2001-02-263918REPS2431902001-02-26—————Mr SPEAKER (Mr Neil Andrew) took the chair at 12.30 p.m., and read prayers.Privilege2431912:31:0024319SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER10000PON/A10—On the last day of sitting, the member for Sturt raised as a matter of privilege actions by other members of the House which he believed to be attempted intimidation. I undertook to consider the matter and report back to the House. I have considered the matter and consulted with many people. In the course of these consultations, I became aware that there may have been a temporary record taken for security purposes and held by the establishment at which the alleged intimidation occurred. At my request, this record was examined without compromising patron privacy. The result of the examination was, I am advised, inconclusive. I have also had regard to the matter raised in 1979 by the then member for Shortland that another member had threatened him. In that instance, in slightly different circumstances, the Speaker stated that it would be idle for the House to pursue the matter. The member for Sturt has advised me that he had raised the matter on the principle at issue. As further investigation has proved inconclusive, I believe the dignity of the House would best be preserved by not pursuing the matter. Bills24319R123624319Bill presented by Mr Bevis.12:33:0024319Bevis, Arch, MPMr BEVISET4BrisbaneALP00—This is the third time that I have introduced the Employment Security Bill 2001 in the life of this parliament. The new Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business, the self-confessed `L-plate minister', will no doubt say that the government has fixed the problem of employee entitlements. In fact, the new minister has released two self-congratulatory documents recently. One was a 12-month report on the inadequate scheme that the government is afraid to even legislate for and another was a document entitled `A rebuttal of Labor's supposed alternatives to the Commonwealth government's employee entitlement support scheme', which seeks to attack me personally and the Labor Party in general. This document has been a long time coming. In fact, the former minister, Mr Reith, wrote to me 18 months ago, acknowledging a copy of Labor's proposal which I had sent to him at that time, shortly after the Oakdale miners' dispute. It has only taken the government 18 months to now put out a paper in an effort to rebut Labor's policy for fixing what is a terrible situation confronting too many workers who face uncertain futures when their company becomes insolvent. The interesting thing about this minister's response, though, is that Dr Shergold, the Secretary to the Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business, has now agreed in Senate estimates that it was inappropriate to have that document on the department web site because it was inherently political in nature.However, I want to turn directly to the provisions of this bill and the concerns we seek to address in once again putting it before this House. The member for Fraser, Mr McMullan, first tabled this legislation in the wake of the waterfront dispute. All members of the public and this House will remember the Patricks waterfront dispute. That 1998 dispute began with the sacking of an entire work force. The company, in collusion with this government and the former minister, conspired to transfer workers to shelf companies and then terminated their employment, claiming that the shelf companies had no assets to pay out the workers' entitlements. It was not that the corporate organisation did not have the money. They had deliberately shifted the money and resources from the company that employed the workers to other legal entities so that when they sacked those workers, no matter what a court might decide, those workers would never, ever get their legal entitlements. The government and Patricks thought that was a slick manoeuvre at the time—a slick manoeuvre which we immediately said would not be tolerated by a Labor government. We have since that time, on no fewer than four occasions, introduced a bill— Government members interjecting—10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—Order! The member for Brisbane has been most accommodating. He is entitled at least to the attention of those currently congregating in the aisles.ET4Bevis, Arch, MPMr BEVIS—We have introduced a bill on four occasions to have this parliament deal with that problem so obviously displayed in the Patricks waterfront dispute. In the time since then, and on each of those four occasions, this government has stood in the way of a debate in this parliament on those matters and has prevented the parliament from voting on them. The government and Patricks might have expected the workers to cop that sweet and accept the word of the management of Patricks that they did not have any money left to pay their entitlements. Of course we knew then, and history has demonstrated correctly, that that was never the case.We know that the workers and indeed all of Australia did not accept that unjust situation. Ultimately it was the workers and their union who were successful in the courts. This legislation, however, seeks to ensure that other employers do not use that Patricks scenario as a template, a case study, for them to seek to artificially put in place a corporate structure where assets are deliberately removed, resulting in workers being denied their entitlements, such as their redundancy pay, long service