1999-05-113913REPS499701999-05-11Mr SPEAKER(Mr Neil Andrew) took the chair at 2.00 p.m., and read prayers.Ministerial Arrangements49974997Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—Mr Speaker, I inform the House that the Treasurer will be absent from question time today due to budget commitments, and the Minister for Finance and Administration will ably answer questions on his behalf.Questions Without Notice499749974997Beazley, Kim, MPMr BEAZLEYPE4BrandALP00—My question is directed to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister aware that the European Union has expressed a formal concern about the negative effect of value added taxes upon employment in labour intensive industries? Can the Prime Minister confirm that the European Union is suggesting that a reduced rate of VAT apply to labour intensive service industries in order to increase employment in these industries and reduce the black economy caused by the VAT in these industries? Doesn't this demonstrate that value added taxes such as the proposed GST destroy jobs and also worsen the black economy?4997Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—No.49974997Moylan, Judi, MPMrs MOYLAN4V5PearceLP10—My question is directed to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Can the Minister for Foreign Affairs inform the House of the steps the Australian government is taking to encourage a constructive outcome in East Timor? Is the minister aware of any alternative views on this matter?4997Downer, Alexander, MPMr DOWNER4G4MayoLPForeign Affairs10—I thank the honourable member for Pearce for her question and for the interest she takes, as do many members of this House, in the issue. Let me begin by saying that the Australian government is well prepared to play its part in helping the United Nations with getting on with the consultation process in East Timor. This is a very important moment in history, and we believe it is appropriate that Australia should do all it can to try to ensure that that process is successful.As members will know, we have already committed $10 million to the UN trust fund. We were the first country to put money into that fund. We have pledged a further $10 million of in kind logistical support to the United Nations, in particular to help them get their advance team on the ground. We have said that we would make an important contri bution also through the civilian police advisory role. We are looking at the moment at providing in the vicinity of 50 officers from the Australian Federal Police. Two Australian Electoral Commission officials are also being seconded to the United Nations headquarters this week to assist in electoral planning. We have also made considerable diplomatic efforts to help the United Nations to achieve what has been achieved over the last few weeks.As both the Prime Minister and I have said on a number of occasions, though, we have no illusions about how tough the road ahead is going to be. It will be an extremely difficult thing to work through the tensions that exist in East Timor—the rivalries, the jealousies, the history of conflict—to a successful ballot, which we very much hope and expect to take place on 8 August. In a difficult and sensitive time, our judgment as a government has been that it is important to work with and try to persuade Indonesia as a friend and as a neighbour, not to do so uncritically but to try to do so in a way that will be effective.Honourable members will have seen reports today of the activities of the opposition on this issue. I suppose it is tempting on these occasions to make party political attacks on your political opponents when they get themselves into positions of embarrassment and difficulty. But I would make this point: the member for Kingsford-Smith has a reputation amongst those who are interested in foreign affairs in this country for being boorish and unproductive, a man who unquestionably has been about as populist as a politician could be. The fact is that the member for Kingsford-Smith not only has embarrassed his party but has been very unhelpful to Australia at this extremely sensitive and difficult time. But he has been helpful in one respect: he has demonstrated to members on both sides of this House that if you play the political game like that, including with Indonesia, you play yourself out of the game. You have no influence, no efficacy and no capacity to try to get a successful outcome for the people of East Timor.In conclusion, let me say that all members of parliament, be they opposition or govern ment, have responsibilities. It is important that all members of parliament understand that they have responsibilities to the whole of this nation and there is a line that should be drawn at party politics, and on this issue the opposition has overstepped that line.49984998Brereton, Laurie, MPMr BRERETON5T4Kingsford-SmithALP00—My question is directed to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, are you aware of the reports in today's newspapers that Indonesian soldiers and police cheered on the pro-integrationist militias as they rampaged through Dili yesterday? Do you stand by your statement at your post-Bali press conference on 28 April that:There is no doubt that there has been a quantum shift so far as the assertion of control both in relation to the military by the [Indonesian] Government and also the central control of the military in relation to its activities in East Timor.Prime Minister, do you stand by your further assertion `that things are infinitely better' in East Timor?4998Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—I thank the honourable member for Kingsford-Smith for that question because it enables me to touch upon some of the things dealt with by the foreign minister and also on what is undoubtedly the most important foreign relations challenge this country has had for a number of years. I think that would be a view shared by the two gentlemen who sit in the second back row of the opposition back bench, the new member for Griffith and the member for Holt, the former foreign minister in the Labor government.The reality is that Australia at the present time is endeavouring to bring influence to bear on the Indonesian government in a very difficult situation. Of course I have seen those reports. Like any other member of this parliament, I am disturbed and distressed and concerned about not only the reports of, but the actuality of loss of life and intimidation and bloodshed, whether it occurs in East Timor or whether it occurs anywhere else. I think all of us feel that way.I would be the last person to pretend that Indonesia is practising model democracy in East Timor. I think we all understand that. But I think we also understand that Australia really has three choices. Firstly, we can do what we are doing now—that is, trying to bring our influence to bear. Secondly, we can embrace the absurd fantasy of pretending that we can embark upon military action. We keep hearing people talking about participating in a peacekeeping role. You cannot participate in a peacekeeping role unless you are invited in because, by definition, it is not a peacekeeping role unless you receive an invitation from the host country. Thirdly, we could throw up our arms in horror, say that the Indonesian government is not a government with which we wish to deal, walk away, sever our military ties, sever our aid ties and give up any capacity to exercise diplomatic influence.We have chosen the first course, and we are doing it conscientiously. We do it against a background of the reality that when the former government was in office it followed policies fairly consistently which, to say the least, were extremely understanding of the Indonesian position and certainly more understanding of the Indonesian position than perhaps was the view that I expressed when I wrote to President Habibie in December of last year. That was the first and most decisive signal from an Australian government that it believed that a fundamental shift of Indonesian policy in relation to East Timor was necessary. Let it be remembered, and I say this very deliberately, Mr Speaker, that it was the action of the coalition government that I lead that did more than anything else to constitute the catalyst for the change in Indonesian policy. That was not done—Opposition members interjecting—ZD4Mr HOWARD—I know that the honourable member for Kingsford-Smith finds this difficult, but that was our action. I would remind the member for Kingsford-Smith in his more unctuous moments that I do not recall any ringing speeches for policy changes when he was a member of the Keating government. I do not remember the member for Kingsford-Smith declaring his undying commitment to human rights when he supported Paul Keating as Prime Minister. Of all the relationships that the former government and the former Prime Minister had with foreign heads of government, none was more understanding, none was more accommodating and none indicated a greater desire to please on all occasions, no matter what the circumstances were, than the relationship between him and the former President of Indonesia.Everyone knows how important the relationship between our two countries is, and it is the responsibility of successive governments. Let me say that I have not joined in some of the criticism of former Labor prime ministers which has been indulged in by some commentators on this issue. I happen to believe that the actions that were taken by Mr Whitlam when he was Prime Minister were understandable and, in the circumstances, struck the right balance at the time so far as our foreign relations were concerned. If you looked through the comments and observations that I made in the various positions I held in opposition, I do not think you would find that I took an opportunistic position regarding the attitude of either the Hawke or Keating governments in relation to their relations with Indonesia because it has always been a difficult, sensitive relationship.Of course Indonesia is a different society from Australia. Of course it is not a democracy. But it is also true that it has made steps towards democracy under Dr Habibie's leadership that we would not have thought imaginable a year ago. Dr Habibie deserves to be given more credit around the world than he has been given for the change he has brought about. He deserves to be given more credit for the commitment that he has made through his foreign minister for the conduct of a ballot that will provide an opportunity for the people of East Timor to exercise a free choice. I notice the member for Holt nodding in assent to what I have said.I do not pretend for a moment that the situation in East Timor is anything other than very fragile indeed. It is easy for an opposition spokesman to ask the sort of question that the member for Kingsford-Smith asked. I have no doubt that he will go on behaving in that sort of manner from now until 8 August. Let me say that I believe the pros pects for an orderly, peaceful and relatively democratic outcome are greater now than they have been for a long time. That does not mean that, in the words of the foreign minister, it will be anything other than a near miracle if all of the eventualities that we want to unfold do in fact unfold.I believe that the Australian government has used the influence that this country has with Indonesia—built up, might I say, under governments of different political persuasions—since Indonesia secured her independence in the mid-1940s. We are using that influence intelligently and sensibly. We are playing the card that is best likely to get the best outcome in East Timor. It is not a time for cheap opportunism by foreign affairs spokesmen for the Labor Party.50005000Haase, Barry, MPMr HAASE84TKalgoorlieLP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs. Can the minister inform the House of the take-up of New Apprenticeships? What is the quality of the skills provided by these New Apprenticeships? Is the minister aware of any comments about this?5000Kemp, Dr David, MPDr KEMPBT4GoldsteinLPEducation, Training and Youth Affairs; Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service10—I thank the member for Kalgoorlie for his question. This government has given a very high priority to providing opportunities to the 70 per cent of school leavers who do not go straight from school to university. We have also taken effective action to address the skills shortages that this country faces in many areas. One of the major responses of this government has been to build up the apprenticeship system. I am pleased to announce to the House that New Apprenticeships are at record levels. The latest statistics for December last year show that there were some 206,400 Australians in New Apprenticeships, which is 70,000 more than were in New Apprenticeships in the Labor Party's last year of office—70,000 additional opportunities for Australians in the apprenticeship system under this government.There have been comments from the other side, the typical misleading kinds of comments that you get from them, that these are not high skill apprenticeships. Nothing could be further from the truth—70 per cent of all those in the New Apprenticeship system are training at the higher skill levels. Indeed, 80 per cent of the younger people are training at the higher skill levels. It is very pleasing to see that, after the devastation of the traditional apprenticeship areas wrought by the Labor Party's economic mismanagement, apprenticeships in the traditional areas are now beginning to rise again and indeed are several per cent higher than they were in 1995, the Labor Party's last year in office.Over the last week, during the Senate estimates process, we have seen the most extraordinary campaign of distortion about the apprenticeship system from Senator Carr. Senator Carr, true to form, has been making charges again and again of fraud within the apprenticeship system. In February, Senator Carr raised six cases which he said were cases of fraud. All of these cases have been investigated and not one of them substantiated a case of fraud against the Commonwealth. We have now seen a whole range of new accusations from Senator Carr.Let me say this: if any valid accusation is raised, this government will address it. But what we have got is simply a campaign of distortion, untruths, coming from the Labor Party. This foreshadows what we will see over the next week in response to the budget. We will see continuing distortion, continuing misrepresentation, because if there is one thing the Labor Party cannot face up to it is the fact that it is this government which has revived apprenticeship and training opportunities for young Australians and which is genuinely committed to improving education and training standards in this country.50005000Beazley, Kim, MPMr BEAZLEYPE4BrandALP00—My question is to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister aware of the assessment by the Reserve Bank in its semi-annual statement on monetary policy May 1999 that consumer spending in Japan has been stagnant since the April 1997 increase in the consumption tax in that country? Doesn't this follow the IMF's assessment last year that a loss of growth momentum two years ago in Japan was attributable to a number of factors including the increase in the consumption tax in April 1997? When will the Prime Minister admit that the international evidence shows that the GST is bad for the economy?5001Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—I would have thought the last report that the Leader of the Opposition would quote against me at the moment would be the recent economic assessment by the Reserve Bank of Australia, because that economic assessment produced some of the most robust headlines that I have seen about the performance of the Australian economy for a long time. That report made it very plain that the Australian economy is now performing better than it has for any period in the last 30 years. It made it plain that we are enjoying unprecedented low levels of interest, that we are enjoying unprecedented low levels of inflation, that business investment is strong, and that we have stared down the Asian economic downturn in a way that not even the most optimistic in the Australian community would have thought likely barely 12 months ago.The other point that the report makes is that this has been the result of reforms taken on earlier occasions. Those reforms, and all of the other reforms that the government has undertaken, have helped to bring the budget back into surplus from the deficit of $10½ billion that we inherited three years ago. The message out of that is that if today's strength is the result of yesterday's reform, then tomorrow's strength will be the result of today's reform. That is why tax reform is absolutely essential to the future strength of the Australian economy.50015001McArthur, Stewart, MPMr McARTHURVH4CorangamiteLP10—My question is directed to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister provide details of the Western Australian Regional Forest Agreement he signed on 4 May with Premier Richard Court? Does the coalition's forest policy reflect a good balance between jobs and the environment? Is the Prime Minister aware of alternative approaches? What is the government's response to them?5001Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—I am pleased to report to the member for Corangamite and also to the House that the RFA, which was signed by me and Western Australian Premier, Mr Court, last week, did produce a very fair and balanced outcome in Western Australia. It provides for 151,000 hectares of new reserves. It provides a $59 million industry package for timber and tourism. The WA timber industry has the basis to create 500 new processing jobs. The RFA and industry package underpins this. Under this government, four regional forest agreements have now been signed—two in Victoria, one in Tasmania and one in Western Australia. All of them have exhibited a balance between the desire of this government to respond to proper mainstream environmental concerns but equally to protect jobs.Mr Beazley interjecting—ZD4Mr HOWARD—I hear the Leader of the Opposition interjecting about attitudes in Western Australia. I have got a few documents in front of me. I have got one that is headed `CFMEU slams Beazley'. The CFMEU—I do not know that there are too many of them in the Colac branch of the Liberal Party. `CFMEU slams Beazley'. It is really not bad. This is what it says:The Federal Opposition Leader Kim Beazley has been bitterly attacked by the CFMEU's Forestry Division over his support for the new Western Australian ALP Forest Policy. On the weekend the Western Australian ALP State Conference passed a motion supporting the prohibition of logging in old growth forests . . . This is what Mr Michael O'Connor, the National Assistant Secretary of the CFMEU, had to say:"Beazley's comments were a betrayal of tens of thousands of workers throughout Australia employed in the Forest and Forest products Industry."I could not have put it better myself. Of course, it gets even better when you find a statement issued by the Western Australian branch of the Australian Workers Union. You are getting even closer to the heartlands of what the Labor Party used to believe in. This is what Mr Daly had to say:"On behalf of two thousand timber workers and their families, I take a great deal of comfort from the position adopted by the Federal Government," . . . This is not the Secretary of the Chamber of Commerce in Western Australia; this is not the secretary of some branch of the Liberal Party in a blue-ribbon electorate in Perth; this is a statement by Mr Tim Daly, who is the Secretary of the Western Australian branch of the Australian Workers Union. But not content with saying that he likes us, he goes on, and he has this to say:"As much as I can take comfort from the Government's position I am disappointed with the attitude of the Federal Parliamentary Labor Party.And he gets to the nub of the issue:The Labor Party purports to represent the interest of blue collar workers but it is prepared to support a disallowance motion in the Senate in relation to RFA's which will perpetuate the uncertainty that the legislation was intended to end.But, to bring us really up to date, I am advised from a very, very reliable source that there was a meeting in Colac last night, I think in or near the electorate of the member for Corangamite. It was a meeting of timber workers and their families, members of the community and contractors. At that meeting a resolution was carried condemning the statement by Mr Beazley which supports the ill-conceived Western Australian ALP forest policy. That meeting unanimously called on Mr Beazley to retract his statement and reconfirm his support for the National Forest Policy Statement for `our jobs, our community and our industry'. They are the words of ordinary Australians and their families who feel bitterly disillusioned by the narrow sectional attitude taken by the Australian Labor Party. The Australian Labor Party has abandoned timber workers and their families. The Australian Labor Party is now bound hand and foot, through the actions of Dr Gallop and the actions of the Leader of the Opposition, to the extremist attitudes of the green movement in Western Australia.Distinguished Visitors500210000SPEAKERMr SPEAKER—I inform the House that we have present in the gallery this afternoon a distinguished group of Norwegian ambassadors to countries in the Asia-Pacific region, who are meeting in Canberra. I welcome the group and ask that they convey my thanks to the Norwegian parliament for the outstanding arrangements made for the visit to Norway last month by a delegation from this parliament, a delegation which I had the honour to lead. I also extend a similar welcome on behalf of all parliamentarians to a distinguished group of Slovenian parliamentarians who are on the floor of the chamber this afternoon and hope they feel very welcome here in the chamber of the House of Representatives.Questions Without Notice500250025002Beazley, Kim, MPMr BEAZLEYPE4BrandALP00—My question is to the Prime Minister. I can bring the Prime Minister further up to date. The CFMEU and the majority of workers in Western Australia voted for my position. But, anyway, we will proceed with the question to the Prime Minister.Government members interjecting—10000SPEAKERMr SPEAKER—Order! The Leader of the Opposition.PE4Mr BEAZLEY—You appear a bit ill-informed, old son.Government members interjecting—10000SPEAKERMr SPEAKER—Members on my right. The Leader of the Opposition knows that he is abusing the forms of question time. I ask him to come directly to his question.PE4Mr BEAZLEY—What a terrible thought. Prime Minister, why are you amending your GST legislation to give huge windfalls to high rollers in casinos while your package will erode pensioners' compensation to zero?5002Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—We are not, and it does not.Mr Melham interjecting—10000SPEAKERMr SPEAKER—The member for Banks is persistently interjecting. I will not, in fact, draw his attention to it again.50025002Macfarlane, Ian, MPMr IAN MACFARLANEWN6GroomLP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for Finance and Administration. Can the minister inform the House of the benefits that will be generated by the government's landmark move to an accrual budget?5003Fahey, John, MPMr FAHEYHQ5MacarthurLPFinance and Administration10—I thank the honourable member for Groom for his very timely question. Later today, as all members know, the Treasurer will deliver yet another budget based on sound economic policy and responsible management. Tonight's budget will be responsible not only in substance but also in form. The 1999 budget will be the first that has been presented in an accrual framework. That is the framework that measures income and expenses when they are accrued not just when the money comes in or goes out.The accrual framework is universally accepted as a superior financial and management practice. Even Labor accepts its benefit. They were always going to do it. In 1992 the then finance minister, the former member for Gellibrand, indicated that Labor would be adopting an accrual accounting process. He described it as a more realistic picture and said it would be in place by June 1995. Of course, we know nothing happened. Three years later the then finance minister and now Leader of the Opposition again sang the praises of accrual accounting and said that Labor would introduce it.Shortly after the coalition came to government in 1996, we announced that we would introduce the accrual framework—and now we have made it happen. So what are the benefits? An accrual system will provide Australians with the true cost of government for the very first time. It will show what the government produces, what it costs and how efficiently it is done. It will provide better accountability by showing that you are able to measure what has been achieved against agreed objectives. It will lead to better decisions. Those decisions will flow from the transparency of resource usage. It will provide better information to agencies and to ministers. They will know the full cost of the goods and services that they provide and they can compare that full cost and that true cost with alternative suppliers. It will lead to better results because agencies will be required to provide the full picture, as Ralph Willis said, of both planned financial performance and planned deliverables. In tonight's budget, the portfolio budget papers will provide figures for 1998 and 1999 in both languages—that is, in both cash and accrual. That will enable a comparison of budget forecasts and the actual results. There will also be a reconciliation table in Budget Paper No. 1.The government is proud of this landmark change. Just as our charter of budget honesty was world's leading edge reform, budgets that are presented and framed on an accrual basis catapult Australia to world's best reporting of fiscal policy.83UCOXMr Cox—Mr Speaker, I ask that the minister table the document from which he just read.10000SPEAKERMr SPEAKER—Was the minister reading from a confidential document?HQ5Mr FAHEY—I was referring to some hand-written notes, Mr Speaker.10000SPEAKERMr SPEAKER—The minister was not reading from a statement.50035003Thomson, Kelvin, MPMr KELVIN THOMSONUK6WillsALP00—My question is also to the Minister for Finance and Administration. When was the minister first advised by his department of the erosion over time of the compensation for pensioners disadvantaged by the GST? When did the minister advise the Prime Minister and the Treasurer of this advice? Does the analysis of the budgetary impact of the tax package, at page 34 of the package circulated in August 1998 by the Treasurer, reflect that advice?5003Fahey, John, MPMr FAHEYHQ5MacarthurLPFinance and Administration10—I am happy to inform the honourable member that at no time was I informed by my department of the erosion of compensation for pensioners, so I guess that means that the question amounts to absolutely nothing—like most others that are asked by the opposition on the tax package. I can say unequivocally that the government's very fair and equitable tax package compensates pensioners with a four per cent one-off, day one provision to pensioners—8I4MARTINMr Martin—One-off—dead right.HQ5Mr FAHEY—One-off up front—and then keeps it at 1½ per cent in real terms above any inflationary factor. That comes off the base that this government had the guts to introduce—that is, a proper formula for pensioners to link pensions to 25 per cent of MTAWE, male total average weekly earnings. This is the government that operates on a fair and equitable basis for pensioners and for all others in the tax system.50045004Gallus, Christine, MPMrs GALLUSCU4HindmarshLP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for Health and Aged Care. Can the minister inform the House about the government's intentions to protect the integrity of Australia's blood supply in the light of developments overseas?5004Wooldridge, Dr Michael, MPDr WOOLDRIDGE8E4ChisholmLPHealth and Aged Care10—I thank the honourable member for her question. I have announced a comprehensive review into Australia's system of blood supply. Australia has one of the safest and most widely respected systems of blood supply in the world, but there are a number of emerging issues that make it timely for us to review our systems of blood donation. There is a threat of emerging infectious agents. There are product shortages. There are changes to testing procedures and determinations of donors.The most awkward is the threat of emerging infectious agents. There is now a new variant of CJD or Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. This is an incurable neurological disorder, and of the 39 cases that have now been reported in the UK a quarter were reported in the December quarter of 1998. This is believed to have been contracted from BSE in cows. BSE is not a problem in Australia and Australia is self-sufficient in blood, so we do not have to be concerned about this new variant ourselves, but it is a particular concern to other countries. There is also evidence of a new type of hepatitis, now called hepatitis G, that appears able to be transmitted by blood. Countries overseas are looking at their recall procedures and so it is timely for Australia to review this in a calm and independent manner.There are a number of very well-documented cases overseas as to what happens when this goes wrong. Germany had manufacturing failures which led to the transmission of hepatitis A; Ireland had a number of women of child-bearing age contract hepatitis C through problems with donor selection and manufacturing problems; and Canada had a number of cases of HIV because they delayed introduction of testing into their blood supply.Product shortages are another chronic problem in the blood supply system in Australia. One particular uncommon illness is Guillain Barre syndrome and intravenous immunoglobulin has been used to treat this. I am very keen to ensure that Australia maintains its self-sufficiency, whilst at the same time we have to look at how our monopoly supplier, CSL, can meet Australia's own needs as well as increase its international profile, and how we can look to the longer term to see that those product shortages do not take place.On the issue of testing procedures, there are new procedures for hepatitis C such as nucleic acid amplification or, for the variant of CJD, a more controversial procedure called leucodepletion where you take the white blood cells out of the blood. These procedures involve very greatly increased cost for marginally increased safety and are decisions that should be made independently by technical experts. Because Australia has a federation, and blood supply is something that is dominated by states and territories, I am also concerned that these testing procedures might be introduced uniformly.Finally, with exclusion of donors, given that Canada has announced that it is considering whether or not to exclude people who have spent periods of time in the UK since 1980—although it has not made a decision on that—it is also timely that Australia should look at this.The response of the opposition to the announcement of this review was predictable but disappointing. The opposition spokesperson on health made three claims, every one of which is untrue. The first claim is that somehow funding for the Australian Red Cross was at risk. This is entirely without foundation and false. Secondly, she said that this will do nothing for people with Guillain Barre syndrome, who are having to wait many months because of the shortages. In fact, it is completely independent of this. The Australian health ministers advisory committee has just completed a working party report on this and states and territories will be working to implement that with, hopefully, an increase in plasma supplies in the very near future. Finally, she raised the spectre of this having something to do with competition policy and charging for blood. It remains the Commonwealth's firm position that blood should be free to the patient.The review is being chaired by Sir Ninian Stephen. It has on it Dame Margaret Guilfoyle, Professor Bob Beale, who is the international president of the Society for Blood Transfusion, and Professor Judith Whitworth, the Commonwealth's Chief Medical Officer. I believe this review will set us up for the future so that we can maintain our respected position internationally in blood supply.50055005Gerick, Jane, MPMs GERICK83WCanningALP00—My question is to the Minister for Financial Services and Regulation. Does the minister recall advising this House on 24 November 1998 that customers are `starting to pay for some of the services that they are demanding of banks'? Does the minister accept that it was reasonable for customers to have paid over $10 billion in fees to the five largest banks last year for these services? At a time when banks are making billion dollar profits, why won't the minister act to stop them taking billion dollar grabs from the pockets of their customers?5005Hockey, Joe, MPMr HOCKEYDK6North SydneyLPFinancial Services and Regulation10—I thank the honourable member for her question because it gives me an opportunity to raise a number of issues in relation to bank fees. The first point is that the $10 billion figure cited in the KPMG report is made up of a number of factors, and they include Treasury activities of the individual banks. The second point is that 25 per cent of the $10 billion is fees and charges from offshore—Australian exports, which is good news for Australia. The third point is in relation to the alleged figure of $10 billion. That represents just three per cent of the total income of financial institutions. What I should point out is that the Labor Party—Opposition members interjecting—10000SPEAKERMr SPEAKER—Order! The minister has the call.DK6Mr HOCKEY—When it comes to Australian financial institutions and Australian banks in particular, the Labor Party has form. It is in the best interests of the people of Australia that the Labor Party stays well away from banks. We know only too well the history of banking and the Labor Party in South Australia where $18 billion was lost. We know the history of the Labor Party and banking in Victoria where $12 billion was lost. We can only speculate on the relationship between the Labor Party and other financial institutions. Our response is the front page of the Asian Wall Street Journal : `Australia evades contagion amid solid banking system'. That is a response. Or the response on the front page of the Wall Street Journal : `Sitting pretty: strong banking system helps Australia prosper as neighbours struggle'.When it comes to hypocrisy, the Labor Party is the very best. I want to remind Labor Party members that, when it comes to bank fees and charges, they are absolute hypocrites. On 11 July 1995, the Treasurer at the time, Ralph Willis, announced:. . . I will direct the new Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to formally monitor and regularly report on the financial services industry in relation to retail transaction accounts for a period of three years.That was the Labor Party on 11 July 1995. Five days before the 1996 election, Ralph Willis again stated:A Labor Government will write to the Chairperson of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission . . . requesting the Commission to formally monitor fees and charges on bank retail transaction accounts.Ask me the question again.50055005St Clair, Stuart, MPMr St CLAIR84BNew EnglandNP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for Trade. What steps is the government taking to improve market access for Australian exporters, particularly in the wool industry, and to preserve hard-won export markets against protectionist threats?5005Fischer, Tim, MPMr TIM FISCHERDG4FarrerNP10—I thank the member for New England for his question. These matters are being pursued on a variety of fronts, including the working visit I will make next week and beyond to several countries to pursue the matter of wool and our exports of wool to China—a half billion dollar market—to try to put in place a prototype contract to further facilitate that and to go into negotiations in respect of China's entry to the World Trade Organisation, something which the government supports but not at any price. We seek to bridge the gap to come to a positive conclusion hopefully in relation to those WTO accession negotiations as far as Australia is concerned.Also, a major focus in the US will be prime lamb. We will be doing battle in conjunction with the Australian prime lamb industry—which has established a $100 million export market in that direction—to see that the US, which preaches free trade to the world, and we all agree with that direction, does not bring in a major restraint on trade in an unfair way in relation to prime lamb exports to a new market established by our producers.8I4MARTINMr Martin—What about steel?DG4Mr TIM FISCHER—The fourth subject I was about to turn to—which is very important for Wollongong, I accept—is the matter of steel and the triangular situation involving Japan and the US, the fallout between those two countries and the impact that could have on Australian steel producers. Minister Nick Minchin and I met recently with BHP and others in respect of that issue, and I will be pursuing that as part of the visit.Of course, Australia will be doing more than that, including bilateral visits associated with this next round of activity in France, Switzerland, Belgium, Hungary, Russia, Korea, China and the USA over 16 days. We will be pursuing, on the multilateral, regional and bilateral levels at every opportunity, improved market access which will generate more jobs here in Australia. I notice there are a couple of non-lockupers in the press gallery today. I pay tribute to one of them: welcome back, Fred, from Europe. You have raised the standard of coverage of trade in the Bulletin.Mr Beazley interjecting—DG4Mr TIM FISCHER—No, he has not. It is good to see more focus on trade issues in a sensible way in the media. I conclude by saying to the House that the very best thing we will do next is in the budget tonight, which will help our exporters provide solid sparkle to country Australia and indeed to all Australians as we build for the next millennium with a budget in surplus. Well done to the Treasurer.50065006Bevis, Arch, MPMr BEVISET4BrisbaneALP00—My question without notice is to the Minister for Financial Services and Regulation. Minister, are you aware that advertisements placed by the Employment Advocate as part of the government's $1 million propaganda campaign were shown in Senate estimates last week to be misleading and in breach of section 51 of the Trade Practices Act? Will you ensure that the ACCC conducts a full inquiry into the government's latest misleading advertising campaign and that its report is tabled in this parliament?5006Hockey, Joe, MPMr HOCKEYDK6North SydneyLPFinancial Services and Regulation10—I am aware of previous investigations by the ACCC into advertising campaigns by government. I am not aware of the particular details that the shadow minister has referred to. However, I am very confident that the ACCC will continue its good role in assessing these procedures and will make its public statements accordingly.50065006Nelson, Dr Brendan, MPDr NELSONRW5BradfieldLP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for Health and Aged Care. Could the minister please inform the House of initiatives undertaken by the government to attract and retain doctors in rural and remote areas? In particular, what recent developments have occurred in relation to the use of overseas trained doctors in rural Australia?5006Wooldridge, Dr Michael, MPDr WOOLDRIDGE8E4ChisholmLPHealth and Aged Care10—I thank the honourable member for his question. I am delighted to be able to inform the House that the number of doctors in rural Australia has been going up. In fact in 1997 and 1998, the number of doctors accessing Medicare provider numbers in rural Australia was up nearly seven per cent, reversing a 30-year historical trend. The reason for this is very simple: it relates to the provider number legislation that was passed through this parliament in 1996 against the staunch opposition of the Labor Party. Nonetheless, this is now providing very substantially increased locum services to country doctors and an increased number of full-time doctors in country Australia.We had 450 medical students last Christmas in rural Australia on John Flynn scholarships. This Christmas we will have 600 medical students experiencing rural practice as part of their medical training. We are very optimistic that over time this will lead to a greater number of doctors in rural Australia, as one of the factors that is very important in getting doctors into the country after graduation is positive experiences of country practice during their training.I am also pleased to inform the House that recently I travelled through rural New South Wales with the Deputy Leader of the National Party. As a result of that trip, I made yet another offer to the states to work jointly with them, because the Commonwealth does not have all the levers here. The states are the people who register the doctors; the Commonwealth does not. Western Australia took us up on that offer, and we had something of a breakthrough in that Western Australia has decided to have geographical registration of doctors. For new overseas doctors coming into Australia, their registration will be conditional on them working in a geographic area. So rather than point fingers at the Commonwealth—as the states have done—and say that it is our problem, Western Australia for the first time has been prepared to say that it is both of our problems and work with us.What this means is that doctors from the UK, Ireland, South Africa, Malaysia, Singapore, Canada and New Zealand who have passed their specialist general practice postgraduate qualifications can now come and work in Australia without passing the Australian Medical Council examination. This will mean that many more doctors who may have been worried about the hurdles to practise in Australia will be eligible to come to this country. Other states have shown a good deal of interest, and I am optimistic that in fact all states and territories will follow the Western Australian lead.Again, in spite of this breakthrough, it is enormously disappointing but nonetheless predictable that we get the usual carping, negative, opportunistic response from the Labor Party. The Labor Party's acting shadow minister at the time, Senator Chris Evans, said that this was a quick fix. You bet it is a quick fix, because we have a crisis at the moment. The only thing he could suggest was bonded scholarships, which would maybe help in the year 2010. I can tell you that we have no intention of waiting until 2010 to improve the lot of doctors in rural Australia. We are doing it straightaway.Senator Evans also went on and said that this discriminates against the large number of overseas trained doctors who are already permanent residents in Australia. That is absolute rubbish and shows his lack of understanding of this difficult and complex issue. The very simple point is that doctors from overseas who are already in Australia and who have postgraduate qualifications from those countries will be eligible in just the same way as a doctor from overseas will be. This is groundbreaking stuff. I expect it will contribute to the increase that has already happened in the last two years—a significant achievement that has not been able to be achieved for generations.50075007McMullan, Bob, MPMr McMULLAN5I4CanberraALP00—My question is to the Minister for Financial Services and Regulation. Does the minister recall saying in this House that parallel importation of CDs was not about trade but was about the protection of intellectual property and the prevention of piracy? Can the minister guarantee to apply the same standards to the issue of parallel importation of computer software, parallel importation of video games and parallel importation of books?5007Hockey, Joe, MPMr HOCKEYDK6North SydneyLPFinancial Services and Regulation10—Yes, I am aware of my previous comments in relation to parallel imports of CDs. I think the member would be well served to direct his question to the appropriate minister.50075007Baird, Bruce, MPMr BAIRDMP6CookLP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for Transport and Regional Services. Would the minister outline to the House what the government is doing in New South Wales to implement the lifesaving Black Spot Program?5008Anderson, John, MPMr ANDERSON4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—I thank the honourable member for his question and acknowledge that, with his background in transport, he has a real interest in this. The Black Spot Program is a very valuable one, albeit one that the Labor Party chose to axe. We reintroduced it in 1996, and we announced during the last election that we would not only continue it but also substantially increase funding for it. That reflects our understanding of the fact that there is a great deal that we can do to help in the area of road safety in this country.8K6FITZGIBBONMr Fitzgibbon—Are you going to restore the national highway?10000SPEAKERMr SPEAKER—I warn the member for Hunter. He persists in interjecting and knows that it is against the forms of the House.4K4Mr ANDERSON—As I was saying, the coalition recognises the impact that the Black Spot Program can have not only in mere economic terms but, much more importantly, in saving lives. I am sure that is something that we would all be prepared to support, and it leaves hanging in the air the mystery of why the ALP was prepared to scrap such a valuable program. Under us it is now in our fourth year of funding and, by 2002, more than $225 million will have been allocated to eliminate dangerous spots around Australia—importantly, in both rural and urban areas.Earlier today some announcements were made in relation to New South Wales and some $12 million worth of black spots programs by Senator Sandy Macdonald, who is the Chairman of the New South Wales Black Spots Community Consultative Panel. In the member for Cook's own electorate, a total of $320,000 is being spent to address three black spots in the Sutherland shire. In the Prime Minister's electorate of Bennelong, there are five projects needing attention—over $700,000 worth of programs. In the Deputy Prime Minister's electorate, there are $¼ million worth of programs to develop an approach to correct a particular problem in Lamington. Lest the opposition claim that this program is not being fairly allocated, I point out that considerable resources are being devoted to, or deployed in, areas such as Wollongong, Wyong, Blacktown and Marrickville, to name just a few.It is quite obvious that, although they were prepared to scrap the program, we are prepared to recognise that saving lives is something we ought to do wherever we can, regardless of political representation. We support this valuable program, and I believe that it would be a very useful thing indeed if the opposition were to acknowledge that this is something of great value that they ought to support.50085008Gibbons, Steve, MPMr GIBBONS83XBendigoALP00—My question without notice is directed to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister guarantee the retention of an appropriate defence manufacturing infrastructure as a result of the decision to privatise Australian Defence Industries? Will he implement safeguards to guarantee that the ADI plant in Bendigo remains in Bendigo, that employment levels are maintained and that vital projects such as the Bushmaster are not lost to Bendigo? Will he agree to the demand of the City of Greater Bendigo that priority be given to the retention of the ADI heavy engineering and specialist vehicle building activities as a condition of sale in the privatisation of ADI in Bendigo?5008Fahey, John, MPMr FAHEYHQ5MacarthurLPFinance and Administration10—I noted with interest the honourable member's question. As all honourable members would know, the government has indicated its intentions to sell Australian Defence Industries. That is a very diverse group. It has a number of operations—in fact, I think it has about 19 sites around the country, including the ones that the honourable member referred to.The government, in all of its assets sales, is very conscious of a number of elements that must be kept in place in the interests of Australia. In industry, that component is extremely important, and in all bids that come in—and I anticipate that we will have bids in in respect of the sale by 30 June—we will have great regard to the fact that there is a need to maintain the industry that is associated with Australian Defence Industries and that is very much centred on defence industries. We will have great regard also for the employees that are part of Australian Defence Industries at this point in time. In the course of proceeding down the road of getting out of businesses that there is no market value in, government will have regard for the employees in all parts of the operations of the particular asset, including the numerous assets, sites and operations of Australian Defence Industries, including those sites which the honourable member referred to.50095009Gash, Joanna, MPMrs GASHAK6GilmoreLP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for Veterans' Affairs. Can the minister advise the House what steps the government is taking to maintain its commitment to review potential service anomalies, in particular the case of those who served in the Far East Strategic Reserve between 1955 and 1975?5009Scott, Bruce, MPMr BRUCE SCOTTYT4MaranoaNPVeterans' Affairs; Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence10—I thank the member for Gilmore for her question and her interest in matters related to defence. She has a very important defence facility in her own electorate and chairs the Liberal and National parties' backbench committee. In keeping with the Liberal and National parties' commitment to listen to the ex-service community and consult with them on what they see as anomalies, I announced last week that we had ordered an independent review of the appropriateness of the repatriation benefits and medals for the Australian Defence Force in South-East Asia between 1955 and 1975. The review will result in a written report that will cover the areas specifically related to the Royal Australian Air Force at Ubon, the Royal Australian Air Force at Butterworth in Malaya, the service in Malaya during the period of the confrontation with Indonesia and also service with the naval component of the Far East Strategic Reserve.The issue of recognition of the naval component of the Far East Strategic Reserve has generated a significant amount of interest. Members on both sides of the House have been lobbied and petitioned by members of the Far East Strategic Reserve. I advise the House that I expect the report to be completed by the end of October. I maintain our com mitment to continue to listen to the ex-service community and also to review potential anomalies if they are raised with us. We have put mechanisms in place. In our first term in government we did look at several perceived anomalies. We were able to extend repatriation benefits to many of those areas which were previously not recognised, including medals, and this is a further review which will be done by an independent inquirer. I expect that review by the end of October.ZD4HOWARDMr Howard—Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper .Auditor-General's Reports500950095009Mr SPEAKERMr SPEAKER10000PON/A10—I present the following Auditor-General's audit reports for 1998-99—No. 35—Performance audit—The service pension—Department of Veterans' Affairs; No. 36—Performance audit—Pay-as-you-earn taxation—Administration of employer responsibilities—Australian Taxation Office; No. 37—Performance audit—Management of Tax File Numbers—Australian Taxation Office; No. 38—Preliminary study—Management of Commonwealth budgetary processes ; and No. 39—Performance audit—National Aboriginal health strategy—Delivery of housing and infrastructure to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Communities—Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission.Ordered that the reports be printed.Documents50095009Reith, Peter, MPMr REITHWI4FlindersLPWorkplace Relations and Small Business10—Papers are tabled as listed in the schedule circulated to honourable members. Details of the papers will be recorded in Votes and Proceedings .Delegation Reports5009500950095009Mr SPEAKERMr SPEAKER10000PON/A10—For the information of honourable members, I present the report of the Australian Parliamentary Delegation to the 44th Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference held in Wellington, New Zealand, and official visits to Samoa and Fiji.Bills5010Messages received from the Governor-General reported informing the House of assent to the following bills:Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1998 Australian Sports Drug Agency Amendment Bill 1999 General Interest Charge (Imposition) Bill 1999 Judiciary Amendment Bill 1999 Motor Vehicle Standards Amendment Bill 1999 National Measurement Amendment (Utility Meters) Bill 1999 Rural Adjustment Amendment Bill 1999 Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No. 3) 1999 Wildlife Protection (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Amendment Bill 1999 Assistance for Carers Legislation Amendment Bill 1999 Bounty (Ships) Amendment Bill 1999 Industry Research and Development Amendment Bill 1999 Taxation Laws Amendment Bill (No. 1) 1999 A New Tax System (Fringe Benefits Reporting) Bill 1999 A New Tax System (Medicare Levy Surcharge—Fringe Benefits) Bill 1999 Airports Amendment Bill 1999 Financial Management Legislation Amendment Bill 1999 Health Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1999 Referendum Legislation Amendment Bill 1999 Matters of Public Importance5010501010000SPEAKERMr SPEAKER— I have received a letter from the honourable member for Reid proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:The disastrous impact on the Defence Reserves of the Coalition's industrial relations and defence policies. 