the Agency to meet its safeguards responsibilities. At the Review Conference, and within the IAEA, Australia has argued for the IAEA to be provided with the necessary financial, manpower and technical resources to meet these responsibilities. (3) The Third NPT Review Conference urged all non-nuclear-weapon States not party to the Treaty to make an international legally-binding commitment not to acquire nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices and to accept IAEA safeguards on all their peaceful nuclear activities, both current and future, to verify that commitment. The Conference further urged all States in their international nuclear cooperation and in their nuclear export policies and, specifically as a necessary basis for the transfer of relevant nuclear supplies to non-nuclear-weapon States, to take effective steps towards achieving such a commitment to non-proliferation and acceptance of such safeguards by those States. The Conference also expressed the view that accession to the Non-Proliferation Treaty is the best way to achieve that objective. (Question No. 2896) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 29 November: What was the level of overseas development assistance expressed as a percentage of Gross National Product (a) for each year since 1970 and (b) as at 30 November 1985. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: AUSTRALIAN OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE (ODA) 1970-1985 Year ended 30 June ODA/GNP ratio (%) 1970... 0.58 1971... 0.56 1972... 0.55 1973... 0.53 1974... 0.53 1975... 0.57 1976... 0.51 1977... 0.47 1978... 0.48 1979... 0.45 1980... 0.44 1981... 0.44 1982... 0.45 1983... 0.47 1984... 0.51 1985... 0.50 1986 (estimated)... 0.45 Source: Budget Paper No. 9, 1985, p. 1. (Question No. 2898) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 29 November 1985: (1) Was the Government consulted by the United States Government on the deployment of Tomahawk cruises missles; if so, (a) did the consultation occur prior to the missiles' initial deployment, (b) on what date did the communication occur and (c) what was the specific nature of the communication. (2) Is the deployment of Tomahawk cruise missiles into the Pacific region consistent with the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty. (3) Is it a fact that the deployment of Tomahawk missiles limits the potential for verification essential to effective arms control agreements. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) No. (2) The South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty would prohibit the deployment of nuclear-armed Tomahawk cruise missiles on the territory of a State party to the Treaty. Protocol I to the Treaty invites the United States, the United Kingdom and France to apply this prohibition in respect of their territories located within the zone. The Treaty does not affect the rights, or the exercise of the rights, of any State under international law with regard to freedom of the seas. (3) Long-range sea-launched cruise missiles like the Tomahawk and comparable Soviet weapons will present formidable difficulties for the verification of compliance with restrictions imposed under any future arms control agreement. (Question No. 2899) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 29 November 1985: What measures has the Government taken to ensure that official funding to non-government organisations is progressively increased to 5 per cent of the aid budget. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: In the 1985-86 budget the Government has substantially increased the level of funds for the programs of NGOs to a total of $19.859m. Details are given in Budget Paper No. 9. This amount represents 1.9 per cent of the 1985-86 aid budget; this excludes unforeseen emergency aid and is likely to be exceeded (in 1984/85 the figure was 2.5 per cent). I announced on 28 November 1985 that further increases in subsidies for projects of NGOs were justified, though further long-term growth in these subsidies would need to be commensurate with the capacity of NGOs to mobilise public support and to deliver the increased allocation. (Question No. 2900) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 29 November 1985: (1) Is he able to say which Australian companies are involved in operations in Namibia. (2) What is the Government's attitude in relation to such operations. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) The Department of Foreign Affairs is not aware of any Australian companies which currently have direct operations in Namibia. (2) Not applicable. (Question No. 2902) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice on 29 November 1985: Has the Government co-ordinated its participation in multilateral bodies dealing with international economic issues through the establishment of a Bureau of International Economic Co-operation within his Department with a view to ensuring a common approach to North/South economic issues; if so, what are the details. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Individual aspects of North/South economic issues are shared among a number of portfolio responsibilities I am satisfied that through Cabinet and Inter-Departmental processes the Government is dealing effectively with the co-ordination of these matters and that a common approach is being taken to North/South economic issues. In these circumstances no decision has been taken to establish a Bureau of International Economic Co-Operation within the Department of Foreign Affairs. (Question No. 2903) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 29 November 1985: What progress has been made in the encouragement by Australia of the negotiation and ratification by the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics of treaties prohibiting the testing or deployment of anti-satellite weapons and space-based anti-ballistic missiles. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Government attaches major importance to the prevention of an arms race in outer space and has consistently advocated both in multilateral forums such as the Conference on Disarmament (CD) and bilaterally with the United Sates and the Soviet Union the negotiation of an appropriate agreement or agreements to this end. For example, in August 1984 the Minister for Foreign Affairs proposed to the (CD) that it look into the possibility of protecting from attack all satelites and associated ground stations that contribute to strategic stability. In this context, the Government welcomed the fact that the prevention of an arms race in outer space was one of the objectives agreed to by Messrs Shultz and Gromyko in January 1985 for the bilateral negotiations between the United States and the Soviet Union on space and nuclear arms. Moreover, President Reagan and General-Secretary Gorbachev reaffirmed this objective at their recent summit in Geneva. The Honourable member will also be aware that the Government has stated that it does not endorse the American Strategic Defence Initiative or the counterpart research program in the Soviet Union. While progress in negotiations on measures to prevent an arms race in outer space has been disappointingly slow it is important that this is now a clearly stated objective in both bilateral and multilateral forums. The Government will continue to urge the superpowers to take concrete steps to prevent an arms race in space and to make the most effective contribution it can to complementary efforts in the CD. Finally, for the Honourable Member's information, I would point out that the testing and deployment of space-based ballistic missile defences is already prohibited under Article V.I. of the ABM Treaty. (Question No. 2906) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 29 November 1985: How many Namibian students have been provided with scholarships to study in Australia. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: Since the inception in 1978 of a scholarship program to enable Namibian refugees to study in Australia, thirteen Namibians have received awards. Five Namibians are presently studying in Australia and it is expected that a further two scholarships will be awarded in the 1985-86 financial year. (Question No. 2908) Mr Tickner asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 29 November 1985: Has the Government made any proposals to the International Monetary Fund to encourage that body to ensure that its economic program do not impose unnecessarily harsh conditions on debtor developing countries, especially those of South America, which adversely affect the poor of those countries; if so, what are the details. Mr Hayden —The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Australian Government supports the case by case approach adopted by the International Monetary Fund to the problems of all indebted developing nations, including those in Latin America. We are sensitive to the problems of those developing countries which are going through the necessary process of economic adjustment while in many cases also attempting to rebuild democratic institutions, sometimes after long periods of authoritarian rule. I have drawn attention on a number of occasions to the need for care in the exercise of conditionality to ensure that economic recovery and political stability are not jeopardised. Concerns of this type are broadly shared in the international community and the International Monetary Fund, through its case by case approach, is able to take these sensitivities into acount. We will maintain an active interest in developments in the indebted developing countries, including those in Latin America.