leave, holiday pay and outstanding superannuation contributions. In some cases, employers are even holding on to the workers contributions to medical benefits funds and other payroll deductions. That was certainly the situation that was related to me by the workers at the Steel Tank and Pipe firm, STP, and the workers at Electruck—two of the more recent examples of company insolvency resulting in workers losing their entitlements.The new minister for workplace relations singled out the workers from Electruck for special mention on 23 January which, interestingly, was the anniversary of the National Textiles collapse. Members of the parliament will recall the workers at National Textiles losing their jobs and going for some time without any compensation. Of course, the workers at National Textiles are the only workers in Australia that this government decided they would endeavour to look after. They are the only workers who got their full entitlements. That may have had something to do with the fact that the chairman of the board was the Prime Minister's brother. They are the only workers in the country that this government have gone out of their way to do anything for. On 23 January, on the anniversary of the event, just days before taking up his role as the new minister, Tony Abbott was quoted in the Sydney Morning Herald as saying this:What we expect people to do is to take their holidays as they fall due and not delay too long in terms of taking any long service leave that's owing to them.What he has said to workers in a situation where a company has become insolvent and they have lost their entitlements is that they should cash out their entitlements—they should no longer take their hard-won and important conditions as annual leave or long service leave; they should cash them out, because you never know when the company will go belly up and it will not have had the money put aside to pay them what they are legally entitled to. That is a pretty familiar refrain from this minister: when in doubt, blame the victim. Remember, this is the minister who did that with the unemployed: when in doubt, blame the victim. Who was it that caused the unemployment problem? It was all the unemployed. Who is it that causes the problem where workers are left without their proper pay? It is the workers of course: they should have taken all their leave each year. There is never a thought that a proper system should have been put in place to guarantee them their entitlements.The interesting thing about the Electruck case is that, like the Patricks example, the chairman of the company had ensured that the assets of the company were safe in another holding company that did not directly employ those workers. Had the parliament properly dealt with this bill on any one of the four occasions we have put it before the parliament, the workers of Electruck would have had secured for them their wages and entitlements. The courts would have been empowered to take that money from the related entities. Time after time this Liberal government has prevented the parliament from making that decision. We are putting the bill back into the parliament today because we think these are important matters. I mentioned meeting with the workers of STP, which I did just before Christmas last year. About a month before Christmas the workers at STP found themselves without a job. They also found themselves deceived over their employment arrangements. They discovered they were not employed by the company they thought they were. Apparently, there are at least 12 related STP companies with the workers being employed by five different shelf companies that have no value at all. This is not old history. This is a current problem affecting workers today and neglected by this government. This is pretty similar to the situation that surrounded the Patrick group in 1998.Last year the government made some superficial changes to the Corporations Law which, it claims, solves the problem of related entities. That is a false position. The changes to the law last year made little real difference. The reality is that the government has been dragged kicking and screaming every inch to do something about the issue of employee entitlements. Just last year the Labor Party took the opportunity in the Senate to amend the government's Corporations Bill at that time to introduce these changes into the bill before the Senate. We received the support of the Democrats in the Senate and were successful in amending the government's legislation. However, the response of the government in dealing with the amended bill was to ignore it. The government could not do the right thing, even belatedly—even being dragged every inch of the way—and accept the Senate's amendments. It continued down the path it has taken since the Patricks waterfront dispute and denied workers any prospect of getting their money back from these corporate shysters who shift the resources very deliberately out of the company that employs the workers so that the workers have no chance of getting their legal due.The government was forced to do something after the Oakdale miners dispute and it was forced to do something with National Textiles. But it is little wonder that the government has been forced every inch of the way to do something about this and it is little wonder that on this matter the government has for some time refused to accept the bill that I once again put before the parliament—because at its highest office there is no support for these propositions. The