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—15:04:005010Ferguson, Laurie, MPMr LAURIE FERGUSON8T4ReidALP00—Yesterday the Australian included a public relations puff from Glenn Milne, headed `Moore's winning war game'. Its thrust was how clever the current Minister for Defence is in his dealings with the Defence hierarchy. We were regaled with the comment:Moore has established his ascendancy. But the top brass and bureaucrats have responded positively. An accommodation has been reached and relations are now much smoother and more productive.Quite frankly, that kind of view would certainly get very little currency with defence personnel or with those who are informed commentators in this policy field. As we all realise, a series of changes in Defence in regard to subcontracting and the disappearance of vast numbers of jobs finds morale in the defence forces at an all-time low. This matter of public importance today notes:The disastrous impact on the Defence Reserves of the Coalition's industrial relations and defence policies.The reality of the coalition's industrial relations policy is that it is hitting the question of the reserves in this country—their availability, the willingness of people to volunteer and their protection in doing so.WI4REITHMr Reith—Give it a go.8T4Ferguson, Laurie, MPMr LAURIE FERGUSON—The minister opposite says, `Give it a go.' His comments are certainly not reflected by the views of the Victorian state council of his own party, amongst others.Mr Reith interjecting—8T4Ferguson, Laurie, MPMr LAURIE FERGUSON—`So what?' he says. The situation is that those changes to industrial relations have made reserve service so much more difficult and have left the Army Reserve understaffed and underprepared. These figures are borne out throughout this country, with virtually every state's recruitment figures at an all-time low, and there is concern by the government as to the availability of people.Reserves are different from career soldiers in that they are people who voluntarily give up their time; they are people who leave their studies and their families. If reserve service becomes too difficult with this lack of government support, people can easily depart from that service. It is a commitment that people willingly give to this country as a matter of very great importance. But, essentially, if reserve service is unattractive, if people find the sacrifices too much for them and if they are not protected, then they will simply drop out. They will simply not volunteer to serve in the reserves.Reservists in this country comprise less than half of one per cent of the total work force. They obviously have very little bargaining power. Their interests are not taken up by strong organisations. It is not an issue that the media focuses on that often. They find themselves fairly isolated and unprotected. This means that it is incumbent on a government that is responsible—a government that makes speeches and issues press releases about the vital need for the reserves—to do something to protect their rights, given their lack of power in the political system and their lack of authority in the process.But far from protecting reservists, the government has abandoned them to the marketplace. The coalition's Workplace Relations Act—driven as it is by an antiworker ideology—prevents reservists from obtaining defence leave as an award condition. In its determination to essentially strip conditions from workers in this country—the coalition has no faith in the ability of the Australian people to innovate, in our ability to educate, in our ability to be trained—and to drive down conditions so that essentially this becomes a rice bowl economy, this government has attacked the rights of reservists and removed their protection.The chief blame for this rests with the Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business, Mr Reith. He has been determined and utterly committed to destroying the award safety net. He has legislated to remove defence leave as an allowable award condition as of July last year. Essentially he is saying that it is not needed. He is saying that, when people in their workplace want to volunteer to work in the Australian reserves and to give up their time, it is not worth any consideration and is not worth any protection. Basically this means that people can get defence leave only at the discretion of their employer or through workplace bargaining.Given the state of our labour market these days, which is an international phenomenon to some degree—the downsizing, the insecurity of people and the constant threat of people's jobs being contracted out—given that industrial environment, the question has to be asked: what is the workplace reality for these people? The reality is that employers are not keen to provide this leave. They are not bending over backwards to race out and allow people six or seven weeks off for induction training.Equally, and I think this is reasonable, for all the altruism and sense of community of their fellow workers, what is occurring for the average worker in workplaces where there are fewer employees, where their fellow workers have to take up more of the burden and more of the slack when reservists are away, is that even their fellow workers are increasingly disinclined to want to have this leave for people. If one of your six work mates walks out to go away for six weeks, essentially you have to carry that burden. Very few employers are going to rush around and hire another person for the interim period.We have a situation where both for this six- or seven-week induction period—this bright idea from the current administration—and for actually getting away for any reserve training, reservists are increasingly coming under pressure not to take that time. The coalition often recites words about encouraging employers to look after reservists. But, if reserve service is not important enough to be an allowable award matter, employers could be forgiven for thinking that the government's attitude towards reservists is that they are not important, not necessary.The trade union movement have been concerned about the matter on behalf of their members. To minimise the damage done by Minister Reith, they have attempted to argue that the Industrial Relations Commission should consider reserve leave as a form of cultural leave in terms of the personal leave test case. However, unfortunately, on 25 February Commissioner Lewin ruled against this submission in relation to the Higher Education General and Salaried Staff Award and removed reserve leave from that award. He clearly felt that the coalition's Workplace Relations Act gave him no other option. He had no way of protecting the rights of these reservists. I want to say that the pattern which the government told us was not going to happen is occurring around this country. Telstra, amongst other organisations, has indicated to its employees its belief that this leave is no longer necessary or important and its view that it will get rid of it.We as an opposition think that the reserves are of vital importance to our defence preparedness. Our point is that the government's actions have seriously undermined the reserves. Quite frankly, the opposition is not alone in this view. The government's official Defence Reserves Support Committee is clearly dismayed by the government's action. The minister opposite, the Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence, and others who are involved in this field would be aware of those views that have been made emphatically clear to the government. The chair of that committee—none other than former defence minister Sir James Killen—has made it clear that he is upset at the government's refusal to reinstate reserve leave as an award condition. He has promised to pursue the matter. I might add that it is not only in his official dealings with the government but also in the public arena that he has indicated his dissatisfaction with this government's policy. His concern—as a person who has been trying to encourage reservists—is that we are not recruiting reservists because of this government's policy.I cite another person who has had some place in this debate, Minister Bishop. In February last year in her then role as Minister for Defence Industry, Science and Personnel, Minister Bishop wrote a nice, friendly letter to the Armed Forces Federation—another lobby group that has an understandable interest in this policy area that is trying to secure some protection for reservists—saying:I am well aware of the threat to reserve training as a possible outcome of the Workplace Relations Act, and my office is monitoring the issue closely. The ADF position and concerns are being well represented by the Office of the Assistant Chief of Defence Force (Reserves) who is actively pursuing the issue.I am optimistic of a favourable long term outcome.That letter was quoted in the Age of 11 February last year. She promised a favourable outcome over a year ago. Her optimism was clearly misplaced. The minister for workplace relations, Mr Reith, has brushed her concerns aside and determined upon a policy which says that industrial relations changes are more important than protecting these reservists. More recently, Minister Reith has been disowned on the matter by his own party in his own home state. On 27 March the Victorian state council of the Liberal Party met to consider policy resolutions submitted by the coalition's state membership. They carried the following resolution. They thought the issue was important enough to resolve in this manner:That this Council reaffirms its support of the Federal Government's commitment to strong and effective Defence Reserves, and urges the Government to ensure that `defence leave' for Reserve Defence Force Members is included as an allowable matter in federal awards.Could there have been a stronger repudiation by the Victorian branch of the Liberal Party in a policy area Mr Reith has made an essential part of his ambitions? Repudiated by the Victorian state branch of the Liberal Party!The other difficulty in this policy area, the other thing hitting reserves very badly, as well as the change to the Workplace Relations Act, is the issue of the difficulties coming from the Common Induction Training program. This requires new reservists to commit to up to six and seven weeks full-time induction training away from their home, their family and their studies, with full-time Army personnel. This change presents a further obstacle to potential reservists. How many employers will respond positively when one of their staff says, `Boss, I've joined the Army Reserve and I need six or seven weeks leave for my induction training'? Obviously, precious few will respond positively. In fact, I know of no government of any state or territory, bar that of the Northern Territory—and obviously reserves are of great importance to that territory—to have legislated to give such leave in this circumstance. Certainly the federal government, supposedly so interested in reserves and their effectiveness, has not given such leave to its public servants.Reservists are supposed to constitute 60 per cent of the Army. They are thus a crucial part of our defence preparedness. Under Labor the Ready Reserve ensured that there was a substantial reservist grouping who were well trained and at a heightened state of readiness for possible call-out for peacekeeping or humanitarian missions. The recent situation in Indonesia with its debate about whether Australia would send forces, at what level and how they would operate occasioned comment and concentration upon this issue—and, quite frankly, the Australian media exposed this government as basically being not able to put that force together without a heavy use of reserves.Did the abolition of the Ready Reserve, a very early gesture of the government, do anything in relation to an increase in full-time Army positions? It certainly did not. Having accused Labor of leaving the ADF `undermanned', it has slashed thousands of full-time uniformed positions from our defence forces. The ADF has been battered on many fronts and, as I said earlier—and the government cannot deny this—the state of morale is at an all-time low.It is not as though the government has not had some kind of indication of the problem. Late last year several newspapers revealed that, in every state, the Army was massively behind in its level of recruitment. Indeed, in four states it has apparently reached less than a third of the target. I repeat: less than a third of the target has been reached. On 12 January this year, the Townsville Bulletin, which does for obvious reasons take a deep interest in defence matters, reported that only 71 people had been recruited into the reserves locally since the previous June. That represented less than 55 per cent of the local target.While talking about Townsville, I would just move to the member for Herbert for one moment. He went on the public record in that same paper at one stage with the ridiculous proposition that defence reserve leave had never existed in awards in Australia. Quite frankly, with the number of awards that it has been taken out of and the debates about it in bargaining, et cetera mean that he is completely wrong in making that statement. It is quite unfortunate that, in an area where defence issues are so vital, we have a member who is so misinformed about industrial relations and the impact of reserves to say that this condition, which Mr Reith abolished, had never existed.A further article in the Townsville Bulletin of 18 January quoted a reserves official, who was remaining anonymous, as saying, `We need the government to change the recruitment policy before the reserve falls over.' More recently, the issue has received extensive coverage following the government's decision to place a second brigade on 28 days readiness. On 3 May the Australian stated:The Workplace Relations Act has resulted in many employers seeing a way out of having an obligation to provide defence leave . . . Defence leave is being thrown up more and more in negotiations in workplace bargaining agreements, whereas before it could not be. In a lot of cases it has been bargained away.The following day, the Courier-Mail stated:In the three years since the election of the Howard Government, the Army Reserve—the army has most of the Defence Force's reservists—has endured enormous change without much obvious benefit . . . It went on:The Ready Reserve was abolished. The reforms which followed the Defence Efficiency Review . . . were supposed to shift the emphasis from Regular-Reserve to full-time/part-time service.(Time expired)15:19:005013Scott, Bruce, MPMr BRUCE SCOTTYT4MaranoaNPVeterans' Affairs; Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence10—I am happy to enter into this matter of public importance raised by the opposition. As usual, we are getting from the opposition spokesman on defence personnel matters another confused message. It is one that does not reflect the policy that those opposite had in place and, as usual, their rhetoric never matches what they did when they were in government.This MPI relates to defence policy and also the policy on reserves. The key principle of a reserve unit is to make it more relevant to the needs of the Defence Force today. That is why we have a reserve force. If those opposite would listen in some silence, as this side of the House did for them, they perhaps might learn something and be able to add something to the debate. If they are serious about ever wanting to be in government again, they ought to be prepared to contribute to this very important subject. And I would urge the shadow minister to make a more meaningful contribution than we have heard from him today.What this government is doing is training the reserves to the same standard as the regulars so that they can be used more effectively than they have been in the past. That is the fundamental reason for having a reserve force; it is the fundamental reason for having a defence capability. We do not want a reserve force that is a `dads army'. We want a defence reserve force that is capable. That is why we have introduced Common Induction Training which provides training for regulars and reserves for a period of 45 days.Already we are starting to see the results. I went to the first march out of the Common Induction Training of reserves and regulars at Kapooka in early January this year. The results speak for themselves. Around 94 per cent—and I hope the opposition is listening—of recruits are successfully completing training as opposed to around 80 per cent under the old system. Under the old Labor system, about 80 per cent would complete their training. Under our system, around 94 per cent are marching out. This will lead to higher retention and a better trained reserve unit, and that is what we are on about. They will be better trained.Contrast this with the opposition's record on reserves. It is an appalling one. They were content to keep the regular reservists units separate from the Regular Army. They under valued the skills that the reserves can bring to the Defence Force. That is what they have done: they have undervalued them. They do not place a benefit on them. We believe that if you are going to have a reserve force you have to value those skills and you have to give them the same skills as those in the regular services. Our policy is working, demonstrated by very positive results. Some 94 per cent of recruits are successfully completing their training as compared with 80 per cent under the old Labor policy. We intend to have an integrated defence force where reservists play an enhanced role. That is what we want, and we are committed to that.The opposition spokesman spoke about reserve leave. An important part of reserve capability is having reservists available. They have to be available if you are going to have reservists. You have to have them available to undertake training in defence activity. If they are not going to be available for training and defence activities, they should not be in the reserve force. That is why you would have a reserve force. They need to participate in training on an ongoing basis. Our approach to reserve leave is one of consultation and one of cooperation, working with employers, the reservists and the Defence Force.The opposition spokesman said that there was only one agency in Australia that had signed up to allowing reservists annual leave. He is wrong. He acknowledged employers like the Northern Territory government. I acknowledge that he got that right, but the Commonwealth Bank have signed up and Telstra have signed up. They have all recognised this and put in place flexible leave arrangements that give reservists the time they need to train. On the one hand, the opposition is acknowledging that the Northern Territory is doing something about this but, on the other hand, it is saying that no-one else is. That is patently wrong, because the Commonwealth Bank and Telstra are already recognising the value of reservists as part of their work force, because so often those who have trained in the reserves in the Defence Force have other skills—for example, leadership skills that are invaluable within the work force. That is what we are promoting as part of the reserve training and encouraging recruits and employers to acknowledge the value of having reservists as part of their own valuable employees.I think it is timely that we look at Labor's past record in relation to defence. I refer to Army 21, under a Labor government in power, and how they have run down the combat capability. This is the Army's own self-assessment taken from Army 21 after 13 years of Labor in power. I will quote from that document because it is enlightening to all members and to all Australians:Units not adequately prepared for combat. Army lacks sufficient combat power. It would require substantial warning time and financial expenditure to mobilise for a major conflict.It further states that with some exceptions units are understaffed, poorly equipped and have a low readiness level. This is an Army report on the defence capability, Army 21, after 13 years of Labor in government. We had to come to power to fix this mess up. That is the record. If that was on your child's record as they came home from school, what would you say? There is something wrong with that school. In this case, there was something wrong with the Labor Party in government because they did not have a commitment to the Defence Force and the capability of the Defence Force. That is the Army's own assessment.I go back to it. It said that it would require substantial warning time and financial expenditure to mobilise for a major conflict. Why do you have a Defence Force capability? So that you can mobilise in the event that your Defence Force is required or that the Australian shores are being breached by other countries. That is why you would have a defence force. We have had to fix the mess that was left behind by the Labor Party, and the Army's own report condemns 13 years of Labor defence policy.The defence efficiency review showed that under Labor around $1 billion or about 10 per cent of the defence budget was lost in waste, duplication and poor efficiency. We know that from their record in financial management. They were always wasting money. They were never really on top of the issues of efficiency. This is what the defence efficiency review showed. Labor gave us the disastrous $600 million blow-out in the JORN program. Remember the over-the-horizon radar? That was great technology. In fact, the one in question is in my own electorate just south of Longreach, near Stonehenge. There was a blow-out of $600 million in one project. Who was going to fix that? The National and Liberal parties in coalition government have once again got to fix up another Labor mess.The technology is great technology, but Labor cannot manage money. There was a $600 million blow-out and we have to fix it. At the end of the day, whose money is it? It is the money of the taxpayers of Australia. They provide the wherewithal for this infrastructure, and Labor was prepared to go down the line of wasting this money. There was no program management at all.In 1993 Labor embarked on another badly thought through project, the ships of shame. It was a landing ship project for which Labor's projected cost was $61 million. You know what it blew out to? It blew out to $228 million. There was no management of the defence budget. It just ran itself. It lost capability. It would take a long lead time to mobilise our Defence Force. In other words, our country was at risk of invasion from a foreign enemy while ever Labor was on the Treasury benches. Those are the facts of the matter. When we came to government we said that we were going to fix it. What have we done? We are down the path of fixing the Labor mess. Let me just outline some of the initiatives that we have put in place since coming to government.We have already freed up some 1,000 military positions, transferring them from administrative functions to combat or combat related duties. Already, a little over three years since we came to the Treasury benches, we have got 1,000 military positions out of the administration area—out of the hill up at Russell, pushing pens across desks and around corridors—into combat or combat related activities. This is all coming out of the defence budget, out of the efficiency review that we put in place. We are providing $100 million per annum to increase the readiness of 1 Brigade in Darwin; they have been put on 28 days notice to move. Labor had one brigade; we now have two. We have increased the capability and addressed the mess that the Labor Party left us.We have increased funding for ammunition. If you are going to have a defence force, you must have not only the capability and the skills but also the ammunition—whether it be for the Army, the Navy, or the Air Force—to use in training. We have refitted the HMAS Tobruk—the Labor Party would have had it at the bottom of the ocean by now—with our Defence Reform Program savings money, and we have got an invaluable asset for the Navy. The HMAS Tobruk is retained in service. Most recently, we have leased an Incat catamaran from Tasmania to provide us with the capability to transport up to 500 troops at speeds of up to 40 knots across the open seas. That is about increasing the capability of our Defence Force. These are only very early results in relation to what we have been able to achieve in the three short years we have been in government.At the last election Labor put forward a most interesting policy to the people; it was a real little pearler. They were going to form a standing Anzac battalion, an Australian and New Zealand battalion—they were going to ask the New Zealanders to commit to this battalion. But they were severely embarrassed over this, because they had not asked the New Zealanders, who thought it was a lousy idea and they rejected it. Once again they were embarrassed. Never thinking through the policy, and looking at a bit of populist rhetoric, they went out and said that we would have an Anzac battalion. We in this country—as do the New Zealanders—value our sovereignty and our independence when it comes to defence matters. That is what the Labor Party was prepared to trade away, but the problem was that they did not go and ask New Zealand whether it would agree.Labor was going to reinstate the Ready Reserve. When they originally introduced the scheme in the early 1990s, they cut two battalions from the regular force. Their reserve policy is to reduce capability. They cut two battalions out of our capability, dimin ishing the capability of our regular force, to put in a reserve force which we know was not working. The Army 21 report shows that our defence capability was being run down year after year whilst ever the Labor Party remained in government. We have had to fix up this mess.We will continue with the Defence Reform Program, because we as a coalition government are committed to ensuring that our combat capability is second to none in the world. We are not going to listen to this populist rhetoric from the other side which is ill-informed and has no basis in policy at all.10000DEPUTY SPEAKERMr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nehl)—Before I call the next member, I say to the member for Bruce that the chair would be much obliged if he could refrain from muttering continually through the next speaker's contribution.15:34:005016Edwards, Graham, MPMr EDWARDS83RCowanALP00—Having just listened to the Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence, I shake my head. Obviously the minister has no grasp of his portfolio, no grasp of his responsibilities. I doubt that, in the times he has visited the various defence units around the place, he has ever gone beyond the officer's mess. That is certainly the indication one would get from listening to him. The minister bragged about a figure of 94 per cent of reservists graduating: 94 per cent of what? Once you counted Army reservists in their hundreds, particularly in country towns and regional areas. Now you can count them on the fingers of both hands; the numbers have fallen away. This government should start to take responsibility for that.There is in Australia considerable concern at the run-down state of our armed forces and the lack of morale of our service personnel. If the minister got beyond the officer's mess he would find this out for himself. Evidence of this concern was well reflected by Lieutenant Colonel Ken Bladen (Retired), President of the WA branch of the Returned and Services League, who, during his Anzac Day address—I thought it was quite a courageous address—said:In August last year US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and US Defence Secretary William Cohen warned Australia that we were in danger of falling so far behind American military technology that our ability to participate in joint combined operations could be `severely restricted'.Mr Bladen went on to say:Currently, Australia is weak and unprepared.We are well aware that the RSL is an extremely conservative organisation, and for them to express such views on a day like Anzac Day is a fair reflection of the concern they and the broader community have over the run-down and neglected state of our defence forces.We also know that the Minister for Defence has said publicly that there will be no increase in defence spending in this budget. This is despite the uncertainty and instability of many regions of the world, some of which are uncomfortably close to Australia, and despite the urgent need for the upgrade of our defence equipment. A further reflection of our weakened state is seen with this government's decision to commit untrained Federal Police to East Timor rather than the properly trained and prepared Defence Force personnel who ought to be going to do a job like that.In the face of these facts, you would think that this government would want to show some support for that all-important component of our defence forces, the Army Reserve—but no. Instead of support, we find that the bullyboy of the cabinet, Minister Reith, gets his way again and displaces good policy. The ministers for defence are either not interested in crucial portfolio issues or are so weak in cabinet that they are rolled and our defence interests are made subservient to ideologically driven workplace reforms. This government's strategy seems to be dogma first, defence last.The Army Reserve is an integral part of our defence strategy. Indeed, I understand it is government policy to have 60 per cent of our Army made up of reservists. An integral part of reserve service is the ability to access paid leave for at least a portion of the time soldiers are required to commit to attending parades, camps, exercises and training. Paid leave only covers a portion of the time a soldier has to commit. The rest is made up of annual leave or leave without pay. A reservist negotiating a workplace agreement has hard choices to make in difficult economic times in an environment of decreasing job opportunities with some employers seeing little value in allowing time for reserve training, and the time that is required is quite considerable.On joining the reserve, a soldier is required to undertake 45 days of basic training—and you have to add to that travel, particularly for people who come from WA—an additional eight weeks of core or trade training and attendance at weekly parades and various camps during the year. In negotiating a workplace agreement, the soldier has to balance these commitments against the need for a decent wage and other workplace benefits he or she may be forced to concede in order to meet reservist responsibilities.We all know that the heavy hand of Minister Reith's industrial relations legislation makes it much more difficult for workers in these situations when they are forced to negotiate from a position of relative weakness. The coalition's defence policies do little to take into account the needs of either the worker who is a reservist or the genuine employer who wants to support the reserve system. There needs to be a policy of support that gives incentives to both parties to ensure our reserve system again becomes a viable tool in our defence strategy.The ministers responsible for our defence, Moore and Scott, should find the courage to stand up to Minister Reith and restore defence reserve leave as an award condition. The truth is that if these two ministers are good at one thing it is procrastination. They ought to get out into the defence service, talk to the reservists and make themselves aware of the commitment, the professionalism and the dedication of these soldiers and give them a bit of support.The minister said during his rather inadequate response to Mr Laurie Ferguson that these people speak for themselves—that is, the reservists speak for themselves. I have a letter here from a reservist which I would like to share with the House. It states:Dear Mr. EdwardsI am currently a member of the Australian Army serving under the now defunct Ready Reserve Scheme. I was attracted to the Ready Reserve Scheme in 1995 whilst still at high school and as a prospective university student. I saw the scheme as an excellent way to enjoy the benefits of serving in the armed forces whilst studying for a university degree and subsequently joined under the conditions of a Ready Reserve soldier in January 1996 after my graduation from high school.On the 9 February 1997, the Ready Reserve Scheme (RRes) concluded and many of the soldiers in the scheme transferred to the General Reserve (Special Conditions) or the GRSR, an idea designed to last until the last person who enlisted under the RRes completed their obligations. The GRSR was to have the same conditions of service that the RRes had. My reference for the information in this letter is the "GENERAL RESERVE-SPECIAL CONDITIONS READY RESERVE PERSONNEL POLICY" (DI(A) PERS 173-9). This document defines the different terms and conditions of service for the GRSR soldiers.Recently these terms and conditions have been modified in such a way that they are detrimental to the majority of the GRSR soldiers myself included.. . . . . . . . .Our grief is simple in that the methods and ways in which we GRSR soldiers train now and the way that we used to train under the RRes system have been significantly altered. One of the most basic conditions of our service contract is that we must serve for a minimum of 50 days a year, 32 of which must be Continuous Military Training days (CMT). Hence there was two 16 day long exercises and one 32-35 day long exercise, which were scheduled in accordance with the major university holidays. The 32-35 day exercise, which normally operated in January/February and attracted the highest attendance of soldiers, has been cancelled. In place there is eight weekend training `opportunities'. Most of us are university students and some of us have part time jobs—which include working on the weekends. The conditions of the scheme that we all signed on to did not include weekends, and in the DI(A) PERS 173-9 paragraph 12 states that". . . formations and units must be mindful of the external demands placed on GRSR members, such as civilian employment and study."Those of us at university needing to study and complete assignments and projects, and those of us in civilian employment on the weekends will find the training schedule for 1999 very hard to complete.They are put in an adverse position. I cannot finish all of the letter, but he goes on to say:. . . but we did not join this Army just for the money. These blokes do a good job. These women do a good job. It is time this government gave them a bit of support. It is time they stopped the rhetoric. It is time they stopped trying to come in here to convince their colleagues that they are doing a good job. The people outside in the community know they are not doing a good job and they ought to wake up to themselves.15:44:005018Brough, Mal, MPMr BROUGH2K6LongmanLP10—I did not intend to cover any ground relating to my own Defence Force experience. Given those last comments, I am moved to say that, training at the infantry centre at Singleton in the early 1980s and training what we called initial employment trainees to go into the infantry corps, I was forced to train 10 soldiers at a time with two M60 machine guns because those who sat opposite, who were in government at the time, did not have the wherewithal to provide us in the peak training units with the weapons and the ammunition or the training hours with which to do the basic requirements for the defence forces which made up our regular defence forces, let alone our reserves.I want to turn to this whole issue of `the disastrous impact of the coalition's industrial relations and defence policy on our defence reserves'. First of all, let us look at the second part—the defence policy. The defence policy to bolster our reserves is a simple one. Two weeks training is insufficient to enable any person to come off `civvy street', as we called it in the Army, and be made an effective member of the defence forces. It is simply not enough. Those opposite are basically standing here today saying that we should put reservists with just two weeks minimal training, which allows them to know how to put a uniform on, how to parade, how to put a rifle on their arm, and perhaps to know what the sharp end is and what the blunt end is, out with our regular forces. That simply is not the case.When I was asked to speak on this today I rang some of the units and contacted some former colleagues of mine and asked them for their opinions. For those who do not know, today our regular forces and our reserve forces do the six weeks basic training to gether, integrated—they get identical training. So no longer do we get comments back from the Army Reserve of `weekend warriors', `cut-lunch commandos' or `chocolate soldiers'. In my day they were held in absolute contempt because of their inability to work alongside the regular forces in training, let alone the thought of having to operate with these people in operations. It is not that we did not respect them for what they were trying to do; they simply were given neither the resources nor the time in training to be an effective force.Today, with six weeks training, identical in every way and integrated with the regulars, they now have a sense of belonging. Without that sense of belonging, without that additional training, we find that we have an inadequate force to fall back on. Australia has always based its defence capabilities on having an expansionist force. We do not have the defence budget of America. We do not have the population where we can maintain a defence force of a million people or even of 150,000 or 200,000 people. So we rely on those people, as those opposite agree, who have the dedication and commitment to do something for their nation. They do not do this for nothing, as it was basically put by those on the other side; they are paid for all the time in which they train. They are paid to make a commitment for themselves and for their country, and we thank them for that.Why do we stand here and argue a point from someone who knows nothing about defence matters that two weeks training is sufficient, when we all know that not to be the case? What do they get in six weeks? They become a more capable force. They have equal training with their regulars so they have the right footing to start off with. They are able to serve alongside regulars, and further down the track when both regulars and reserves are promoted through the ranks they will have had something in common. They will have built bonds and friendships, some of which—I must say, 20-odd years after I left the defence forces—still endure for me today from the days when I was in training. We will see an intermeshing of the experiences that they all shared at that junior level, at recruit training, coming through when they are perhaps warrant officers or even officers. It also provides a solid basis upon which to deliver more advanced training.In talking to one of the COs of a unit today, he pointed out to me that, whilst the reservists have now increased their training to six weeks, the regulars have come back to six weeks. That has highlighted a problem which I intend to take up with the minister, because the battalions and the other field force units are having to do a little more when they get them into the unit. But he said, `The flip side to that is that when we have reservists and when we are involved with them, they now have so much more basic training that we find it much easier to build on that and to come up with a far more competent soldier who can actually achieve something for Australia's needs.'As I said, in my days in the defence forces it was not uncommon for everyone, from a private soldier through to the highest ranks, to refer with contempt and ridicule to our army reservists as `chocolate soldiers', `weekend warriors' and `cut-lunch commandos'. I think this will go a long way to integrating and making the reservists feel part of our defence forces in a real fashion, rather than being seen as the poor cousins.Why the importance of training? Why do we, on this side of the House, see that it is not good enough just to simply have numbers so that a minister can stand before the parliament and say, `We have X number of units with X number of people'? Because in reality when they go to deliver on the ground we know that we cannot put those men into battle because we will be putting their lives more than at risk: we will be condemning them to death because we have not given them the basic training in the first place.Go back through history to the American Civil War. At the battle of Chancellorsville in May 1863, General Lee, the great general, defeated a much larger force. Why? Because he had better quality, better trained soldiers and good leadership. The Six-Day War saw the Israeli force of 260,000 men defeat a combined Arab force of 550,000. That is because they had the basic training and because they were a well-oiled and cohesive team. If you want to turn to Australia, you need to look no further than to 6RAR in the battle of Long Tan in Vietnam when the courageous Delta Company overcame massive odds to defeat an enemy and remain intact. I had the privilege of serving with 6RAR many years after that battle. Esprit de corps comes from those sorts of victories in battle because of the training that was delivered to our professional soldiers. We should be delivering exactly the same level of training to our reservists.When you deliver good training you do not just deliver the practical experience of how to fire a rifle and how to do fire and manoeuvre, and how to run, crawl, observe, aim and fire; you teach esprit de corps, you teach soldiers some of those enduring skills which are the ethos of the military, where mateship is so important, where you know you can rely on the man next to you. They are not qualities that any of us in this place who have not experienced esprit de corps—and there are one or two who have—can understand. It is when you know that you do not have to look to the man next to you and you do not have to look to the unit that is supporting you because you know the level of their training.I go back to my uncle who fought in World War II with the 2nd/25th Battalion. He speaks of, in some instances, the American forces that were there to support them—those who did not have the same level of training that they had—and the fear that they would often encounter knowing that they were on their flanks. I know from my own training when we have trained with some units from other countries which have had less than the discipline and less than the training we had who have left the training field. What despair that leaves you with! We do not need to have one Australian regular or reserve soldier ever face that because of one of his colleagues who wears that Australian military uniform. We must know that anyone who represents this country in battle does so from the basis of the best training that we can provide, and that is what we in the coalition are about.When you turn to industrial relations I acknowledge that there are employers who do not understand the importance of this, and we in the government also knowledge that we need to do more to make them understand. But it is not about legislating and putting into awards that you must release people for training, because what will they do? Quite simply, they will say to the potential employee, `I am sorry. You were not suitable,' not, `You were not suitable because you were putting your hand up for Australia's defence.' They will make any other number of excuses.We need to break down the barriers between employees and employers. This must be a win-win situation where employees say, `This is what I want to do for me. This is what I want to do for my employer. This is what I want to do for my country,' and the employer says, `I can acknowledge that. I can see how this can benefit us all.' When that happens, everyone is a winner. Most of all, we as a nation are winners, because we have people who will stand up for Australia in times of peace who will also stand up for us in times of war.This government has the right policy. It should be supported by those opposite. We must make sure that it is implemented in full, and that our reserves get the training not only that they deserve but that is absolutely paramount for them to deliver the sort of service they will, in good faith, deliver for us, whether it be in East Timor, in Darwin or in any other part of the world.10000DEPUTY SPEAKERMr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nehl)—Order! This discussion has concluded.Committees502050205020UNKNOWNMr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nehl)Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nehl)—Mr Speaker has received a message from the Senate transmitting a resolution agreed to by the Senate extending the time for the presentation of the report of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Securities on the provisions of the Corporate Law Economic Reform Program Bill 1998 .Bills5021The following bills were returned from the Senate without amendment or request: Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 2) 1998-99 Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 1998-99 Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 1998-99 Primary Industries (Excise) Levies Bill 1998 Primary Industries (Customs) Charges Bill 1998 Primary Industries Levies and Charges (Consequential Amendments) Bill 1998 National Residue Survey (Excise) Levy Amendment Bill 1998 National Residue Survey (Customs) Levy Amendment Bill 1998 Customs (Anti-dumping Amendments) Bill 1998 Customs Tariff (Anti-Dumping) Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1998 Sales Tax Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 1998 Bills5021r7225021Bill returned from the Senate with amendments.Ordered that the amendments be taken into consideration at the next sitting.Bills5021s1985021Bill received from the Senate, and read a first time.Ordered that the second reading be made an order of the day for the next sitting.Miscellaneous502110000DEPUTY SPEAKERMr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nehl)—I advise the House that I have fixed Wednesday, 12 May 1999 at 9.40 a.m. as the time for the next meeting of the Main Committee, unless an alternative day or hour is fixed.Miscellaneous5021Motion (by Mr Ronaldson)—by leave—agreed to:That the following bills be referred to the Main Committee for consideration: Law and Justice Legislation Amendment Bill 1998 Customs Amendment Bill (No. 2) 1999 Import Processing Charges Amendment Bill 1999 National Health Amendment Bill (No. 1) 1999 Tradesmen's Rights Regulation Repeal Bill 1999 Committees50215021502110000DEPUTY SPEAKERMr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nehl)—I present the report of the Selection Committee relating to the consideration of committee and delegation reports and private members business on Monday, 31 May 1999. The report will be printed in today's Hansard , and the items accorded priority for debate will be published in the Notice Paper for the next sitting.The report read as follows—Report relating to the consideration of committee and delegation reports and private Members' business on Monday, 31 May 1999Pursuant to standing order 331, the Selection Committee has determined the order of precedence and times to be allotted for consideration of committee and delegation reports and private Members' business on Monday, 31 May 1999. The order of precedence and the allotments of time determined by the Committee are shown in the list.COMMITTEE AND DELEGATION REPORTSPresentation and statements1 MIGRATION—JOINT STANDING COMMITTEE: Report on the review of Regulation 4.31B.The Committee determined that statements on the report may be made—all statements to be made within a total time of 30 minutes.Speech time limits—First 2 Members speaking—10 minutes each.Other Members—5 minutes each.PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESSOrder of precedenceNotices1Mr Forrest to move:That this House:(1) acknowledges the significance of Murray River bridge crossings to the national economy;(2) recognises the deteriorated condition of many existing bridge crossings and their urgent need of major capital for upgrading to meet modern safety and traffic load standards;(3) commends the federal Government for its funding commitment of $44 million for upgrading of bridge crossings at Corowa, Echuca and Robinvale and a further $203 million for a new bridge and approaches on the Hume Highway at Albury and Wodonga;(4) acknowledges the Murray River Crossings Transport Economic Study which clearly establishes the regional and national economic significance of all Murray River crossings and establishes a priority for the upgrading of bridges for the first time; and(5) calls on the State Governments of Victoria and New South Wales to provide like funding for reconstruction of bridges requiring urgent replacement.Time allotted—remaining private Members' business time prior to 1.45 p.m.Speech time limits—Mover of motion—10 minutes.First Opposition Member speaking—10 minutes. Other Members—5 minutes each.The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.2Mr McLeay to move:That this House deplores the complete disregard of mobile phone carriers for the rights and health of 500 000 hearing-impaired people shown by the failure of the carriers, particularly Telstra, to address the problem of GSM interference with hearing aids.Time allotted—40 minutes.Speech time limits—Mover of motion—10 minutes.First Government Member speaking—10 minutes.Other Members—5 minutes each.The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.3Mr Mossfield to move:That this House:(1) notes that 1999 is the International Year of the Older Persons; (2) notes the large number of middle-aged persons who have been retrenched in Australia and who have little chance of obtaining further employment;(3) recognises that aged care services should provide a continuity of care in which services come to the people;(4) further recognises that many older persons who have been retrenched will have used up their superannuation entitlements by retiring age and will need to fall back on the aged pension; and(5) agrees that more work needs to be done to preserve Australian jobs, so that people are free to make their own retirement decisions based on quality of life issues rather than be forced to retire due to a management decision of their employer.Time allotted—remaining private Members' business time.Speech time limits—Each Member—5 minutes.The Committee determined that consideration of this matter should continue on a future day.Bills5022s2145022Bill received from the Senate, and read a first time.502215:58:005022Ruddock, Philip, MPMr RUDDOCK0J4BerowraLPImmigration and Multicultural Affairs; Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Reconciliation10—I move:That the bill be now read a second time.I introduce the Migration Legislation Amendment (Temporary Safe Haven Visas) Bill 1999 at a time when the people of Australia have opened their hearts to the first of many displaced Kosovars who are being offered temporary safe haven in our country. No-one can fail to have been moved by the arrival in Sydney last Friday of the first contingent of just over 400 people in dire need of protection.Let me recall the series of events that led to that outcome. On 6 April 1999 the Prime Minister announced the government's decision to provide temporary safe haven to 4,000 persons displaced from the Kosovo region of the Republic of Yugoslavia. This was in response to a global appeal by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees for countries beyond the immediate region to make an exception and provide emergency shelter to Kosovars forcibly displaced from Kosovo. Honourable members would agree that the events in Kosovo are a terrible human tragedy.On 10 April 1999 Australia's offer was put on hold at the request of the UNHCR, who were trying to keep the evacuation within the European region. However, on 1 May 1999 the UNHCR requested Australia as well as the United States and Canada to reactivate their offers of temporary safe haven due to increasing outflows from Kosovo and continued pressure within the camps in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. The government immediately decided to reactivate its plans.An eight-person Australian team had been in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia for several weeks. This team was able to quickly select individuals for evacuation to Australia. The first plane load of evacuees arrived last Friday will be followed by another plane load tomorrow and others in coming weeks. Additional staff have been sent to Skopje to increase processing capacity.The Commonwealth and state governments and various organisations throughout Australia have made extensive preparations for reception of the evacuees in Australia. Defence establishments have been prepared to receive the Kosovars and a range of federal, state and non-government organisations are cooperating to provide for their needs. The first group of arrivals travelled to Brighton Barracks in Tasmania today.I should also mention that there has been a tremendous response from both individuals and businesses throughout Australia offering assistance. I anticipate this high level of support and cooperation will continue as many Australians work to welcome these people who have suffered so much.This bill is an integral part of the larger scale cooperative effort to put in place the infrastructure and assistance to help displaced Kosovars. Together with changes made to the Migration Regulations on 15 April 1999, it will provide the statutory framework for the effective management and return of persons to whom temporary safe haven is provided.This short-term humanitarian measure will assist in alleviating the massive suffering and human tragedy that has developed in Kosovo. The government has also announced that it would give priority to those Kosovars who have been forcibly displaced and have close family in Australia within the numbers of the existing humanitarian program. We are also committed to work with UNHCR using our existing refugee and humanitarian program to offer permanent resettlement to others who may not be able to return to Kosovo.The emergency temporary protection we are offering with the safe haven is another example of Australia's proven commitment to uphold its international responsibilities and contribute to international burden sharing.The bill amends the Migration Act 1958 to ensure that persons to whom temporary safe haven is provided are unable to apply for any other form of visa, including protection visas, while in Australia. Any applications made by such persons for other types of visas from 6 April 1999 will be rendered invalid. This will ensure that the government can meet its commitment to provide temporary safe haven and also effectively maintain the integrity of Australia's migration and humanitarian programs. Temporary safe haven is not to be used as a means of obtaining permanent residence in Australia. The bill will provide the minister with a non-compellable power to allow a particular non-citizen who holds a temporary safe haven visa, or who has not left Australia since ceasing to hold such a visa, to make a valid visa application for another type of visa. This will only be exercised where the minister believes it is in the public interest to do so in exceptional circumstances on a case by case basis. This power may only be exercised by the minister personally.As temporary safe haven is to be provided to persons at short notice and in situations where extensive character checking is not possible, it is necessary to have effective powers to withdraw temporary safe haven which has been provided to any person who represents a danger to the Australian com munity, or Australia's security or whose presence in Australia would be harmful to Australia's international relations. This power is exercisable only by the minister personally, and allows the minister to refuse to grant or to cancel a visa without prior notice. Where the minister uses this power, the minister must table a statement about its use in both houses of the parliament.Any decision to refuse to grant or to cancel a temporary safe haven visa under this special power will automatically apply to members of the immediate family of that person.The period of temporary safe haven visas can be extended or shortened by the minister by way of a notice in the Gazette. The government has agreed to amendments moved in the Senate which provide that the visa period can only be shortened if, in the minister's opinion, temporary safe haven is no longer necessary because of changes of a fundamental, durable and stable nature in the country concerned. If the minister gives such a notice, the minister must table in parliament the notice and a statement that sets out the reasons he or she believes that the changes are fundamental, durable and stable in nature.The arrangements that have been made to date demonstrate Australia's commitment to join with other members of the international community to assist in this humanitarian crisis by providing emergency temporary relief. Passage of the bill without delay is