Prime Minister has on a number of occasions endorsed the view that these workers' entitlements are actually money for cash flow purposes available to their employer. In June 1999, at the height of the Oakdale miners dispute, he did a prolonged interview with radio broadcaster Alan Jones, who I believe is a friend of the Prime Minister. Alan Jones was, quite rightly, championing the cause of those workers to get their money. On no fewer than five occasions Alan Jones said to the Prime Minister, `This is their money. Shouldn't they have it?' and, on no fewer than five occasions, the Prime Minister prevaricated; the Prime Minister sought to defend the role of employers in taking that money for themselves. I will quote some passages from the transcript of that interview in June 1999. Jones said to the Prime Minister:But see, if you could have a central fund into which long-service leave entitlements are paid, why can't you have a central fund into which annual leave's paid and severance pay is paid and retirement pay is paid? It's so simple.The Prime Minister said:Well, that is being examined at the present time. Now, there are pluses and minuses. I know at the moment it sounds all plus but the more money that small businesses are not able to invest in the day-to-day running of their businesses the lesser will be their operations.To which Jones said:Oh yes, but it's not their money.I would have thought that was pretty self-evident, but the Prime Minister was not persuaded; he kept going. He said: I know but the point I'm making, Alan, is that in reality because of cashflow needs of many companies, many firms actually use this money for the day-day-to operations of their business ...And Jones said again that you:... shouldn't employ people if you can't pay them.And the Prime Minister still persisted. He said:... I'm saying to you that the business and commercial reality of many small firms is that they need this cash for their day-to-day operations.And Jones had another go to save his friend, the Prime Minister, and said:But part of employing someone and going into business is knowing that you must pay the wage plus.And the Prime Minister still persisted:If you apply that kind of system in relation to all of those entitlements you will have less money for small business to invest in its operations.That is the Prime Minister of Australia defending employers taking workers' money and using it as if it were some sort of interest-free unsecured loan—as if the workers had said, `Well, by all means take our money. We won't charge you interest. We want no security. You do what you like with it, because you need it for your cash flow.' That is a view the Prime Minister has publicly endorsed—not once, not twice but five times on one program; and, I might say, he has endorsed it publicly since then.This is a government that is not moved to solve this problem at all. The Prime Minister thinks that when workers have an entitlement to annual leave, long service leave, sick leave or any of these other entitlements, the workers are actually giving the company that unsecured interest-free loan. Well, they are not. It is the workers' money—no-one else's and, of course, that was the point that Alan Jones tried to make, without success.The simple problem is that not only does the government not want to do anything to assist workers; they are also unwilling to even debate these reforms. In spite of the bluff and bluster from the new Minister for Workplace Relations and Small Business—which is the standard way, it seems, that some ministers want to deal with these matters—the record speaks for itself. The Labor Party has sought to resolve this issue in this parliament on a number of occasions. As I said, I have moved this bill three times in the life of this parliament alone. We will not be backing away from this issue. We have pursued this matter in the Senate as Corporations Law has come before us, we will continue to pursue the matter through the Corporations Law and we will continue to pursue it in private members legislation. If the government does not see sense and deal with this before the election later this year, I assure the people of Australia that we will deal with it as a matter of urgency after the next election as the new government.In the interview in 1999, there was an interesting parallel that directly relates to the issue at hand in this bill, and that was a point made by Alan Jones when he said of the owners of the mine:Well, this bloke owns other coalmines.That is, the company had plenty of money to pay the workers; he just was not willing to. And what did the Prime Minister say? He said:That is one of the reasons why we are asking the Securities Commission to have a look at the matter.That was in June 1999. They have had enough time to look at it, Mr Prime Minister. Now is the occasion on which this matter should be dealt with. We once again put this private member's bill before the parliament, and we look forward to a debate with government members and we look forward to a vote in this House. There is the challenge for the government. Bring this bill on for a vote in the parliament and let us see whether or not the government has the stuffing to deal with this issue up-front, decently and properly for the good of all Australian workers and families who are asking for no more than to get their legally due payments. (Time expired)Bill read a first time.10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—In accordance with standing order 104A, the second