essential to enable Australia to grant this relief, while also maintaining the effective management and control of Australia's immigration and entry requirements.Given its passage by the Senate already, I very much commend the bill to the House. I table the explanatory memorandum to the bill.Leave granted for second reading debate to continue forthwith.16:06:005024Sciacca, Con, MPMr SCIACCA6J4BowmanALP00—The Migration Legislation Amendment (Temporary Safe Haven Visas) Bill 1999 before the House today is very special legislation and will be remembered for many years as a model of what Australians can achieve. It is special not just for its content or what else it may have contained or for the tight deadlines that confronted and ultimately united the many people from all sides of politics who made it happen. This bill before us today is special because it reaffirms, above all, that Australians, in time of crisis or great need, can rally and set aside their differences to alleviate the pain and suffering of those who have no choice.As we hear and see the horrors of the war in the Balkans on both sides, a peaceful nation like Australia has no choice but to contribute to the solution and not become part of the problem. We have a hard-won international reputation as a compassionate humanitarian nation, and this bill will strengthen our international standing and make Australia even more relevant in a global context.Leader Kim Beazley and the federal opposition recognised the importance of bipartisanship for this bill from the moment the government approached us. With a leap of faith, we provided in principle support to a piece of legislation that at that stage had not even been drafted and was beginning to sound more and more like a political liability and a legal nightmare. What the opposition endorsed in principle was the legislation's intent, its spirit and the belief that the other side of this chamber also had the interests of those unfortunate, displaced people at heart.I am happy to say that our intuition was correct and our trust of the other side's motive was not on this occasion misplaced and, as shadow minister for immigration, I want to reaffirm my and my party's support for this bill. Let me make it clear, however, that our support does not mean that we agree with all the details contained in this bill. On the contrary, there are many areas that must be improved but, if the spirit and the intent are correct, we can toil away at making the rest workable. We must never lose sight of for whom the bill was drafted.I wish that every member of this chamber could have had the honour as I did—the minister and the Prime Minister were there; I was there as their guest and I appreciated the opportunity—to welcome the first 414 refugees last Friday night at Sydney airport. First of all, before their arrival, just by looking at the assembled crowd one could feel their pride in having been chosen to assist in making the lives of so many people just that much better—the medical staff, the airline crew, the many volunteer helpers from the Albanian community, the representatives from aid agencies and charities and the immigration department staff.All those present had one thought only in their minds: how can we make these people safe and how can we make them feel comfortable? Until the plane's door swung open, I do not think anyone present really knew how they would respond. It was certainly one of the most emotional experiences that I have been part of, and I am sure the minister would agree. The minister's wife and the Prime Minister and his wife were there, and I am sure they were similarly touched.The sight of those people, who have little or nothing left to remind them of their previous life and who were dishevelled, tired beyond comprehension and yet able to smile, to laugh and to embrace their new hosts, left little doubt in my mind about our decision to support their relocation. At that time, all the political debate in the world about the wisdom of bringing people to such a faraway country like Australia did not even come close to looking into the eyes of those hundreds of men, women and children as they marched down the stairs smiling, crying and thanking us for possibly saving their lives.Now that these people are beginning to arrive here, it is once again up to us as the leaders of this nation to make many more important decisions about their future. Also, we must bear the responsibility for the future of Australia's humanitarian assistance to Kosovo as events continue to unfold and the future of the region looks more uncertain with each passing day. From today, even before we vote in support of this bill, the government must start to think about what will happen to these 4,000 people over the coming months. The government must keep an open mind and an open heart. It is now becoming a distinct possibility that it is unlikely that hostilities will be resolved within the time frame set in the legislation, although we acknowledge that it is a very fluid situation and the circum stances in Kosovo seem to change from day to day.Even if the fighting did end and the bombs stopped dropping from the sky, what will be left for these people to go back to? The government will have to consider over the next weeks and months whether the nation should extend its welcome permanently to those who wish to remain and start afresh, leaving behind misery and destruction in an attempt to rebuild their dreams and their lives. Also, the government will have to decide whether to accept more refugees and alleviate more suffering. I say here today that, in the event that they so decide, they will receive similar bipartisan support from the opposition.I have said many times that we are a wealthy, mature and culturally diverse nation. Where else could these people feel more at home than in a nation built by people similar to them? Our effort already is amongst the most generous in the world not only per capita but also as a total number. Our initial offer to relocate 4,000 refugees compares well with the 20,000 the United States has accepted, keeping in mind that the population of the United States of America is around 250 million. Germany has accepted 10,000; Italy, 10,000, with a population of 55 million; Canada, 5,000, with a population of approximately 30 million; and I understand that Holland has taken on 2,000. When you consider that we are certainly not part of NATO in the sense that we are involved in the crisis over there or in the decisions to take the action that NATO has, I believe that Australia is probably out in front in terms of the number of refugees that we have taken.We must not become complacent about this achievement but must rather realise that humanitarian assistance is not about numbers, figures or percentages but about compassion and empathy. Similarly, the government must not become complacent about its obligations to international conventions. We have signed, and indeed pioneered, many of these treaties. It must be foremost in our minds that, if we are to err, it should be on the side of caution and on the side of generosity. If we think that denying the rights of these refugees to apply for a different visa class may contravene some international agreement, the minister must exercise his discretion with wisdom and err on the side of generosity. We must ensure that our international obligations are honoured.Likewise, when the decision will have to be made about whether these people should be repatriated, the government must steer clear of technicalities and loopholes and act with wisdom and an open mind. Six months, notwithstanding any extensions, is a long time and it is safe to assume that these refugees will become used to a normal way of life again during this time. Some may form ties in Australia. Others may not be able to leave because of medical or other problems. Again, children may be born here and represent for their parents a symbol of a better life. It is important that the government realises that many of our guests will have nothing and no-one to go back to, and that is a challenge that it will face, whether it likes to think about it at all or not.As the opposition has done in the past, again we call on the government to consider expanding the permanent humanitarian intake and allow these 4,000 and possibly any others to make Australia their new home if they choose to do so. I want it to be clear: when the opposition calls on the government to allow however many of these 4,000 displaced people who choose to remain here permanently, we envisage a true expansion of the program, an addition to the existing number of places. We do not want to see a situation where genuine cases from other troubled nations are denied refugee status in favour of the Kosovars. This I think would be unacceptable to the Australian public.I just want to turn briefly to the issue of accommodation facilities for those people while in Australia. The federal opposition from the very beginning of this operation has stressed the need for appropriate accommodation, services and counselling to cater for the refugees. We have been very reluctant to accept the fact that these people would be housed in military barracks and other military establishments, particularly if they were to be in remote areas.I acknowledge the fact that difficult decisions had to be made within short periods of time, and I also realise that the refugees seem to be quite happy with the arrangements that we have provided for them. However, these considerations should not form part of the government's decision making processes when it comes to considering the location of the next safe havens.The government has to this date failed to consider alternatives, such as billeting the refugees with members of the Albanian community, friends or relatives. I accept the difficulties that would be involved there, and I know that it would not be easy. Nevertheless, there has been no real attempt to look at this as a definite alternative, certainly in terms of taking it up. This alternative, especially for extended periods of time, would certainly be more desirable than communal life. Billeting would provide these families with a further opportunity to experience not only a broader aspect of Australian life but also a partial return to a feeling of family life.Another aspect of this operation that the opposition is concerned about is the lack of support that the refugees will experience if they choose to spend time with relatives or friends outside the so-called safe haven camps. I understand that away from the safe haven camps the refugees will not be entitled to medical care, counselling, support services or other allowances. These measures seem quite drastic and seem designed to discourage these people from leaving the camps. The opposition does not agree with these measures and calls on the government to extend the full range of benefits to the refugees, whether or not they choose to remain in the camps.The government has to remember that these people are not detainees and must not be treated like them. I am not suggesting that there is any desire or intent on the part of the government and the department to do that. But there is this penalty that, if they leave the compound, unless it is just for a couple of days, they will not get that support while they are away. One must therefore have some suspicions that these people are being told that they will only be looked after if they stay in the compounds. We would hate to think you are switching one compound for another one 10,000 or 20,000 kilometres away, albeit a safer one and one where they are being looked after.They have been through trauma, many of them through torture. Unspeakable horrors have been committed upon some of them, and I think we need to realise that they are suffering a great deal of psychiatric problems, in the sense that they have been in a situation of horror. They are our guests for a finite period of time, and perhaps many of them will be allowed to stay here as permanent residents and ultimately citizens. We do not know that. As such, we must make their stay here as comfortable and as dignified as possible.While I mentioned earlier that the intent of the bill is of paramount importance as it seeks to alleviate suffering and provide a home away from home for so many people, albeit temporarily, the content of the legislation needs to be scrutinised. While the Labor Party does not seek to move any amendments today, as we continue our policy of bipartisan support on this issue, I want to draw attention to some of the details of this legislation and the ramifications which they may have in the future.In drafting this legislation, the government set as their objective the creation of a visa subclass that would allow the minister ultimate discretion on all its aspects without the benefit of an appeal system at any stage. The opportunity for appeal and individual choice at any stage is very much a cornerstone of any policy that the Labor Party endorses. Unfortunately, the minister has chosen a path that seeks to deny such opportunity and relies solely on his discretion rather than on the principles of natural justice. The minister has complete discretion on the granting of a visa, the reduction or lengthening of it and its cancellation under any ground and circumstance. These provisions are stated clearly in the legislation.I believe that the minister will use these broad powers with wisdom and generosity. However, to draft a piece of legislation with such latitude can create a dangerous precedent. I remember when I was a minister of the Crown in this place and sitting where the present minister is now sitting, my shadow was saying to me, `You're a good bloke, Minister, but who is to say that the person after you is going to be as good.' I say that to you, Minister: you do have a good reputation, but who is to say that the person after you will be as compassionate as you certainly seem to be.The minister has been made aware of it not only by the opposition but also by many other expert groups who are in a better position to judge the full consequences of such decisions upon the everyday life of refugees. Amnesty International, the Refugee Council of Australia, the International Jurists Association, the Law Council—the list of submissions both verbal and written goes on and on.The opposition will monitor closely the implementation of this legislation and we will not tolerate any breach, however minor, to any of the refugee conventions or United Nations protocols signed by Australia. Our in-principle support does not extend that far, and we will criticise the government every step of the way if this legislation is used in any way other than for what it was originally intended.In the final analysis, it is fair to say that this bill should be used both as a model of what can be achieved and as an example of what should be avoided in terms of being reactive rather than proactive. Australia is a peaceful, wealthy and democratic nation. It is inevitable that those who seek to flee persecution, instability and unrest within their countries of origin will place Australia high on their list of destinations. It can be argued that there is no higher goal than altruism and helping those in need, wherever they may be—I certainly subscribe to this theory. However, we must have a plan and we must take a broader look at the world and where the next crisis may come from.Without a doubt, Australia will witness and be asked to take part in more and more of these situations, and those seeking refuge will not always come from across the other side of the world. I do not think anyone in this parliament would again want to be confronted with another piece of `special legislation', drafted virtually overnight and pushed through both houses of parliament after being hastily considered and debated. It is not the way to do things. Given the volatile nature of politics around the world and in our region, it is imperative that we develop a plan to deal with these contingencies—no more ad hoc decisions and no more emergency cabinet meetings to decide what should already be part of a long-term humanitarian emergency plan.In summarising my arguments today I want to outline what the opposition believes the government should consider without delay. We call on the government, and especially the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, to ensure that Australia does not breach international conventions and United Nations protocols on refugees. If there is any shadow of a doubt that the provisions contained in the legislation may at some stage in the future fall foul of these conventions, the minister must exercise his broad and very generous discretionary powers to meet the plight of these refugees.The opposition calls on the government to develop without delay a standing plan to cater for any emergency of a similar nature that may arise in the future. Such a plan is essential as it is safe to assume that it may well be required in the not too distant future. Finally, the opposition again calls on the government to expand the permanent humanitarian intake to cater for any of the 4,000 Kosovars that may wish to remain in Australia. This expansion must not be to the detriment of any other allocated place, but must be in addition to the existing number of 12,000.This exercise has been a very worthwhile one, and one where the opposition and, I think, all other parties as well have gone along with the government. This was a humanitarian exercise of mammoth proportions. When I saw these people on Friday night—there were 400-odd—I tried to work out in my mind that here were 400 of something like 750,000 people, let alone 400 of 4,000 people. In my own mind I could not comprehend what it would be like to look across a place like that and see literally thousands of dishevelled faces, crying people, happy people—mixes of all emotions. The opposition has been very glad, very happy, to go along with the government. I think this is something that the country can be proud of. Hopefully, this sort of thing will not happen again, but it may well, in which case we do hope that we are perhaps a little bit more ready for it.I am sure that the minister will give me the appropriate opportunity to inspect the safe haven sites from time to time so that we can all be sure that what it is that we intend to do for these people does happen. I am a little bit concerned, I must say, about housing them in military barracks, but I accept that there may be, on a short-term basis, nowhere else that we can put them and nowhere else that we can put such numbers of people. Nevertheless, I think we need to be very careful, and we need to ensure that, when we try to help these people, we do not perhaps hurt them at the same time.The opposition supports the bill, as we did in the Senate. As much as I can I congratulate the government on taking this step, and assure them that, within reason, we will continue to support them in this exercise.16:25:005028Barresi, Phil, MPMr BARRESIZJ6DeakinLP10—It gives me great pleasure to join in this debate and to support the Migration Legislation Amendment (Temporary Safe Haven Visas) Bill 1999 . I also take the opportunity to welcome the comments made by the shadow minister for immigration, particularly his support for the government's response and his ongoing support for any flexibility in our response that may need to take place in the weeks or months to come.The passage of this bill will give legal grounding to our current humanitarian efforts on behalf of the Kosovar refugees and further enhance Australia's considerable reputation for reaching out to the oppressed, the downtrodden and the persecuted wherever they may be. Australia's offshore humanitarian program is, as the member for Bowman mentioned, one of the largest in the world for resettling displaced people; per capita it may, indeed, be the largest. As a nation, we should all be proud of our contribution thus far to the humanitarian effort.At the same time, this bill offers protection for Australia which has already accepted significant numbers of refugees from that troubled part of the world we know as the Balkans. In fact, in the eight months until the end of February which preceded NATO's armed response to the Milosevic regime, over 3,500 visas were granted to displaced people by the Australian government. Furthermore, we have seen around 32,000 people settled in Australia as refugees since the beginning of the decade.It is a timely opportunity for me to speak on this bill because just last week I had an opportunity to have a close-up look at the refugee situation in Albania. First of all I would like to thank World Vision, whose Australian operation is headquartered in my electorate of Deakin, for their guidance and cooperation while I was in Albania. This is a crisis of enormous proportion. Almost 600,000 people have already been forced to flee Kosovo. Of those, 409,000 are in Albania, 140,000 in Macedonia and 65,000 in Montenegro. It is also estimated that of those refugees 14 per cent are under 14 years of age. You can see the concern, the fear, not only on the faces of the refugees at large but, in particular, on the faces of the young kids—the babies, the teenagers—who have no idea or appreciation of what is going on or where they are going.The Australian presence in the strife torn region is significant, with World Vision and CARE among international non-government organisations providing much of the needed help to the displaced. These are just two of approximately 160 NGOs in the area. The NGOs range from globally based organisations such as the Red Cross to the British husband and wife team that I met in the township of Elbasan that is looking after approximately 400 people. World Vision itself has a staff of approximately 15 people spread over four locations in Tirana, Vlore, Saranda and Elbasan. As I mentioned, the latter is the one which I was fortunate enough to visit.It is not stretching it to say that arrival at Tirana airport last week was quite a different experience for me from touching down at Tullamarine or Canberra. The intimidating presence of the Apache helicopters, the tanks and the military personnel are sure signs that NATO troops are digging in and establishing their defences. They are obviously there for the long haul and intend to make sure that the Milosevic regime appreciates and understands that they are not going to go away and that the refugee crisis needs to be resolved before the refugees return to their homeland.The township of Elbasan is approximately 1½ hours south-east of Tirana, towards the Macedonian border. You get there by a narrow, semisealed, often potholed road. It normally has a population of 100,000 but that number has swelled immeasurably, with approximately 14,000 refugees already housed there and with plans for Elbasan to be a major centre—with the increasing number of refugees constantly coming across the borders. The roads to Elbasan are a sure sign of a nation struggling to shrug 40 years of communist repression and the more recent national financial collapse, now known as the pyramid scheme, caused by a number of opportunistic groups.Yet, despite all this, the Albanians refuse to let their own problems interfere with what they see as their obligation. They are willing to accept as many refugees as want to go there. Albania has a policy of not turning away any refugee. This open, warm-hearted approach is in stark contrast to the often unwelcoming, cold reception reportedly received by the refugees in other neighbouring countries. I am extremely pleased that Australia, along with a number of other Western countries, is pitching in to help a very willing Albania, because our help is desperately needed by that nation as well as by the nations of Macedonia and Montenegro.The warm-heartedness and good intentions of the Albanians do not match the magnitude of the situation. With over 409,000 refugees now in Albania, resources are stretched to the limit. Refugees are housed in one of three ways: in tent cities, in collective centres or with host families. I had the opportunity of visiting one such tent city—a Turkish run camp in Elbasan. While the camp itself is an obvious improvement to life in Kosovo or in the border camps of Kukes, it was nevertheless less than satisfactory. The camp holds 10,000 refugees. It held only 4,000 at the time I was there, but with only one doctor on duty.The collective centres—a concept not unlike our safe haven centres and, from what I could see, certainly having nowhere near the conditions of our current military barracks—are insufficient to handle the demand. There are simply not enough schools, colleges and sports centres in the entire country to handle the demand. The more resources that are taken up by refugees, obviously the fewer are available for the Albanians in their day-to-day life. Host families are also providing resources, but these are stretched to the limit. There is no remuneration from the government and none is asked. There is only some small relief if food supplies arrive. In fact, the Kosovo refugees, before they were displaced from their homeland, enjoyed a lifestyle and an economy far superior to the Albanian people and now, ironically, they are being looked after by the Albanians, often in host families, and little is asked of them.What I saw prompted quite a lot of thoughts and emotions. Firstly, how can the obvious horrors, atrocities and oppressions be so easily dismissed by the protesters outside embassies around the world? It made me realise that, no matter how we may not want to believe the atrocities, they have occurred. Our condemnation of the Serbian authorities should in no way be taken by the Serbian community here in Australia as a condemnation of the Serbian people themselves. It also made me realise how proud I was that Australia, through this government and through this Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, is one of the few nations that has made a real commitment to the displaced people of Kosovo. I might add that I was not backward in mentioning that to the groups and people that I met. Finally, I also realised that it is very hard to see how a solution might be found to this enormous problem in the very near future.The primary need I noticed as well from all this is that of immediate attention to the 400,000 or so in Albania who are not leaving for Canada, USA, Germany, Italy or Australia. None of the refugees that are leaving are coming from Albania. The primary need, I learned, is for more tents and more food. The tents themselves in Elbasan were of a very poor level of construction, with no flooring and mattresses thrown on top of bare earth. As we moved around the site, heavy rain began to fall and we were drenched, but you could not complain about it because all we had to do was open the flaps of the tent and walk in and see rain coming through underneath the tent soaking the mattresses that these refugees were going to be sleeping on, with no lighting, no linen, no furniture, no heating, no showers and often too few latrines.There is a need there which is beyond simply taking refugees and providing tents. DIFID, which is the British equivalent of AusAID, is building a 10,000 man tent camp in Elbasan and has asked World Vision to run it. At the moment they are contemplating whether or not to do so. There will soon be an even greater need because all the Kosovar refugees—if not the township of Kukes on the border, which has a population of 20,000—will be cleared for a major NATO air base. Clearing that township is a clear message from NATO that they are there for the long haul and that they have real intentions of sending in ground troops at some stage. There is also a consistent cry for more food for the thousands of children and babies in the tent camp. It was very noticeable that every time we moved around the camp we were inundated by men and women who were saying, `More food for children.' This happened consistently as we went around. The supply of food is slow. The World Food Program supplies are only just beginning to trickle in. The reason given for this is simply the overwhelming number of refugees—they cannot cope with the demand—as well as the difficulty the NGOs are having in getting registration from the Albanian government, a government which has had very little experience in dealing with the international corp. One proposal that was put to me, which I think is at least useful for Western governments to consider, is the implementation of what was referred to as a micro-credit type program for those refugees housed close to townships. You have to remember that these refugees have no money. They were stripped of money, documentation, watches and jewel lery when they crossed the borders. All they have are the clothes on their back. While the people are in no way contained inside wire or walls and are free to move about, there is nothing for them to do. This does not contribute to their spirit, aid their self-esteem or promote confidence in their future.There are a number of individual stories which I could go into, but I will simply touch on a couple because we do need to accept and realise the human side of this tragedy. This is one of the reasons why we have made such a swift response to the needs of the refugees. In one of the camps, just by coincidence I happened to meet an old lady, someone not too different from most grandmothers that people have. In speaking to her, slowly with every minute that past she opened up more and more. As she opened up, the stories and the atrocities became worse—so much so that I have had difficulty in telling my own wife the full atrocities that this old lady repeated to me. I understand that hers is not a solitary situation but one that is repeated with all the refugees that you meet. I also had the pleasure on the way home to be on the Qantas jet with one Kosovar refugee family, the Alija family. They were the only family that missed the original flight that the minister and the Prime Minister welcomed when it arrived at Sydney. Six members of the Alija family were on the plane with me from Rome to Bangkok. They had missed the plane because the old mother had a health concern at the time. When I spoke to them, I realised how unsure they were of where they were going, where Australia was and what Australia is all about. It is not unusual to hear this, because for many of the Kosovars it was one of their first experiences of seeing an ocean. For quite a few of them the first time they saw an ocean was when they went from Macedonia to Rome, let alone having to cross the Mediterranean Sea, the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean to get to Australia. The family had two adult children who spoke very patchy English as well as a nine-month-old baby. They were going to a new land frightened and shell-shocked. They eventually got here on that plane through a circuitous route of escaping by train, bus and walking. There was a young man in the Turkish camp who kept on following us around impressing on us the need for us to employ him because of his English skills. He was desperate to get out of the place. He does not know where his immediate family is; he believes they are all in the hills of Kosovo, fighting and hiding. He managed to locate some of his extended family in a camp about two or three hours away. He hitchhiked there and, despite the conditions of the camp, he is now trying to convince the Turkish authorities to allow him to bring them to his camp. He, too, has a story to tell on escaping from the Serbs by hiding from them. He was studying at a school in Pristina—he had a future—and he saw before escaping to Kukes two other students shot.These are stories which we have heard and will continue to hear more of as we begin to know the human side of these refugees who have come to Australia. But, at the end of the day, no matter what the conditions may be in camps or in host families or even in the military bases in Australia, it can all be summed up by a statement that was made to me by that little old lady. When I asked her whether or not she wants to go back home, she said, `I would rather be anywhere but where there are bullets flying over my head.'At the same time, it has made me realise how difficult it must be for a lot of these Kosovar refugees to go back to their nation. I know that, as a government, we will have to consider at some stage when they go back and whether or not they all go back at once, because some of the atrocities that have been committed have not necessarily been committed by Serb military forces or by Serb police; they have been committed by Serb civilians. So we are asking these refugees at some point in time to go back to a community and to live and to coexist in that community in harmony with civilians who have beaten down their door and who have perhaps committed atrocities against them.I am proud of our government's response. I am proud of the leadership that was exhibited by our minister and by our Prime Minister and the swiftness of that response. After seeing the situation for myself, I can only say that our response is indeed a correct one. I look forward to more refugees coming to this country from that war-torn area.16:43:005032Theophanous, Andrew, MPDr THEOPHANOUSQJ4CalwellALP00—Let me begin by commending the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and the government for the way in which they have reacted to this humanitarian situation. As our shadow minister, Con Sciacca, said, we will be supporting the Migration Legislation Amendment (Temporary Safe Haven Visas) Bill 1999 . It is important that Australia as a nation has united in a bipartisan way to support the refugees from Kosovo. It is important that, once they arrive here, we do not put into place excessive or bureaucratic hassles for them. The situation with those arriving is that, on the one hand, they will be given temporary safe haven but, on the other hand, they will not have access—at this stage anyway—to other types of applications to stay in Australia permanently, with the exception that the minister has the power to make a determination in this matter. I will come back to that point.When this matter was being considered, representatives of the Kosovar people in Melbourne, led by Mr Eric Lloga, whom I have known for a number of years—he is an outstanding Australian leader not only of his community but in general multicultural affairs—came to see me about this issue. This was at the time when the UN had said that we should suspend the program. At that time I wrote to the minister to say that, if we were to suspend the program, we should at least put into place some kind of humanitarian program for those who had relatives here.After it had been announced that the 4,000 Kosovars would be coming, I spoke again with Mr Lloga. His concerns and those of the Kosovar representatives were that we should try to select from amongst those who were to arrive in this country those with some links with Australia, whether in the form of relatives or close friends or whatever. I understand that this selection process would have had to be undertaken very quickly and it may be possible that it has not happened. Never theless, on 4 May I wrote to the minister in these terms:Dear MinisterI wrote to you two weeks ago in relation to the Kosovo refugees and I received a letter from your assistant Ms Duffield advising that you are considering the matter. I now see that we are to accept 4000 refugees on a short term basis.While I think this is an excellent humanitarian action, it does not in itself resolve the issue of those Kosovo refugees who have relatives in Australia. I believe it is very important that they be given special consideration.After discussions with Mr Eric Lloga of the Kosovo organisations in Australia, I would like to submit that in Australia's selection of the four thousand refugees, we should give priority to those who have relatives in Australia and those that have other close links with Australia—for example, close friends from the same village.I am of course aware that there is a general refugee program under which such persons could apply to come to Australia on a permanent basis. However, many of these people are unable to pay for fares to come to Australia and apply from here. On the other hand, they are not in a position of waiting in Albania and Macedonia for the long period of time that may be involved, while we develop mechanisms for processing them as permanent refugees.I hope that you will take this submission into account, when making your selection decisions and therefore set aside at least a few hundred positions in the four thousand, for those with relatives in Australia or with links to Australia.I would appreciate an early response to this suggestion, as there are many people from Kosovo here in Australia who are very keen to see their relatives as soon as possible.After writing that letter, I contacted the minister's assistant and I was told of the way that the minister had decided to handle this issue. Firstly, Minister, for those within the 4,000 Kosovars coming to this country who have relatives here, I imagine that obviously, under the special power you have, you will be able to consider them for permanent residence if they so desire, and I would ask you to give that matter consideration. Further, perhaps you might indicate in your response to this issue whether in the public interest you will consider, with the power given to you, making a determination to allow a particular non-citizen holding a temporary safe haven visa or who has not left Australia since ceasing to hold such a visa to make a valid application for another type of visa. Under that provision, I would ask that you consider those who have relatives here in Australia. We may think that the Albanian Kosovar community is a small one, and relative to other communities it is small. But, even if it comprises only a few hundred families, it is still significant for those families, and I make this plea on their behalf.The minister has done something else for which I have commended him; that is, he also has announced that the government will provide resettlement of a permanent nature for displaced people from Kosovo who do have relatives and who are able to make application. Minister, what I am not clear about in relation to this matter is just how these people will be able to make application. Will they be able to make application from camps in Macedonia and Albania? Will we have officers there who will be able to take care of this matter? If so, perhaps in your reply to this bill you could indicate to us how those people who are additional to the 4,000 and who have close relatives in Australia will be able to apply for refugee status and be given some priority. Nevertheless, Minister, I commend you for invoking that program. I think you have said that initially some 200 families may be resettled. I hope that is not a quota; I hope that is just your indication of how many. I hope that certainly, if there are to be more than 200 in this category, they would all at least be given the opportunity to come under your consideration.Having said all of that, I think in general we can approach this matter on a bipartisan basis and we can achieve something of substance for the refugees of Kosovo. Of concern to a number of members who have spoken to me about this matter is the question of the longer term future of these people. The bill indicates that they will be asked to return once circumstances have reached a point where they are able to return—and we all hope that that will be the case. But what happens if the circumstances become drawn out over a considerably long period of time? What do we do in that situation? I think this question needs to be addressed. It may be that that power which has been given to the minister will have to be exercised more significantly or more extensively than was originally envisaged to enable more groups of people to stay here on a permanent basis or at least an extended or more extended basis than was the original idea in the bill.I hope that under the provision which is allowed to you, Minister, you will be taking into account developments in that part of the world and seeing whether it is safe for them to return—not merely to the borders of Albania and Macedonia but to Kosovo itself—and to return in a way which guarantees their safety. Some people have said that, while they agree with this program, they do not want preference given to this particular group of people for permanent resettlement ahead of others. That argument has been put in an analogy to what has happened with the Chinese students issue. Being one of the people who supported what happened with the Chinese students, if the circumstances become such that we consider these people will not be able to return safely for a very long period of time—a point made by the honourable member who spoke prior to me—then I think we ought to consider down the track the possibility of their staying here permanently. We are talking about only 4,000 people, after all, in a nation of more than 18 million. We are talking about a group of people which has suffered a lot and which may desire, in the final analysis, to stay here rather than return to the circumstances which may be created for them.I think we should be flexible about this. I think we should keep our options open. I think we should allow the minister to exercise his powers in a humanitarian way to ensure that, firstly, those who have relatives here who want to come and join those relatives are able to do so; and, secondly, those in the 4,000 who do have relatives be able to join their relatives. Also, those who are here who do not have relatives but who will have concerns about returning to Kosovo in the short term will need to be given some compassion and consideration.I have dwelt so far on the question of the general circumstances. I want to make one point about the living conditions of the people who have arrived. Some of the proposed places of dwelling are not ideal. The situation regarding those who want to be billeted or live with either relatives or friends in the general community has not been made as clear as it should. In fact, the impression has been created in the public by the media that while they are in the camps here in Australia they will be provided with all sorts of facilities—health, education and other provisions. If they choose to go out with families, the argument is that they will not be provided with any government assistance.I am not sure whether that is absolutely the situation, and I hope the minister will take the opportunity to clarify that position, because obviously it will be much less of a burden on the public if they are with relatives or friends. Perhaps the only thing we need to provide for them in the short term, Minister, may be something like Medicare coverage and perhaps a small stipend. That might be much cheaper than providing these various facilities in what would be a pretty costly exercise. I think we should be flexible with those who want to be billeted into the community to at least provide some minimum support for them as well as the ones that decide to stay in the facilities.In concluding my comments on this bill, I want to refer to the political situation which has created these circumstances. Many people who are supporting the Kosovar refugees and who are supporting the general thrust of trying to get them returned are sometimes accused of supporting the Western powers in all that they are doing in relation to the Milosevic regime. I want to say this about the Milosevic regime: whatever one says about the people of Serbia—and the Serbian people are the ones who have suffered the most from the Milosevic regime in my opinion—what is happening in Kosovo is a very shameful exercise. Whether or not it has been approved by certain people or whether or not other people have been kept in the dark in Serbia about these atrocities, the reality is that it is a very shameful thing.If the soldiers and some civilians of Serbian background are involved in these activities, which appears to be the case, then it is a shameful thing, and it is a shameful thing for the Serbian nation. I am sure that the majority of the Serbian people do not condone these activities. Many of them do not know of these activities or believe these allegations to be false because they have not been told the truth by their media. In terms of the Milosevic regime, some of us warned years ago about the nature of Mr Milosevic and his regime at the time when Croatia was seeking independence, at the time of the atrocities in Bosnia-Herzegovina, when I and several members of parliament went to that part of the world. We saw some of the atrocities of the Milosevic regime and the Karadzic regime at that time, and some of us were accused of taking sides. We were not taking sides. We were not taking sides against the Serbian people. What we were saying was that there were certain atrocities which the regime had approved of and which had been covered up by the media.The shameful thing was that after that time, because Mr Milosevic signed the agreement on Bosnia-Herzegovina, he was considered for a time by a number of Western nations to be an acceptable leader in Serbia. In fact, he had been responsible for a lot of the atrocities in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina. That should never have happened. It is a little pious for the Western powers to now be saying, `We want to get rid of Milosevic at whatever cost.' What happened back then when it would have been possible, through political processes in Serbia itself, to initiate a campaign against Mr Milosevic for what he had been responsible earlier on in Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia?The Leader of the Opposition, Mr Beazley, has called for some kind of political solution in Kosovo. I think that is right. We need a political solution, because only a political solution will resolve the issue. But some people are fearful that a political solution will somehow bolster the position of Mr Milosevic. I do not agree with that—quite the contrary. I believe that a political solution which is just, which allows the people of Kosovo to return, which allows the participation of the United Nations by way of peacekeeping forces and which allows for safety and some return to normality in Kosovo is possible. I believe that such a solution will not be to the benefit of Mr Milosevic.Once a solution comes about I think the Serbian people are going to come to understand what has happened and Mr Milosevic will not politically survive what he has brought on the Serbian people, on the people of Kosovo and on the people of the whole region. So it is not a contradiction to say, `The armed conflict has gone on, the NATO war has definitely had its point; but maybe now is the time to look at the possibility of discussions, at the possibility of a political solution which we can get an acceptance for and which will allow the beginning of a rebuilding process.' Only in that context will we be able to provide the conditions in which the 4,000 people that have come here may choose voluntarily to return rather than be in a forced situation. I hope that that day will come for them. I believe that Australia can hold its head high for what we have done by way of this legislation. I commend the minister for his actions, especially with respect to the relatives, and I support the legislation.17:03:005035Georgiou, Petro, MPMr GEORGIOUHM5KooyongLP10—I am glad to have the opportunity to speak on the Migration Legislation Amendment (Temporary Safe Haven Visas) Bill 1999 . This is an important bill which provides a legislative framework for Australia's efforts to provide a temporary safe haven for victims of the Kosovar refugee crisis. I think it is gratifying that the Leader of the Opposition and the opposition spokesman on immigration and multicultural affairs have made it clear that they will provide bipartisan support for the legislation. It is also gratifying that the legislation has passed through the Senate.Early in April the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees made a global request, including to the Australian government, for assistance in the temporary humanitarian evacuation of refugees from Yugoslavia. In response the Prime Minister announced that Australia would accept some 4,000 refugees from Kosovo as part of that temporary humanitarian evacuation. I think it is instructive that at the time the request was made there were approximately 500,000 refugees already in temporary camps throughout Macedonia and Albania. Yet, as we speak today, the latest estimate is that more than 776,000 refugees have been displaced from their homes in Kosovo during the last year.As the 20th century draws to a close we are witnessing in Kosovo a human tragedy of immense proportions. The magnitude of the Kosovo tragedy is underscored when we recollect that some 350,000 Armenians fled from Turkey after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and that 290,000 refugees fled Germany between 1933 and 1938 following the establishment of the National Socialist regime. Yet these two tragic events combined did not involve the number of people that have fled Mr Milosevic's forces. His collection of paramilitary and police units has engaged in a systematic campaign of ethnic cleansing. The brutality of their actions is on a par with some of the worst human rights abuses in the second half of this century.The rapidity with which Mr Milosevic's forces have acted has also left the international community unprepared. It is hard to imagine that the strategic planners of NATO foresaw the brutality and speed with which the ethnic cleansing of Kosovo would take place. Mr Milosevic has embarked on a strategy that seeks to employ ethnic cleansing as a military tactic. He appears to believe that the creation of this human tragedy will place an unbearable burden on the NATO alliance.But it seems that Mr Milosevic has also created his own endgame. By his own actions he has galvanised international opinion. The citizens of Kosovo cannot return to a region that is not free from the terror that they have experienced. They should not return until NATO's conditions—including an immediate and verifiable end of violence and repression in Kosovo, the withdrawal of Serbian forces and paramilitary police from Kosovo, the deployment in Kosovo of an international military force and the establishment of an interim political solution—are all met. The fact is that the Milosevic regime cannot be permitted to benefit from the ethnic cleansing of a civilian population.The bill we are discussing today recognises the reality of providing rapid humanitarian assistance while being committed to returning the refugees of Kosovo to their homeland. The bill provides for the temporary safe haven for Kosovo refugees in Australia. It does depart from our longstanding policy which requires that refugees be accepted here for permanent settlement. It provides for the return of the refugees to their homeland eventually. The return of the people of Kosovo to their homes is a commitment that Australia and the international community have made to prevent Mr Milosevic from acting out his brutal hope to permanently depopulate the Muslim Albanian citizenry of Kosovo.The bill provides for the granting of an initial special visa for three months for Kosovo refugees who Australia has agreed to accommodate. The bill will prevent the holder of a temporary safe haven visa from applying for permanent settlement except for exceptional circumstances as determined by the minister. Holders of temporary safe haven visas will not be able to apply for refugee status. Some have argued that this will have a negative impact on the international refugee principle of non-refoulement. Under article 33 of the UN Convention on the Status of Refugees, to which Australia is a party, the principle of non-refoulement requires the host nation to ensure that any applicant for refugee status is not returned to their country of origin if they could face harm or persecution.In light of this view, I believe it is very important to note that the minister and the UNHCR have clearly laid down benchmarks which will need to be met before the refugees from Kosovo can return home. The government has indicated that its response to the crisis in Kosovo will be flexible and will measure and respond to the changing circumstances in the region. After the initial three months, the minister has the discretion to renew the period of stay in Australia as circumstances require. The fact is that the timing of the resolution of the Kosovo crisis remains uncertain. Today there was some excitement about an indication that Mr Milosevic is prepared to offer some limited withdrawals, but these, at least the last I heard of them, seem to be a long distance from meeting NATO's demands. Just last week the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, General Wesley Clark, said that the international community must prepare for the refugee crisis to continue into the middle of the year 2000.Australia, as a responsible and humane member of the international community, will undertake the necessary measures to ensure that the refugees we have accepted are cared for until it is deemed safe for them to return to their homes. The Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs already gave that undertaking last week. He stated on Radio 2GB:If it is not possible to return people safely the arrangements can continue . . . because we are not going to return people to a situation which is not safe for them.Of course, our decision to take in refugees was in response to a request from Madame Ogata, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Madame Ogata advised the Security Council last week that refugees should not return to Kosovo until:. . . Serbian forces withdraw and international armed forces are deployed in the province to keep the peace. I have to insist on this point.The bill also has wide provisions in the event that the minister determines that a temporary resident from Kosovo is engaged in activity that could be considered to incite discord, criminal conduct, conduct contrary to national security and a number of other grounds. In some such circumstances, the minister is able to revoke the individual's visa status.Underlying these provisions is the fact that Australia has responded to the crisis in a rapid fashion by providing a safe haven to persons without the time for extensive character checking. It also needs to be noted that the bill provides that the revocation of an individual's visa also means that the temporary safe haven visa held by each member of his or her family is also automatically revoked. It requires that the whole family will have their visas cancelled in the event that one member has his or her visa cancelled. This type of provision is not, to my knowledge at least, something we have seen before in Australian immigration law. While we are all aware that there are reduced rights for non-residents, the imposition of what seems to be a form of collective sanction is something that, as a matter of principle, we should be very concerned about. I do understand that the minister is alert to this issue and does understand it.This is a turbulent time in the international community. The decision to remove refugees halfway across the world for temporary refuge is not one that is easily taken. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has generally regarded the temporary resettlement of refugees as its least preferred option. Member nations have generally agreed that refugees should be accommodated in neighbouring states wherever possible. But the scale of the refugee crisis in Kosovo has overwhelmed authorities trying to meet the needs of the refugees. My colleague the member for Deakin has graphically illustrated some of the problems that are faced by authorities in the lands nearby.The crisis also comes at a time when the UNHCR estimates that there are some 20 million refugees globally compared with only 1.4 million in 1960. The growing international refugee crisis creates unprecedented dilemmas for nation states. There are tensions between international obligation and state self-interest. In a recent address, Phillip Rudge, the General Secretary of the European Council on Refugees and Exiles, has argued:When we talk about `state interests' we might recall that the Universal Declaration of Human Rights refers to the obligations not only of the governments but also of the peoples of the world.The civil sector, argues Rudge, has an equal responsibility to that of the state in relation to refugees. It is a responsibility that we in Australia have seen exercised. Our historical experience has been an overwhelmingly beneficial and successful one in respect of refugee intakes, and our community's response to the Kosovo crisis reflects that. The overwhelming public response to the Kosovo crisis has reinforced the distinctive character of Australia as a humanitarian, hospitable and compassionate nation. The outpouring of support and goodwill from the Australian public, from the various levels of Australian government, from voluntary associations, non-government organisations, community groups and private enterprise demonstrate that there is no compassion deficit in this country.As a liberal democracy with a strong appreciation of its international humanitarian and moral obligations, Australia has long played an important role as a home to refugees. Between 1945 and 1980 more than 400,000 refugees and displaced persons found a new life here. Refugees from World War II, Eastern Europe, China, Indo-China, South and Central America, Africa, East Timor, Afghanistan and Iraq have all found refuge from conflict and oppression in Australia. They have embraced the freedom and opportunity of Australia and, in return, have made a substantial contribution to our wealth, diversity and development.Australia is a wealthy and prosperous country, now with economic growth rates amongst the highest in the OECD. Our wealth and prosperity have always been accompanied by compassion and responsibility. In the past, Australia has not shirked its responsibility and it has again shown—and I pay tribute to the Prime Minister and the minister—that it will not. I am confident that we will continue, as the Prime Minister has said, to `meet our moral obligation to play our part in a compassionate, fair and decent fashion'.There is bipartisan support in this House for the efforts of NATO and the considerable hurdles it must overcome. NATO has gone to great efforts to ensure the targeting of non-civilian facilities. Yet, despite this, the people of Yugoslavia have suffered terribly during this conflict. I believe we should be careful not to dismiss this as `collateral damage' as sometimes there is a tendency to do. There is a very real cost and a very real human tragedy for the people of Yugoslavia, and one does need to distinguish between the Milosevic regime and the people of Yugoslavia. It is estimated that at least several hundred civilians have so far died from the NATO bombing campaigns. The tragedy of women and children forced to hide in shelters each night as their cities are bombed is something which few in this country have experienced. We are justifiably focused on the victims of Kosovo and the need to respond to the actions of the Milosevic regime. However, there are many others in the region who have also suffered from human rights abuse and the horrors of war, and it is important that we do not forget their suffering. I commend the bill to the House.17:17:005038Ruddock, Philip, MPMr RUDDOCK0J4BerowraLPImmigration and Multicultural Affairs; Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Reconciliation10—in reply—Firstly, I thank the members who have spoken for their expressions of support in relation to the Migration Legislation Amendment (Temporary Safe Haven Visas) Bill 1999 —the member for Bowman, speaking on behalf of the opposition, the member for Deakin, the member for Calwell and the member for Kooyong. I will come to the members' comments in detail in a moment, but I do want to say how appreciative I am of the very thoughtful contributions that have been made.The member for Deakin was able to draw upon his own experience, having recently travelled in the region and having seen something of the suffering that the people who have fled to Albania in particular have experienced. Having had the opportunity to visit refugee situations on a number of occasions myself, I think it is very important for members of this parliament to be familiar with and to see what is being done. When you do, you will be surprised how often you will find Australians in the front line providing ongoing support and care, and behaving in a way which I think we ought to be fundamentally proud of as Australians. I recently toured in Africa and saw a number of Australian nuns who have been working in the Kakuma refugee camp amongst people who have fled the Sudan. I was recently in Bangkok and again, travelling to the Burma border, saw the involvement of many Australians, something of which I am very proud.The member for Kooyong highlighted the importance of this measure. I was delighted to hear his reference to the fact that compassion is not dead. Reference to compassion fatigue has often been heard here in Australia. I am very proud—and I want to take this opportunity of saying this—of the way in which Australia and Australians have responded to this emergency. We have seen it in terms of the response of the government. I do not want to speak about that at length. I want to speak about the cooperation that we have seen between the government and the opposition, the cooperation that we have seen between the Commonwealth and the states, and the cooperation we have seen between the Commonwealth and the voluntary sector.As time goes on and a lot of these things unravel, we will look back and decide that we could have done things better. We will see a bit of point scoring develop over time and other observations will be made. But at this point in time I think it is important to focus on the fact that I made the announcement Saturday week ago and the first flight to Australia landed in Sydney last Friday night. Australian immigration officials were present in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and were able to commence the assessment of those who would be able to participate in this measure.The UNHCR assisted over a period of three weeks in relation to their broader work and were ready immediately to resume the implementation of this measure. The arrangements for people to be brought halfway around the world to be placed in a position of safety where a full range of services would be provided were geared in a thoroughly professional way and have gone off largely without a hitch. I saw some gratuitous remarks in one newspaper today, which nobody has commented on, in relation to one aspect of the travel. I understand Qantas will be clarifying that in some statements they will make, which will put beyond doubt that the rather unhelpful and incorrect comments were just that—unhelpful and incorrect.I want to take the opportunity in relation to this measure to say that it is part of a larger scale effort to provide safety for the displaced Kosovar Albanians. It enables us to meet our commitment to provide temporary safe haven. It also enables us to maintain the integrity of both our migration and our humanitarian programs. I will come back to that in a little while. The provision is significant, because it adds to our very, very significant refugee and humanitarian programs.While people argue that we ought to expand our program—and people can argue very, very forcefully why we should do more, and I hear it often—and I feel much the same way, the fact is that they are arguing that we need to expand a program that is the largest in per capita terms in the world. That is where we are, and this is on top of that measure. It is not without cost. We are not scrimping in relation to the cost, but we are talking about something like, over three months, $70 million, with a further $10 million for each month thereafter—a not inconsiderable sum. They are estimates. This may go up or down, I do not deny that. But it is important to focus on what is being done here. It is a very, very significant additional measure.I want to explain the measure to honourable members, because I think that those who speak about the matter and suggest, as they do, with all the feeling that has mounted—and I understand it—that this should be, for some at least, a permanent outcome and then argue that we ought to be allowing people to move into the community more quickly, which I think can have self-fulfilling aspects associated with it, are ignoring the nature of the request that was put to us and the political dimension that guided the UNHCR in relation to the decision that was taken.If you consider the comments that were made by the member for Calwell and by the member for Kooyong about the Milosevic regime, their objective, what they have been seeking to do, and you say, `It is game, set, match. The people have gone. Ethnic cleansing works,' you simply need to understand that this measure was deliberately intended to be temporary. It needs to be made clear that, in principle, ethnic cleansing will not work, that these people will have the opportunity to go back to their homes. That is what they aspire to. I have heard it in the comments that have been made by individuals. I have heard it in relation to families here who recognise, even when they have found loved ones who have been included in the evacuation, that their objective will be to return home when it is safe to do so. Let me make that very clear.Regarding the UNHCR's request to us and the guidelines for the humanitarian evacuation used by Mrs Ogata when she asked Australia on 30 April to resume our program for the evacuation of people from the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, she had this to say:The humanitarian evacuation program is not a resettlement program.I emphasise that.. . . is not a resettlement program and, hence, resettlement procedures and criteria should not be applied unless required by law in receiving countries. Humanitarian evacuation does not focus, as does resettlement, on addressing individual protection needs. Rather, it focuses on the protection requirements of the group. It moves groups of refugees so that all in need of protection can have access to safety. It is, therefore, essential that countries with resettlement programs establish their humanitarian evacuation quotas in addition to their resettlement programs or quotas.It could not be clearer. That is what the UNHCR was seeking. It was because the situation in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia was such that people would be turned away at the border when seeking safety that this measure has been implemented. It is not hard to understand what happened. There was a general request. The UNHCR thought about it and said, `We would rather see people located close to home, in Europe and in the Balkans. We'll try to implement that.' I think at that stage only 20,000 people had been moved, although 80,000 to 85,000 places had been located. They then said, `We really do need to have a wider range of opportunities for people to be able to be evacuated.' That is the measure.If the UNHCR was not able to have the opportunity to locate some people temporarily in Australia, the border of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia would have remained closed. I do not know whether honourable members saw the reports and the UNHCR statements of what happened this week when the border did close. One thousand people were turned back, and they were seen to be beaten and abused on the other side of the border when they were returned. The international community cannot afford to have a situation where a border of that character, with the large numbers of people involved, is closed. That is what we have to do. Australia is out in front. Australia has always been `out in front', if I can use the terms of the shadow minister. We have implemented measures to ensure that we can respond positively to the UNHCR's request.Out of these debates there are some interesting developments, and the honourable member asked me about how we might handle these measures in the longer term. I have sought some advice—and, obviously, people will look at these things in greater detail just to check that we have got it right—and I am told that this measure is such that if there are future evacuations and we put in place regulations for an evacuation we will not have to legislate further. So we have established legislation that will ensure that if there is a requirement for further temporary evacuations in the future the measure will be in place.The honourable member for Calwell and the honourable member for Bowman, the shadow minister, both accepted that what we were doing was appropriate, commended us for what was being done and recognised the full range of benefits that were being provided. They then said, `But shouldn't we billet people out in the community?' I hear this argument and I have heard it on many occasions, but there is a problem in delivering the full range of services that you want to be able to deliver to people in these circumstances: to provide them with accommodation, food, shelter, full health care and to ensure that if they are traumatised they are able to get appropriate counselling and support. If you are going to disperse people throughout the community, particularly such a large number of people, getting those sorts of facilities—in addition to all that we are doing at the moment, including specialised torture and trauma counselling—right throughout the Australian community, wherever people might be billeted, would become an enormous and difficult logistic exercise.These measures provide the opportunity for us to be able to provide the full range of services and meet the needs within a structured environment. But we certainly do not want to detain people. We certainly do not want to prevent them from being able to move within the Australian community. If people want to offer support, all we are asking is that we know where people are. But to move that step further would mean that you then have to try to meet the costs or assist with the costs that people would have to undertake, and to recognise that some might want to do it for a week, others might want to do it for a month, other people might not have thought that it could end up being three months, six months or 12 months. There needs to be a sense of realism, it seems to me, about the way in which you implement these arrangements. We have sought to respond fully, compassionately and professionally. I think we have demonstrated all of that but, for the reasons I have outlined, it is really not possible to encourage the dispersal that many would seek.The member for Calwell knows Eric Lloga who has very generously assisted with liaison with the Albanian community. I would agree that he is an outstanding community leader. He translated for the Prime Minister when the first group arrived on Friday evening. He and I have met now on numerous occasions to discuss this matter. The community understands that the program is additional and temporary and that if people have permanent migration or humanitarian settlement in mind then they should not seek places in the temporary movement; they should in fact seek places within the permanent refugee and humanitarian program. As quoted, I have announced that some 200 families should be able to be accommodated within the contingency places we have within the refugee and humanitarian program. The community is very much aware that we have invited those people who have relatives to lodge their applications here, that they can do it within Australia and that the information will be sent from here to our officials who will be visiting the camps. The processing can occur in the camps as a result of that. The community is aware of it. I have briefed the community on that and I am happy for the member for Calwell to be aware of it if he wants to advise people of it as well.I do not think it is appropriate for us at this time to try to surmise what might happen in the future. I recognise that there is a great deal of uncertainty as to the future, but the expectation at this time is that people should be able to return to their homes. It is a temporary evacuation because that is what we want to see happen, it is what they want and it is what the international community wants. Why then would you talk about wanting to turn it into a permanent outcome where people are removed? Why would you want to do that at this stage when the objective is to be able to get people back home? There is flexibility, as has been outlined in relation to the measures that we have implemented, but I am certainly not going to be offering any comfort to those who are suggesting that at this time the measure should be anything else but temporary. I want to make that very clear. The measures that we have put in place are designed to give us flexibility, but flexibility against the background that the reason—I will conclude on this—that we have enacted this legislation in the way we have is to ensure that we are meeting our international obligation.Our international obligation is to provide people with protection. The obligation is not to provide permanent resettlement; the obligation has only ever been to provide protection. When the situation changes and protection is no longer required, ordinarily people would be expected to go home. It is only the difficulty in some cases of making a judgment about whether people should be able to return home at some future time that has meant we have tried to put in place programs that will enable people to rebuild their lives under a permanent program. This legislation meets our international obligations. The reason we have excluded further applications is to ensure that people do not abuse the protection stream by wanting to have decisions taken to grant a permanent outcome and then using the Refugee Review Tribunal, my department's decision making or the courts to try to achieve an outcome that clearly would not be appropriate, particularly when we are meeting our obligations by providing the protection that this bill and the other measures has ensured. I thank honourable members for their support for this legislation. I think it is very important and I am glad that it will be carried today.Question resolved in the affirmative.Bill read a second time.5041Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith.Bill (on motion by Mr Ruddock) read a third time.Bills5041r7395041Debate resumed from 30 March, on motion by Dr Kemp:That the bill be now read a second time.upon which Mr Lee moved by way of amendment:That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:"The bill be withdrawn and redrafted to provide for removal of the items which seek to impose voluntary student unionism, which will damage the interests of students, communities and the nation as a whole by(1) undermining the independence of universities by imposing political conditions on Commonwealth grants;(2) reducing student representation in an attempt to silence opposition to higher education funding cuts;(3) slashing services available to students, such as child care, legal and employment advice, cafeterias and sporting facilities;(4) placing a further financial burden on universities; and(5) putting at risk community services, facilities and employment, particularly in regional areas."17:37:005041Gillard, Julia, MPMs GILLARD83LLalorALP00—I rise to oppose the Higher Education Legislation Amendment Bill 1999 and to support the amendment moved by the member for Dobell in his capacity as the shadow minister for education. I oppose this bill because it is appalling public policy and a breathtaking act of hypocrisy. In his second reading speech, the Minister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs told us that the government believed in freedom of association. Nothing could be further from the truth. This government proved that it did not believe in freedom of association during the waterfront dispute. On our wharves we had workers who had exercised their right to freedom of association and, in particular, to come together as a trade union, the MUA. This government found that situation, that exercise of the right of freedom of association, abhorrent. Indeed, so abhorrent, so disgusted, so anti the right to freedom of association was this government that it was prepared to send in guards, dogs and Dubai trained workers to introduce non-union labour and to break the MUA, the organisation formed by workers through free association.So let us strip this debate of the government's pious cant and be clear about what is the true motivation for and the philosophical underpinning of this bill. This government does not believe in the positive right to freedom of association. Instead, it believes in the negative right of freedom not to associate. One may wonder about the mental and philosophical gymnastics which would lead one to abhor a positive right but champion the associated negative right, but that is what this government believes in. This government believes that, if you are a worker who wants to freely associate and be part of a trade union, you are clearly a demonic wrecker of everything that is fair and good in our society whereas if you are a student who says, `I don't want to join my student union,' you are a champion of freedom of association. I would suggest that there is no consistency of approach to the question of freedom of association in this philosophy. Rather, the only consistency in this approach is the hatred of anything called union. One is entitled to wonder about bannering such a philosophy as a Liberal philosophy when true Liberals throughout the world have championed the right to freedom of association in the face of oppressive and violent regimes.But the intellectual and philosophical paucity of this government and this minister does not stop there. Cloaked in the pretence of believing in freedom of association, while they actually believe only in the freedom to not associate, this government and minister then take the next step and pretend that the freedom to not associate applies in all circumstances, public and private. Clearly this is not right.In the public domain when dealing with public entities we accept for all sorts of public purposes that there is no freedom to not associate in our society. This simple statement explains why, for example, you cannot rely on some trite statement about freedom of association and opt out of paying tax. It is why you cannot say you want to be registered as a medical practitioner in our society but rely on freedom of association to refuse to register with the appropriate medical boards and pay the requisite fees. It is why you cannot say you want to own a dog or a cat but rely on freedom of association to refuse to register as an owner and pay the licence fee.Properly viewed, student associations and the payment of services and amenities fees by students are in the same category. Universities are public entities incorporated by state law for a valuable public purpose—the provision of higher education and the undertaking of research. In line with our long cherished belief in academic freedom and autonomy, these state laws give universities wide discretion in relation to governing the university community.Universities generally regulate the working of their community by having the university council enact statutes or by-laws. As a former university councillor, I am able to say that those statutes and by-laws deal with a vast range of matters. For example, a university might require a student to have a student card complete with a photo on it and to produce that student card for certain purposes like accessing library books or computer facilities. A prospective student could say, `I object to being required to have a photo ID document.' Some people do. To this the university would be entitled to say, `Bad luck. That is a condition of being a student at this university. Accept it or don't enrol.' Would the members on the other side be chanting, `Shame! Free dom of association! How dare they!' to that kind of conduct by a university? I think not.A university could say that it is a requirement for a student to undertake a particular form of assessment, a gruelling exam or compulsory attendance at a certain number of classes. Would we hear freedom of association rhetoric from the other side in relation to those conditions? Once again, I think not. But somehow everything changes if a university says, `We think the best way of providing student services is through a student controlled body and we are requiring payment of a fee to support those services.' How is this position intellectually defensible? How can these distinctions be drawn?I urge members on the other side, particularly the large number who are already deeply concerned about this legislation, to think through these questions. I know that they are unlikely to be open to a chain of reasoning laid out by a Labor Party member of this House. After all, by definition, I am the lowest form of life. I am not only a trade union member; I was that most dangerous of animals, an active student unionist.0J4RUDDOCKMr Ruddock—It never passed my lips.83LGillard, Julia, MPMs GILLARD—I was a successful student politician, unlike the current federal Treasurer, but I will come to that later. Indeed, I was a national president of the Australian Union of Students, the only president of that organisation or its successor, the National Union of Students, to enter this parliament—a fact I know will so horrify members opposite I am lucky security has not been asked to clear me from the building. So I am specifically saying: `Don't listen to me about these matters. Listen to Alan Goldberg QC, who has written the definitive legal advice on the question.' Members opposite can be reassured that Alan Goldberg QC is no radical, no subversive supporter of trade unions. Indeed, he was the man who acted for the employers in the noted Dollar Sweets case whilst the current federal Treasurer, as his junior, carried the bags and procured the sandwiches for lunch. Alan Goldberg is an eminent Victorian lawyer who was appointed by the current government to be a judge of the Federal Court.In May 1994 he provided a memorandum of advice to the National Union of Students on the question of whether student unionism breached the principle of freedom of association as laid down by the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Alan Goldberg concluded:Even though there may be differences in the formal constitution of the various student associations, they all have the same essential functions and purposes, and are an integral part of these public educational institutions. They provide essentially the same services and activities. Their role as part of the institution, and as representing the student body, no less an important part of the university than the other constituent parts, is formally recognised by the institution in the majority of cases. They function as a formal means by which student participation in the university or other post-secondary institution is organised. We—that is Alan Goldberg and his junior counsel—have considered the relevant principles and have had regard to a number of decisions of international courts and have reached the conclusion that reliance on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to support the proposed introduction of what is said to be voluntary student unionism on the grounds that the present situation in most Victorian post-secondary institutions does not accord with these instruments, is misconceived. We are of the opinion that the argument advanced fails to recognise and appreciate the integral and symbiotic relationship between a student association and a university. The significance of this is that a university is an institution of a public character and principles and decided cases to which we shall refer demonstrate that the relevant Articles do not apply to public institutions and organisations. Rather, they only apply to voluntary non-public organisations.The advice then deals in great detail with Australian and international case law precedents. It should be noted that each and every Australian case on this question and each and every judge who has looked at it has reached the same essential conclusion as Alan Goldberg QC—now Judge Alan Goldberg.At every turn, the Goldberg advice reinforces the precept that we accept compulsion, some limit to the right to not associate, in public institutions and for public purposes. As I have said previously, this is why we accept without question that government can compel the payment of taxes, councils can compel the payment of rates and registration boards set up under statutes for various purposes can compel those who want to be recognised as a doctor or a lawyer to register, pay a fee and comply with rules set down by the board. This is the correct set of analogies when looking at universities and their associated student organisations—not the analogy the government seeks to put of voluntary, private organisations like trade unions.Whilst on the question of legal advice, my attention has been drawn to legal advice provided to the Australian Vice-Chancellors Committee by the law firm Minter Ellison. In that advice, they canvass whether or not the legislation before the House this evening is in fact constitutional and they cast some doubts on the question of its constitutionality. I commend that piece of advice to members opposite and suggest that, prior to casting their votes on this bill, they read it and think long and hard about that fundamental legal question.When analysing the situation with student organisations, we must not only be clear about the question of freedom of association in the way that Alan Goldberg was clear about it but be more intellectually rigorous about what is being compelled. The government paints this broad brush and highly inaccurate picture that what is being compelled is membership of a student union. The reality is very different.Student organisations are constituted in various ways. Whilst all are structured around a concept of universality—in that they aim to provide services to the full student community and define the electorate for their democratic structures as inclusive of the full student community—many are not structured on the basis that each and every student is a member. For example, the Monash Student Association is structured on the basis that the only members of the association are the members of the governing councils of the association, while the student body forms the constituency and the electorate. Indeed, this model of limited membership is the traditional model for universities on the east coast of Australia. What is being compelled in this model is not membership; what is being compelled is payment of a fee, which is then used to support services. What can be the objection to that? Clearly, when analysed properly, the government's justification for this bill stands threadbare. It is not about freedom of association; it is not about ending compulsory membership.As a former President of the Australian Union of Students, I have a strong view about the real motivation for this legislation. This legislation is about nothing more or less than a bunch of failed student politicians on the other side of the House trying to win in the 1990s the war they lost in the 1970s. It is time warp legislation through which middle aged men are seeking to relive their youth and come out victors this time. Essentially, this minister and his ageing student cohorts opposite have failed to realise life on campus in the 1990s is fundamentally different to life in the 1970s.There is no doubt that in the 1970s the then Australian Union of Students lost its way. Instead of properly performing its core role as an advocate for student interests and a provider of student services, it became hostage to extremist views more interested in international affairs than domestic education policies. But it should be noted that this problem was basically confined to the national level of student politics and, even during the height of concerns about AUS radicalism, student unions at campus level throughout the country continued to provide welfare services, counselling, jobs boards, student housing schemes, cut price goods and services, campus bands, student theatre, student sports, services to overseas students and the like.Members opposite sought to answer AUS's radicalism by destroying forever national and campus student unionism. In that they failed. The radicalism of AUS at that time was always going to prove to be a transient and unsustainable political stage, and so it was that this extremism was ultimately defeated through democratic processes; not by the members opposite, but by a coalition of progressive and pragmatic forces led by Labor students. At that time, a new student political culture developed and the culture has been seared into the current student activists who have learnt well and truly the lessons of the past. Student activists from that time on have understood that their job was to meet the needs of, and truly represent, their student constituency.Inevitably, undertaking that role leads to a collision course with government. For example, during the period I served as the national education vice-president of AUS prior to becoming president, we defeated by public campaigning the Fraser government's student loans proposal. In doing so, we clearly did not endear ourselves to the coalition, but we did play a legitimate role representing our constituency. In the same way, the student campaign of today against the GST might not be endearing to the coalition, but it is a legitimate campaign on behalf of the student constituency.What we find in this legislation is a cruelly destructive sledgehammer being used to crack a 20-year-old and very mouldy nut. This is a government full of members who want to destroy 1990s student associations because they hated the 1970s student union bogyman. The fact that the 1990s version of student unionism bears no resemblance to the 1970s bogyman does not seem to have sunk in. The question for members opposite is clear: will they allow themselves to be used so that this minister and his failed student politician mates can have a pyrrhic victory over the bogyman of their youth or will they stand up and say, `Students need services, and we will defeat this legislation to ensure those services continue to be provided by democratic student organisations'? Clearly, if they listen to their electorates and their constituencies the answer will be that they will vote against this bill.I want to refer in the final minutes of this speech to the position taken by the Victoria University, which is represented in my electorate by its campus at Werribee where they do some fine work in food technology and science in cooperation with Food Science Australia in the technology precinct we have at Werribee. I commend members who want to look at a fine example to come to Werribee and I will happily show them around. The council of Victoria University has considered the student union legislation that is before the House today and has written to the Minister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs, the Hon. Dr David Kemp, and put their view that the legislation will be bad for students and, in particular, will be bad for the Victoria University. I want to quote from that letter of 30 March:New universities like ours, with a large number of campuses, have not had the opportunity to build up the student support and amenities infrastructure which exists in more established institutions so the inevitable losses of revenue—that is, the loss of student fees should this legislation go through—will be particularly damaging. The problem is made even worse by the lower socio-economic group from which much of our student population is traditionally drawn, making it difficult to raise what would need to be a greatly increased general services fee (GSF) as a voluntary contribution.The letter goes on:The problem is exacerbated by the fact that in an effort to establish the standard of amenities required to attract students to the newer Victoria University campuses the Victoria University Student Union arranged to borrow money from the University to build new facilities. The University lent this money on the understanding that the debt would be served by future GSF proceeds.That is, proceeds from the general services and amenities fee. With your proposed legislation, it is unlikely that this debt will be honoured.Apart from these practical problems, the letter goes on to say that, in the council's view, the student organisation plays a pivotal role in the governance of the university.I therefore say to members opposite that, if they consult with the student communities and the academic communities in their electorate and reflect those views, they will vote against this bill. They ought to vote against it because it is wrong in terms of public policy and it is wrong on the question of freedom of association. They ought not be prosecuting in this House a case that was prosecuted in campuses in the 1970s and on which campuses in the 1970s returned their verdict.Debate (on motion by Mr Ruddock) adjourned. Committees50465046504617:57:005046Charles, Bob, MPMr CHARLESOT4LaTrobeLP10—On behalf of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit I present the following report entitled Report on the draft budget estimates for the Australian National Audit Office for 1999-2000.Ordered that the report be printed.OT4Charles, Bob, MPMr CHARLES—by leave—In accordance with the provisions of section 53 of the Auditor-General Act 1997, the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit has considered the draft budget estimates of the Australian National Audit Office for the 1999-2000 financial year. The committee is able to advise the parliament that it is satisfied that the draft budget estimates submitted by the Auditor-General to the committee on 24 March 1999 are sufficient to enable the Auditor-General to properly exercise his functions and powers under the act covering financial statements, performance audits and audit services. In his submission, the Auditor-General noted that the ANAO's total cash budget appropriation in 1998-99 was $53.8 million and that no additional estimate funding had been sought. The 1998-99 budget allocations were used to fund strategically important projects such as restructuring and computer replacements and enhancements to the ANAO financial management and human resource management systems.The Auditor-General told the committee that there were a number of significant changes to the environment in which the 1999-2000 budget and forward estimates were constructed, the most important of these being the implementation of an accrual budgeting framework for the Commonwealth to take effect from the 1999-2000 budget. The ANAO has for some years been costing its products on an accrual basis and is well placed to move to an accrual based budget. The ANAO has also implemented, with effect from 1 July 1998, a new financial management information system to support the revised financial management framework.The implementation of accrual budgeting is accompanied by the introduction of an outcomes and outputs structure which will replace the existing program structures. The new framework places a particular focus on the outputs or goods and services produced by agencies and the links between them and the desired outcomes of government activity. The ANAO's outputs are defined as follows: one, performance audit services; two, information support services; and, three, assurance audit services.The key elements of ANAO's business summarised in the Auditor-General's submission are: running costs account for a significant majority of ANAO resources; property operating expenses, covered by a memorandum of understanding with the Department of Finance, are included in running costs; under the accrual budgeting environment, the previous system of annual appropriations for agencies will be replaced by appropriations for departmental items and appropriations for administered items; for the ANAO, future appropriations will, for the most part, relate to departmental items; and the Auditor-General's salary and allowances will continue to be funded by the special appropriation under the Auditor-General Act.The total budget allocation being sought for 1999-2000 is $53.6 million. In terms of output groups, the performance audit services output group estimates were $18.7 million. The information support services output group estimates were $1.7 million, and the assurance audit services output group estimates were $26.6 million. Although the Auditor-General understands that carryovers will not form part of the budget parameters beyond 1999-2000, it is proposed, in line with existing practice, to maintain a strategic reserve fund which is needed to assist in the management of the ANAO's businesses.The process by which the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit has been able to fulfil its enhanced responsibilities under the Auditor-General Act and the Financial Management and Accountability Act has continued to evolve during this year. It is only by the experience of deliberating on matters like the appointment of the independent auditor and the approval of ANAO's draft budget estimates that the practical extent of the committee's powers of scrutiny can be defined in a way which enhances the powers of the parliament to keep government accountable.I advise the House that, to the best of my knowledge, this is the first time in the history of the Commonwealth parliament that budget appropriations have been tabled prior to the budget. I move:That the House take note of the report.OT4Charles, Bob, MPMr CHARLES—I seek leave to continue my remarks later.Leave granted; debate adjourned.Sitting suspended from 6.03 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.Bills5047r8075047Message from the Governor-General transmitting particulars of proposed expenditure and recommending appropriation announced.Bill presented by Mr Costello, and read a first time.504719:30:005047Costello, Peter, MPMr COSTELLOCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—I move:That the bill be now read a second time.This is the Budget for the last year of the Century.In putting together this Budget, the Government wanted to achieve a number of things:. We wanted to deliver the election commitments we made last October.. We wanted an economic framework which would help families by keeping home mortgage rates low.. We wanted to deliver increased services to rural and regional Australia.. We wanted to build the nation's educational and research capacity.. We wanted to keep Australia strong—having come through the first two years of the Asian economic and financial crisis.. We wanted to keep the Budget in surplus.We wanted to frame a Budget which would set us up to enter the next Century much as we entered this one—a world leader in living standards, prosperous, free, and with all the potential of a dynamic young nation.Mr Speaker, this Budget is right for the times. The Commonwealth Government, this year, budgets again to spend within its means.Mr Speaker, for the third year in a row, the Budget will be in surplus—a surplus of more than $5 billion. And that means that this year, again, we can pay off debt.In the last five years before the Coalition was elected, Labor ran up Commonwealth debt by nearly $80 billion. We had to raise $9 billion in taxes just to pay the Government's interest bill. The Coalition put an end to that spiral of deficit and debt. This is the fourth Budget I have presented on behalf of the Coalition Government. In those four Budgets, in net terms, we have not borrowed a dollar.And we have repaid over $24 billion of Labor's debt.If the Senate passes the Government's legislation—legislation to implement policies we put to the electorate last October—by 2002-03, we could repay all of Labor's debt. And the Commonwealth Government could be debt free.We could begin the next Century, as we began this one: No Commonwealth debt—a clean sheet—and no interest bill to pay. We would have the chance to lower taxes, and build better opportunities for our people.The historic turnaround in the Commonwealth Budget was not done by pushing up tax, but by pruning expenses.The Budget I present tonight, for the fourth year in a row, proposes:. No increase in rates of income tax.. No increase in rates of company tax.. No increase in rates of petrol excise.. No increase in rates of wholesale sales tax.The Economic EnvironmentJust under two years ago events beginning in Thailand led to the most severe financial crisis and economic downturn in our region in 50 years. Since then, Japan, Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, New Zealand—nearly all the countries of our region—went into recession.Many thought Australia couldn't stand against such a severe regional crisis. Some predicted Australia would be dragged into recession and spiralling unemployment. But sound economic management and sound institutions protected our economy. It didn't go into recession. Our economy grew. In fact it grew faster than the countries of Europe and faster than the developed world, faster than the countries in America. And unemployment fell. In the past year, 180,000 new jobs were created.Our inflation is as low as we've seen it in 30 years. Home mortgage interest rates are the lowest they've been in 30 years, and unemployment—while still too high—has fallen to its lowest level since the start of the decade.But we would fool ourselves to think our problems are now all over. Our region is still in trouble. The world economy is still weak. Next year the Government forecasts economic growth at 3 per cent—this is faster than most of the major economies of the world—but a little slower than the very high growth of 4¼ per cent this year. Our current account deficit—widened by weak export prices and a strong consumer demand for imports—is forecast at 5¼ per cent of GDP. This is a little better than this year. But it means we cannot afford to be complacent.The world economy is still a very uncertain place.Just as the economic reform of three years ago gave us the strength to ride out the challenges of the last year, the reforms of today will determine how we ride out the challenges of tomorrow. If we want the growth, the living standards, and the jobs in the next decade, we must rise to the challenges of today.And, of course, the reform of the Australian taxation system is our greatest reform challenge.With a strong year behind us, new challenges now upon us, and with great opportunities before us, the Government has carefully drawn up its initiatives and set its priorities for the coming year. Our economic strategy is responsible, fair and prudent.It is right for the times.Our priority is our election commitments. We are able to announce tonight how the Government will deliver those commitments. And tonight we outline some exciting new initiatives for our country and our future.EducationMr Speaker, we cannot, with certainty, predict all the challenges our children will face in the future. We cannot with certainty, predict the work skills they will need for the jobs they will do—but we do know that the best possible way to prepare them is a strong education.The Commonwealth, in this forthcoming year, will spend $4.8 billion on the education of primary and secondary children. The Government is committed to ensure that all young people have access to a strong basic education and a quality pathway from school to further training, further education, and employment. A key Government priority is to ensure that every Australian school child is able to read and write. This Budget builds on previous initiatives by allocating $131 million over four years for literacy and numeracy programmes in schools. For the first time, literacy and numeracy programmes will extend to the middle years of schooling. Parents want their children to be able to read and write. We want to help schools do it. Funding of $78 million is being provided for a Quality Teacher Programme to help teachers focus on professional development in literacy, numeracy, mathematics, science, information technology and vocational education.Additional funding of $553 million over five years has been provided for Catholic systemic schools, implementing our election commitment made last October. This decision followed an independent assessment of the needs of this system conducted by the Non-Government Schools Funding Review Committee.In this Budget we are announcing a new formula for distributing recurrent funding to non-government schools. The new system will be based on the needs of the parents, taking into account the resources of the community that a school serves. It will provide a fairer and better treatment. It will boost funding for needy schools. The new system will be phased in to operate fully by 2004. Schools which could have been disadvantaged by the new arrangements will be protected. They will have their existing per capita grants adjusted in line with cost rises. This guarantee and the increased grants going to more needy schools will increase funding by around $561 million over the 2001-04 school quadrennium.Mr Speaker, if we are to educate our children for life, we must also educate them about the evils in our society.The Government rejects the inevitability of increasing damage to individuals and the community from illicit drugs. To date the Government has committed to a range of new measures in the fight against drugs, as part of the National Illicit Drug Strategy. In this Budget $80 million over four years is announced for interception, treatment and a National School Drug Education Strategy: to teach our children the dangers, and hopefully protect them from the scourge of illicit drugs. This Budget also provides a further $221 million over four years to allow police to compulsorily divert illicit drug users from the criminal justice system to counselling and treatment. We do not accept that drug addiction cannot be treated. This Budget provides funds to expand treatment services for drug users.A Safer CommunityThe Government will establish a National Crime Information System (Crimtrac) to build a National DNA Criminal Intelligence Database and a National Child Sex Offender Database. Crimtrac will provide access to the most up to date and efficient technology to store and retrieve information to help police stop crime and protect the public. The Government will also be establishing a National Crime Prevention Programme aimed at finding and promoting ways of preventing crime and violence in the community.To enhance an equitable and accessible system of federal law and justice, additional counselling and mediation dispute resolution services will be provided and access to justice for disadvantaged people in rural and regional areas will be extended. The Commonwealth will establish a new Federal Magistrates Service to deal with less complex Federal cases. A Commonwealth Law Courts building will be constructed in Adelaide.FamiliesMr Speaker, the Government has before the Parliament legislation to provide around $2½ billion of extra family assistance each year.Associated with the introduction of the new tax system from 1 July next year, over two million Australian families will qualify for additional assistance—at least $140 per child, and in a one income family with a dependent child under five, $490 per child.This is in addition to income tax cuts now contained in legislation before the Senate. The Government's legislation proposes to cut income tax for every Australian taxpayer.In addition to the increased benefits provided to families as part of the Government's tax reform—A New Tax System —from 1 July 2000, eligibility for Family Tax Benefit, Part A will be extended further than is contained in the legislation. The benefit will be payable for dependent young people up to the age of 21 years who are not receiving Youth Allowance, or if they are receiving part Youth Allowance, the benefit will be topped up for qualifying families to the maximum rate of $37.50 per fortnight.The Government's focus on helping families includes a range of specific initiatives including increased relationship support services, assistance to resolve family disputes, developing approaches to reduce domestic violence, expansion of children's contact services, a new suicide prevention strategy and support for carers of young people with disabilities. The Government will implement a new youth homelessness early intervention programme and provide increased funding for the Supported Accommodation Assistance Programme which provides transitional support and accommodation to help homeless people and those at risk from domestic violence.The Government's economic strategy is directed squarely at helping Australian families. The average Australian family with a mortgage is saving over $320 a month as a result of interest rate falls under this Government. More young Australians can buy homes. More families can pay the mortgage to keep their home. Good economic policy is good family policy.HealthThe Government is working to improve the health and medical care of all Australians. We are committed to a balanced health system with Medicare, a strong public hospital system and the opportunity for more Australians to take out private health insurance.We are working with the States and Territories to ensure continued improvement in the efficiency and quality of services in public hospitals. To encourage private health insurance, from 1 January this year, every Australian taking out private health insurance is eligible to have 30 per cent of the premium paid by the Commonwealth.To build on this initiative, and to further encourage people to take out health insurance, Lifetime Health Cover will be implemented from 1 July 1999. This system will allow registered health funds to charge different premiums, depending on the age at which a person first joined a health fund. People taking out cover early in life will pay lower premiums. The new system rewards early and continuous membership. The premium will be set at the age a person first joined, and once set, remains at a lower rate, relative to people entering at an older age. We want young people to make health insurance a habit. There will be a 12 month grace period from 1 July to allow those not yet insured to do so. If they do, they will be credited with the lowest possible joining age. In addition, special provisions will protect people aged 65 or more on 1 July 1999 by ensuring that they can take out hospital cover at any time and be credited with the minimum joining age.In this, the International Year of the Older Person, the health care of older Australians is a particular priority. The Budget provides funding of $228 million for an Enhanced Primary Care Package, targeted to older Australians and those with chronic conditions. The package is designed to better coordinate health services and to improve people's self-reliance and capacity to manage their own conditions. For example, the Government will provide for voluntary annual health assessments for those Australians aged 75 and over. We will put in place a programme to help prevent injuries to elderly people arising from falls. Separately, $82 million has been provided to expand the provision of respite care for carers of people with dementia and other cognitive and behavioural problems. These measures are designed to support carers and by supporting them, to support those with disability.The Government will provide additional funding of $210 million over the next four years for hearing rehabilitation services, including the provision of hearing aids for eligible persons. The funding will enable a further 67,000 Australians to be assisted each year. While this will mainly benefit older Australians, a component of this funding will be directed towards the ongoing delivery of high quality hearing services to children and others with special needs. The Government will continue to work toward addressing the huge disparity in the health of our indigenous people. Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander primary health care funding is to be increased by $79 million over four years. The Army/ATSIC Community Assistance Programme which provides environmental and health infrastructure delivered by defence personnel to indigenous communities will also be extended.Rural and Regional AustraliaThe Government is strongly committed to rural and regional Australia. We know the many challenges that country people face. So tonight, in this Budget, there are a number of initiatives seeking to help strengthen the social and economic fabric of rural and regional areas.We are working with Australia's primary industries to secure their profitability, sustainability, and competitiveness. Part of this is the ongoing Supermarket to Asia Strategy to develop Australia as the food supplier to the region. To add to this, a new Food and Fibre Supply Chain Programme will be established. These programmes will open up markets for Australia's farmers. Resources are also being provided for the Northern Australian Quarantine Strategy and regional flood mitigation programmes. The Government will provide $32 million over five years to restore ground water pressure in the Great Artesian Basin, a major water resource for the country, supporting pastoral and mining enterprises.People living outside capital cities must have access to quality health care. During the 1998 election campaign, the Government committed itself to a series of measures to improve rural health services in the short and longer term. This budget delivers on those promises. An additional 30 Regional Health Service Centres will be established in rural communities across Australia over the next four years. These centres will draw together health, aged care, and other community services to a central location; based on community need, providing a mix of services to best meet local priorities.And we know rural Australia needs more doctors. The Government will spend $43 million over four years to pay retention money for long serving GPs as an incentive for them to continue practice in rural and remote areas. The Government will establish a clinical school based in Wagga Wagga and a medical school at James Cook University in Queensland. We will establish a Rural Australia Medical Undergraduate Scholarships Scheme for rural students to train as doctors. Rural people trained as doctors are more likely to serve in rural Australia. We will establish a fly-in female general practitioner service for women in rural and remote areas who currently do not have access to a female GP.To ensure that students from rural and regional areas have access to education, this Budget provides a number of initiatives including increasing boarding allowance under the Assistance for Isolated Children Scheme and extending eligibility for the student financial loan supplement.Two new Centrelink call centres will be established, in Maryborough in Queensland and Port Augusta in South Australia. The new call centres will tailor services to customers in regional and rural Australia.As part of the social bonus to be funded from the sale of the second tranche of Telstra, the Government will fund the establishment of up to 500 rural transactions centres at a cost of $70 million over five years. This means small rural communities can establish centres that provide access to services, such as banking, post, phone, fax and Medicare from the one centre. This goes a long way to defeating the distance that makes it hard for rural and regional Australians to access services.An efficient and integrated transport sector is vital to underpinning economic growth, creating investment and providing services to people in both urban and regional Australia.The Government has allocated an additional $195 million over four years to upgrade the National Highway System and roads of national importance. Increased funding is also being provided for bridge upgrades to facilitate the introduction of increased mass limits for heavy vehicles. These programmes will enhance the efficiency of our road transport system, with consequential national and regional economic benefits. The Black Spot Programme is also being extended for a further two years in order to make our roads safer and reduce the social trauma and human costs of road crashes.Training and EmploymentMr Speaker, one of the most significant structural changes introduced by this Government was the concept of mutual obligation—the obligation of the community to the individual, and the obligation of the individual, in return, to the community.That is why the Government introduced the Work for the Dole scheme. It has been immensely successful.The Government is pursuing a wide range of labour market reforms to achieve sustained reductions in the level of unemployment. As part of an integrated approach to employment, the scope of activities that satisfy the mutual obligations of unemployment beneficiary recipients will be increased. Work for the Dole will be extended to those aged between 25 and 34 years who have been in receipt of unemployment payments for twelve months or more. Work for the Dole will also be expanded to Year 12 school-leavers in receipt of unemployment payments for more than three months. In total, this will involve a doubling of Work for the Dole places from 25,000 in 1998-99 to 50,000 by 2000-01.Employers in rural and regional areas will be provided with an additional incentive payment of $1,000 to progress new apprentices to higher skill levels in trades and occupations experiencing skill shortages.To combat the severe employment problems faced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, the Government will introduce the Indigenous Employment Policy. The package of additional initiatives to address the severe employment situation faced by indigenous Australians will double the funding for indigenous programme initiatives from $25 million to $50 million per annum.Frontiers in Science and ResearchMr Speaker, advances in health care and quality of life in the future will come from new knowledge and new scientific breakthroughs. Australia has a proud history of science and medical research. Australian pioneers—the Howard Floreys, the Macfarlane Burnets, the Victor Changs—led the world. We want to build a culture that will bring forth new pioneers in the new century, who will expand the frontiers of knowledge and advance just like their predecessors.In an historic commitment, the Government has decided to invest an additional $614 million over the next six years into health and medical research funded through the National Health and Medical Research Council. No previous Australian Government has ever given health and medical research such a high priority.This will more than double the Council's existing funding level by the year 2005. A significant part of this investment will be for the development of an enhanced national medical genomics capacity, which will have the potential to look for ways to cure major illnesses such as cancer and heart disease. This capacity, along with other research initiatives I am announcing tonight, will ensure that Australia can maintain its place at the cutting edge of biotechnology. This is a new frontier for innovative, knowledge-based industries in health, agriculture and many other related areas. Most importantly, this funding will enable our best and brightest to pursue opportunities in science and medicine, here in Australia. In addition, new funding of $20 million over the next two years will develop enhanced physical facilities in Australia's leading health and medical research institutes.This significant boost in funding for health and medical research flows, in part, from the recommendations of the Wills Review, the most comprehensive report ever undertaken into medical research. These measures will consolidate Australia's position in the top 10 OECD countries in terms of health and medical research investment.Biotechnology will have a major impact on many commercial activities and has the potential to improve the lives of Australians through new medical treatments, safer and more nutritious food, reductions in the use of chemicals and more sustainable land use practices. We are going to assist the biotechnology industry to maximise its contribution to the Australian economy. This will be done through a one-stop-shop named Biotechnology Australia, supported by a Council of Ministers, to advance developments and harness discoveries in this area. The Government will also establish the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator, operating with existing mechanisms to ensure Australia has a nationally consistent system to regulate food, agriculture and therapeutic goods to develop public confidence and ensure public safety in reaping benefits from this cutting edge area of science.To help ensure that Australia maintains its strength in scientific and industrial research and innovation, the Government will maintain higher baseline funding for the CSIRO. Research infrastructure funding for universities will be increased and new science lectureships will be established. This complements the Strategic Partnerships-Industry Research and Training programme for which additional funding has previously been announced.Leading Financial ServicesAustralia's system of financial regulation leads the world. The stability shown in the banking and corporate sector, notwithstanding the Asian financial crisis, is evidence of how well placed the regulatory reforms have proved. To enhance Australia's capacity to participate fully in the strong global growth in the financial services industry, the Government has allocated $3.5 million in each of 1999-2000 and 2000-01 for initiatives to promote Australia as a centre for global financial services.Australia's public finances are reported and presented on a world class basis. Our Charter of Budget Honesty is now advocated internationally as a model for other countries. This Budget is presented on an accrual basis for the first time. It allows us to properly budget for future expenditures. This puts Australia at the forefront of transparency in the conduct of fiscal policy.Economic OutlookMr Speaker, after two years of economic growth in excess of 4 per cent, growth of around 3 per cent is expected in 1999-2000. Growth over the year to the June quarter 2000 is expected to be around 3½ per cent. This is a remarkable achievement given the crisis in Asia and the slowdown in world growth. Economic growth in Australia will remain stronger than all the G7 economies and the average of the OECD countries and more favourable than most countries in the region.In 1999-2000 we are expecting stronger growth in both exports and investment in plant and equipment as the international economy gradually improves.Employment growth is set to be strong enough to keep intact the very significant gains this Government has made on reducing the unemployment rate. The unemployment rate should remain around its current level. The outlook is for inflation to remain low, averaging 2 per cent in 1999-2000.As exports and commodity prices respond to a gradual strengthening in world growth, the current account deficit will ease in 1999-2000 to average around 5¼ per cent of GDP.Concluding CommentsWithin the space of four budgets the Coalition has positioned Australia for the next century. We now have very sound fundamentals: strong growth, low inflation, the budget in surplus and the prospect of completely eliminating Commonwealth net debt.Our next Budget will begin the story of the 21st century. By then we should have a new tax system—A New Tax System for the new century. A new tax system will fund and sustain our hopes and aspirations in health care, in education, in care for the old, and care for the young.The next decade could be a special one for Australia—a step up in growth, in jobs, in our community infrastructure, in our services, for those in need, in our living standards, leading the region and, in many respects, leading the world.Good economic policy will determine our capacity to meet these important social objectives. This is a budget for those objectives. This is a budget right for these times.I commend the Budget to the House.Debate (on motion by Mr Beazley) adjourned.Miscellaneous50535053Costello, Peter, MPMr COSTELLOCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—I present for the information of honourable members the following papers in connection with the Budget for 1999-2000:Budget strategy and outlook 1999-2000 (Budget paper No. 1);Budget measurers 1999-2000 (Budget paper No. 2);Federal financial relations 1999-2000 (Budget paper No. 3);Agency resourcing 1999-2000 (Budget paper No. 4).Ordered that the papers be printed.Ministerial Statements50535053Costello, Peter, MPMr COSTELLOCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—I present ministerial statements as listed in the document now being circulated to honourable members in the chamber. Details of the statements will be recorded in Votes and Proceedings . Bills5054r8095054Message from the Governor-General transmitting particulars of proposed expenditure and recommending appropriation announced.Bill presented by Mr Fahey, and read a first time.505420:02:005054Fahey, John, MPMr FAHEYHQ5MacarthurLPFinance and Administration10—I move:That the bill be now read a second time.It is with great pleasure that I introduce Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 1999-2000 which, together with Appropriation Bill (No. 1), is one of the principal pieces of legislation underpinning the first budget of the second term of the coalition government. This bill seeks appropriations of the consolidated revenue fund in 1999-2000 totalling $5,950 million. This is a historic occasion for the parliament. It is the first time in which the Commonwealth's budget has been presented on the basis of accrual accounting principles. The move to accruals, which is consistent with the recommendation of the National Committee of Audit, complements and extends the government's accountability under the Charter of Budget Honesty.As noted by my colleague the Treasurer, the move to accruals means that, for the first time, the budget will contain financial statements for the Commonwealth general government sector for 1998-99, the budget in forward estimates years, including the statement of revenues and expenses, balance sheet, cash flow statement and capital budget statement. This means that parliament and the community at large will have comprehensive information on the financial performance of the government consistent with the information disclosed in company annual reports. This information will be complemented by the inclusion in the portfolio budget statements of full financial statements for all Commonwealth agencies. In providing estimates in this way, the Commonwealth is moving ahead of the general practice in the private sector where budgets are rarely, if ever, released to shareholders and certainly not for a five-year time period.Under the accrual framework, the focus in the government's appropriation bills is on achieving agency outcomes rather than the current input focus and funding for the full price of agency outputs or administrative expenses estimated to be incurred rather than merely estimates of cash payments to be made. Taken together, these changes disclose to the parliament the full costs of the government's activities and allow a greater focus on performance of agencies. Appropriation Bill (No. 2) provides for the revenues of agencies to meet expenses in relation to grants to the states under section 96 of the Constitution and for payments to the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory, administered expenses on new outcomes and equity injections and loans to agencies, as well as administered capital funding.As part of the transition to accruals, any carryovers from 1998-99 associated with the former running cost system governing Commonwealth departments and agencies are being appropriated in bill No. 2 as an equity injection. Details of the proposed appropriations are set out in schedule 2 to the bill, the main features of which were outlined in the budget speech delivered by my colleague the Treasurer earlier this evening. I commend the bill to the House.Debate (on motion by Mr McMullan) adjourned.Bills5054r8105054Message from the Governor-General transmitting particulars of proposed expenditure and recommending appropriation announced.Bill presented by Mr Fahey, and read a first time.505420:06:005054Fahey, John, MPMr FAHEYHQ5MacarthurLPFinance and Administration10—I move: That the bill be now read a second time.The purpose of this bill is to appropriate the consolidated revenue fund for the expenses of the parliamentary departments for the year ending 30 June 2000. The total amount sought is $161.4 million. Details of the proposed appropriations are set out in the schedule to the bill. I commend the bill to the House.Debate (on motion by Mr McMullan) adjourned.Miscellaneous505520:08:005055Slipper, Peter, MPMr SLIPPER0V5FisherLP10—I move:Excise Tariff Proposal No. 1 (1999)Customs Tariff Proposal No. 2 (1999)Excise Tariff Proposal No. 1 (1999) and Customs Tariff Proposal No. 2 (1999), which I have just tabled, contain alterations to the Excise Tariff Act 1921 and the Customs Tariff Act 1995. They implement increases in excise and customs duties on aviation kerosene, avtur and aviation gasoline—avgas—as announced by the Treasurer in his budget speech earlier this evening. These increases will operate from midnight tonight.The new rate of duty on both avtur and avgas will be 2.71c per litre. A portion of the increase will be paid to the Civil Aviation Safety Authority to fund its role of fostering air safety regulation in Australia. The remainder of the increase will defray the government's subsidisation of Airservices Australia operations at a number of control towers at regional and general aviation airports.An increase in the excise and customs duties of 0.391c per litre on avtur and 0.467c per litre for avgas will be assigned to CASA. It is estimated that the increases on aviation fuels attributable to CASA will raise $8.6 million per annum in combined excise and customs duties. An additional increase of 0.51c per litre on both avtur and avgas will offset the government's subsidisation of Airservices. It is expected to raise $11.1 million per annum in combined excise and customs duties. I commend the proposals to the House.Debate (on motion by Mr McMullan) adjourned.20:10:005055House adjourned at 8.10 p.m.Notices5055The following notices were given:Dr Theophanous to move:That this House, noting that:(1) the administration of the visitors' visa program is a matter of serious concern to a large number of Members of Parliament, especially the impression created that there is discrimination with respect to particular countries, such as China, Turkey, Lebanon, Vietnam and India;(2) representatives of the tourism industry and ethnic communities have expressed great concern about this matter in a number of public forums;(3) the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs attempts to justify its discriminatory practices based on an assessment of risk factors which rely on a specific definition of non-returnees; and(4) this definition of non-returnees is open to challenge as is demonstrated in the material provided by the Member for Calwell to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs—calls upon the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs to initiate an inquiry into the administration of the visitors' visa program which would include:(a) an assessment of the various categories which go into the definition of non-returnees and whether those categories legitimately apply;(b) an overall assessment of all the countries which are listed under the risk factor in the light of any re-evaluation of the non-returnees category; and(c) an evaluation of the practices of the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs with respect to the administration of visitors' visas, including any misuse of the powers granted to officers in relation to visitors' visas.Mr Reith to move:That standing order 48A (adjournment and next meeting) be suspended for the sitting on Thursday, 13 May 1999. Mr Reith to move:That the time for presenting the report of the Joint Select Committee on the Retailing Sector on the degree of industry concentration within the retailing sector in Australia be extended to 30 August 1999.Mr Slipper to move:That, in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Committee Act 1969, the following proposed work be referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works for consideration and report: CSIRO Clayton (Eastern Precinct) Development Works, Vic.Answers to Questions in Writing5057The following answers to questions were circulated:5057(Question No. 61)615057Crosio, Janice, MPMrs Crosio7T4ProspectALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Justice and Customs, upon notice, on 11 November 1998:(1) Is the Minister able to say, according to the most recent figures, (a) how many pirate CDs Australian Customs has seized coming into Australia and (b) the estimated value of the material seized, since the Government approved the parallel importation of CDs; if not, why not.(2) Has the Government allocated extra resources or funding to Australian Customs for the detection and confiscation of imported pirate CDs; if not, why not.(3) Is Australian Customs conducting an operation specifically designed to detect and seize imported pirate CDs; if not, why not; if so, (a) what is the name of the operation, (b) when did it begin, (c) how many staff have been allocated to work on the operation, (d) is the operation ongoing or does it have a scheduled end-date and (e) what is its budget.(4) Has the Minister directed Australian Customs to be alert specifically for imported pirate CDs since the Government approved parallel importation; if so, when was the direction made; if not, (a) why not and (b) will the Minister direct them accordingly.(5) Has the Minister's attention been drawn to comments by Mr Michael Speck, Manager of Music Industry Piracy Investigations (MIPI), that triad gangs controlling CD distribution in Asia have unwittingly been granted an entry into the Australian music market by the Government's approval of parallel importation; if so, what is the Minister's response; if not, will the Minister examine the comments and respond; if not, why not.(6) Has Australian Customs or the Australian Federal Police uncovered or detected any evidence to suggest that organised crime is importing pirate CDs following the Government's approval of parallel importation; if so, will the Minister provide details.(7) Is Australian Customs' staff working with staff of MIPI, on any level, to detect and seize imported pirate CDs being imported into Australia; if not, (a) why not and (b) will the Minister direct Australian Customs to work with MIPI and coordinate its operations more closely with the agency; if not, why not.5057Williams, Daryl, MPMr Williams7V5TangneyLPAttorney-General10—The Minister for Justice and Customs has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) Australian Customs has examined numerous consignments of CDs imported into Australia for compliance with the import provisions of the Copyright Act 1968; (a) since 31 July 1998 it has seized 2,438 pirate CDs, (b) estimated Customs value is $5700.00.(2) No. Customs officers at the border are alert to a range of prohibited goods including narcotics, guns, quarantine items, child pornography and counterfeit CDs. Apart from narcotics having the first priority of search and detection, all other goods including counterfeit CDs are treated the same, that is, when they are detected action is taken to seize.(3) No. For the reasons mentioned above.(4) No. Customs was already aware of the importance of this issue but the effectiveness of any enforcement action will continue to be limited by the lack of information/intelligence to identify illegal importations.(5) Mr Michael Speck, Manager of MIPI, is reported as making such comments. However to date, he has not produced any information to Customs or the Australian Federal Police to corroborate the statements. Should he provide such specific information, appropriate action will be considered.(6) No. This issue has been raised by the music industry, in particular MIPI, but they have not produced any evidence to support this claim. Should specific information be forthcoming, Customs and the Australian Federal Police will use it.(7) Yes. Customs often call in an "industry expert" to establish if imported goods infringe the legislation whilst being conscious of commercial confidentiality and privacy. Customs has, however, advised the music industry and MIPI on numerous occasions that it would welcome any specific commercial information or intelligence which might assist it in the targeting of possible infringing imports.5058(Question No. 77)775058Crosio, Janice, MPMrs Crosio7T4ProspectALP00 asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 12 November 1998:(1) According to the most recent information, what sum has been approved for projects under the Federation Fund (a) in total and (b) for each electoral division.(2) Will he provide a list showing the (a) name of each project for which funding has been approved, (b) date of approval and (c) sum to be received; if not, why not.(3) When will the process of approving projects for the allocation of funds under the Federation Fund be completed.(4) Will he explain the selection process by which each successful Federation Fund project is approved; if not, why not; if so, (a) is there a selection panel involved, (b) who are the individuals on the selection panel, (c) who chairs the selection panel, (d) are members on the panel remunerated for their work or do they participate in an entirely voluntary capacity and (e) if remuneration occurs, (i) what form does it take, (ii) what sum does each receive and (iii) how regularly is it received.5058Howard, John, MPMr HowardZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) As at 22 February 1999:(a) $1006.8 million has been approved for expenditure on projects under the Federation Fund;(b) Table 1 lists the major projects under the Federation Fund that have been announced, the amount of assistance to be provided from the Fund for each project, and the electoral division in which each project is located.(2) Table 1 lists the major projects under the Federation Fund that have been announced, the amount of assistance to be provided from the Fund for each project. It also shows the date of announcement of each project. The relevant dates of approval are not provided—those details are Cabinet-in-Confidence.(3) In the near future.(4) The Government established the following processes to deal with the selection of major Federation Fund projects:Federation Fund proposals received were registered by the Federation Fund Task Force established in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. The Task Force acknowledged receipt of the proposal and submitted the application, together with an assessment of the degree to which it met the Federation Fund criteria and any other information requested by the Government, to a committee of ministers.The Task Force provided advice on each proposal received for Federation Fund funding, but was not asked to make recommendations in relation to proposals.The committee of ministers, operating under the authority of Cabinet, was established to consider applications for Federation Fund assistance. The committee was chaired by the Prime Minister and comprised the Deputy Prime Minister, the Treasurer, the Minister for the Environment, the Minister for Communications, the Information Economy and the Arts, the Minister for Industry, Science and Tourism, the Minister for Finance and Administration, and the Minister for Transport and Regional Development.The committee of ministers made recommendations to Cabinet in relation to possible Federation Fund projects. All selections were ratified by Cabinet.See footnote 1 to Table 1 for information regarding the FCHP and FCP programs.TABLE 1: MAJOR FEDERATION FUND PROJECTS BY EXPENDITURE, ELECTORATE AND DATE OF ANNOUNCEMENT*(4) ProjectTotal ($m)(4) Electoral DivisionDate of announcementNational/ACTNational Museum147Fraser1997-98 BudgetAustralian Federation Centre5.5Canberra30 September 1998National Centre for Christianity and Australian Culture5Fraser20 September 1998 Australian War Memorial11.9Fraser2 September 1998Manuka Oval1Fraser17 December 1998FCHP and FCP programs1100National15 October 1998Western AustraliaJervoise Bay80Fremantle26 January 1998Prospectors' and Miners' Hall of Fame5Kalgoorlie25 August 1998SA/NTNational Wine Centre12Adelaide2 September 1998Alice Springs-Darwin railway100Northern Territory23 August 1997QueenslandBrisbane Light Rail65Brisbane13 March 1998Heritage Trails Network 250Statewide30 May 1998Institute of Molecular Bioscience15Ryan10 June 1998New South WalesSydney Harbour Federation Trust96Warringah, North Sydney, Bennelong, Sydney5 September 1998Grahame Park12Robertson29 May 1998St Andrew's Cathedral5Sydney27 February 1998Marine Sciences Centre12Cowper23 September 1998NIDA25Sydney20 September 1998Murray River Bridges (3)22Farrer12 February,16 September,18 September 1998, Holsworthy Rifle Range9Hughes19 September 1998Centennial and Moore Parks10Wentworth24 September 1998 Line of Lode Museum, Broken Hill 4.6Parkes14 September 1998Shearers' Hall of Fame, Hay4.7Riverina8 September 1998Belgenny Farm Wool Centre6Macarthur16 September 1998Gunnedah Performing Arts Centre1.6Gwydir3 September 1998Tamworth Entertainment Centre1.2New England11 August 1998Naval Aviation Museum, Nowra1.6Gilmore17 September 1998Oddfellows Hall, Corowa0.8Farrer6 September 1998 VictoriaShrine of Remembrance5Melbourne Ports22 September 1998National Gallery of Victoria25Melbourne Ports13 November 1997Australian Centre for the Moving Image50Melbourne16 September 1998Murray River Bridges (3)22Mallee, Murray, Indi12 February, 16 September, 18 September 1998Commonwealth Technology Park22.5Melbourne14 September 1998Regional Art Galleries312Statewide21 July 1998Victorian College of the Arts10Melbourne Ports26 July 1998Ballarat and Bendigo sports facilities2Ballarat, Bendigo11 and 30 September 1998Walhalla Goldfields railway1McMillan15 September 1998Defence sites at Portsea and Queenscliff7Corangamite, Flinders24 September 1998TasmaniaTSO Concert Hall1Denison27 June 1998Abt railway20.5Lyons24 July 1998Total986.9* These figures have been rounded to the nearest $100,0001 The Federation Cultural and heritage Projects (FCHP) program is the joint responsibility of the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts and the Minister for the Environment and Heritage; the Ministers announced 60 successful projects around Australia on 15 October 1998. The Federation Community Projects (FCP) program will provide funding for projects in each electoral division ($200,000 per electorate), with announcements to be made later in 1999; the Minister for the Arts and the Centenary of Federation has responsibility for funding decisions under the program.2 The Queensland Heritage Trails Network involves four heritage trails, involving over 20 sites across Queensland.3 The Federation Fund is providing assistance to 16 regional art galleries across Victoria.5060(Question No. 82)825060Crosio, Janice, MPMrs Crosio7T4ProspectALP00 asked the Minister for Health and Aged Care, upon notice, on 23 November 1998:(1) What Commonwealth funding was provided in each financial year since 2 March 1996 directly to projects or programs operating in the electoral divisions of (a) Prospect, (b) Fowler, (c) Reid, (d) Chifley, (e) Lindsay, (f) Werriwa, (g) Greenway, (h) Blaxland and (i) Parramatta with the purpose of (i) combating or (ii) preventing the negative health effects of opiate addiction.(2) With respect to each project or program referred to in part (1), (a) what is its name, (b) who operates it, (c) what are its aims and objectives, (d) what funding has it received and (e) in what year did Commonwealth funding commence.(3) Has Commonwealth funding or resources been allocated to assist State and Territory governments carry out rapid detoxification trials or programs since 2 March 1996; if so, (a) what funding or resources have been allocated and (b) why did the Commonwealth allocate the resources or resources.(4) Will he act to regulate the proliferation in Australia of private health clinics and organisations offering opiate addicts rapid detoxification cures before clinical trials of rapid detoxificants are completed by State and Territory authorities; if not, why not; if so, what action will he take.(5) Has his attention been drawn to the fact that (a) opiate addicts undergoing rapid detoxification in private clinics are paying up to $10,000 for the treatment which is not recoverable under private health insurance or Medicare, (b) rapid detoxification treatments, such as Naltrexone, are being marketed to the Australian public by private health clinics as instant cures when the actual cure rate is less than 50 per cent and (c) unscrupulous profiteers are moving into the rapid detoxification industry without having the necessary expertise or experience; if so, will he act to regulate the (i) proliferation and (ii) advertising claims and marketing practices of the rapid detoxification industry; if not, why not.(6) What legal requirements and obligations apply to operators of rapid detoxification treatment programs and how are they enforced.(7) Are the requirements referred to in part (a) sufficient and (b) being policed effectively; if so, why; if not, why not.(8) Has his attention been drawn to comments by Dr Alex Wodak, Director of Alcohol and Drug Services at St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, and NSW State MP, Mr Bill Rixon, that there is a black market in rapid opiate detoxificants such as Naltrexone; if so, will he act to combat the black market; if not, why not.(9) Will he provide the name of every (a) individual, (b) organisation, or (c) company that has registered concern with his office over the use of Naltrexone and other rapid detoxificants to treat opiate addicts in Australia; if not, why not.(10) Did he register concern with the Western Australian Government over its failure to adequately regulate a private trial of the drug Naltrexone by Dr George O'Neil; if so, (a) why did he register concern and (b) did four patients associated with Dr O'Neil's trial die.(11) Is the level of WA Government regulation governing Dr O'Neil's practice adequate; if so, why; if not, why not.5061Wooldridge, Dr Michael, MPDr Wooldridge8E4ChisholmLPHealth and Aged Care10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) As part of the National Illicit Drug Strategy, organisations received the following funding under the Non-Government Organisation Treatment Grants Program: The Ted Noffs Foundation received $1,465,417 (over four years) for a comprehensive non-residential treatment service for 12-18 year old substance abusers in the Wentworth area which includes the electorate of Lindsay.Youth Off The Streets received $1,000,000 (over four years) for the Dunlea Adolescent Alcohol and Other Drug Program for an intensive residential program for young adults with a history of substance abuse in the electorate of Reid.Richmond Fellowship received $395,846 (over four years) for young people with a history of mental health problems along with substance abuse in the electorate of Lindsay.Odyssey House McGrath Foundation received two grants of $997,531 and $186,237 (over four years) in the electorate of Werriwa. The first grant was to establish a residential medicated detoxification service and the second was to expedite assessment and treatment for children in families with drug dependence problems.Under the Community Partnerships Initiative, the Vietnamese Community in Australia (NSW Chapter) Inc received funding of $75,000 (over two years) to undertake a primary prevention project in Cabramatta, which is situated in the electorate of Fowler.No funding was provided directly from the Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care (and previous Departments incorporating the Health portfolio) in the period of 1983-1996.(2a) (a) A non-residential treatment service for 12-18 year olds.(b) The Ted Noffs Foundation.(c) The project aims to increase the ability of clients to manage their lives effectively and includes case management (assessment, referral, continuing care), cognitive-behavioural skills training for adolescents and for their families, individual and family counselling and a social/recreational program.(d) $1,465,417 over four years.(e) December 1998.(2b) (a) "Dunlea"(b) Youth Off The Streets(c) Its aim is to address and reduce the harm associated with substance use in adolescents. It is a 2-4 week residential alcohol and other drugs rehabilitation centre for young people aged between 15-18 years who are experiencing significant problems associated with drug usage.(d) $1,000,000 (over four years)(e) January 1999.(2c) (a) Dual diagnosis drug treatment service for young people (b) Richmond Fellowship(c) Its aim is to provide an innovative new service which will reduce the harm associated with illicit drug use. Its objectives are to provide a drug counselling and education service which is specific to the needs of young people with mental illness/mental health problems and problematic drug use, and which is integrated with existing services(d) $395,846 (over four years).(e) January 1999.(2d) (a) Grant 1—A residential medicated detoxification service.Grant 2—Treatment for children in families with drug dependence problems.(b) Odyssey House McGrath Foundation.(c) Grant 1—Its aim is to provide an established protocol by which clients can detoxify from specific drug groups in a supportive residential environment. Its objectives are to increase the level of knowledge of clients to reduce the risk of harm associated with drug misuse; achieve detoxification within 7-10 days; and provide counselling and referral informationGrant 2—Its aim is to expedite assessment and treatment for children in families with drug dependence problems by employing a child development specialist.(d) Grant 1—$997,531 (over four years).Grant 2—$186,237 (over four years).(e) Grant 1—February 1999Grant 2—Funding will commence in 1999.(2e) (a) "The Bright Future Family Project".(b) Vietnamese Community in Australia (NSW Chapter) Inc.(c) The project aims to educate and mobilise parents, carers and friends of Indo-Chinese young people in the South Western Sydney area to reduce illicit drug use and the problems arising from illicit drug use amongst Indo-Chinese young people. The project will include three stages including a media drug information campaign targeting parents, carers and friends; a face to face bilingual education program; and a train the trainer program.(d) $75,000 (over two years) has been approved for the project, with the first payment due to be paid in late December 1998.(e) December 1998.(3) No funding has been allocated to assist State and Territory Governments carry out rapid detoxification trials or programs since 2 March 1996. With a view to developing best practice in the treatment of opiate addiction, as part of the National Illicit Drug Strategy, the Commonwealth has committed $1.3 million towards a national evaluation of trials of alternative pharmacotherapies (including trials of naltrexone, buprenorphine, slow release oral morphine and LAAM) currently under way, or about to commence, in States and Territories. The trials included in this national evaluation have State and Territory Government support, and have been nominated by respective jurisdictional Governments to be included.(4) The Commonwealth Government does not regulate the way in which individual doctors or the medical profession in general conduct their practices. It is for medical practitioners to exercise their professional clinical judgement in deciding which procedures they should render to their patients having regard to the medical condition of the patient.(5) (a, b, c) I am aware that there are now a number of private clinics operating around the country making various claims about the effectiveness of naltrexone-assisted accelerated opiate detoxification.(i), (ii) The Commonwealth Government does not regulate the way in which individual doctors or the medical profession in general conduct their practices.It is for medical practitioners to exercise their professional clinical judgement in deciding which procedures they should render to their patients having regard to the medical condition of the patient.(6) A naltrexone product (ReVia tablets) is approved for general marketing in Australia for use as part of comprehensive treatment programs for alcohol dependence and also as adjunctive therapy in the maintenance of formerly opioid-dependent patients who have ceased the use of opioids such as heroin and morphine.It is not approved for use for rapid or accelerated opiate detoxification. However the Therapeutic Goods Administration does not control the prescribing or treatment decisions of individual doctors.There are provisions under the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989 for use of drugs in clinical trials. This could include use of a registered product for a new indication. Such use could be conducted under the Clinical Trial Notification (CTN) or Clinical Trial Exemption (CTX) Scheme.Under the CTN Scheme there is no requirement that a clinical trial be approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration—only notification to the TGA by the sponsor of intention to conduct the trial is required. Responsibility for approving and monitoring the conduct of clinical trials rests with Institutional Ethics Committees.(7) (a, b) The TGA is considering issues relating to the current arrangements for supply of unregistered drugs. (8) Naltrexone is approved for general marketing in Australia.(9) A large number of individuals, organisations, and companies have registered both their support and concerns over the use of naltrexone and other rapid opiate detoxificants to treat opiate addicts in Australia. I am not prepared to seek the consent of each of these individuals, organisation and companies, to release their details.(10) (a) I have made my concerns known in private to the Western Australian government.(b) The TGA has received reports of the deaths of 13 individuals who had been treated with naltrexone for opiate dependence. In the cases where the information is available, these deaths are reported as occurring as a result of heroin overdose following cessation of Naltrexone therapy.(11) Issues of medical practice and the conduct of individual practitioners are matters for the States. However, the TGA has been working closely with the Health Department of WA and jointly commissioned a review by a group of experts regarding the mechanisms of supply of naltrexone as an unregistered drug, including supply in Dr O'Neil's treatment program. The reporting of deaths of patients who had been treated with naltrexone in Dr O'Neil's trial was a factor which led to the review.5063(Question No. 91)915063Andren, Peter, MPMr AndrenKL6CalareIND00 asked the Minister for Aged Care, upon notice, on 23 November 1998:(1) Will the Government act on the Productivity Commission's proposals on the funding of nursing homes.(2) Did the Productivity Commission propose in respect of nursing homes that (a) Government funding be sufficient and (b) the industry have adequate and appropriate representation to assist the Government implement changes; if so, will the Government adopt the proposals and, if so, how.(3) Did the Productivity Commission propose that coalescence should not proceed in its current form; if so, will she ensure that high-care nursing homes in New South Wales are refunded for the coalescence factor implemented from 1 July 1998.(4) Will the Government address an anomaly in the subsidy rates relating to Other Cost Reimbursed Expenditure for New South Wales.(5) Did the Productivity Commission identify deficiencies in the hostel system similar to those in the nursing home sector; if so, how will the Government address the deficiencies.(6) Did the Productivity Commission propose that additional Government funding support be provided to smaller nursing homes in rural and remote areas; if so, will she ensure that the particular needs of nursing homes in regional centres, like Bathurst and Orange, also receive additional funding.(7) Is it a fact that various State-related charges are not recognised in funding but have a significant impact on the viability of aged care facilities; if so, how will the Government take the charges into account.5063Bishop, Bronwyn, MPMrs Bronwyn BishopSE4MackellarLPAged Care10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) The Commission handed the final report to the Treasurer on 13 January 1999. The Government has now authorised the release of the Report and has been released today. Comment will be sought prior to a whole of Government response being made to the Report.(2) See answer to (1) above.(3) See answer to (1) above.(4) I am advised that the position is as follows.The system of reimbursement of salary on-costs (Other Cost Reimbursed Expenditure) that applied under the previous nursing home arrangements has ceased. Funding which takes account of these costs is now provided through the residential care subsidies and the payroll tax supplement. The amounts included for salary on-costs were derived from the average costs actually claimed by all residential care facilities under the previous arrangements. This was done with the support of industry associations who were fully involved in the development of the new funding structure.(5) See answer to (1) above.(6) See answer to (1) above.(7) State-related charges are a very small part of the overall cost structure of nursing homes. Funding which takes account of State-related charges is provided through the residential care subsidies and the payroll tax supplement. The amounts included for these charges were derived from the average costs actually claimed by all residential care facilities under the previous arrangements.5063(Question No. 116)1165063Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Family and Community Services, upon notice, on 23 November 1998:Did the Minister, his or her predecessor or his or her Department appoint a (a) former member of the Commonwealth Parliament or (b) member of the secretariats of the national offices of the Liberal Party of Australia, National Party of Australia, Australian Labor Party, Australian Democrats or Australian Greens as a (i) statutory appointment, (ii) consultant or (iii) other appointment to government boards or posts between 30 April 1996 and 31 August 1998; if so, in each case, (A) what was the person's name and the position to which he or she was appointed, (B) to which political party was he or she affiliated, (C) what remuneration was involved, (D) was the appointment (I) full-time, (II) part-time or (III) casual, (E) what fees were applicable and (F) with respect to (I) travel allowance, (II) vehicles, (III) telephones and (IV) attendance fees, (aa) what entitlements were claimable, (ab) how often were entitlements claimed and (ac) what sum was paid under each entitlement.5064Truss, Warren, MPMr TrussGT4Wide BayNPAgriculture, Fisheries and Forestry10—The Minister for Family and Community Services has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(a) Yes(ii) Yes(A) The Hon Dame Margaret Guilfoyle DBE was engaged to undertake a Review of the Social Security Review and Appeals System.(B) The Liberal Party of Australia.(C) Fee for service.(D) (III)Yes(E) A fee of $100 000 was paid for carrying out the review and preparation of a Report.(F) (I) (aa) Standard SES travel allowance rates were claimable in respect of each trip made away from Dame Margaret's home base.(I) (ab) Travel allowance entitlements were paid on completion of each trip.(F) (I) (ac) $1647.95.(F) (II), (III) & (IV) Not applicable.(A) The Hon Dame Margaret Guilfoyle DBE was appointed as a member of the 1997 Review Committee of the Social Policy Research Centre (SPRC) at the University of New South Wales. The SPRC is subject to review as part of the regular updating of the contract between the Commonwealth and the University of NSW.(B) The Liberal Party of Australia.(C) Fee for service and sitting fees.(D) (I) The appointment was full-time as a member of a short-term Review Committee.(E) A total fee of $4788.80, half of which was paid by the University of NSW and half, or $2894.40 by the Commonwealth. The sitting fee based on Remuneration Tribunal rates ($235 per day) over a period of 14 days was $3290.00.(F) Apart from the above fees, no others were applicable apart from two return airfares from Melbourne to Sydney ($749.40 each or $1498.80).5064(Question No. 122)1225064Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Industry, Science and Resources, upon notice, on 23 November 1998:Did the Minister, his or her predecessor or his or her department appoint a (a) former member of the Commonwealth Parliament or (b) member of the secretariats of the national offices of the Liberal Party of Australia, National Party of Australia, Australian Labor Party, Australian Democrats or Australian Greens as a (i) statutory appointment, (ii) consultant or (iii) other appointment to government boards or posts between 30 April 1996 and 31 August 1998; if so, in each case, (A) what was the person's name and the position to which he or she was appointed, (B) to which political party was he or she affiliated, (C) what remuneration was involved, (D) was the appointment (I) full-time, (II) part-time or (III) casual, (E) what fees were applicable and (F) with respect to (I) travel allowance, (II) vehicles, (III) telephones and (IV) attendance fees, (aa) what entitlements were claimable, (ab) how often were entitlements claimed and (ac) what sum was paid under each entitlement.5064Moore, John, MPMr MooreEI4RyanLPDefence10—The Minister for Industry, Science and Resources has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:I am advised that the answer is:(a) (i) Yes(ii) No(iii) No(b) (i) Yes(ii) No(iii) NoThe following individuals were appointed to the nominated positions between 30 April 1996 and 31 August 1998 (the requested information follows in parts (B) to (F)):(a)(i)(A) Professor Peter Baume AO, (Chair of the Australian Sports Drug Agency (ASDA), initially appointed in 1991, reappointed 18 February 1997 (B) Liberal Party of Australia(C) Total payments (30 April 1996 to 31 August 1998): $6,038(D) Casual appointment(E) refer to paragraphs (aa) below(F) (I) (aa) up to $200 per meeting(ab) 4 claims(ac) $500(II) (aa) cost of transport between office/airport/meeting(ab) 10 claims(ac) $1,738(III) (aa) cost of telephone calls related to ASDA business, and rental for line(ab) 10 claims(ac) $550(IV) (aa) $325 per meeting(ab) 10 claims(ac) $3,250(a)(i)(A) The Hon Tony Staley, Member of the Tax Concession Committee of the Industry Research and Development Board, appointed 20 June 1997(B) Liberal Party of Australia(C) Total payments: $8,330.68(D) Part-time appointment(E) refer to paragraphs (aa) below(F) (I) (aa) $320 per overnight stay capital cities(ab) 7 claims(ac) $2,840(II) (aa) reasonable use of taxi service; mileage allowance for use of own car; and parking(ab) 3 claims(ac) $254.48(III) not applicable(IV) (aa) $502 per day, less for part-day(ab) 10 claims(ac) $5,236.20(b) (i)Mr Donald F J McDonald OBE, Member of the CSIRO Board, appointed 8 July 1998(B) National Party of Australia(C) $19,850 per annum(D) Part-time appointment(E) refer to paragraphs (aa) below(F) (I) (aa) $320 per overnight stay capital cities(ab) 1 claim(ac) $960(II) no entitlement(III) no entitlement(IV) no entitlementThe honourable member should note that my portfolio does not require disclosure, nor keep records of the employment history or political affiliations of appointees or consultants. The above information has been compiled from information which has been voluntarily disclosed by appointees and consultants, and recorded by the portfolio.It should also be noted that the response to (b) of the question relates only to persons who were members of the various secretariats at the time of their appointment.5065(Question No. 128)1285065Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs, upon notice, on 23 November 1998:(1) How many applications did the Department receive for the National Youth Roundtable before the original October 1998 deadline.(2) What was the (a) age and (b) place and State of residence of each applicant referred to in part (1).(3) Will the applications received before the October deadline be accorded priority over later applications.5065Kemp, Dr David, MPDr KempBT4GoldsteinLPEducation, Training and Youth Affairs; Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) The Department received 505 applications, of which 461 fell within the age criteria for eligibility, before the October 1998 deadline for applications from young people to participate in the National Youth Roundtable.(2a) The age breakdown of the eligible applicants per State/Territory is provided at Attachment A.(b) A detailed list of place of residence is at Attachment B.(3) No.