reading will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Committees24323243232432312:49:0024323Causley, Ian, MPMr CAUSLEY4K6PageNP10—On behalf of the Standing Committee on Environment and Heritage, I present the committee's report of the inquiry into catchment management entitled Coordinating catchment management, together with the minutes of proceedings and evidence received by the committee.Ordered that the report be printed.4K6Causley, Ian, MPMr CAUSLEY—Australia is facing major environmental problems. That is well known. What we as a nation plan to do is still emerging. It is clear, however, that the nation's environmental problems are the greatest challenge to face the nation in the past half century. They challenge all Australians: those who live in the bush, those who live in the rural towns and those who live in the nation's large cities. The response must be national, it must be ongoing and it must involve all sectors of the society.The report tabled today draws these strands together. It sets out clear proposals upon which a national effort must rest. In particular, I draw honourable members' attention to the core elements of the report. It is now recognised that financial, material and human resources must be organised to build solutions to the problems in Australia's catchment systems. We need a systematic plan—and an agency to coordinate and deliver it—whereby funds, information and expertise can flow by the most direct route and with the greatest speed to those people and places where it is most needed and where it will do the most good. The committee has recommended therefore that a national catchment management authority be established. Such an authority will be effective only if it is adequately funded over a long period of time. It is now recognised that such funds are not available from the ongoing taxation receipts. We know that the Australian community will shoulder the burden of an additional levy for a particular purpose when judged to be in the national interest. The protection of environment is one of those things that Australians are prepared to pay for. For this reason, the committee recommends that the feasibility of an environmental levy be examined.Much can also be done to promote responsible catchment management by providing other forms of incentive to land-holders, especially those on low incomes. The committee recommends that the government develop options for increased taxation incentives and for removing disincentives, especially for land-holders on low incomes. The committee recommends also that the principles and targets be developed and embodied in legislation. They should be mandatory, and access to funding should depend upon the adoption of them and compliance with them. Information is the key to developing effective plans to fight environmental degradation. For this reason we have recommended that the government develop an education strategy and we have recommended that the National Land and Water Resources Audit be established and funded as an ongoing body and that the information it develops be publicly and freely available.Our proposals involve the renewal of rural and urban communities. For this reason the committee recommended the creation of a system of extension officers operating out of community centres, centres that provide a range of community services. None of our recommendations are untested or theoretical. They are practical, pragmatic and feasible responses to a serious situation. The committee has not ignored the great work currently being done throughout the community or the recent announcement of the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality. All the initiatives—from those in the nation's towns and villages to that of the national action plan—provide excellent foundations. But we can do better and the recommendations in this report take all those efforts a stage further.In closing, I wish to point out that this is a bipartisan report. It is so because the sustainable management of the environment is not the monopoly of any one party but a responsibility of us all. As a result, in this report there was no battle, there was no division, only solid bipartisan agreement. I wish therefore to thank all the other members of the committee for their hard work on this report. Most particularly I wish, on behalf of the committee, to thank all those private citizens who not only work tirelessly for improved catchment management but also took the time to make submissions to the committee and by doing so rendered great assistance. I also thank very much the secretariat, led by Ian Dundas, for its work. 12:54:0024324Byrne, Anthony, MPMr BYRNE008K0HoltALP00—First of all, I would like to thank those primarily responsible for this report tabled today of the Standing Committee on Environment and Heritage: the secretariat staff, whom the chair has just acknowledged. The report is an important document. It is a bipartisan report—rare given the temper of the times and the impending federal election but reflecting the crisis we now face in our catchment areas. Members of the committee have agreed to a report that, if implemented, would lay the foundation for dealing effectively with one of the most serious environmental problems facing our country. This is particularly important in this, the centenary year of our Federation. A quote from the introduction in the report says it all:The evidence is overwhelming that Australia's catchment systems are facing enormous and ongoing threats from human