(b) ATTACHMENT AAge breakdown of applicants per State/TerritoryAgeState/Territory15161718192021222324NSW4.8%12.7%17.5%12.7%14.3%6.3%11.1%11.1%6.3%3.1%VIC1.6%9.4%18.8%17%4.7%14%3%14%9.4%7.8%QLD5%15.1%20.2%12.6%9.2%7.6%9.2%4.2%5%11.8%SA10%13.5%25.8%14.6%3.4%4.5%4.5%12.4%3.4%7.9%WA4.3%23%17.4%8.7%8.7%13%5.8%5.8%10%2.9%NT11%33%38.9%5.6%5.6%--5.6%--TAS4.5%9.1%31.8%4.5%4.5%22.7%18.2%4.5%--ACT-17.6%11.8%17.6%5.9%17.6%11.8%5.9%5.9%5.9%Places of residence of applicants for the National Youth RoundtableNEW SOUTH WALESAlbion ParkArmidaleBellevue HillBerryBerry ParkBomaderryBungendoreCabramattaCarlingfordCherrybrookCobarConcordCootamundraCowraFairy MeadowGlebeGoulburnGraftonHornsbyKalangKariongKingsfordLane CoveLeichhardtMangertonMaroubraMerrylandsMetfordMoreeMoruyaNewtownNth RocksOakhurstOatleyOrangeOrchard HillsPottsville BeachPymbleQueanbeyanRooty HillRose BayRydeSt Ives St LeonardsTamworthThe OaksThirroulUltimoUrbanWentworthvilleWollongongWombatSOUTH AUSTRALIAAdelaideAldgateAllenby GardensAthelstoneBallannahBarmeraBlakeviewBridgewaterBroadviewCedunaCoober PedyCrafersDover GardensEdwardstownElizabeth SouthEvandaleFlagstaff HillGawler WestGilbertonGlenelgGreenwithHallett CoveHappy ValleyKapundaKensington ParkKingscoteKingstonKingswoodLight PassMagillMcLaren ValeMedindie GardensModbury HeightsMorphett ValeMount BarkerMount GambierMount PleasantMurray BridgeO'Halloran HillParalowieParksideParndanaPaynehamPort AugustaPort LincolnPort LincolnPort NeillProspectQuornRedwood ParkRenmarkReynella East RostrevorSalisburySalisbury EastSalisbury HeightsSeacombe GardensSeatonSeaview DownsSemaphoreSheidow parkSmithfield PlainsSouth PlymptonStonyfellTailem BendTanundaThebartonTorrensvilleTrott ParkUnleyUpper SturtVictor HarborWest LakesWhyallaWynn ValeTASMANIABlackmans BayChigwellDynnyrneHobartInvermayKings MeadowsKingstonLauncestonMt Stuart, HobartNew NorfolkOld BeachOtago BayRiversideSomersetSouth HobartTaroonaTranmereYoungtownAUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORYActonCampbellChapmanDicksonDownerDuffyFlynnForrestIsaacsKambahLynehamLyonsMonashRed HillRichardsonWatsonQUEENSLAND 8 Mile PlainsAlbany CreekAlexandra HillsAshgroveAspleyBayview HeightsBiloelaBirkdaleBli BliBrisbaneBroadbeach WatersBuddinaBuderimBuranda, BrisbaneBurleigh WatersCabooltureCairnsCalamvaleCapalabaCawarralClontarfCollingwood ParkCoorparooDalbyDutton ParkEast IpswichEast MackayGreenslopesHatton ValeHeatleyInghamIpswichKaraleeKenmoreKeperraKingstonLaidleyLake PlacidMackayMcDowallMilesMillaa MillaaMillmerranMolendinarMoores PocketMountain CreekMouraMundingburraNambourNerangNewtownNorth BoovalNorth BuderimNorth IpswichOrmistonPetriePialbaPimpamaRaceviewRedbank PlainsRedland BayRobinaRockhampton RomaRuncornSalisburyShailer ParkSouth TownsvilleSpringwoodSt LuciaStudio VillageThe GapThornesideThuringowa CityToowongToowoombaTownsvilleUpper KedronWarwickWellington PointWoombyeWorongaryWurtullaYamantoYerongaWESTERN AUSTRALIAAtwellBictonBridgetownBull CreekCarnarvonCollieCorriginDenmarkDuncraigEdgewater, PerthEsperanceFitzroy CrossingFremantleGirrawheenGosnellsGreenwoodGuildfordHuntingdaleJoondalupKalamundaKalgoorlieKalgoorlie-BoulderKambalda WestKarrathaKelmscottKelscottKensingtonKingsleyKinrossKojonupKununurraLesmurdieMandurahManningMargaret RiverMurdochNannupNorandaNortham OreliaPadburyPerthRockinghamRoleystoneSubiacoThornlieVictoria ParkWannerooWembley DownsWest KambaldaWestfieldWillettonWilliamsWilsonWongan HillsNORTHERN TERRITORYAlawaAlice SpringsAnulaBerrimahBrinkinDarwinJabiruJingiliKatherineNightcliffWinnellieWulagiVICTORIAArmadaleAshburtonBairnsdaleBeaumarisBell Post HillBendigoBentleighBox HillBox Hill NorthBrightonBrunswickBrunswick WestBuchanCamberwellCaulfield SouthDarnumDevenishDingleyDumbalkEast BrightonElwoodEssendonFerny CreekFootscrayGarfieldGreensboroughGrovedaleHawthornHopetounHorshamInverloch IvanhoeKeilor DownsKewLeongathaMalvern EastManifold HeightsMilduraMooroolbarkMorwellMount HelenMount WaverleyMulgraveNoble ParkNorth FitzroyPortlandRingwood NorthSandringhamSouth YarraTangambalangaVermont SouthWantirnaWarragulWarrandyteWarrnamboolWatsoniaWattle GlenWheelers Hill5072(Question No. 141)1415072Latham, Mark, MPMr LathamK26WerriwaALP00 asked the Minister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs, upon notice, on 24 November 1998:(1) Did Australia accede on 6 August 1986 to UNESCO's 1979 Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Diplomas and Degrees concerning Higher Education in the States belonging to the Europe Region.(2) Was Australia the first country outside Europe to become a party to the convention.(3) Which other countries outside Europe have acceded to the convention and when did they do so.(4) Did Germany become a party to the convention on 8 December 1994.(5) Was Germany the last country in Europe to become a party to the convention.(6) Was a memorandum of understanding on recognition of academic qualifications signed in Canberra on 29 September 1998 between the Australian Commonwealth Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs and the Secretariat of the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs of the German Lnder. (7) What steps has Australia taken towards concluding such memorandums with other parties to the convention.5072Kemp, Dr David, MPDr KempBT4GoldsteinLPEducation, Training and Youth Affairs; Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Australia acceded to the UNESCO Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Diplomas and Degrees concerning Higher Education in the States belonging to the Europe Region on 6 August 1986.(2) Australia was the second country outside Europe to become a party to the Convention. Israel became a party to the Convention on 13 August 1981. Canada followed Australia on 6 March 1990.(3) Countries outside Europe that acceded to the Convention and dates of accession are:Israel—13.08.81; Australia—06.08.86; Turkey—28.04.88; Canada—06.03.90; Armenia—21.09.91; Kazakhstan—16.12.91; Tajikistan—28.08.92; Azerbaijan—29.12.94; Kirghizistan—18.02.96.(4) Germany became a party to the UNESCO Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Diplomas and Degrees concerning Higher Education in the States belonging to the Europe Region on 30 December 1994.(5) As stated in UNESCO information on State parties to the UNESCO Convention on the Recognition of Studies, Diplomas and Degrees concerning Higher Education in the States belonging to the Europe Region, Germany was the last country in Europe to become a party to the convention. (6) A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on Recognition of Academic Qualifications between the Commonwealth Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs (DEETYA) and the Secretariat of the Standing Conference of the Ministers of Education and Cultural Affairs of the Lnder in the Federal Republic of Germany was signed in Canberra on 29 September 1998.(7) The Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (DETYA) has worked towards bilateral agreements with a number of other key European countries.In October 1997, the National Office of Overseas Skills Recognition (NOOSR), a Branch of Higher Education Division in DETYA, jointly with the Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee signed a record of understanding on arrangements for the recognition of qualifications with Italy. This built on earlier work under the Program of Cultural Cooperation between the two countries and provides for appropriate levels of comparison of academic titles.Discussions have taken place with the French Ministry of National Education, Research and Technology in relation to the recognition of higher education qualifications and it is possible that an MOU with France may be signed in the near future.5073(Question No. 155)1555073McClelland, Robert, MPMr McClellandJK6BartonALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 24 November 1998:(1) Has his attention been drawn to studies proposing that the safest mode of operation for Sydney (Kingsford-Smith) Airport and surrounding air space is one which maintains segregated air space; if so, (a) what studies and (b) what were the major recommendations of the studies with respect to developing segregated air space.(2) Has the Government abandoned the use of segregated air space at Sydney (Kingsford-Smith) Airport, if so, why.5073Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) and (2) Segregated airspace was introduced in Sydney in the mid 1990s and such airspace arrangements continue to be used in Sydney. This is supported by a study conducted by Ratner and Associates in 1992. 5073(Question No. 187)1875073McClelland, Robert, MPMr McClellandJK6BartonALP00 asked the Minister for Health and Aged Care, upon notice, on 24 November 1998:Did his office provide any direction, guidance or indication to the Health Insurance Commission on which Medicare customer service centres it should consider closing; if so, what are the details.5073Wooldridge, Dr Michael, MPDr Wooldridge8E4ChisholmLPHealth and Aged Care10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:The HIC discussed the criteria for closure with me, however, I did not tell them which offices to close.5073(Question No. 209)2095073Latham, Mark, MPMr LathamK26WerriwaALP00 asked the Minister for Health and Aged Care, upon notice, on 26 November 1998:Further to the answer to question no. 804 (Hansard, 3 December 1996, page 7604), what proportion of (a) total health expenditure in Australia was funded by health insurance funds in each year since 1994-95 and (b) recurrent health expenditure was funded by health insurance funds for (i) public hospitals, (ii) private hospitals, (iii) medical services, (iv) dental services, (v) other professional services and (vi) all other services in each year since 1994-95.5073Wooldridge, Dr Michael, MPDr Wooldridge8E4ChisholmLPHealth and Aged Care10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:Detailed information on health expenditure (other than that funded by private health insurance funds) is not available beyond 1995-96. Most data on health expenditure is collected by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. The data below shows total health expenditure in Australia since 1994-95 funded by private health insurance funds. 1994-95—32.8% 1995-96—31.9% 1996-97—31.3%Source: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Health Expenditure Bulletin Number 14, November 1998.The attached table shows funding of areas of recurrent expenditure by health insurance funds as a proportion of total funding for the years 1989-90 through to 1995-96. 5074(Question No. 303)3035074Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Employment Services, upon notice, on 7 December 1998:(1) Has his Department met with the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI) since 2 March 1996 to discuss employment, education and training issues; if so, (a) on how many occasions, (b) when were the (i) first and (ii) latest meetings held and (c) how regularly are the meetings held.(2) Has his Department met with other organisations since 2 March 1996 to discuss employment, education and training issues; if so, (a) which organisations, (b) when were the (i) first and (ii) latest meetings held in each case and (c) how regularly are the meetings held.(3) Which organisations did his Department regularly consult before 2 March 1996 on employment, education and training issues, especially as they related to Working Nation.(4) How has the consultation process changed from 1993-96 to 1996-98.(5) Has his Department allocated funds to assist the ACCI to communicate to employers the range of Job Network services available and how employers can access them; if so, (a) what sum was allocated, (b) when was the allocation approved, (c) what is the nature of the communication process between the ACCI and employers, (d) have departmental officers been seconded to the ACCI to assist the communication process; if so, in each case, (i) what is the substantive position of the officer and (ii) for what period has the officer been seconded and (e) how is the communication process being monitored for effectiveness.(6) Has his Department allocated funds to assist other organisations to communicate to constituent bodies the range of Job Network services available and how these services can be accessed; if so, (a) which organisations and (b) how does the arrangement differ in each case from that entered into with the ACCI.5074Abbott, Tony MPMr AbbottEZ5WarringahLPEmployment Services10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:The following response covers the Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business and the employment component of its predecessor, the Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs. The honourable member may wish to ask this Question of the Minister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs in respect of areas for which he has responsibility. (1) (2) and (3) My Department and its predecessors have for many years consulted a wide range of organisations, including the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI), on employment issues. There is no single forum for such consultations, and it would be a major undertaking to provide comprehensive data at the level of detail sought. I am not willing to commit the resources which would be needed to undertake that task.(4) I am advised that there has been no fundamental change in the consultative procedures employed by my Department and its predecessors over the period in question.(5) The Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business has not allocated funds for this purpose, although the Department has provided ACCI with a range of information, including background information and brochures.(a) Not applicable.(b) Not applicable.(c) Not applicable.(d) No, however, one officer was granted Leave Without Pay and Commonwealth funding, unrelated to Job Network, contributed to his employment at ACCI from 1 May 1998 until his resignation from the Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs on 31 July 1998.(e) Not applicable.(6) (a) The Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business provides funding to Area Consultative Committees to advise me on employment issues and on ways to improve job and training opportunities in their regions. Core functions of Area Consultative Committees include supporting the effective establishment and operation of Job Network in their region by:. bringing together Job Network members on issues of common interest;. promoting Job Network particularly to employers (and particularly among small to medium sized businesses); and. advising me on the impact of Job Network and the extent to which providers collectively are meeting the needs of local employers and job seekers.(b) Not applicable.5074(Question No. 306)3065074Hall, Jill, MPMs Hall83NShortlandALP00 asked the Minister for Aged Care, upon notice, on 7 December 1998:Are there inequities in the subsidisation of small compared with large, and metropolitan compared with rural, nursing homes and hostels; if so, what steps is the Government taking to eliminate the inequities.5075Bishop, Bronwyn, MPMrs Bronwyn BishopSE4MackellarLPAged Care10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:The Government currently provides a viability supplement to help small services in rural and remote parts of country Australia.At the request of the Government, the Productivity Commission conducted an inquiry into Nursing Home subsidies that included funding methodologies.The Commission handed the final report to the Treasurer on 13 January 1999. The Government has now authorised the release of the Report and it has been released today. Comment will then be sought prior to a whole of Government response being made to the Report.5075(Question No. 325)3255075Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, upon notice, on 9 December 1998:(1) In each month in (a) 1995-96, (b) 1996-97, (c) 1997-98 and (d) 1998-99 to the date of answering this question, (i) how many unauthorised arrivals occurred at (A) Australian airports in total and (B) each airport, (ii) from which countries did they come immediately before arriving in Australia and (iii) what was their claimed nationality on arrival.(2) In each month in (a) 1995-96, (b) 1996-97, (c) 1997-98 and (d) 1998-99 to the date of answering this question, (i) how many unauthorised arrivals occurred at (A) Australian sea ports in total and (B) each sea port, (ii) from which countries did they come immediately before arriving in Australia and (iii) what was their claimed nationality on arrival.(3) What action has the Government taken since 1995-96 to monitor and prevent unauthorised airport arrivals and at what cost.(4) Is there evidence of organised rackets involving unauthorised entry through (a) airports and (b) sea ports; if so, (i) in either case, in which countries do the rackets originate, (ii) if different rackets are involved at airports and seaports what strategies has the Government adopted to counteract them, (iii) what instructions has he given for Australian authorities to cooperate with international enforcement agencies to counteract the rackets and (iv) what assessment process has been established to measure the success of measures to counteract the rackets.5075Ruddock, Philip, MPMr Ruddock0J4BerowraLPImmigration and Multicultural Affairs; Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Reconciliation10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) (i) (a)1995-96: UNAUTHORISED ARRIVALS AT AUSTRALIAN AIRPORTSAdelaideBrisbaneCairnsDarwinMelbournePerthSydneyTOTALJuly231-1284066August12--583551September2---5102643October-2-3331930November-11-1322239December-4--172436January-312242638February11--113539March-4--8113760April----1834869May-45-6144372June-171-121086126Total 641958681441669(1)(i) (b)1996-97: UNAUTHORISED ARRIVALS AT AUSTRALIAN AIRPORTSAdelaideBrisbaneCairnsDarwinMelbournePerthSydneyTOTALJuly -12--3423684August-71212106395September-2--725768October14311517398November-4--16976105December-6--1394775January-17--111585128February181125668110March-3551272693187April-151117896138May-13-4171998151June-1211101470108Total 213512112041218621347(1)(i) (c)1997-98: UNAUTHORISED ARRIVALS AT AUSTRALIAN AIRPORTSAdelaideBrisbaneCairnsDarwinMelbournePerthSydneyTOTALJuly -182-161289137August-1051126103137September-27177768117October12042101485136November219-715678127December312-325968120January-21341345499February-30-921172133March-352-4673120April-26--69103144May2331-24491155June122-412383125Total92731837165819671550(1)(i) (d)1998-99: UNAUTHORISED ARRIVALS AT AUSTRALIAN AIRPORTSMonthAdelaideBrisbaneCairnsDarwinMelbournePerthSydneyOtherTOTALJuly 13319621080160August146531510840164September-181-8171200164October531-120161320205November-23--32211153194December418-11917990158January333792119850177February-36-53119840175Total 14238142815212182731397(1)(ii)1998-99: LAST COUNTRIES OF EMBARKATION FOR UNAUTHORISED ARRIVALS TO AUSTRALIACountry of EmbarkationJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEB1998/9 9 to dateArgentina111-1--15Bahrain34231054233Fiji--1-----1France----1---1Hong Kong9511261549685Indonesia317795131117100Japan1012663713158Korea, South10277112814988Malaysia2922306145271930263Mauritius-11-----2New Caledonia-----11-2New Zealand102081315417592Papua New Guinea-1------1PRC2-32754427Philippines432-1143431Singapore2838353938223429263South Africa61086626852Taiwan-1--153414Thailand113412209122123142United Arab Emirates--112113523United Kingdom-1------1USA----5-5313Vanuatu2-------2Vietnam1-241--2331Zimbabwe-1-9---515Unknown31529881652TOTAL 1601641642051941621771751397NOTE: Data available only from 1 July 1998 to date (not kept for previous years).(1)(iii)1995-96: CLAIMED NATIONALITY ON ARRIVAL OF UNAUTHORISED ARRIVALSClaimed NationalityJULAU GSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJU NTota lAfghanistan----1---2--14Albania12----------3Algeria-5--1-212-4621Bangladesh1-1-2-----228Brazil---1------1-2Bulgaria2--------1--3Bermuda1-----------1Burundi-------2----2Canada---1--------1Chile----------1-1Colombia---1--2-1---4Congo-1----------1Costa Rica---------1--1Croatia---3--------3Denmark----1--2----3Ecuador--------4---4Ethiopia-2----------2Fiji-1-----1-1--3France-1-----11-1-4Germany--------1---1Ghana-----11-22-39Hong Kong----------1-1India2116--1--1-1224Indonesia289--1156110741109Iran-------1-3--4Iraq-12112-16-36133Israel-2-----21---5Italy--------1---1Japan2-----------2Korea (so called)---------1--1Korea, South2--1-1---1-16Liberia---------1--1Malaysia-2--2---4-1-9Mauritius-----1------1Mexico--1---------1Morocco-----------11Nepal-----------33Netherlands11-1-----1--4New Zealand344344111522548Nigeria---------3-14Pakistan---42231132220Peru----------1-1PRC342-255-97154092Philippines322-2-----1111Portugal---—----—1--1Romania-1----------1Russia (so called)---1-11-----3Samoa------------0Singapore3-----------3Somalia6793114581464683South Africa-----1--1-327Sri Lanka1-21-----63215Syria-----------11Taiwan1--------3--4Thailand--1-1--25104225Tunisia---------1--1Turkey-51251----1-15UAE--------1---1United Kingdom2-2312--219123USA---2-1----2-5Vietnam---------1--1 Yugoslavia1---------1-2Stateless3---1--4111213Unknown------2-----2TOTAL66514328393638386169741266691996-97: CLAIMED NATIONALITY ON ARRIVAL OF UNAUTHORISED ARRIVALSCLAIMED NAT'YJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNTotalAlbania------2-1---3Algeria1621258471041161Angola---------1--1Austria1-----------1Bahrain----------1-1Bangladesh3-1-132-213218Belarus----1-------1Brazil--1---------1Bulgaria---3--12-1--7Burma------1-1---2Cambodia5-----3---2-10Canada----1---111-4Colombia-----2---21-5Costa Rica---1--------1Czech Rep-----------11Denmark-------1----1Dominican Rep.-----------11Ecuador----------1-1Ethiopia------113---5Fiji1-----1-----3France--1--1--1--13Germany------2-11--4Ghana-4-1--1--2--8Greece-----------11Hong Kong3-------314-11India2--22343151326Indonesia5159151491921311210124Iran-2-211-112--10Iraq21046646129721390Ireland----1--11--14Italy1--1-----2--4Japan------111-126Kenya----2----1--3Korea (so called)--------1---1Korea, South-1--1-11-1117Kuwait---1--51133519Lebanon-12---1-----4Liberia1111---1----5Malaysia-325-11-511120Malta-------1----1Mongolia---------3--3Morocco---1--1-1-3-6Nepal-----------22Netherlands-----1--1---2New Zealand12443256226441Nigeria-1422213--1-16Norway----1---1---2Pakistan3--112-1322-15PNG--------21--3PRC3329122523101791730188231Peru--------1--12Philippines1--61-3-511119 Russia (so called)---------1-12Sierra Leone1-----------1Singapore1-----1-222311Somalia28641061616178145112South Africa-12-1--31--19Sri Lanka52810141472358282015204Sudan-------11-2-4Syria--1----1-1--3Taiwan1---1--123-210Tanzania---1---3-1--5Thailand661143124149241397Tonga----11------2Tunisia-------1----1Turkey1-122----2--8Uganda----------1-1United Kingdom1-21211-333522USA211-11-13---10Vietnam-1-1-111----5Yugoslavia11----------2Zaire-------3---14Stateless--3-411-1--111Unknown------1--1--2TOTAL849568981047412710918814115410513471997-98: CLAIMED NATIONALITY ON ARRIVAL OF UNAUTHORISED ARRIVALSCLAIMED NATIONALITYJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEBMARAPRMAYJUNTotalAfghanistan--2---1-223212Albania--1----2114-9Algeria14586-414-42351Angola-----2------2Argentina---------1--1Austria------11--114Bangladesh---2521---1-11Belgium----------1-1Bosnia----------1-1Brazil--3---------3Burundi----------1-1Cambodia-12--1--1--27Canada-------113--5Chad---12-------3Chile----------2-2Colombia5212-21--32119Croatia---------1--1Czech Republic--1---------1Denmark----2----1--3Ecuador--------2---2Egypt----1-------1Ethiopia-----------22Eritrea---1--------1Fiji---1--12----4France2-------21117Germany21211--1--1-9Ghana1-112-1-1-2-9Greece--------1--12Hong Kong1-414--2324122India341333-2-25127Indonesia133216151459428412134Iran8-245-65545145Iraq8118871642014171113137 Ireland--11--3-1-1-7Israel-----1--31--5Italy---1--------1Ivory Coast--1---------1Japan--11-12---4-9Korea (so called)--1----1---24Korea, South11211344761251Kurd (so called)----------1-1Kuwait102-6-267589459Kyrgystan----43------7Lebanon1-2-1---1---5Liberia--11----11--4Libya----------1-1Lithuania-------1----1Macedonia----1-------1Malaysia--1312324314942Mexico---------1--1Micronesia-1----------1Morocco------1-----1Nepal------3--1--4Netherlands2---1-1-11219New Zealand22783964346458Nigeria------2-----2Norway--1---------1Oman-----------11Pakistan-42-1--2311115PNG------11----2PRC24361538924161314292021259Peru--1-----1---2Philippines6512-315514437Poland-----------11Portugal-------1----1Romania-------22---4Russia (so called)--1------2--3Samoa-------1----1Saudi Arabia----------1-1Sierra Leone----1-------1Singapore-----12-211411Slovenia1-----------1Somalia563329566545-77South Africa--1----14---6Spain---------1--1Sri Lanka78111414137178746116Sudan1-1--131111-7Sweden-----1--2--14Switzerland1----1------2Syria1-2--1------4Taiwan-----212--229Thailand129537915469777Tonga-4----11----6Tunisia-------11---2Turkey-11-1--21--18Uganda--1------1--2United Kingdom12157126594346Uruguay---1--------1USA3-11--12122-13Vietnam-----1---32-6Yugoslavia-----1--1---2Zaire---1---1----2Stateless1----------23Unknown1----------12TOTAL1371371171361271209913311914415612515501998-99: CLAIMED NATIONALITY ON ARRIVAL OF UNAUTHORISED ARRIVALSCLAIMED NATIONALITYJULAUGSEPOCTNOVDECJANFEB1998/99 Afghanistan2-4-617525Albania1-1-----2Algeria41051613361572Bangladesh-6-3----9Bulgaria-1---5--6Burundi--1--1--2Cambodia1-----3-4Canada-1-111116Chile------437China572514101610895Czech Republic-2--1---3France----4-419Greece1-1-----2Hong Kong--1311-28India45--131317Indonesia71731814115681Iran553174101045Iraq2211203021371335189Italy--11-1--3Japan2112-23-11Kenya12------3Korea (so called)--3-----3Korea, South216121410152012110Kuwait172--112427Macedonia----21--3Malaysia17122150272199157Mongolia-----3--3Nepal-2------2Netherlands12-2--1-6New Zealand61297956458Nigeria1--1----2Pakistan1-1-----2Philippines44-11454638Poland1121--3412Singapore414-312116Slovenia---2----2Somalia6734--2325South Africa3-1-----4Sri Lanka212332211742Sudan-1---1--2Syria-1---1--2Taiwan16224-3-4453Thailand-1061499131273Turkey---2-42210United Kingdom47371545550USA--1112218Vietnam---142-18Yemen-----2--2Yugoslavia-----2--2Other143-919532Stateless-313241216Unknown-713253425TOTAL 1601641642051941581771751397(2)(a)(i) and (iii)1995-6: UNAUTHORISED ARRIVALS (STOWAWAYS) AT AUSTRALIAN SEAPORTSCLAIMED NATIONALITYACTNSWQLDSATASVICWATOTALAlbania---1---1Bangladesh-1-----1British Dependent--1----1Bhutan-----2-2Burundi------11Ethiopia---2---2Fiji-1---1-2Indonesia-2-----2Iran-1-1--24Liberia------11Morocco-----1-1Mozambique--1----1PRC-1---1-2Tanzania-1-----1Tonga-42----6United Kingdom-1---1-2USSR (so called)-----1-1Stateless-----2-2Unknown-31--149TOTAL015540108421996-7: UNAUTHORISED ARRIVALS (STOWAWAYS) AT AUSTRALIAN SEAPORTSCLAIMED NATIONALITYACTNSWQLDSATASVICWATOTALAlbania------11Algeria-----1-1Angola-2-----2Bohemia------11Congo------11Fiji-2-1-1-4Ghana-2-----2Iran-1-----1Liberia------11Libya-1-----1Nigeria-1-----1Niger------22New Zealand--2----2PRC------22Tanzania-2-1---3Tonga-2-----2Turkey------22United Kingdom--1--1-2Yugoslavia1------1Unknown-1---236TOTAL114320513381997-8: UNAUTHORISED ARRIVALS (STOWAWAYS) AT AUSTRALIAN SEAPORTSCOUNTRYACTNSWQLDSATASVICWATOTALAfghanistan------11Algeria------99Angola------22Bangladesh-3-----3Burundi-1-----1Canada-1-----1Ethiopia-----1-1 Fiji-1---1-2Hong Kong------11Indonesia-2-----2Iraq------33Kenya-----2-2Morocco-3----36New Zealand-21----3Pakistan-1---1-2PRC-1---3-4Rwanda-1-----1Somalia------11Tanzania-1----34Tonga--1----1Vietnam------22Yugoslavia------11Unknown----2147TOTAL01720293060FY 1998/99 (to Dec `98): UNAUTHORISED ARRIVALS (STOWAWAYS) AT AUSTRALIAN SEAPORTSCOUNTRYACTNSWQLDSATASVICWATOTALAlgeria------11Fiji-1-1---2New Zealand-1-----1PRC-1----34Unknown-----112TOTAL030101510Note 1: Unauthorised Arrivals at Seaports data not available by month.Note 2: Unauthorised Arrivals at Seaports data not yet available for January and February 1999.(3)Since 1995-1996 the Government has reviewed and strengthened the Department's focus and resources to better target and prevent unauthorised arrivals.In the 1998 Budget additional funding was provided to post more Australia based officers overseas to improve intelligence collection in respect of immigration fraud and people smuggling.Greater emphasis has been given to preventing unauthorised arrivals at Australian airports by increasing the number of airline liaison officers (ALOs) at major overseas airports which are last ports of embarkation to Australia. Their role is to advise airlines on the acceptability of passengers' travel documents for entry into Australia. Each ALO position costs the Department about $230,000 per annum. Australia now has full-time airline liaison officers in Bangkok, Hong Kong, Kuala Lumpur and Singapore. From time to time ALOs are temporarily placed in other high-risk airports in response to immediate needs. For example, ALOs were temporarily placed in Nairobi and Jakarta during 1998.Additional resources have also been placed at Australian airports to detect persons who arrive without valid documentation and to expedite decisions on their removal if they do not engage our protection obligations.(4)(a) (b)Yes.In the main, different rackets operate in relation to people arriving illegally by air and sea. There is some evidence, however, that people smugglers operating in Indonesia have been involved in organising the arrival of people both by air and by sea.(4)(a)(i)The greatest incidence of people trafficking by air involves varying combinations of the use of fraudulent documentation, boarding pass swaps and the destruction of identifying documentation prior to arrival. This is also the experience of the USA, Canada and European countries.In 1997-98, 1550 people were refused entry at Australian airports. So far this financial year (as at 28 February 1999), 1397 people were refused entry. This increase reflects a global trend. In a significant number of cases, their travel appears to have been organised by people smugglers, with about 55 per cent of them arriving with bogus or otherwise inadequate documents. Those involved in people smuggling operate from many countries, including Bahrain, Indonesia, Jordan, Kenya, Lebanon, Malaysia, People's Republic of China, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Syria and Thailand.(4)(b)(i)Organised rackets involving sea travel originate mainly out of the People's Republic of China, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Indonesia, Kenya, South Africa, Jordan, Turkey, Lebanon and Malaysia.In 1997-98, 157 persons arrived without authorisation on 13 boats. The points of arrival for those boats were:- Northern Territory: 34 people from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Algeria and Morocco on 3 boats;- Ashmore Reef: 35 people from Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Senegal, Algeria and Morocco on 5 boats;- Torres Strait: 30 Irian Jayans from Papua New Guinea on 1 boat;- Christmas Island: 40 people from Afghanistan, Algeria, Bangladesh, Iraq and Sudan on 2 boats; and- Western Australian waters: 18 people from China on 2 boats.In most cases the boat people have been returned to their home countries.(4)(a)(b)(ii)In addition to the initiatives explained above (see (3)), the government has in place comprehensive operational strategies to counteract people smuggling.These strategies include increased resources to gather intelligence on immigration malpractice; increased resources to assess the bona fides of applicants and detect organised malpractice; enhanced liaison arrangements with Australian law enforcement agencies to collect and share information on immigration malpractice; strong cooperation with overseas law enforcement and immigration agencies to detect and deter smuggling; better focused initiatives for the investigation and prosecution of those in Australia assisting people smuggling; the continued detention of those arriving unlawfully in Australia and refused admission; and the prompt return of those who have no bona fide claim to be admitted to Australia.(4)(iii)I have ensured that Australia plays a leading role and cooperates effectively with international law enforcement agencies, and with the immigration services of other countries, in detecting and stopping people smuggling rackets. In addition to bilateral and multilateral cooperation on specific instances of people smuggling, Australia participates in a number of international fora aimed at sharing information, expertise and strategies for countering people smuggling.Australia is an active participant in the International Air Transport Association/Control Authorities Working Group (IATA/CAWG) established in 1987 by air carriers in cooperation with governments to combat illegal entry by air. This group coordinates anti-smuggling strategies and coordinates multinational interdiction exercises at selected airports.Australia is a leading member in the international group maintaining the Electronic Documentation of Information System on Networks (EDISON), which provides an electronic aid in the detection of document fraud.(4)(iv)The assessment process involves on-going monitoring of the volume and characteristics of unauthorised movements, the numbers deterred from entering Australia (when that can be ascertained) and the number of irregular arrivals at the border.5085(Question No. 328)3285085Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Employment Services, upon notice, on 9 December 1998:(1) What processes have been implemented to ensure that job agencies who are members of the Job Network are accountable for the appropriate spending of Commonwealth funds on upfront fees for the long term unemployed.(2) Has the Department received (a) general complaints under the code of conduct process associated with the Job Network or (b) complaints specifically about the way the fees are used to help the unemployed.(3) Has a member of the Job Network been found to be improperly using the fees in contravention of the code of conduct; if so, what action did the Department take, what was the nature of the decision taken under the code of conduct process and when was this decision taken.(4) How many departmental officers are delegated to work (a) full-time or (b) part-time in each departmental region to investigate complaints made under the code of conduct.(5) Have officers referred to in part (4) initiated independent investigation of members of the Job Network on the basis of concerns that the Code may be being contravened; if so (a) on how many occasions, (b) in which departmental regions, (c) what was the nature of the investigations and (d) what were the results.5086Abbott, Tony MPMr AbbottEZ5WarringahLPEmployment Services10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) A fundamental objective of the Government's reforms of the employment services market is to ensure that the focus of assistance is on getting people into long-term jobs. The payment and incentive structure for Job Network is designed to reward the placement of job seekers into sustainable employment.This payment for results focus of Job Network provides Job Network members (JNMs), particularly those delivering Intensive Assistance, with the flexibility to tailor assistance to the particular needs of the individual job seeker. It is up to JNMs to decide how best to organise and deliver their services and the payment for results approach should guarantee that public funds are spent to best possible effect. In particular instances, JNMs may purchase or provide considerable and costly services for particular job seekers whilst spending less on others. JNMs will make these decisions based on an assessment of the employment-related needs of the individual job seekers.In addition to the accountability for the appropriate spending of Commonwealth funds inherent in the payment for results approach, a range of other measures have been established to encourage JNMs to provide high quality service. For example, the performance of JNMs in the current contract period will be a consideration in assessing their tenders for the next contract period, should those members choose to tender. This provides an incentive for JNMs to provide necessary assistance to job seekers to help them get a job.In addition, the Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business has in place a Job Network monitoring strategy which has a number of components. It includes the assessment of the performance of each JNM against their allocated level of business as well as monitoring of client complaints and compliance with statutory legal requirements. JNMs are also contractually bound to assist the Department to evaluate and monitor their performance, including through providing access to their premises, financial accounts and records, employees and job seekers' records.(2) (a) In the period 1 May 1998 to 12 February 1999, some 8,416 callers have contacted the Job Network Customer Service Line with a complaint, query or feedback. It is estimated that about 60% of callers have been requesting information and advice about Job Network.(b) Of the 8,416 calls, 62 have been specifically recorded as complaints about the level of services provided.(3) No.(4) At the end of December 1998, there were more than 160 Department of Employment Workplace Relations and Small Business staff located in State and regional offices Australia-wide involved in Job Network contract management activities. Contract management is a broad function which includes:. promoting and monitoring compliance with the Code of Conduct;. contract monitoring and compliance;. performance monitoring;. payments to Job Network members; and. operation of the Customer Service Line and investigation of complaints.It is estimated that, overall, time spent on promoting and monitoring compliance with the Code of Conduct by these 160 staff equates to 30 full-time staff positions. A State by State breakdown of this allocation is in the following table.StateCode of Conduct Staff (Including Complaints Handling)NSW7Queensland 6Victoria6South Australia4Western Australia4Tasmania2Northern Territory1TOTAL30(5) Departmental officers have not initiated any independent investigation (that is an investigation undertaken by or through an external agency or organisation) of JNMs in relation to concerns that the Code of Conduct may have been breached. If appropriate, Departmental Customer Service Officers (CSOs) conduct investigations into complaints or concerns received about quality of service provided by JNMs. If necessary, CSOs can require JNMs to take action to rectify a breach of the Code of Conduct. Complaints to date have been resolved without the need for the Department to go to external agencies. Where exceptional circumstances warrant it, a CSO may recommend to a complainant that they raise their complaint with a more appropriate external agency, for example with the police (if there is an allegation of criminal behaviour) or with the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission.5087(Question No. 342)3425087Bevis, Arch, MPMr BevisET4BrisbaneALP00 asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 8 February 1999:(1) How many employees in the Minister's Department have their principal conditions of employment set by (a) an award, (b) an industrial agreement; (c) a certified agreement; and (d) an Australian workplace agreement.(2) What is the classification of each person in the Minister's Department employed under an Australian workplace agreement.5087Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) The number of employees for each part of the question are as follows:1.1.—nil; 1.2.—nil; 1.3.—597 employees; 1.4.—35 employees.(2) The classification of people employed under an Australian workplace agreement are as follows:2.1.—29 employees in the Senior Executive Service; 2.2.—6 employees with classifications below the Senior Executive Service.[An error occurred in the publication of Question No. 346 (Hansard, 23 March 1999, page 3508). The correct answer is as follows.]5087(Question No. 346)3465087Bevis, Arch, MPMr BevisET4BrisbaneALP00 asked the Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business, upon notice, on 8 February 1999:(1) How many employees in the Minister's Department have their principal conditions of employment set by (a) an award, (b) an industrial agreement, (c) a certified agreement and (d) an Australian workplace agreement.(2) What is the classification of each person in the Minister's Department employed under an Australian workplace agreement.5087Reith, Peter, MPMr ReithWI4FlindersLPWorkplace Relations and Small Business10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) No employees of the department have their principal conditions of employment set by an award. All employees are either covered by the department's certified agreements or by Australian workplace agreements.It is estimated that:. 123 employees are covered by the DEETYA Network Certified Agreement 1998. 1403 employees are covered by the DWRSB Agency Agreement 1998-2000. 106 employees are covered by Australian workplace agreementsThe DEETYA Network Certified Agreement 1998 is not comprehensive, it calls up the APS Salaries Awards. All other agreements are comprehensive and do not call up any awards.(2)—. Senior executive employees (Band 1 to 3). Executive Level 2 employees. An APS level 6 employeeThe certified agreements provide for the introduction of Australian workplace agreements with employees whose terms and conditions of employment would otherwise be regulated by the certified agreements.5087(Question No. 361)3615087Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business, upon notice, on 8 February 1999: (1) What were the primary and secondary sources of information on regional skills shortages and job vacancies in (a) January 1994, (b) January 1997, (c) January 1998 and (d) July 1998.(2) What is the value of the information referred to in part (1) and how has it been used in policy planning across all Commonwealth departments.(3) If there have been changes in the sources of information has its accuracy been affected; if so, (a) how and (b) what measures have been taken in response.(4) Did the abolition of the Commonwealth Employment Service affect the collection of regional data; if so, how.5088Reith, Peter, MPMr ReithWI4FlindersLPWorkplace Relations and Small Business10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Occupational assessments undertaken by the State and Northern Territory offices of the former Department of Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs (DEETYA) were the primary source of skill shortage information for States and the Northern Territory in each of the above periods. These assessments included some information on metropolitan and non metropolitan shortages. In addition, from late 1995 to late 1997, regional skill shortage information was obtained through a periodic survey of Commonwealth Employment Service (CES) offices.Data on the median duration of time to fill vacancies notified to the CES and hard to fill vacancies were also used as indicators of skill shortages, mainly for States and the Northern Territory. The newspaper based Skilled Vacancy Survey (SVS) provided data on trends in the demand for selected skilled occupations for States and the Northern Territory.Data on CES vacancies notified, vacancies filled and unfilled vacancies by CES office or DEETYA region were used to monitor regional demand for labour.From 1 May 1998, the National Vacancy Data Base (NVDB) has been established as part of the Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business's (DEWRSB's) Integrated Employment System (IES) and lists all vacancies contained in IES. Vacancy information is entered onto the NVDB to enable jobs to be advertised to job seekers and to facilitate payment of fees under Job Network arrangements. Vacancy data derived from the NVDB are available by region.(2) Regional skills shortage information was circulated widely. The information was used for educational, training and labour market program planning, including by DEETYA, the Australian National Training Authority (ANTA), State government agencies and individual educational institutions. This information was also available to Area Consultative Committees to use in the development of Strategic Regional Employment Plans. Use by other Commonwealth agencies was limited, and would have included input to some industry studies.(3) The primary source of skill shortage information, the Skill Shortage Program (previously called the Occupational Assessment Program) is continuing in DEWRSB. Skill shortage lists for Australia, the States and the Northern Territory are prepared annually and are available on the DEWRSB Internet site. A new publication titled Skills in Australia: Trends and Shortages was released in mid 1998 and includes information on occupations experiencing skill shortages for the States and the Northern Territory.The Skill Shortage Program, based on occupational assessments, includes considerable direct contact with employers who have recently advertised positions as well as professional and industry organisations, educational and training institutions and Industry Training Advisory Boards (ITABs). This approach provides the most accurate information on skill shortages.(4) Replacement of the CES has resulted in discontinuance of the CES based survey of regional skill shortages and CES data on the median duration of vacancies and unfilled vacancies. Vacancy data are available from the NVDB by region for monitoring regional labour demand trends.5088(Question No. 365)3655088Thomson, Kelvin, MPMr Kelvin ThomsonUK6WillsALP00 asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 8 February 1999:(1) Does the GST package specify life insurance as a financial supply but not other types of insurance.(2) Will death cover be exempt from, but disability cover attract, the GST; if so, (a) will the distinction between the two forms of cover impose additional costs and reduction of benefits in respect of death and disability cover and (b) is this consistent with a simple tax system.5088Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) The Government's legislation specifies that life insurance is a financial supply that will be input taxed. This means GST will not be charged on a life insurance premiums, however suppliers of life insurance will not be eligible for input tax credits on GST they have paid on purchases of inputs used to provide life insurance.The Government's legislation also specifies that other forms of insurance will be subject to GST. (2) Where other forms of insurance are included in a life insurance policy, but the policy retains the character of life insurance, then these additional forms of insurance will also be input taxed. In such circumstances, the disability insurance sold as part of a life insurance policy would also be input taxed.(a, b) The Government is currently consulting with industry on the technical design issues of applying GST to financial supplies, such as life insurance. The consultation process is designed to ensure that the application of GST to financial services is consistent with all the principles behind the Government's tax reforms.5089(Question No. 368)3685089McClelland, Robert, MPMr McClellandJK6BartonALP00 asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 8 February 1999:(1) What are the obligations of constitutional corporations to disclose the remuneration of their senior chief executive officers.(2) Will the Government revoke or modify the obligations referred to in part (1).5089Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:The term "constitutional corporations" is taken to refer to foreign corporations, and trading or financial corporations formed within the limits of the Commonwealth, within the meaning of paragraph 51(20) of the Constitution.I am advised that there are three sets of requirements for entities registered pursuant to the Corporations Law to disclose either the individual remuneration of an entity's directors or other officers, or the aggregate of such remuneration paid to the entity's directors or other officers. These obligations can be found:. in Accounting Standards made by the Australian Accounting Standards Board - Standard AASB 1017, Paragraphs 4.2(a), 4.2(b), 4.3, 4.15 (a) (b) and (c); and - Standard AASB 1034, Paragraphs 12.1 and 12.2;. at Paragraph 300(1)(d) of the Corporations Law; and. at Section 300A of the Corporations Law.I am further advised that:. the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Securities is examining whether listed company annual reports should include those matters required by section 300A of the Corporations Law. The Government will consider its response to the Parliamentary Committee's recommendation when it is to hand.5089(Question No. 369)3695089McClelland, Robert, MPMr McClellandJK6BartonALP00 asked the Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business, upon notice, on 8 February 1999:(1) Further to the answer to question No. 177, (Hansard , 10 February 1999, page 2299) which small business organisation or organisations other than the Council of Small Business Organisations has provided an estimate that 50,000 jobs would be created if small businesses were exempt from federal unfair dismissal laws.(2) Are the one in twenty small businesses referred to in the answer to question No. 177 respondent to a federal industrial award and also constitutional corporations.5089Reith, Peter, MPMr ReithWI4FlindersLPWorkplace Relations and Small Business10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) There is an unprecedented level of support within small business organisations for the Commonwealth initiative to exempt small business from unfair dismissal laws. The Small Business Coalition, which is a meeting of some 40 organisations representing small business has repeatedly endorsed the government policy and rejected the Labor Party and Australian Democrats' opposition to it. COSBOA is a member of the Small Business Coalition. A list of members is attached. I note that Dr Steven Kates, Chief Economist at the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry indicated at the public hearing on the 29 January 1999 of the Senate Employment, Workplace Relations, Small Business and Education Legislation Committee's inquiry into the Workplace Relations Legislation Amendment (Unfair Dismissals) Bill 1998 that up to 200,000 jobs could be created if small businesses were excluded from Federal and State unfair dismissal laws (Committee Hansard of 29 January 1999 at p.42).(2) The "one in twenty small businesses" referred to by Mr Bastian refers to one in twenty of the total number of small businesses. Not all small businesses are constitutional corporations respondent to federal industrial awards.I point out, however, that the application of federal unfair dismissal laws is not limited to employees of businesses that are constitutional corporations respondent to federal industrial awards. Subject to the limited classes of exemptions under the Workplace Relations Act 1996, the federal unfair dismissal provisions apply to:. employees of any employer in Victoria or a Territory;. employees of the Commonwealth;. employees of constitutional corporations who are covered by a federal award or agreement;. employees of an employer engaged in certain interstate trade or commerce who are covered by a federal award or agreement; and. employees of an unincorporated employer who are covered by a federal award or agreement in a State where there is State legislation applying the federal provisions so as to confer jurisdiction (in respect of dismissals by unincorporated employers of employees who are covered by federal awards or agreements) on the Australian Industrial Relations Commission (such legislation exists in New South Wales and Queensland).MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL SMALL BUSINESS FORUMACT & Region Chamber of Commerce and Industry; The Association of Consulting Engineers Australia; Australian Business Chamber; Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry; Australian Council of Professions; Australian Hotels Association; Australian Industry Group; Australian Petroleum Agents and Distributors Association; Australian Retailers Association; Australian Society of Certified Practising Accountants; Business in the Community Limited; Business Educators Australasia; Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Western Australia; Council of Small Business Organisations of Australia; Employers' Federation of New South Wales; Franchise Council of Australia; Hotel and Motel Accommodation Association; Housing Industry Association; Institute of Chartered Accountants; Institution of Engineers, Australia; Jewellers Association of Australia; Master Builders Australia; Master Plumbers and Mechanical Services Association; Motor Trades Association of Australia; National Electrical Contractors Association; National Farmers' Federation; National Institute of Accountants; Northern Territory Chamber of Commerce and Industry; The Pharmacy Guild of Australia; Printing Industries Association of Australia; Queensland Chamber of Commerce and Industry; Real Estate Institute of Australia; Retail Traders' Association of South Australia; Small Enterprise Association of Australia and New Zealand; South Australian Employers' Chamber of Commerce and Industry; State Chamber of Commerce (NSW); Tasmanian Chamber of Commerce and Industry; and Tourism Council Australia. 5090(Question No. 381)3815090Mossfield, Frank, MPMr MossfieldMK6GreenwayALP00 asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 8 February 1999:Has his attention been drawn to complaints by public benevolent institutions that (a) while registration into the existing sales tax system is unnecessary and record keeping is minimal, under the proposed new system registration is necessary to reclaim GST and in some cases institutions will need to employ additional staff to keep records, (b) the financing costs involved in waiting for the return of GST paid to suppliers will impose an additional recurrent burden on institutions, (c) limits on non-monetary components of employees' salary packages will substantially affect the manner in which institutions remunerate their employees, and (d) the changes to the taxation system will result in a loss of approximately 10 per cent of their revenues from Government funding.5090Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(a) The requirements are appropriate for the proper operation of the GST. Overall, the Government expects the community services sector to benefit from 2.7 per cent cost reduction due to tax reform.(b) This is addressed in the Bill.(c) The FBT changes will make the system fairer. The proposed measures will allow PBIs to retain concessional fringe benefits tax status and a resultant cost advantage in terms of their ability to attract and retain qualified staff. The open-ended nature of the existing concession will be capped.(d) This is incorrect.5090(Question No. 384)3845090Melham, Daryl, MPMr Melham4T4BanksALP00 asked the Minister for the Arts and the Centenary of Federation, upon notice, on 8 February 1999:Did the Minister's Department assess applications for funding (a) for major projects from the Federation Fund and (b) from the Federation Cultural and Heritage Projects program; if so, in each case , (i) how many applications were made in each State and Territory (A) in total and (B) by or on behalf of indigenous organisations, (ii) will the Minister provide a list of all applications made by or on behalf of indigenous organisations in each State and Territory, (iii) how many applications made by or on behalf of indigenous organisations were successful and (iv) will the Minister provide a list of all successful applications made by or on behalf of indigenous organisations.5091McGauran, Peter, MPMr McGauranXH4GippslandNPArts and the Centenary of Federation10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(a) Federation Fund ProjectsThe Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts did not assess applications for funding for major projects. The Federation Task Force was established in the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet in 1997 to assist the Government in assessing Federation Fund proposals.(b) Federation Cultural and Heritage Projects Program (FCHP)(i) (A) The total number of applications made in each State and Territory is listed as follows:ACTNSWNTQLDSATASVICWATotal143002097434913583741(i) (B) For the purpose of this question, those organisations which clearly identified the inclusion of a predominantly indigenous cultural heritage element in their exhibition, site interpretation, education or other materials related to the project and directly referred to a process of consultation or partnership with indigenous communities in their region were counted. On that basis, the total number of applications made in each State or Territory by or on behalf of indigenous organisations is listed as follows:ACTNSWNTQLDSATASVICWATotal0179107141260(ii) Those organisations identified under (i)B are listed at Table 1.(iii) There were 7 successful applications made by or on behalf of indigenous organisations.(iii) Successful applications made for or on behalf of indigenous organisations are listed below:OrganisationProjectStateGilgandra Shire CouncilGilgandra Centennial Celebration of FederationNSWCity of MarionThe Warriparinga Interpretive Centre Inc.SAWarlyirti ArtistsNew Art/Cultural centreWAShire of KojonupKojonup Federation Park ComplexWAThe Friends of AraluenCommunity Gallery at Alice Springs Cultural PrecinctNTNational Trust of QueenslandJames Cook Museum Cook Gallery DevelopmentQLDCity of Holdfast BayCelebrating Federation and First Settlement LinksSATABLE 1: APPLICATIONS MADE BY OR ON BEHALF OF INDIGENOUS ORGANISATIONS.OrganisationProjectStateBlacktown City CouncilAboriginal Cultural CentreNSWWutuma Keeping Place Aboriginal CorporationWutuma Keeping Place Gallery and MuseumNSWMimaga WajaarCultural Awareness Complex and Educational ComplexNSWEden Local Aboriginal Land CouncilCultural and Heritage Keeping PlaceNSWGilgandra Shire CouncilGilgandra Centennial Celebration of FederationNSWMoree Plains Shire CouncilMoree Aboriginal Cultural CentreNSWOCTEC IncAboriginal Cultural Centre/Keeping PlaceNSW Western Institute of TAFEAboriginal Arts and Cultural Development CentreNSWGandangara Local Aboriginal Land CouncilGandangara Cultural Centre and Keeping PlaceNSWNSW National Parks and Wildlife ServiceKurnell Meeting and Keeping PlaceNSWArmidale and Region Aboriginal Cultural Centre and Keeping Place Inc`Stage 3 Development of Aboriginal Cultural Centre and Keeping PlaceNSWMarrickville CouncilOld Marrickville Town Hall ProjectNSWMetropolitan Local Aboriginal Land CouncilAn Aboriginal History and Cultural CentreNSWThe National Aboriginal and Islander Skills Development AssociationNAISDA Indigenous Performing Arts ComplexNSWTullagulla LtdContemporary Aboriginal Cultural CentreNSWWellington Local Aboriginal Lands CouncilWirathuri Floral, Fauna and Aboriginal Culture ParkNSWNSW National Parks and Wildlife ServiceConservation and Interpretation of Sydney Basin Aboriginal HeritageNSWThe Friends of Araluen IncCommunity Gallery at Alice Springs Cultural PrecinctNTBarkly Regional Economic Development Committee IncNyinka Nyunyu Interpretive CentreNTBorroloola Community Government SchoolBorroloola Cultural CentreNTBula'Bula Arts Aboriginal CorporationMapping and Documenting Arafura WetlandsNTYilli Reling Regional CouncilConstruct Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Culture CentreNTArrernte Council of Central Australia Aboriginal CorpCentenary of Federation Working TogetherNTYothu Yindi Foundation Aboriginal CorporationGarma Cultural Studies InstituteNTElliott District Community Government SchoolElliott Conservation and Heritage ProjectsNTPirlangimpi Community Government CouncilFort Dundas Accommodation and Archaeological ProjectNTNational Trust of QueenslandJames Cook Museum Cook Gallery DevelopmentQLDKombumerri Aboriginal Corporation for CultureYugambeh Museum, Language, Heritage, Research CentreQLDTownsville City CouncilAboriginal and Islander Cultural CentreQLDFoundation for Aboriginal and Islander Research Action Aboriginal CorpKey Centre for Indigenous Cultural EstatesQLDMareeba Shire CouncilKuranda Cultural CentreQLDTorres Strait Regional AuthorityTorres Strait Museum Cultural Centre Thursday IslandQLDCairns and District Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Corporation for WomenFederation 100 House Technology for YouthQLDAng-Gnarra Aboriginal CorporationThe Split Rock Interpretive CentreQLDDouglas Shire CouncilKuku Yalanji Cultural Interpretive CentreQLDMackay South Sea Islanders CommunityMandarra Cemetery Restoration and Museum ComplexQLDCity of Holdfast BayCelebrating Federation and First Settlement LinksSACity of SalisburyNorthern Region Aboriginal Community CentreSAKoonibba Aboriginal Community CouncilScrubcutter FestivalSAMannum Aboriginal Community AssociationNgaut Ngaut Rockshelter Culture Tourism ProjectSAIga WartaIga Warta Cultural CentreSACity of MarionThe Warriparinga Interpretive Centre IncSADept of Human ServicesAboriginal Records Access CentreSATasmanian Aboriginal CentreRisdon Cove Cultural Sharing PlaceTASAborigines Advancement LeagueKeeping Place Fit-out at the Aborigines Advancement LeagueVICSonglines Dreaming IncSonglines Dreaming IncorporatedVICKoorie Heritage trust IncAdditional Construction for Koorie Cultural CentreVICWestern Murray Development IncUniversity of Stars, Indigenous Astronomy ProjectVIC Warlyirti ArtistsNew Art/Cultural Centre Balgo HillsWAUniversity of Western AusBerndt Museum of AnthropologyWAGascoyne Development CommissionCarnarvon Aboriginal Heritage and Cultural CentWAShire of KojonupKojonup Federation Park ComplexWAWarburton Community IncNgaanyatjarra Cultural and Civic CentreWASwan Aboriginal CorporationAboriginal Cultural Centre and Heritage TrailWATown of NarroginGnarojin Cultural Heritage CentreWAAboriginal Advancement Council of Western Australia Aboriginal CorpAboriginal Cultural PrecinctWAAboriginal Affairs DeptCultural Centre, Capital InfrastructureWAThe Bennett Brook Catchment GroupBennett Brook Cultural and Environment CentreWANoongar Language and Cultural CentreNoongar Language and Cultural CentreWAAboriginal and Islander College of Music (ABMUSIC)ABMUSIC'S Cultural AuditoriumWA5093(Question No. 385)3855093Andren, Peter, MPMr AndrenKL6CalareIND00 asked the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, upon notice, on 9 February 1999:Has his attention been drawn to the RSL's welfare priority list for 1998-99 and its proposal that the war widow's pension be reinstated to widows who remarried before May 1984; if so, (a) what is the estimated cost of the proposal and (b) will the proposal be implemented.5093Scott, Bruce, MPMr Bruce ScottYT4MaranoaNPVeterans' Affairs; Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:Yes.(a) and (b) The cost of recommencing pensions for an estimated 4,000 former war widows who remarried before 28 May 1984 and thus lost their pensions would be about $65 million over the next four years. Policy changes of this magnitude would be considered in the annual Budget context.5093(Question No. 400)4005093Jull, David, MPMr JullMH4FaddenLP10 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 9 February 1999:(1) How many incidents of passenger disruption or "air rage" occurred on Australian commercial airliners during (a) 1995, (b) 1996, (c) 1997 and (d) 1998.(2) Have investigations revealed the cause of each incident.(3) What penalties apply to passengers involved in incidents.(4) What action has been taken to minimise incidents. (5) What legislative provisions are available for dealing with disruptive passengers on (a) Australian-registered aircraft flying internationally out of Australian airspace and (b) foreign-registered aircraft in Australian airspace.5093Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Australia's major carriers have advised that during 1998, 44 acts of violence occurred on board Australian commercial airliners (covering both international and domestic flights). The same number of acts occurred during 1997. Unfortunately, industry-wide data is not available for earlier years. For the purposes of these figures, acts of violence include the touching of another person, no matter how minor. To place these figures in perspective, during this period over 32 million passengers were carried on board these flights each year.(2) The cause of incidents is not always reported. There are a number of causal factors which may be involved including alcohol, smoking and domestic disputes.(3) Acts of violence on board these flights incur the same civil and criminal penalties as if the acts were committed in a public place on the ground. The relevant criminal codes apply to all acts on board these flights. For example, the maximum criminal penalty for assault (causing actual bodily harm) is imprisonment for 5 years.(4) Australian airlines are committed to ensuring the safety and security of their passengers and have developed policies to reduce the likelihood of violent behaviour. They also employ a range of techniques to diffuse potential acts of misconduct on board commercial flights. For example, crew members are trained in conflict resolution and responsible alcohol service. Airlines also undertake programs to cater for the special needs of their passengers—such as special interest groups. Finally, Australia's international airlines pursue global solutions, through the International Air Transport Association (IATA), promoting the enactment of standard laws to facilitate the arrest, conviction and punishment of disruptive passengers world-wide.(5) Acts on board intrastate flights are covered by relevant State/Territory legislation (including the relevant State/Territory criminal codes). Interstate and international flights are covered by the Australian Government's Crimes (Aviation) Act 1991. This legislation applies to both: (a) Australian-registered aircraft flying internationally out of Australian airspace and (b) foreign-registered aircraft in Australian airspace.5094(Question No. 402)4025094Hall, Jill, MPMs Hall83NShortlandALP00 asked the Minister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs, upon notice, on 10 February 1999:(1) What assessments will Centrelink use to test the literacy and numeracy of its clients.(2) Will the assessments be given routinely to all young unemployed Australians.(3) Who will administer the assessments and what training will they have.(4) Will additional staff be employed to enable the assessments to be made.(5) Will the assessments be made under proper test conditions.(6) Will all Centrelink offices have a dedicated area for literacy assessments.5094Kemp, Dr David, MPDr KempBT4GoldsteinLPEducation, Training and Youth Affairs; Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:The assessment of clients' literacy & numeracy needs comprises two main steps:The first step is an initial identification by Centrelink of those job seekers who may have a literacy and numeracy need. This is done in several ways:. when job seekers apply for benefit they are asked about their English language skills for employment purposes. If a job seeker indicates his/her Reading, Writing or Speaking skills are either limited or very limited, this contributes particular numbers of points to their Job Seeker Classification Instrument `score';. the Centrelink officer may use a literacy screening questionnaire which has been designed by literacy specialists for use by Centrelink staff who are given training in its use; and. the Centrelink officer may notice the job seeker's reading, writing, speaking and number skills and note that they may have a literacy and numeracy need. The second step is an individual professional assessment of the job seeker's literacy and numeracy competencies which is carried out by a contracted adult literacy and numeracy assessor.(1) Centrelink staff will use a range of means to ascertain whether clients have a literacy and numeracy need. These will include the client's response to literacy questions in the Looking for Work form which feed into their Job Seeker Classification Instrument `score', and feedback from the customer during contact with them and their response to a simple literacy screening questionnaire.If any of these indicate the client may have a literacy and numeracy need, then Centrelink staff will encourage him/her to accept a referral for a professional assessment by a contracted adult literacy and numeracy assessor.(2) The Job Seeker Classification Instrument is routinely applied to all registered job seekers. Trained Centrelink staff may ask customers to fill in the literacy screening questionnaire during the course of an interview.Young job seekers subject to mutual obligation who appear to have a literacy and numeracy need can be compulsory referred by Centrelink for a professional assessment by a contracted provider.Job seekers who are not subject to mutual obligation who appear to have a literacy and numeracy need will be encouraged by Centrelink staff to accept a referral for a professional assessment.(3) All Centrelink staff who deal with job seekers receive training in how to identify customers who my have a literacy and numeracy need. Staff who administer the literacy questionnaire are given specific training in its use.The assessments are conducted by qualified adult literacy and numeracy assessors. The contract specifies that assessors are required to have the following minimum qualifications:. a recognised degree related to teaching; or. formal teaching qualifications determined by a State/Territory education or teacher registration authority; or. specific teacher education qualifications (eg Diploma of Education, Special Education)In addition, all people delivering services (including assessment services) must have all of the following:. at least 800 hours adult literacy and/or numeracy teaching and/or assessment experience in the last 5 years;. adult literacy and numeracy specific professional development activities within the last two years (such as an adult literacy and numeracy teaching course or a post graduate diploma course); and. specific training undertaken in the use of the National Reporting System.(4) No. Additional staff will not be employed to enable assessments to be made. The Government has contracted providers to carry out the assessments.(5) The assessments will be conducted on an individual basis in a suitably private and quiet setting to enable the job seeker being assessed to demonstrate their skills as fully as possible.(6) No. Centrelink offices will not have dedicated premises for literacy assessments. These will be conducted in providers' premises and not at Centrelink.5095(Question No. 409)4095095Macklin, Jenny, MPMs MacklinPG6JagajagaALP00 asked the Minister for Health and Aged Care, upon notice, on 11 February 1999:(1) What was the nature of the relationship between his Department and the Royal College of Physicians in the development of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Clinical Practice Guidelines.(2) Was a contract made between the parties to develop the guidelines; if so (a) will he provide a copy of the contract, (b) did the College comply with all terms of the contract, (c) how was the contract enforced and (d) did the College produce the contract and provide it to the Department.(3) Were terms of reference prepared for the development of the guidelines; if so, (a) who prepared them and (b) will he provide a copy.(4) Did a Royal College of Physicians working group undertake (a) a survey of consumers' views, (b) a consumers' conference, (c) an open consensus conference and (d) multiple consumer and community representation on activities associated with the development of the guidelines.(5) Did the working party (a) use a consensus based model, (b) refuse to accept the submissions of consumers as evidence and (c) fail to invite relevant consumer groups to participate in developing guidelines.(6) Did the working group exclude all consumer submissions because they did not meet the National Health and Medical Research Council guidelines; if so, how were the views of consumers represented in the consultation process other than through the consumer representative on the working group.(7) Did the Consumers' Health Forum representative on the working group produce a separate document for circulation with the exposure draft of the guidelines; if so, was the document circulated with the exposure draft.(8) Did the exposure draft include cost effectiveness studies; if not, why not.(9) Was a motion moved at the International Conference on Chronic Fatigue Syndrome in February 1998 to withdraw the exposure draft on the grounds that it (a) was scientifically and academically flawed, (b) was clinically inadequate, (c) did not support general or patient care and (d) contained no useful guidelines for continuing care of patients; if so, how did his Department respond.(10) Did the working group receive complaints from persons, consumer groups or professional organisations about the development of the guidelines; if so, (a) how did the working group respond and (b) what was the outcome.5095Wooldridge, Dr Michael, MPDr Wooldridge8E4ChisholmLPHealth and Aged Care10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) The Department participated in discussions with the Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP) in developing the contract for the grant arrangement with the RACP for the production of the Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) clinical guidelines. A Departmental officer has observer status on the working group established by the RACP to develop those guidelines.(2) A contract between the Commonwealth of Australia and the RACP was signed on 11 June 1996. The contract is not yet completed.(a) a copy of the contract has been provided separately to the honourable member;(b) I am not aware of any breaches of the terms of the contract with the RACP;(c) The contract is on-going; and(d) The contract was produced in the Department following discussions with the RACP.(3) The conditions of the grant are described in Schedule 1 of the grant document.(4) (a) I understand that the working group has made every effort to ensure that consumers and professionals have been able to express their views in every stage of the guideline development process. However, no formal surveys have been undertaken;(b) The working group did not convene a consumers' conference, nor was there any requirement in the contract for them to convene one;(c) The working group did not convene an open conference, nor was there a requirement in the contract for them to convene one; and(d) I understand that a representative of the Consumers' Health Forum on the working group had extensive discussions with community groups and individuals throughout the guideline development process.(5) (a) According to the Preface of the Draft Clinical Practice Guidelines, the working group conducted an exhaustive review of the relevant scientific literature on prolonged fatigue, chronic fatigue and CFS, and the evidence was rated according to a modification of the schema recommended by the NHMRC. In addition, the Ministerial review Committee report and a variety of other local and international public domain documents were examined. Submissions were also invited from interested practitioners, consumers and patient support groups.(b) No. The working group received eighty submissions from people with CFS, carers, concerned individuals and CFS Societies, and these were compiled and summarised for the working group by the consumer representative. A copy of the consumer perspective summary document is available on the world wide web at http:// www/racp.edu.au/consumer.htm.(c) No. The Consumers' Health Forum was represented on the working group and the submissions from people with CFS, carers, concerned individuals and CFS Societies were compiled and summarised for the working group by the consumer representative.(6) No. Eighty submissions from consumers were considered by the working group.(7) The Consumers' Health Forum representative compiled and summarised the eighty submissions from people with CFS, carers, concerned individuals and CFS Societies. A copy of the consumer perspective summary document is available on the world wide web at http://www.racp.edu.au/consumer.htm.(8) The project involves the development of guidelines on the most clinically relevant and cost effective methods of diagnosing and treating CFS. New cost studies are not required in the project outline, only a survey of existing literature.(9) Yes. The comments from the Conference about the Draft Clinical Practice Guidelines will be considered by the working group.(10) I understand that the working group received over 200 responses from Chronic Fatigue Syndrome health consumers and health care professionals. The vast majority both criticised various aspects of the draft and also provided valuable suggestions for improvement. I also understand that the working group is now evaluating the submissions and intends to produce a revised edition of the Guidelines. 5096(Question No. 412)4125096Danby, Michael, MPMr DanbyWF6Melbourne PortsALP00 asked the Minister for the Arts and the Centenary of Federation, upon notice, on 11 February 1999:(1) What sum did the Australia Council grant to organisations for the employment of multicultural arts officers in each year from 1991-92.(2) Will he provide details of the operation of the Australia Council's Community Development Program since its inception including the (a) total sum granted to organisations under the program, (b) names of organisations granted funds, (c) sum granted to each organisation, (d) period covered by each grant, (e) manner of selection of organisations, (f) individual, group or body specifically responsible for the selection of recipients and (g) criteria, guidelines or policies used in making selections.(3) Has the Australia Council decided not to renew triennial funding for 6 multicultural arts officer positions at two organisations under the Community Cultural Development program; if so, what involvement did the Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts or his office have in the decision.5096McGauran, Peter, MPMr McGauranXH4GippslandNPArts and the Centenary of Federation10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) 1991-92—$ 161,743; 1992-93—$ 217,606; 1993-94—$ 293,397; 1994-95—$ 364,172; 1995-96—$204,903; 1996-97—$ 220,044; 1997-98—$ 193,086; 1998-99—$40,000.(2) The Community Arts Board which began in the 1970s first funded Multicultural Arts Officers (MAOs) under the Ethnic Arts Officers program in 1987. In 1988 the Community Cultural Development Committee funded those positions under the Multicultural Arts Officers Program. In 1991 the Community Cultural Development Board was set up, which continued the program. In 1994-1995 the program ceased, and the MAOs were able to apply to, and were funded under, the "Creative Development: Organisers" program. When the Council restructured all its grant programs in 1996, this program was replaced by the Program Grants Category and is now known as the Triennial Grants Category.Peer assessment at arm's length from government is the fundamental tenet of the Australia Council's structure and decision-making process.(a) Total sum granted to organisations under the programs1987 Ethnic Arts Officer program to 1999 Triennial Grants Program: $2,272,099 (b) Names of organisations granted funds are listed in the Australia Council Annual Reports (see summary table 1 attached)(c) Sum granted to each organisation is listed in the Australia Council Annual Reports (see summary table attached)(d) Period covered by each grant as listed is annual, but grants made to these organisations after 1996 were Triennial, ie. an annual grant for three years (see summary table attached).(e) Manner of selection of organisation for each grant is as per the grants handbook current in the year in which the decision was made. Organisations which wished to be considered for funding completed an application form and lodged it with the Australia Council by the advertised closing date. Applications were then assessed in competition with each other, and the highest ranked applications funded. The Australia Council Support for the Arts Handbook, 1999 describes the assessment process as follows;Assessment of your applicationIn making grant decisions the Funds and the Board will assess your application with regard only to the published selection criteria for the grant category to which you are applying, as set out in section 4 of this handbook.Assessment of applications and final grant decisions are made by the relevant Fund or the Board primarily on the basis of the information supplied by you in your application.Fund and Board members may also take into account information from other sources such as:. their attendance at performances and other events;. assessment reports from members of the Register of Peers who may be asked to provide formal assessments of designated works;. reviews, videos and recordings, referee reports and other material; and. any previous Australia Council grant acquittal reports and performance agreements you may have had.While your application may meet the stated selection criteria, this does not guarantee you a grant. The Australia Council receives many more applications than it can support. The success of your application must rest ultimately on the merits of your proposal against published criteria and in competition with all the other applications considered for funding.(f) The body specifically responsible for the selection of grants recipients to the programs listed above was: 1987—Community Arts Board; 1988—1990—Community Cultural Development Committee; 1991-1995—Community Cultural Development Board; 1996-1999—Community Cultural Development Fund.(g) Criteria used in the making of selections has varied from program to program and year to year, and can be found in the Grants Handbook for each year. The Australia Council Support for the Arts Handbook, 1999 lists the following information in the Triennial Grants Category;The purpose of this category is to further understanding of, and support innovation in, community cultural development practice by providing triennial funding to a limited number of outstanding organisations. By supporting these organisations the Fund aims to increase opportunities for communities to control and participate in their own cultural development.Applicants must have a substantial record of achievement in community cultural development and be able to demonstrate that they have contributed to community cultural development through the artistic work they have produced and/or through the role they have played in fostering and developing work in the field.Applicants may be community cultural development organisations, or organisations which have a community cultural development program or worker as a component of their broader activities.EligibilityThis category is open to organisations.Applicants must be able to demonstrate that at least 50% of their income is derived from sources other than the Funds or Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Arts Board of the Australia Council.Applicants will be expected to have had a record of funding through the Australia Council and should have been awarded at least three grants from the Council within the last five years.Selection CriteriaApplications will be selected that best demonstrate:. a high level of achievement in the advancement and development of community cultural development practice;. that the organisation is best placed to deliver services to a regional, State or national constituency;. a capacity to stimulate critical debate about community cultural development practice;. a strategy for increasing opportunities for communities to control and participate in their own cultural development;. that the operations and services proposed are community-based and culturally inclusive; and. effective management of finances and administration including a well developed three-year plan which includes strategies for accessing new resources and new sources of income.P63 of the Handbook also advises that "It is unlikely the Fund will provide funding for community cultural development arts workers positions for more than two triennial periods."(3) From the seven applications received by the Community Cultural Development Fund from previously funded MAO applicants to the Triennial Grants Category in 1998-1999, the Liverpool Migrant Resource Centre, was successful.The six unsuccessful applications did not receive funding in that grant round because like other unsuccessful applicants, they did not compete against the selection criteria as strongly as those who did receive funding. In no instance is triennial funding `renewed' as each application is considered on its own merit, in competition with other applications received by the same closing date.All unsuccessful triennial applicants have been encouraged to apply for project funding under other grants category programs.There was no involvement of the Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts or the Minister's office in the assessment of applications to the Community Cultural Development Fund's Triennial grants category. As listed in the 1999 Australia Council Support for the Arts Handbook; While the Australia Council Act 1975 enables the Minister to give directions to the Council regarding performance of its functions or the exercise of its powers, these directions must not be in regard to particular grants, scholarships or other benefits.A copy of the Australia Council's Arts for a Multicultural Australia policy is available on request.5098(Question No. 415)4155098Wilkie, Kim, MPMr Wilkie84GSwanALP00 asked the Minister for Employment Services, upon notice, on 15 February 1999:(1) How many staff has the Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business allocated to ensure that Job Network providers comply with regulations and the terms of their association with the network.(2) Has the Department received complaints about the operations of Job Network providers; if so, what is the nature of the complaints.(3) How many on-site inspections has the Department made of Job Network providers' premises specifically to (a) ensure that a register of complaints is maintained and (b) inspect financial accounts and records, records of employees and job seeker's records for monitoring and evaluation to protect Commonwealth interests.(4) How many inspections referred to in part (3) were conducted in the electoral division of Swan.5098Abbott, Tony MPMr AbbottEZ5WarringahLPEmployment Services10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) At the end of December 1998, more than 160 staff of the Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business (DEWRSB) located in State and regional offices Australia-wide were directly involved in Job Network contract management activities. Contract management activities include:. promoting and monitoring compliance with the Code of Conduct;. contract monitoring and compliance;. performance monitoring;. payments to Job Network members; and. operation of the Customer Service Line and investigation of complaints.In addition, a number of National Office staff have responsibilities which contribute to ensuring that Job Network providers comply with regulations and the terms of the Employment Services Contract 1998/1999. It is not possible to precisely identify the number of National Office staff allocated for these purposes as the duties are spread amongst many officers and the duties form only part of the range of functions performed by these officers. Activities related to compliance with the Employment Services Contract undertaken by National Office staff include, but are not confined to, the design and monitoring of records data bases and other performance related tools such as the Employment Services Industry Code of Conduct and the Quality Audit process.(2) Yes. Generally these complaints relate to staff attitude or behaviour, or the quality of service provided.(3) (a) and (b) The Department undertakes on-going monitoring of Job Network member performance and contract compliance. Site visits comprise an essential element of the routine monitoring program and when site visits are undertaken, a range of contract management and compliance issues are monitored.As at the end of February 1999, most Job Network sites around Australia had been visited for monitoring purposes at least once. Some recently opened sites or sites that have relocated have yet to be visited but these will be visited in the near future. The majority of site visits have included a check to ensure that a register of complaints is maintained, and many visits have involved an inspection of financial accounts and records and records of employees and job seekers to protect Commonwealth interests.As site visits can be routine or ad-hoc and vary according to frequency and duration, a precise record of the number of visits undertaken is not maintained.(4) There are four Job Network sites in the electoral division of Swan. Site visits for the purpose of monitoring Job Network member performance and contract compliance have been conducted for all these sites.5099(Question No. 416)4165099Thomson, Kelvin, MPMr Kelvin ThomsonUK6WillsALP00 asked the Minister for Financial Services and Regulation, upon notice, on 15 February 1999:Does the Government endorse the draft rulings in the National Competition Council's draft report on subsection 52(2) and 52(3) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 regarding the exceptions from the Act provided for (a) employment conditions in the labour market, (b) standards and (c) intellectual property.5099Hockey, Joe, MPMr HockeyDK6North SydneyLPFinancial Services and Regulation10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:On the 5 March 1999, the Government received the National Competition Council's final report on the review of subsections 51(2) and 51(3) of the Trade Practices Act 1974. The Government is considering the recommendations and will announce what action is to be taken in due course.5099(Question No. 419)4195099Ellis, Annette, MPMs Ellis5K6NamadgiALP00 asked the Minister for Health and Aged Care, upon notice, on 15 February 1999:Further to the answer to question No. 242 (Hansard , 11 February 1999, page 2459), how many private health insurance members resided in the electoral division of Canberra on (a) 25 November 1998 and (b) 1 February 1999.5099Wooldridge, Dr Michael, MPDr Wooldridge8E4ChisholmLPHealth and Aged Care10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:Statistical collection conducted by the Private Health Insurance Administration Council (PHIAC) incorporates the ACT (not the electoral division of Canberra) into NSW. An annual survey as at 31 December 1998 shows 104,321 ACT residents covered by private health insurance.5099(Question No. 420)4205099Ellis, Annette, MPMs Ellis5K6NamadgiALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Regional Services, Territories and Local Government, upon notice, on 15 February 1999:How many (a) local and (b) interstate/international visitors were recorded at the (i) Australian War Memorial, (ii) Parliament House, (iii) Old Parliament House, (iv) National Science and Technology Centre, (v) Australian National Gallery, (vi) National Library of Australia, (vii) High Court of Australia, (viii) Tidbinbilla Space Centre, (ix) National Botanic Gardens, (x) Australian Institute of Sport, (xi) Royal Australian Mint and (xii) Telstra Tower in Canberra in (A) 1995-96, (B) 1996-97 and (C) 1997-98.5099Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The Minister for Regional Services, Territories and Local Government has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:The National Capital Authority is not responsible for the management of these attractions and therefore does not keep details of the numbers of visitors to each of these attractions.The figures below have been provided to the Authority by each of the attractions. I understand that the attractions do not keep statistics that differentiate between the number of local, interstate and international visitors they receive. The figures represent the total number of visitors to each attraction for the periods requested.Attraction1995-961996-971997-98(i) Australian War Memorial884,396800,791761,450(ii) Parliament House1,229,6791,176,9181,161,323(iii) Old Parliament House112,561123,872142,425(iv) National Science and Technology Centre371,884288,194316,244(v) National Gallery of Australia785,698734,028654,712(vi) National Library of Australia349,353348,665442,196(vii) High Court of Australia212,496157,416108,398 (viii) Tidbinbilla Space Centre (Canberra Space Centre)69,40165,44673,131(ix) Australian National Botanic Gardens330,516325,024352,749(x) Australian Institute of Sport103,530107,730108,023(xii) Royal Australian Mint170,015148,087132,405(xiii) Telstra Tower413,998372,856357,6125100(Question No. 422)4225100Latham, Mark, MPMr LathamK26WerriwaALP00 asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 15 February 1999:(1) When did Australia last nominate for membership of the Unesco Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to its Countries of Origin or its Restitution in case of Illicit Appropriation.(2) Does Australia propose to nominate for membership of the committee at the Unesco General Conference in 1999.(3) How many persons are employed at the Australian Embassy in Paris.(4) Did Australia have an observer at the committee's 10th session (Paris, 25-28 January 1999); if not, why not.(5) Will international conferences and seminars concerning the Parthenon Marbles, including their conservation, be held in Washington (February 1999) and Athens (December 1999).(6) At which of the conferences and seminars will Australia be represented, and at what level.(7) Did the committee at its 10th session invite the United Kingdom and Greece to negotiate on the issue of the Parthenon Marbles.(8) Further to the answer to question No. 986 (Hansard , 9 May 1994, page 519), is it still the Australian Government's position that the question of the return to Greece of the Parthenon Marbles is a matter for resolution by the Greek and British Governments.(9) In what circumstances has the Australian Government made representations to the Greek or British Governments on the issue of the Parthenon Marbles.5100Downer, Alexander, MPMr Downer4G4MayoLPForeign Affairs10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Australia last nominated for membership at the 25th General Conference of UNESCO in 1989.(2) No.(3) Paris Embassy staff numbers are as follows:- Total Embassy A-based:: 14 (DIMA 1, Defence 2, Austrade 1, DFAT 10) and 8 OECD Delegation- Total Embassy A-based and LES:: 60 (14 A-based as above; LES: UNESCO 1 (1/2 DFAT-1/2 DETYA), DIMA 6, Defence 1, DFAT 38) and 8 OECD Delegation A-based, 8 OECD Delegation LES(4) Australia did not send an observer to the committee's 10th session. Australia is not a member of the committee. The UNESCO Delegation was at the time fully committed to other priority activities.(5) A seminar on "The Parthenon Sculptures: Their History and Destiny", sponsored by The Society for the Preservation of the Greek Heritage and the Corcoran Gallery of Art, was held in Washington D.C. on 13 February 1999. No information has been received about a meeting in Athens in December 1999. It has been ascertained from the Greek Permanent Delegation in Paris that the Greek Ministry of Culture is to organise a symposium on the Conservation of the Parthenon Marbles. No dates or agenda have been finalised.(6) The Australian Government was not and will not be represented at these conferences or seminars.(7) The committee at its 10th session did not invite the UK and Greece to negotiate on the issue of the Parthenon Marbles. It did however adopt a Recommendation which "Invites the Director-General to undertake further initiatives to promote bilateral negotiations between the two Member States".(8) Yes.(9) The Australian Government has not made any representations on this issue. 5101(Question No. 424)4245101Mossfield, Frank, MPMr MossfieldMK6GreenwayALP00 asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 16 February 1999:(1) Will self-funded retirees aged between 55 and 60 who have not reached pensionable age, such as widows, be ineligible to receive the proposed one-off goods and services tax compensation package; if so, would this discriminate unfairly against this category of retiree.(2) Has his Department identified other groups or individuals who would similarly be ineligible; if so, what groups or individuals.(3) Were self-funded retirees referred to in preceding parts considered in modelling upon which the Government based its proposed tax package.5101Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Self funded retirees aged between 55 and 60 will benefit from a number of elements of the tax package such as the cuts in personal income tax and refundable imputation credits, as well as the new private health insurance rebate/benefit which came into effect on 1 January 1999.(2) No.(3) The Government has always been determined that all Australians should share in the benefits of tax reform.5101(Question No. 425)4255101Mossfield, Frank, MPMr MossfieldMK6GreenwayALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 16 February 1999:(1) Further to the answer to question No. 79 (Hansard , 15 February 1999, page 2553) will the construction of the western Sydney orbital road system divert the heavy volume of heavy transport travelling through residential areas of Western Sydney.(2) Has he received submissions from, or seen media releases by, the Chair of the Greater Western Sydney Economic Development Board, Mr Jim Bosnjak, seeking funding for the Western Sydney orbital road system; if so, has Mr Bosnjak claimed that decisions on further business development are being delayed in Western Sydney because the road system has not been constructed.(3) Would expenditure on the construction of the Western Sydney orbital road system be justified by the resulting creation of further business and employment in Western Sydney. 5101Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) On completion the Western Sydney Orbital will provide a high standard through road between Liverpool and Hornsby and is intended to attract through traffic that currently uses existing routes. It will also serve a number of developing industrial and residential areas through which it will pass. However, it will not divert traffic that has an origin or destination in western Sydney serviced by the existing routes, which is the bulk of existing traffic.(2) I am aware of the interest of Mr Bosnjak in the construction of the WSO, however, I have not received a submission from him or the Greater Western Sydney Economic Development Board seeking funding for the WSO.(3) Benefit cost analysis shows that construction of the WSO would be economically justified, which is why the Commonwealth proposes to construct the road when funds are available.5101(Question No. 431)4315101Thomson, Kelvin, MPMr Kelvin ThomsonUK6WillsALP00 asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 16 February 1999:(1) On 2 October 1998 did he announce grants to welfare agencies under the Gas Assistance-Material Aid Program through the Victorian Emergency Fund; if so, who in the general community was informed about the grants.(2) Were criteria set to satisfy demonstrated hardship for the purposes of the program; if so, what criteria.(3) Which welfare organisations in Victoria received grants from the emergency fund.(4) Were there welfare organisations in Victoria which did not receive grants to help meet requests for assistance.(5) Was the emergency fund's closure date extended from 18 December 1998 to 31 January 1999; if so, who (a) decided to extend the closure date and (b) was informed of the decision.(6) Were steps taken to invite interstate applications in accordance with the announcement on 2 October 1998; if so, what steps.(7) What procedures have been implemented to review the effectiveness and operation of the Gas Assistance-Material Aid Program.5101Howard, John, MPMr HowardZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) On 2 October 1998, I announced a Victorian Gas Emergency Assistance Fund, including a Community Assistance component. There was no specific Gas Assistance-Material Aid Program as contemplated by the honourable member's question, but material aid was one aspect of the Community Assistance, later known as the Community Recovery, component of the Fund.My announcement was reported in the media nationally, and advertised in Victorian newspapers on the weekend of 3 and 4 October 1998. To ensure broad community access to information relating to the Fund, a number of advertisements were placed in city, regional and foreign language newspapers. These advertisements, which appeared from early October to mid November 1998, provided information on eligibility and how to apply for assistance, and details of hotline numbers that could provide further information.(2) Under the Community Recovery component, major welfare agencies were allocated funds to distribute to people they considered to be in hardship. The Commonwealth did not attempt to lay down specific criteria as to how hardship should be assessed, leaving it instead to agencies with experience in the field. This is the usual procedure for Commonwealth emergency assistance funding.The Heads of Agreement did specify that agencies to be provided with assistance should have higher payments and expenditures during 25 September to 18 December 1998 as a direct result of the emergency. The agencies themselves were to be identified by the Department of Human Services of Victoria.The Heads of Agreement also specified eligibility criteria for assistance with gas appliance replacement, namely: "4.1 An applicant will be eligible for assistance pursuant to this clause 4 if he or she: (a) holds a Centrelink Pensioner Concession Card or Health Care Card or a Department of Veterans' Affairs Gold Card or is otherwise in a category of need determined by the Department of Human Services; and (b) owns and occupies the home with the failed appliance. 4.2 Gas cooking appliances and gas water heating appliances that have failed as a result of the Emergency and cannot be repaired may be replaced and installed without charge to the householder. 4.3 A person may lodge a claim to the Program Director prior to or after replacement of the appliance. 4.4 If the applicant is an eligible person and applies prior to replacement, the appliance will be replaced with an equivalent unit. 4.5 If the applicant is an eligible person and applies after the appliance is replaced, on production of a receipt, the cost of replacing and installing the failed appliance with an equivalent unit will be paid to the person." (3) I am advised that the Department of Human Services of Victoria established a State Community Recovery Committee to monitor the social impact of the gas shortage, and to identify options for providing support and assistance to those in need. This Committee included representatives from most of the major voluntary welfare organisations in Victoria, relevant State Departments, local government, and the churches.Community Recovery component funding was allocated to four agencies, as agreed by the Material Aid Sub-Committee of the State Community Recovery Committee. These agencies were the Salvation Army, St Vincent de Paul, Community Information Victoria, and the State office of the Commonwealth Department of Family and Community Services. Their combined networks provided a total of 534 distribution points throughout Victoria.Practical and professional support service agencies were reimbursed for providing services to individuals who experienced hardship as a result of the gas restrictions. Services provided included HACC home care, food services, crisis assessment and in home support.(4) I am advised that the Material Aid Sub-Committee considered that it was- important to ensure funding was directed to people in need;- efficient to use agencies with established infrastructure throughout the State; and- necessary to choose agencies that could meet the Commonwealth's comprehensive accountability requirements.The Sub-Committee agreed to the four agencies mentioned in part (3) on the basis of these criteria.The Department of Human Services of Victoria has advised my Department that there are four agencies who claimed reimbursement for support services, but who were assessed as having provided something else. Apart from those four, my Department has been advised that all of the other forty-four practical and professional support service agencies that requested reimbursement for extra costs incurred as a result of the gas shortage received payment.(5) (a) At the request of Premier Kennett of Victoria, the Acting Prime Minister, the Hon Tim Fischer, agreed to an extension of the Community Recovery component of the Fund from 18 December 1998 to 31 January 1999.(b) I am advised that Victorian officials were informed on 24 December 1998 that the request had been approved. Mr Fischer wrote to Mr Kennett on 21 January 1999 formally advising him of the decision to extend the Community Recovery component of the Fund. (6) I am advised that three of the agencies nominated by the Victorian State Community Recovery Committee have national coverage and were provided with maps of all the areas affected by the gas shortage, including southern New South Wales.(7) The Community Recovery component is subject to audit. I am advised that a draft specification of the audit requirements is being finalised, but it will ensure that both the Victorian Department of Human Services and the welfare agencies that received funds have complied with the Heads of Agreement negotiated between the Commonwealth and Victoria.5103(Question No. 446)4465103Latham, Mark, MPMr LathamK26WerriwaALP00 asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 18 February 1999:(1) Has his attention been drawn to the message transmitted on 6 January 1999 by the President of the USA to the US Senate seeking its advice and consent to ratification of the Convention and accession to the Protocol for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (The Hague 1954); if so, when.(2) Has the President's message been brought to the attention of the Departments, States and Territories mentioned in question No. 218, which has been on the Notice Paper since 30 November 1998; if so, in each case, when.5103Downer, Alexander, MPMr Downer4G4MayoLPForeign Affairs10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Yes, the President's message to the US Senate to which the question refers has recently been brought to my attention.(2) No. However, updated information on countries' positions in relation to particular treaties is available on request from the Treaties Secretariat of my Department.5103(Question No. 448)4485103McClelland, Robert, MPMr McClellandJK6BartonALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 18 February 1999:(1) What percentage of airline movements at Sydney (Kingsford-Smith) Airport involve the mode of operation known as Mode 4.(2) Is it a fact that Mode 4 does not permit departures from the main North-South runway over Botany Bay; if so, will the Government consider varying Mode 4 to facilitate a greater number of aircraft movements over water.5103Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) During 1998 `over the water' modes, including Mode 4, were used for approximately 5.2% of the non-curfew operating hours at Sydney Airport.(2) Operating with take-offs to the south from the main north-south runway would reduce the number of hourly aircraft movements that could occur and thereby reduce the amount of time that Mode 4 would be available for use. This, in turn, would be likely to reduce the overall number of aircraft movements over water.5103(Question No. 455)4555103McMullan, Bob, MPMr McMullan5I4CanberraALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Regional Services, Territories and Local Government, upon notice, on 18 February 1999:Has the Minister's attention been drawn to the ACT Government's Rural Residential Development (RRD) Scheme; if so, (a) what is the Minister's position on the ACT Government's encouragement of RRDs, (b) do RRDs conform with the spirit and letter of the National Capital Plan and (c) is it a fact that an open-ended process in evaluating the suitability of rural leases to RRDs may lead to the majority of rural leases being converted to RRD purposes.5103Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The Minister for Regional Services, Territories and Local Government has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:I am aware of the ACT Government's Rural Residential Development Scheme.(a) The means by which the Commonwealth can influence rural residential development in the ACT is via the provisions of the National Capital Plan.The Principle for "Rural Areas" identified by the National Capital Plan is:"The rural areas of the ACT should be retained and utilised on a sustainable yield basis whilst providing a distinctive rural landscape setting for the National Capital."One of the Plan Policies for "Rural Areas" is:"Rural holdings shall not be subdivided into units which cannot support long term economic farming or agriculture, or which create small units primarily used for residential purposes, except where a Development Control Plan for a clearly defined area identifies smaller holdings and is agreed by the Authority."Having endorsed the ACT and Sub-Region Planning Strategy, the Commonwealth also has an interest in the consistency of this proposal with the Strategy. The Strategy provides a regionally agreed planning approach. While the Strategy provides for rural residential development in surrounding shires, it is silent on this type of development in the ACT.(b) The ACT Government has identified three areas as having potential for rural residential development.The land use identified by the National Capital Plan for Kinlyside and North East Gungahlin is "Urban". The Authority has advised the ACT Government that development in these two areas would not be inconsistent with the provisions of the Plan. However, development would be required not to intrude into the adjoining "Hills, Ridges and Buffer Spaces" as identified in the Plan.The third area identified for rural residential development is Melrose Valley which lies within the "Rural Areas" identified by the Plan. Under provisions of the Plan, the Authority would need to approve a development control plan in order for rural residential development of the site. The development control plan would need to ensure that any environmental impacts of development are negligible. One of the principles in the National Capital Plan relates to the long-term sustainability of rural land. Before agreeing to a development control plan, the Authority would need to be convinced that the existing rural holdings cannot support long term economic farming or agriculture.(c) The ACT Government is understood to be investigating the potential of only three sites for rural residential development. It is speculative to contemplate that this process might lead to extensive rural residential development in the ACT.5104(Question No. 458)4585104Latham, Mark, MPMr LathamK26WerriwaALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Industry, Science and Resources, upon notice, on 8 March 1999:Has the Minister or his Department held discussions with the visiting delegation of the Hungarian President, such that Hungary will meet its nuclear energy needs from Australia in place of the former Soviet Union; if so, what are the details.5104Moore, John, MPMr MooreEI4RyanLPDefence10—The Minister for Industry, Science and Resources has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:No. Neither I nor officials of my Department held discussions with the visiting delegation of the Hungarian President on this matter.5104(Question No. 459)4595104Latham, Mark, MPMr LathamK26WerriwaALP00 asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 8 March 1999:Has Australia held discussions with other countries about possible peace-keeping operations in East Timor; if so, what are the details.5104Downer, Alexander, MPMr Downer4G4MayoLPForeign Affairs10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:Australia has been in close consultation with a range of interested governments and the United Nations over developments in East Timor, with a focus on East Timor's transition to either an autonomous part of Indonesia, or an independent state. The question of peacekeeping has come up in many of those discussions. Australia's position has been to advocate for involved parties to first pursue dialogue before recourse to a peacekeeping presence. Peacekeeping operations have often been seen as a panacea by parties in conflict, and in that way, can undermine rather than advance the process of conflict resolution. We have argued there is no point contemplating peacekeeping operations in the absence of a settlement between parties to the dispute. Successful peacekeeping requires a peace agreement to keep, as well as the support of the wider UN membership for the establishment of such a force. For as long as East Timor is under Indonesian sovereignty, such an operation would also require Indonesia's consent and compliance. For all of these reasons, it has been widely agreed that discussion of peacekeeping is premature.The Government has made clear in its discussions that should a consensus form to insert a UN transitional arrangement, we would be willing to assist with a substantial contribution, given our role as a major regional country. We would work to ensure that any UN effort is effective, that its objectives are achievable and that the mission has a clear sunset clause.5104(Question No. 463)4635104Lawrence, Carmen, MPDr LawrenceXS4FremantleALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Family and Community Services, upon notice, on 8 March 1999:What proportion of Centrelink debt is (a) collected from clients who have committed fraud or made an error and (b) attributable to Centrelink administrative and procedural error. 