activities. Unless we as a national community begin to address these problems the quality of our life will be substantially eroded over the coming decades.The headline recommendations of this report are: an assessment of the feasibility of an environment levy to pay for the public contribution in order to implement the ecologically sustainable use of Australia's catchments; a national catchment management authority to ensure that the many programs are coordinated, funded and appropriate to the problem at hand; and national catchment management coordinating principles, targets and legislation. These recommendations are reflective of the enormous challenges we face to address this crisis.There are a total of 26 recommendations in this report ranging from those just mentioned to taxation incentives to participate in landcare activities for land-holders on low incomes, greater accountability by government agencies administering funding programs, accreditation for the ecologically sustainable use of catchment areas systems and regional programs, greater education about the programs, and greater coordination of the flood of data and information so that it can be shared and coordinated rather than completed in the haphazard manner in which it is compiled at the moment. All that remains now is for a government to have the foresight, the vision and the courage to implement it. The report does not merely make recommendations to the current government but also to any future government.I believe, and I think that this report demonstrates, that there are serious deficiencies with how governments deal with environmental matters. What is done—and what has been done—is generally piecemeal, tentative, poorly conceived and driven more, as some have said, by expectations of electoral advantage than a serious consideration of the issues. I hope that this report begins to address this particular issue and provides clear guidance on the approach to be taken. There are those who will proclaim, by the time the election is called later this year, that roughly $3.8 billion will have been allocated to counter environmental degradation and so the government can safely ignore this report. The problem is that, in this and in many cases, the money would not have been well spent. For example, a considerable proportion of the $1.6 billion that will be spent on roads is misdirected. The problem that has caused the degradation of the rural road system remains: rising water tables and salinity. Ten years from now the problem will be back again.Additionally, cost shifting, rent taking and inappropriate policies by state bureaucracies have diminished the effectiveness of the moneys allocated and spent. There is no advantage in having a regional policy if the bureaucracy does not effectively administer it. People on the ground are bombarded by a blizzard of information from government agencies who appear not to be properly integrated. They are poorly coordinated and in many cases ineffective. What I have been disturbed to discover, as I did last week, was that in many cases the people who are affected most—like, for example, the farmers of Narrogin and the surrounding wheatbelt—have been the least consulted when policy is being effected, the least supported financially and otherwise, the least informed and the least listened to but the most affected. They are losing their livelihoods, their families are suffering and our community as a whole is losing as a result. It was a privilege to meet these brave individuals and families, as I and other members of the committee did last week at their homes and their farms, and to listen to their experiences. These people want the same thing that we do: a better environment for their families, their children and the Australian community. All they are asking for is support and consultation, not unilateral impositions of policy after bodgie consultation processes. They must be listened to. We must not allow the bureaucracy to get in the way of delivering effective support to those on the ground who will implement the changes that we require. This was again emphasised to me when meeting representatives of a local catchment management authority in Renmark, as we did last week. I believe that enough work has been done to determine the course of action we need to take. That is certainly the view of the people most affected by the salinity and other environmental issues that we are dealing with in this report. They are demanding action—as we are—on these issues. I believe that nowhere near enough has been done to effectively address these issues. All I have seen is a labyrinthine system of bilateral agreements that even the Minister for the Environment and Heritage admitted just last week were the last chance for action and that if they did not work the Commonwealth would act.This report provides a plan for action. Its recommendations channel funds directly to those people on the ground who will ensure that the environmental problems are addressed. Australians are searching for sensible, affordable and responsible solutions to the environmental problems that are rotting our cities, our towns and our land from the bottom up. We have enough examples. The warnings are clear. Let us now heed the remedies and have the courage to implement the recommendations of this report. (Time expired)12:59:0024325Billson, Bruce, MPMr BILLSON1K6DunkleyLP10—The Coordinating catchment management report of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Environment and Heritage