5105Truss, Warren, MPMr TrussGT4Wide BayNPAgriculture, Fisheries and Forestry10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:Centrelink's debt management system (DMIS) indicates that for 1997-98:(a) 60.5 per cent of recovered debts were due to the failure of customers to notify of a relevant change in their income or other circumstances. Whether such omissions are fraudulent or not can only be determined by a court. Under longstanding Commonwealth prosecution policy, only the most serious cases are referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions who decides whether to prosecute the case; and(b) 1.5 per cent of debts recovered were attributed to administrative error.The balance of recoveries were largely from debts which resulted from payments made lawfully at the time, but which subsequently became recoverable. These payments include, for example, Compensation, Assurance of Support, Advance Payment debts and transfers between different benefit types.5105(Question No. 466)4665105Mossfield, Frank, MPMr MossfieldMK6GreenwayALP00 asked the Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business, upon notice, on 8 March 1999:Has action been taken to impose a moratorium on the activities of the National Competition Commission in relation to the retailing sector until parliamentary inquiries on the matter have been completed.5105Reith, Peter, MPMr ReithWI4FlindersLPWorkplace Relations and Small Business10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:The Government has not taken any action to impose a moratorium on the actions of the National Competition Council, a body created by the previous Labor Government, for the duration of the Joint Parliamentary Inquiry on the Retailing Sector.5105(Question No. 468)4685105Albanese, Anthony, MPMr AlbaneseR36GrayndlerALP00 asked the Minister for Community Services, upon notice, on 9 March 1999:(1) Is the Centrelink office in Marrickville, NSW, downgrading it's Arabic interpreter position from permanent full-time to part-time, 20 hours over three days each week; if so why.(2) How many Arabic- speaking clients (a) have used the interpreter's service since March 1998 and (b) are projected to use the interpreter's service between March 1999 and March 2000.(3) What are the existing arrangements for interpreting community languages at the Marrickville Centrelink office.(4) Will the existing arrangements change; if so, (a) what changes will be made and (b) when will they be made.5105Truss, Warren, MPMr TrussGT4Wide BayNPAgriculture, Fisheries and Forestry10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) This position has not been a permanent fulltime position but rather has been filled on a sessional basis. Following a formal review of sessional interpreter services, a decision was made to reduce the hours of the Arabic session interpreter to a level that was more consistent with established levels of customer contact and aligning the service more closely with the customer appointment system of bilingual resources.(2) (a) From 2 November 1998 to 5 March 1999—370 booked appointments averaging 4.5 per day. The review determined that figures prior to this period were unreliable.(b) At this stage, projected demand for the next 12 months is 1040.(3) and (4) (a) Details of arrangements prior to the review and arrangements put in place as a result of the review are set out below.Interpreter HoursLanguagePrevious ArrangementNew ArrangementVietnameseMon, Thur & Fri—8.30—4.30Mon—Fri—9.00—4.30GreekMon, Tue—8.30—4.30; Wed—Fri—9.15—2.15Mon, Tue—9.00—4.00; Wed—Fri—9.15—2.15ArabicMon—Fri—8.30—4.00Mon, Tue & Thur—9.00—4.00Cantonese/MandarinMon—Fri—8.30—4.00Mon—Fri—9.00—1.00Portugese/Spanis hMon—Fri—8.30—4.30Mon—Fri—9.00—1.00SerbianFri—12.30—3.30Fri—12.30—3.30(4) (b) The new arrangements as detailed above commenced on 8 March 1999.5106(Question No. 470)4705106Latham, Mark, MPMr LathamK26WerriwaALP00 asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 9 March 1999:(1) Has his attention been drawn to the seminar on the `Parthenon Sculptures: Their History and Destiny' held at the Corcoran Gallery of Art in Washington on 13 February 1999.(2) Was a paper presented at the seminar by the chairman of the Unesco Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to its Countries of Origin or its Restitution in case of Illicit Appropriation.(3) Did the UK and Greece have observers at the seminar.(4) How many persons are employed at the Australian embassy in Washington.(5) Did Australia have an observer at the seminar.(6) Will a recommendation on the Parthenon Marbles come before the Unesco General Conference at its 30th session in October-November 1999.5106Downer, Alexander, MPMr Downer4G4MayoLPForeign Affairs10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Yes.(2) The Australian Embassy in Washington have advised that David Walden, the Chairman of the UNESCO Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to its Countries of Origin or its Restitution in case of Illicit Appropriation, was an invited speaker and member of the panel discussion group at the seminar. He addressed the seminar from his own notes, but did not distribute his paper at the time. However, The Society for the Preservation of the Greek Heritage, which co-sponsored the event, advised that the proceedings of the seminar will be published later this year and Mr Walden's paper will be included.(3) According to The Society for the Preservation of the Greek Heritage, who had responsibility for the seminar guest list, representatives from Greece and the UK were invited to the seminar, but only Greece attended.(4) Washington Embassy staff numbers (as of 30 March 1999) are as follows:- Total Embassy A-based staff:: 90 (DFAT 28, Defence 47, Austrade 1, DIMA 3, DoFA (OPG) 1, DoCITA 1, Treasury 2, AQIS 1, DISR 1, ANSTO 1, AFP 2, Customs 2).- Total Embassy A-based and LES staff:: 252 (90 A-based, as above; and 162 LES: DFAT 74, Defence 62, Austrade 3, DIMA 13, DoFA (OPG) 2, DoCITA 1, Treasury 1, AQIS 1, DISR 2, ANSTO 1, AFP 1, Customs 1).(5) No. The Australian Embassy in Washington had not been informed of the seminar and was not invited. An Australian representative was therefore not sent as an observer to the seminar on the Parthenon Sculptures.(6) The Australian Embassy in Paris has advised that as the agenda currently stands there is no proposal for a recommendation on the Parthenon Marbles to come before the UNESCO General Conference at its 30th session later this year.5106(Question No. 475)4755106Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Family and Community Services, upon notice, on 9 March 1999:(1) Further to the answer to question No. 12 (Hansard , 11 February 1999, page 2437) concern ing social security entitlements for New Zealand citizens, is it a fact that the Gold Coast has the highest concentration of New Zealand-born persons receiving entitlements under the terms of the international social security agreement between Australia and New Zealand.(2) How many persons receive each type of benefit paid under the international social security agreement between Australia and New Zealand in each small area labour market throughout Australia.5107Truss, Warren, MPMr TrussGT4Wide BayNPAgriculture, Fisheries and Forestry10—The Minister for Family and Community Services has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) Figures available from Centrelink records on 12 March 1999 show 1,078 New Zealand-born persons living on the Gold Coast receiving entitlements under the Australia-New Zealand Social Security Agreement.Prima facie, a comparison across Centrelink's 16 administrative Areas suggests there is no higher concentration in any other locality within a Centrelink Area.(2) As agreed with the office of the Member for Batman, the figures in answer to the honourable Member's second question have been provided for each of Centrelink's 16 administrative Areas (as a substitute for small area labour markets).In Centrelink's Area Pacific Central there are 2,404 persons (including non-New Zealand-born) receiving entitlements under the Agreement. The payment categories are:Age Pension1,898Disability Support Pension220Wife Pension52Widow Pension Class B17Pension PP (Single)217Total2,404In Centrelink's Area Brisbane there are 2,073 persons (including non-New Zealand-born) receiving entitlements under the Agreement. The payment categories are:Age Pension1,668Disability Support Pension195Wife Pension46Widow Pension Class B9Pension PP (Single)155Total2,073In Centrelink's Area North Queensland there are 284 persons (including non-New Zealand-born) receiving entitlements under the Agreement. The payment categories are:Age Pension168Disability Support Pension38Wife Pension9Widow Pension Class B1Pension PP (Single)68Total284In Centrelink's Area Hunter (NSW) there are 323 persons (including non-New Zealand-born) receiving entitlements under the Agreement. The payment categories are:Age Pension252Disability Support Pension43Wife Pension3Widow Pension Class B3Pension PP (Single)22Total323In Centrelink's Area South West New South Wales there are 139 persons (including non-New Zealand-born) receiving entitlements under the Agreement. The payment categories are:Age Pension80Disability Support Pension23Wife Pension1Widow Pension Class B0Pension PP (Single)35Total139In Centrelink's Area East Coast New South Wales there are 421 persons (including non-New Zealand-born) receiving entitlements under the Agreement. The payment categories are:Age Pension283Disability Support Pension73Wife Pension5Widow Pension Class B7Pension PP (Single)53Total421In Centrelink's Area West New South Wales there are 310 persons (including non-New Zealand-born) receiving entitlements under the Agreement. The payment categories are:Age Pension179Disability Support Pension49Wife Pension5Widow Pension Class B2Pension PP (Single)75Total310In Centrelink's Area South Metropolitan New South Wales there are 239 persons (including non-New Zeland-born) receiving entitlements under the Agreement. The payment categories are:Age Pension146Disability Support Pension37Wife Pension5Widow Pension Class B8Pension PP (Single)43Total239In Centrelink's Area Area West Victoria thee are 121 persons (including non-New Zeland-born) receiving entitlements under the Agreement. The payment categories are:Age Pension79Disability Support Pension16Wife Pension0Widow Pension Class B0Pension PP (Single)26Total121In Centrelink's Area South Victoria there are 273 persons (including non-New Zealand-born) receiving entitlements under the Agreement. The payment categories are:Age Pension199Disability Support Pension32Wife Pension4Widow Pension Class B4Pension PP (Single)34Total273In Centrelink's Area East Victoria there are 196 persons (including non-New Zealand-born) receiving entitlements under the Agreement. The payment categories are:Age Pension146Disability Support Pension24Wife Pension3Widow Pension Class B4Pension PP (Single)19Total196In Centrelink's Area North Victoria there are 111 persons (including non-New Zealand-born) receiving entitlements under the Agreement. The payment categories are:Age Pension53Disability Support Pension16Wife Pension2Widow Pension Class B0Pension PP (Single)40Total111In Centrelink's Area Northern Australia there are 20 persons(including non-New Zealand-born) receiving entitlements under the Agreement. The payment categories are:Age Pension8Disability Support Pension5Wife Pension1Widow Pension Class B0Pension PP (Single)6Total20In Centrelink's Area Tasmania there are 54 persons receiving (including non-New Zealand-born) entitlements under the Agreement. The payment categories are:Age Pension42Disability Support Pension4Wife Pension1Widow Pension Class B0Pension PP (Single)7Total54In Centrelink's Area Western Australia there are 696 persons (including non-New Zealand-born) receiving entitlements under the Agreement. The payment categories are:Age Pension553Disability Support Pension66Wife Pension11Widow Pension Class B10Pension PP (Single)56Total696In Centrelink's Area South Australia there are 176 persons (including non-New Zealand-born) receiving entitlements under the Agreement. The payment categories are:Age Pension131Disability Support Pension22Wife Pension3Widow Pension Class B1Pension PP (Single)19Total1765110(Question No. 477)4775110Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs, upon notice, on 9 March 1999:(1) Has the Australian National University (ANU) established an endowment for excellence; if so, (a) what funding supports the endowment and (b) how was the funding created.(2) Is it a fact that the major portion of funding is derived from the sale by the ANU of residential properties surplus to its needs; if so, (a) how were the properties funded when purchased, acquired or built, (b) were the properties purchased, acquired or built with funding under appropriations from the Commonwealth, (c) were the properties part of the capital stock of the ANU and used for purposes in which the ANU no longer engages or from which it has substantially withdrawn and (d) why were the funds not returned to the Commonwealth.(3) Does the ANU have a capital works program; if so, does it involve the construction of new buildings and facilities and the upgrading of existing buildings and infrastructure.(4) If the funds accrued from the sale of surplus residential properties were not returned to the Commonwealth, were they used to fund the ANU's capital works program; if not, why not.(5) Will he accede to or reject a request from the ANU for new funding for its capital works program in its annual allocation if funds derived from the sale of assets acquired or built under earlier capital works programs had not been returned to the capital works program.(6) Can the ANU be prevented from investing in buildings, facilities or property from its annual allocation and selling them and placing the sums realised from the sale in some kind of investment account; if not, can other universities act in the same manner.(7) Will he adjust the allocation made to the ANU to take account of an implicit transfer of funds from annual allocations to investment accounts.5110Kemp, Dr David, MPDr KempBT4GoldsteinLPEducation, Training and Youth Affairs; Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Yes.(a) The ANU Endowment for Excellence receives donations, bequests and other gifts from individuals, groups and companies who are supporters of the University. In addition, the University has contributed to the Fund.(b) The University's contribution has been derived from part of the actuarial surplus in the University's superannuation reserve.(2) No.(3) Yes, and yes.(4) Yes.(5), (6) and (7) It would be inconsistent with the Government's policy of recognising universities' autonomy and keeping to a minimum government intervention in their detailed financial management to pursue the courses of action outlined in these questions. 5111(Question No. 478)4785111Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, upon notice, on 9 March 1999:(1) What processes have been established for regular payments from the Department of Finance and Administration to his Department for the anti-racism tolerance campaign.(2) When was the (a) first, (b) second and (c) latest payment received for the campaign.(3) When will the next payment be received.(4) Have private sector sponsors contributed to the campaign; if so, have all private sector contributions been paid to his Department.(5) Has all funding for the campaign been paid from the Department of Finance and Administration; if not, why not.5111Ruddock, Philip, MPMr Ruddock0J4BerowraLPImmigration and Multicultural Affairs; Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Reconciliation10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Payments for the campaign, Living in Harmony, have been made in the usual budget process, with appropriations allocated at the beginning of each year.(2) The first and only appropriation for Living in Harmony was made in the beginning of the 1996-1997 financial year.(3) Decisions regarding future allocations to Living in Harmony will be made in the Budget context.(4) Private sector organisations have not contributed financially to the campaign.(5) Yes.5111(Question No. 481)4815111Hollis, Colin, MPMr HollisDH4ThrosbyALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 9 March 1999:What was the final cost of the construction of facilities associated with the Australian Advanced Air Traffic System (TAAATS) for the Civil Aviation Authority as recommended by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works in its seventh report of 1993 at an estimated cost of $50 million.5111Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:Airservices Australia advises that the $50 million referred to in this question relates to the estimated cost of the TAAATS buildings. The actual cost of construction of those buildings was $49 million. 5111(Question No. 489)4895111Burke, Anna, MPMs Burke83SChisholmALP00 asked the Minister for Health and Aged Care, upon notice, on 10 March 1999:(1) What Commonwealth funding was provided in (a) 1996-97 and (b) 1997-98 directly to programs aimed at the rehabilitation and treatment of drug users in the electoral division of Chisholm.(2) With respect to each program referred in part (1), (a) what was its name, (b) who operated it, (c) in which suburbs did it operate, (e) what were its aims and objectives, (f) what funding did it receive and (f) in what year did Commonwealth funding commence.5111Wooldridge, Dr Michael, MPDr Wooldridge8E4ChisholmLPHealth and Aged Care10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Up until August 1998, it has not been the Commonwealth's practice to fund drug rehabilitation and treatment. In August 1998, the Commonwealth reversed the longstanding position of the previous Labor Government to leave it to the States.(2) Not applicable.5111(Question No. 494)4945111Hollis, Colin, MPMr HollisDH4ThrosbyALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Family and Community Services, upon notice, on 11 March 1999:Were tenders called for the relocation of Centrelink's call centre at George Street, Warilla, NSW; if so, (a) were tenders advertised or was the process conducted internally within Centrelink and (b) was the tender process completed; if not, why was it terminated.5111Truss, Warren, MPMr TrussGT4Wide BayNPAgriculture, Fisheries and Forestry10—The Minister for Family and Community Services has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) Yes.(a) Advertisements for Expressions of Interest were placed in the Financial Review on Thursday 12 November 1998 and the Sydney Morning Herald and Illawarra Mercury on Saturday 14 November 1998.(b) The tender process was not completed.In January 1999 a plan for restructuring the Wollongong office was completed. The plan identified a substantial parcel of floor space, already under long term lease to Centrelink, which could be made available for other uses. It was therefore more cost effective for Centrelink to utilise this existing leased space for the Call Centre rather than committing to new accommodation elsewhere.All proponents who had responded to advertisements for expressions of interest were advised of the termination on 29 January 1999.5112(Question No. 495)4955112Price, Roger, MPMr PriceQI4ChifleyALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 22 March 1999:Further to the answer to question No. 210 (Hansard , 9 March 1999, page 3069), concerning the Badgerys Creek environmental impact statement (EIS), has his Department or PPK Environment and Infrastructure Pty Ltd, the consultants involved in preparing the EIS, identified further work to be undertaken for the final EIS; if so, (a) what work, (b) is PPK Environment and Infrastructure undertaking the work; if not, who is, and (c) what is the estimated (i) time required to complete the work and (ii) date of completion.5112Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:Yes. Additional work has been identified, drawing on the public submissions to the Draft EIS and the Auditor's report, to be undertaken for the EIS Supplement.Further work is being undertaken on the environmental impacts of the second airport proposal, including aircraft noise, air quality, water quality, health and flora and fauna.PPK Environment and Infrastructure Pty Ltd has been contracted to assist with the preparation of the EIS Supplement.(c) (i) and (ii) The EIS Supplement is being prepared as quickly as possible.5112(Question No. 496)4965112Price, Roger, MPMr PriceQI4ChifleyALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 22 March 1999:Further to the answer to part (3) of question No. 212 (Hansard , 9 March 1999, page 3069), concerning the Badgerys Creek environmental impact statement (EIS), (a) what further work is being undertaken, (b) who is undertaking it, (c) what is the cost, (d) when will it be completed, (e) will noise affected areas and areas not previously thought to be affected by noise be more accurately identified and (f) how will the view of affected communities be able to have their views heard and considered.5112Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(a) to (f) In response to public submissions on the Draft EIS, further work on the potential interaction between Sydney Airport and the proposed second Sydney airport at Badgerys Creek is being undertaken for the EIS Supplement.The EIS Supplement is being prepared as quickly as possible.5112(Question No. 498)4985112McClelland, Robert, MPMr McClellandJK6BartonALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Family and Community Services, upon notice, on 22 March 1999:(1) Further to the answer to question No. 264 (Hansard, 10 March 1999, page 3203), how many officers responsible for serving members of the public were employed in Centrelink customer service centres in the electoral division of Barton on (a) 1 July 1998, (b) 1 July 1997 and (c) 1 July 1996.(2) How many clients were served by Centrelink customer service centres in the electoral division of Barton on (a) 1 July 1998, (b) 1 July 1997 and (c) 1 July 1996.(3) How many case managers will be employed under the service delivery model which he announced on 9 November 1998.(4) How many clients in total have been served through the new service delivery model since 1 July 1998.5112Truss, Warren, MPMr TrussGT4Wide BayNPAgriculture, Fisheries and Forestry10—The Minister for Family and Community Services has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) (a) 99(b) 99(c) Nil, Centrelink was established on 1 July 1997.(2) (a) (b) and (c) This data is not available.(3) Nil, Centrelink does not employ case managers.(4) This data is not available. 5113(Question No. 499)4995113Albanese, Anthony, MPMr AlbaneseR36GrayndlerALP00 asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, upon notice, on 22 March 1999:(1) How many applicants for visa subclass 804 (aged parent) were waiting for their cases to be finalised at 1 March 1999.(2) How many subclass 804 visas will be allocated in 1999-2000.(3) Have all applicants for subclass 804 visas been sent letters encouraging them to transfer to subclass 819 visas.(4) What was the processing time at each overseas post for subclass 103 visas at 1 March 1999.(5) How many applications for subclass 103 visas were undecided at 1 March 1999.(6) How many applications referred to in part (5) are from (a) working age and (b) aged parents.(7) Have all applicants for subclass 103 visas meeting the aged parent definition been sent letters encouraging them to transfer to subclass 113 visas.(8) How many parent visa applications allocated to Group Three have been approved since General Direction No. 3 of 13 December 1996, under section 499 of the Migration Act, entitled "Order of consideration of applications for visas in the family stream" was issued.(9) How many offshore parent visas have been issued in 1998-99 to the date of answering this question.(10) How many applications for subclass 103 parent visas were awaiting decision at each overseas post at 1 March 1999.(11) Are parent visas allocated globally or is each overseas post allocated a number.(12) If each overseas post is allocated a number, (a) how many were allocated to each post 1998-99, and (b) how were the allocations determined.(13) If parent visas are allocated globally, are allocations made to each post initially to streamline administrative procedures; if so, how many were allocated to each overseas post for 1998-99.5113Ruddock, Philip, MPMr Ruddock0J4BerowraLPImmigration and Multicultural Affairs; Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Reconciliation10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) As at 28 February 1999 there were 3,493 aged parent applicants (persons) in visa subclass 804 waiting for their applications to be finalised.(2) The Cabinet is yet to formally consider the size and composition of the 1999-2000 Migration Program but I will publicly announce the planning levels for different migration categories after decisions are made.(3) Regional offices of the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs wrote to all applicants for subclass 804 visas to advise them of the new visa provisions available from 1 November 1998 and their right to apply for a subclass 819 visa. Applicants were also advised that whether or not they chose to apply for a subclass 819 visa their current application would continue to be processed.(4) Table A (below) provides median processing times in months, for every overseas post with a subclass 103 caseload. It should be noted that:. these processing times reflect cases finalised in the current Program Year ie. from 1 July 1998 to 1 March 1999;. median processing times are derived from the Migration Program Management System (MPMS) and represent the time taken to process 50 percent of all cases processed in the nominated period - in other words, 50 percent of the cases finalised in Ankara in the period 1 July 1998 to 1 March 1999 were finalised in 22.62 months (see table A);. capping of the visa categories results in an elongation of processing times because the existence of a cap means that a substantial proportion of the caseload cannot be finalised.(5) At 5 March 1999 there were 13,860 persons (representing 7,835 cases) that were undecided (see note 1 below).(6) Among the number of cases in subclass 103 unfinalised at 5 March 1999, there were 4,737 applications from working age parents and 3,066 applications from aged parents (see note 2 below).(7) Overseas posts of the Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs wrote to all applicants for subclass 103 visas to advise them of the new visa provisions available from 1 November 1998 and their right to apply for a subclass 113 visa. Priority in distributing the letters was given to those who currently met the `aged parent' definition. Applicants were also advised that whether or not they chose to apply for a subclass 113 visa their current application would continue to be processed.(8) The number of visas (persons) granted to 28 February 1999 for applications allocated to priority processing group three were:YearOffshoreOnshore1996-975292061997-98160571998-99*78988TOTAL1478351* 1998-99 is 1 July 1998 to 28 February 1999.It should be noted that once a person is queued, priority processing under the General Direction ceases to apply.(9) As at 25 March 1999 there have been 2,056 visas (representing 1,211 cases) issued in subclass 103 and 146 visas (representing 92 cases) in subclass 113.(10) Table B (below) provides a breakdown of the number of persons, by post, who had undecided applications under subclass 103 as at 5 March 1999 (see note 1 below).(11) Parent visa subclass 103 visas were allocated in 1998-99 in queue date order. Visas are currently being granted to applicants who have queue dates up to and including 15 April 1998. An applicant's queue date reflects the date at which they met all criteria for the grant of a parent visa except for the lodgement of the Assurance of Support bond and payment of the second instalment of the Visa Application Charge. The methodology and principles of the operation of the queue are set out in my General Direction No 6, which was tabled in the House of Representatives on 14 May 1998.(12) N/a.(13) No.Note 1: The answers to questions 5 and 10 are based on figures extracted from the MPMS on 5 March 1999. Due to the dynamic nature of the system, data on undecided applications cannot be extracted for a past date and the closest date of data available at hand is 5 March 1999.Note 2: There can be instances where the date of birth of an applicant is not known, thereby resulting in slight variations from aggregates in other reports.TABLE A: PROCESSING TIMES FOR VISA SUBCLASS 103PostProcessing Time in Months*ANKARA22.62ATHENS35.54AUCKLAND25.15BANGKOK33.23BEIJING25.85BEIRUT21.23BELGRADE25.38BONN16.38CAIRO24.46COLOMBO29.31DUBLIN13.62GUANGZHOU26.77HO CHI MINH CITY37.85HONGKONG26.54ISLAMABAD20.08JAKATRA15.92KUALA LUMPUR23.54LONDON21.92LOS ANGELES18.92MALTA15.46 MANCHESTER15.92MANILA29.54MEXICO CITY29.31MOSCOW17.31NAIROBI32.54NEW DELHI25.15OTTAWA17.54PARIS20.31PHNOM PENH22.85PORT MORESBY13.15PRETORIA19.38ROME15.92SANTIAGO DE CHILE18.23SEOUL14.77SHANGHAI24.92SINGAPORE18.23SUVA23.77TEHRAN17.77TEL AVIV16.85THE HAGUE20.31TOKYO17.31VIENNA11.31WARSAW18.92WASHINGTON14.54TABLE B: VISA SUBCLASS 103 APPLICANTS AWAITING DECISIONPostCasesPersonsANKARA3661ATHENS4373AUCKLAND63104BANGKOK69118BEIJING413738BEIRUT120257BELGRADE351621BONN6196CAIRO4575COLOMBO200329DUBLIN610GUANGZHOU9081695HO CHI MINH CITY6001103HONG KONG462816ISLAMABAD3054JAKARTA61114KUALA LUMPUR81135LONDON609945LOS ANGELES3145 MADRID1012MANCHESTER197333MANILA141240MOSCOW241416NAIROBI3579NEW DELHI383710OTTAWA2235PARIS2337PHNOM PENH69128PORT MORESBY48PRETORIA351576ROME2136SANTIAGO DE CHILE5087SEOUL3861SHANGHAI14972707SINGAPORE3148SUVA250490TEHRAN3673TEL AVIV2752THE HAGUE1420TOKYO3250VIENNA80135WARSAW5675WASHINGTON3863Total7835138605116(Question No. 503)5035116Andren, Peter, MPMr AndrenKL6CalareIND00 asked the Minister representing the Special Minister of State, upon notice, on 22 March 1999:Is Australian Electoral Commission material advertised in all country newspapers; if not, why not.5116Fahey, John, MPMr FaheyHQ5MacarthurLPFinance and Administration10—The Special Minister of State has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:Australian Electoral Commission material is not necessarily advertised in all country newspapers. AEC information campaigns are carefully targeted to ensure maximum exposure within available financial resources. Therefore the AEC takes advice from the Government Communication Unit and the centrally appointed placement agency (currently Mitchell and Partners) to ensure that the most effective media strategy is employed. At the 1998 federal election the AEC placed formality ads in 456 newspapers which included all country news papers registered with the then placement agency, AIS media.5116(Question No. 506)5065116Latham, Mark, MPMr LathamK26WerriwaALP00 asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 22 March 1999:Is he able to say whether 339 out of the 626 members of the European Parliament signed a petition calling for the return of the Parthenon Marbles to Athens.5116Downer, Alexander, MPMr Downer4G4MayoLPForeign Affairs10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:The official records of the European Parliament (available on the world wide web) state that written declaration No. 8/98 on the Return of the Elgin Marbles received 341 signatures from the 626 members of the European Parliament.5116(Question No. 507)5075116Edwards, Graham, MPMr Edwards83RCowanALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Communications, Infor mation Technology and the Arts, upon notice, on 23 March 1999:Has Telstra entered negotiations to increase its land holdings in Landsdale, WA; if so, (a) with whom is it negotiating and (b) what area of land is involved.5117McGauran, Peter, MPMr McGauranXH4GippslandNPArts and the Centenary of Federation10—The Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:Telstra advised it had discussions with the Western Australia Ministry of Planning in October 1998 in relation to zoning and possible acquisition of land in Landsdale Western Australia. However, Telstra advised it is not currently negotiating to increase its land holdings in Landsdale.5117(Question No. 508)5085117Edwards, Graham, MPMr Edwards83RCowanALP00 asked the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, upon notice, on 23 March 1999:Is it a fact that totally and permanently incapacitated (TPI) pension entitlements are not adjusted for movements in the consumer price index; if so, what steps is he taking to ensure recipients of TPI pensions regain an acceptable standard of living.5117Scott, Bruce, MPMr Bruce ScottYT4MaranoaNPVeterans' Affairs; Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:No. Special Rate (TPI) pensions are automatically adjusted in line with movements in the consumer price index (CPI) and have been so adjusted since 1976.5117(Question No. 512)5125117Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 23 March 1999:Did the organisers of the 1998 Sydney to Hobart yacht race consult an agency or authority for which he has portfolio responsibility before the race started; if so, (a) what information was provided and (b) did the agency or authority suggest then or subsequently that the timing of the race was dangerous or inappropriate in the circumstances.5117Moore, John, MPMr MooreEI4RyanLPDefence10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:No.5117(Question No. 513)5135117Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Sport and Tourism, upon notice, on 23 March 1999:Did the organisers of the 1998 Sydney to Hobart yacht race consult an agency or authority for which she has portfolio responsibility before the race started; if so, (a) what information was provided and (b) did the agency or authority suggest then or subsequently that the timing of the race was dangerous or inappropriate in the circumstance.5117Kelly, Jackie, MPMiss Jackie KellyGK6LindsayLPSport and Tourism; Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Sydney 2000 Games10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:No.(a) Not applicable(b) Not applicable.5117(Question No. 516)5165117Latham, Mark, MPMr LathamK26WerriwaALP00 asked the Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business, upon notice, on 23 March 1999:(1) How many ILO freedom of association conventions have been ratified by each country in the Asian Region.(2) How many other ILO conventions have been ratified by each country in the Asian Region.(3) When and where will the 13th ILO Asian Regional Conference be held.5117Reith, Peter, MPMr ReithWI4FlindersLPWorkplace Relations and Small Business10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1 and 2) The ILO's Asian Region consists of 37 ILO Member States. The two fundamental freedom of association Conventions are Convention No. 87, Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 and Convention No. 98, Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949.Convention No. 87 had been ratified by twelve countries in the region as at 30 June 1998.Convention No. 98 had been ratified by twenty countries in the region as at 30 June 1998.The following table provides information about the ratification of ILO conventions in the Asian region.Total Ratifications of ILO Conventions in the Asian RegionMember StateC. No 87C. No 98Total Ratifications (inc. C. Nos 87 & 98)AfghanistanNONO15AustraliaYESYES57BahrainNONO4BangladeshYESYES31CambodiaNONO5ChinaNONO19FijiNOYES17IndiaNONO37IndonesiaNOYES10Iran, Islamic Republic ofNONO11IraqNOYES64JapanYESYES42JordanNOYES17Korea, Republic ofNONO7KuwaitYESNO14Lao PDRNONO4LebanonNOYES37MalaysiaNOYES13MongoliaYESYES9MyanmarYESNO21NepalNOYES7New ZealandNONO56OmanNONO0PakistanYESYES32Papua New GuineaNOYES19PhilippinesYESYES26QatarNONO2Saudi ArabiaNOYES13SingaporeNOYES21Solomon IslandsNONO14Sri LankaYESYES36Syrian Arab RepublicYESYES46ThailandNONO11TurkmenistanYESYES6United Arab EmiratesNONO6Viet NamNONO14YemenYESYES26Further information on the ratification of ILO Conventions is available on the ILO homepage on the Internet. The address for this site is http://www.ilo.org.(3) The date and location details of the 13th ILO Asian Regional Conference are not yet finalised.5119(Question No. 540)5405119Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, upon notice, on 24 March 1999:Has (a) the Minister, (b) his or her predecessors or (c) the Department or an agency for which the Minister holds, or his or her predecessors held, portfolio responsibility, engaged Australasian Research Strategies, related companies or organisations or Mr Mark Textor to undertake research since 2 March 1996; if so, in each case, (i) what was the nature of the research, (ii) what was its purpose, (iii) what was its cost, (iv) was the outcome of the research supplied to a non-government organisation, individual or political party and (v) will the Minister release the outcome of the research.5119Ruddock, Philip, MPMr Ruddock0J4BerowraLPImmigration and Multicultural Affairs; Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Reconciliation10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(a)—(c) No.5119(Question No. 544)5445119Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, upon notice, on 24 March 1999:(1) Has his attention been drawn to reports in the New Zealand media predicting that tens of thousands of New Zealanders will cross the Tasman in the next few years.(2) Has his attention also been drawn to claims by economic forecasters Business and Economic Research that net migration from New Zealand in the next few years will reduce unemployment from 7.6 per cent to 5.7 per cent in 2001 sparing New Zealand some of the potential social costs and disruptions from underperforming and erratic economic management.5119Ruddock, Philip, MPMr Ruddock0J4BerowraLPImmigration and Multicultural Affairs; Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Reconciliation10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) I am aware of predictions such as those mentioned by the honourable member.The number of New Zealanders coming to Australia to live permanently is strongly influenced by how the Australian economy is faring in comparison with the New Zealand economy. For example, in 1991-92, during a low point in Australia's economic cycle, there were only 8,206 New Zealander settler arrivals. Since then this number has gradually risen to some 19,400 in 1997-98. When New Zealanders who leave perma nently are taken into account, the net permanent gain from New Zealand in 1997-98 was 12,660. This number could be expected to decline if and when Australia's economic situation changes in relation to New Zealand's.(2) I am also aware of the claim that net migration from New Zealand in the next few years may reduce unemployment in that country from 7.6 per cent to 5.7 per cent in 2001. As the honourable member would appreciate, it is not for me to speculate on future rates of unemployment in New Zealand.5119(Question No. 546)5465119Theophanous, Andrew, MPDr TheophanousQJ4CalwellALP00 asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, upon notice, on 24 March 1999:(1) Further to the answer to question No. 426, (Hansard , 23 March 1999, page 3512), in which he stated that he saw no reason to initiate an inquiry into the administration of the visitor visa program as it applied to Lebanon, Turkey, the People's Republic of China and Vietnam, has his attention been drawn to evidence on the matter presented at public hearings in February and March 1999 of the Joint Standing Committee on Migration in its inquiry into entry requirements for the Sydney Olympic Games.(2) Did his Department confirm before the committee that the four countries referred to in part (1) suffered from very high rejection rates with respect to the application for visitor visas; if so, is this consistent with fair administration of the program.(3) Has his attention been drawn to evidence provided to the committee by representatives of the tourism industry expressing concern on the application of the Government's policy in relation to the countries, especially the People's Republic of China.(4) Has his attention been drawn, in particular, to the statement made by Mr Christopher Brown, Chief Executive of the Tourism Task Force, (Hansard, Joint Committee on Migration, 3 March 1999, page M 215) that Asia, on a racial basis, and the less developed parts of the world, on economic grounds, were most targeted in determining unsuitability for entry into Australia; if so, what is his response.(5) Has his attention also been drawn to protests against the visa system by representatives from the four countries and criticism of the Government in the ethnic media on the matter.(6) Does the evidence contribute to an impression that there is significant discrimination against persons from the four countries in relation to visitor visa applications.(7) Does he maintain his position that there is no need for an inquiry.5120Ruddock, Philip, MPMr Ruddock0J4BerowraLPImmigration and Multicultural Affairs; Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Reconciliation10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) I am aware of evidence presented at public hearings of the Joint Standing Committee on Migration on 2 and 3 March 1999 regarding entry requirements for people from Turkey, Lebanon, Vietnam and the People's Republic of China.(2) The Department did confirm before the Committee that there are high rejection rates for visitor visa applications from the four countries referred to in Question 1.The Government's approach to visitor visa processing varies from country to country only on the basis of objective data on rates of overstay and non-return. This is consistent with the approach taken by previous governments and endured by the Joint Standing Committee on Migration in its report on Australia's Visa System for Visitors. This approach is also consistent with that taken by our main tourism competitor countries. Table A below highlights the fact that the countries with the highest non-return rates are also those with the highest rejection rates.For other countries such as Taiwan, with a much larger number of visitor arrivals (145 000) compared to, for example, mainland China with 56 000 arrivals, the total non-return rate for visitors differs by a factor of 28. That is, Taiwan has a non-return rate of 0.51% for visitors, while for China the comparable figure is 14.6%.Consistent with this differential in non-return rates, visa application rejection rates for Taiwan are also significantly lower than the comparable figure for mainland China. Indeed, it is because of this objective evidence that the Government has decided to extend the Electronic Travel Authority (ETA) system to Taiwan and to Hong Kong from 1 July 1999.(3) My attention has been drawn to evidence provided to the Committee by representatives of the tourism industry. My response to this question is contained in my response to Question (2) above.(4) I have noted Mr Brown's statements about Asia and our targeting the less developed parts of the world on economic grounds.My response to Mr Brown's comment is contained in my response to Question (2) above. There is absolutely no basis to Mr Brown's contentions regarding race as a factor in the processing of visa applications.(5) Australia maintains an ongoing dialogue with officials in these countries and issues are dealt with as they arise in the normal course of events. I am aware of concerns expressed in the ethnic media regarding high rejection rates for visitor visa applications from some countries. I too would like to see these rejection rates fall. However, this is unlikely to occur until we firstly see a fall in non-return rates.(6) No.(7) I see no need for an inquiry. I am, however, committed to examining ways of reducing both non-return rates and rejection rates for visitors. It is against that background I announced a review to see if a limited use of the concept of a visitor bond, as has been introduced or is being introduced in a number of countries, may also be of some use in Australia.CountryApplication Rejection Rate 1997/98ArrivalsLegal Departure on New VisaDeparture after Expiry of Visitor VisaRemaining in Australia after Expiry of Visitor VisaRemaining in Australia on New VisaTotal Non-Return ARGENTINA515610027732166Percentage1.38%1.94%0.52%0.13%0.62%3.21%CHINA (PRC)55642549726580415548120Percentage25.50%9.88%0.48%1.44%2.80%14.59%LEBANON31384487243239802Percentage46.50%14.28%2.29%1.36%7.62%25.55%TAIWAN1446065018130102741Percentage0.06%0.35%0.01%0.09%0.07%0.51% TURKEY27102396018152469Percentage31.70%8.82%2.21%0.66%5.60%17.30%UNITED ARAB EMIRATES174010304Percentage4.77%0.06%0.00%0.15%0.00%0.20%VIETNAM33484735160123707Percentage19.50%14.13%1.52%1.80%3.68%21.12%Global Average2.77%1.22%0.13%0.25%0.37%1.98%5121(Question No. 553)5535121Latham, Mark, MPMr LathamK26WerriwaALP00 asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 29 March 1999:(1) Which Prime Ministers of Australia, other than Prime Ministers Menzies and Whitlam, have addressed the General Assembly of the UN.(2) On what dates did they do so.5121Howard, John, MPMr HowardZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:I refer you to the response by the Minister for Foreign Affairs to question number 434 printed in the House of Representatives Hansard on 24 March 1999, page 3653. The information sought by the honourable member is publicly available from the Official Records of the United Nations General Assembly.5121(Question No. 554)5545121Price, Roger, MPMr PriceQI4ChifleyALP00 asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, upon notice, on 29 March 1999:(1) Has his attention been drawn to long delays in processing correspondence regarding visa applications between Members' offices and migration personnel stationed in diplomatic missions overseas.(2) Has his attention been drawn to examples of similar correspondence being handled by email in approximately 24 hours.(3) Is email a more timely and cost-effective method of communication than other methods being used. (4) Which Australian embassies have email access.(5) Will the number of Australian embassies with email access be increased; if not, why not.(6) Has he established guidelines for the use of email by migration personnel in responding to correspondence from Members' offices; if not, will he do so; if not, why not.(7) Has he advised Members of the correct email addresses and guidelines for migration inquiries for embassies with appropriate facilities; if not, will he do so; if not, why not.5121Ruddock, Philip, MPMr Ruddock0J4BerowraLPImmigration and Multicultural Affairs; Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Reconciliation10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Yes, in relation to some overseas posts.(2) Email is already answered in some cases within 24 hours, as is the case for some correspondence received by fax and mail.(3) Email can be more timely and cost effective. However, delays generally do not reflect the type of enquiry but the sheer volume of inquiries and/or their complexity.(4) Where there is an immigration presence, immigration areas can be accessed by email at all Australian embassies.(5) See (4) above.(6) Electronic mail usage guidelines have been established for the use of departmental officers. There are no specific guidelines for responding electronically to correspondence from Members' offices.(7) No. A list of immigration email addresses will be forwarded to all members. 5122(Question No. 563)5635122Albanese, Anthony, MPMr AlbaneseR36GrayndlerALP00 asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, upon notice, on 30 March 1999:(1) How many applicants for visa subclass 806 (special need relative) were waiting for their cases to be finalised at 29 March 1999.(2) How many subclass 806 visas will be allocated in 1999-2000.(3) Has his attention been drawn to a humanitarian crisis in Sierra Leone; if so, is he considering a special assistance category for displaced persons from Sierra Leone within the Humanitarian Program.(4) What criteria are used to assess applicants originally from Afghanistan who apply for entry under the Humanitarian Program.(5) Is priority given to persons of a particular ethnic group, gender, religion or political background.(6) Were applicants originally from Afghanistan who have applied for entry under the Humanitarian Program in Germany or Austria granted visas in (a) 1997-98 and (b) 1998-99.5122Ruddock, Philip, MPMr Ruddock0J4BerowraLPImmigration and Multicultural Affairs; Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Reconciliation10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) As at 29 March 1999 there were 2,200 special need relative and carer applicants (persons) in visa subclass 806 waiting for their applications to be finalised. (Regulations came into force on 1 November 1998 which amended the provisions for applicants in the special need relative category. Reference to carers reflects this change and applies to applications lodged on or after 1 November 1998.)(2) The Cabinet is yet to formally consider the size and composition of the 1999-2000 Migration Program but I will publicly announce the planning levels for different migration categories after decisions are made.(3) I am aware of the humanitarian crisis in Sierra Leone. I also met with United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) officials in Kenya in January 1999 and Sierra Leone was one of the issues discussed. The Government is considering the size and composition of the 1999-2000 Humanitarian Program. I will announce the Humanitarian Program once a decision has been made.(4) Applicants from Afghanistan are considered against the same legal criteria set down in the Migration Regulations against which all entrants under the Humanitarian Program are assessed.(5) Each application for a Humanitarian Program visa is assessed on its individual merits against the Migration Regulations. Assessment is conducted by Australian Missions overseas taking into account information provided in the application and country reports from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and other human rights organisations. Applicants referred by UNHCR for resettlement are given processing priority.(6) (a) A total of 778 humanitarian visas were issued to Afghans globally during 1997/98, six Special Humanitarian Program (sub class 202) visas were granted to Afghans who applied to the Australian Embassy in Bonn and none from Vienna(b) From 1 July 1998 to 31 March 1999 338 humanitarian visas were granted to Afghans. In this period no visas were granted to Afghans by the Australian Embassies in Bonn or Vienna.5122(Question No. 567)5675122Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business, upon notice, on 30 March 1999:(1) Was he advised by his Department or the Australian Industrial Relations Commission on whether Mr Mike Kelly or any other member of the Industrial Relations Commission or the Department should be appointed as the Industrial Registrar.(2) Was the position of Industrial Registrar advertised, if not, why not.(3) What are the terms of the remuneration package offered to the incoming Industrial Registrar, Mr Peter Richards, and does the package differ in any way from what was paid to the outgoing Industrial Registrar.(4) Is it a fact that the principal role of the Industrial Registrar is to provide administrative support to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission and that the appointments to this position have traditionally come from within the Commission and/or the Department.(5) Over the period 1972 to 1996, who were the Industrial Registrars and what were their jobs prior to their appointment as Industrial Registrar.5122Reith, Peter, MPMr ReithWI4FlindersLPWorkplace Relations and Small Business10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) The Cabinet accepted my recommendation that the Governor-General be asked to appoint Mr Peter Richards as Industrial Registrar on the expiry of Mr Michael Kelly's appointment on 24 March 1999. I consider it inappropriate, in relation to any Government appointment, to reveal publicly any advice a Minister receives about persons who may be considered for appointment. I can say that neither my Department nor the President of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission has ever advised me that the field for potential appointees as Industrial Registrar should be confined to persons who have worked in the Australian Industrial Registry or in my Department, nor would I consider such a restriction to be warranted.(2) No. It was not considered necessary. I note that the last three appointments to the office of Industrial Registrar were made by the then Labor Government. I am advised that in no case was the position advertised.(3) On the date of Mr Richard's appointment (25 March 1999), his remuneration package was identical to that of his predecessor, Mr Kelly. Mr Richard's appointment took effect on the day following the expiry of Mr Kelly's appointment and the then remuneration as determined by the Remuneration Tribunal applied.However, the Remuneration Tribunal has determined new basic rates of annual salary for statutory office holders, including for the Industrial Registrar. Determination No. 5 of 1999, which came into effect on 31 March 1999, set a new basic rate of annual salary of $109,800 (comprising salary of $104,000 and office holder supplement of $5,750—the latter remained unchanged from that applying previously).Prior to 31 March 1999, the basic rate of annual salary for the Industrial Registrar was $99,931 together with office holder supplement of $5,750, set by Determination No. 18 of 1998 on 1 July 1998.The components of the former and current Industrial Registrars' remuneration package that are additional to basic annual salary are superannuation (accounting for the major portion of non-salary remuneration), provision of a privately-plated car, standard travel allowances, and payment of certain telephone costs.(4) A range of functions are specifically conferred on the Industrial Registrar by the Workplace Relations Act 1996. The Industrial Registrar heads the Australian Industrial Registry, and one of its main statutory functions is to provide administrative support to the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. As to the previous employment of Industrial Registrars since 1972, see my answer to question (5).(5) Industrial Registrars from 1972 to 1996 were Dr Ian Gordon Sharp (August 1966—December 1972, formerly Assistant Secretary, Commonwealth Department of Labour and National Service), Mr Keith Douglas Marshall (December 1972—June 1981, formerly a Deputy Industrial Registrar under the Commonwealth Conciliation and Arbitration Act 1904), Mr John Denis McMahon (July 1981—January 1989, formerly Principal Adviser, Commonwealth Department of Industrial Relations), Mr James Patrick O'Shea (February 1989—August 1992, formerly First Assistant Secretary, Client Services Division, Commonwealth Department of Employment, Education and Training), Ms Barbara Deegan (September 1992—October 1993, formerly Assistant Secretary, Legal Services Group, Commonwealth Department of Industrial Relations) and Mr Michael Desmond Kelly (March 1994—March 1999, formerly Executive Director, Corporate Services, Australian Industrial Registry).