tabled today is a very useful look forward at tackling sustainability for our country. The terms of reference we worked to recognised a number of things: (1) there are significant catchment related challenges that we as a nation must face; (2) we have had mixed results from the existing structures and systems; (3) integrated catchment management has been embraced as the only logical way forward to tackle these issues; and (4) how we embrace catchment management in a way not simply to guard against further degradation but to actually use those tools to restore the quality of our natural systems. I share with the previous speaker, the member for Holt, the frustration over the finger-pointing that has gone on and the opportunities that have been lost, but there are some reasons for that, and these are tackled fairly and squarely in the report.In my view, the report could have been subtitled `Vital approaches for vital communities'. The Constitution apportions jurisdictional responsibility for natural systems management, but that does not guarantee effective action and the essential outcomes that are required. This report seeks to work within the framework of our Federation to propose some new structures, some new, more rigorous intergovernmental relationships, some planning and reporting tools and, above all, some accountability—a framework to improve the prospect for vital action, resourcing certainty, localised management and transparent reporting against shared priorities and responsibilities. These vital approaches will take some courage to implement, but to not face up to the natural resource challenges and the creeping atrophy eating away at too many regional communities amounts to failing these communities. I talk about `vital communities' not only in the sense of the importance of these communities but also in the sense of communities that are full of life, that are invigorated, that are animated, that are optimistic about the future—communities where their natural systems are the foundation of their economic and social life. Let me put it another way: if essential natural systems are degraded, what are the drivers of these communities? Why will people invest in these communities? Why will people choose to raise their families in these communities? What is the reason for the community being there in the first place if the natural systems they depend upon are so degraded that they cannot sustainably support agricultural production, biodiversity conservation, living standards or basic services that their citizens depend upon, such as water. This report seeks to tackle that head-on.As we travelled around Australia, we asked some difficult questions. We asked local government whether, if they had a few extra tens of thousands of dollars or even millions of dollars, that money would go towards natural systems management? Sadly, too often we were told that there were other, more pressing priorities. Yet those of us on the committee believe that, unless we get our natural systems restored, these other, lesser priorities in these local communities will not matter, as the only economic base they will have will be people trying to restore the degradation that has been left to them by earlier generations. Proposals in the report include the formulation of a national catchment management authority, the drafting of catchment management legislation, setting management principles clearly before all the parties involved, creating performance standards, looking at the difficult question of property rights, setting up an environmental auditor, addressing reporting processes and working with accredited plans so that we know that the resources are there and that they are being spent wisely. Once the $1.5 billion in the Natural Heritage Trust Fund has been expended, I am concerned that some citizens will say, `Did we get value for money?' Sadly, through cost-shifting from states and territories, through other jurisdictions not accepting their responsibilities, we have not been able to leverage those resources in the way that was first envisaged.4T4Melham, Daryl, MP1K6Billson, Bruce, MPMr BILLSON—You can tell from the behaviour of those opposite that they are not that interested in sustainability. It has not cracked it as one of the four Beazley pillars. I can understand that: they were not interested in it in government and they are certainly not interested in it in opposition. If anything is going to be done to look after our natural systems, it will take a coalition government to do it, and this report provides a useful blueprint for the future.4T4Melham, Daryl, MPMr Melham—One less speech from you!10000Nehl, Garry (Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER)Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nehl)—There will be a few less from you if you don't be quiet, Member for Banks. Does the member for Page wish to move a motion in connection with the report to enable it to be debated on a future occasion?24326Causley, Ian, MPMr CAUSLEY4K6PageNP10—I move:That the House take note of the report.I seek leave to continue my remarks later.Leave granted.10000DEPUTY SPEAKER, MrMr DEPUTY SPEAKER—In accordance with standing order 102B, the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting, and the member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.Bills24326R1237Bill presented by Mr Beazley.13:05:0024326Beazley, Kim, MPMr BEAZLEYPE4BrandALPLeader of the Opposition00—The School Funding Amendment Bill 2001 does two things: firstly, it abolishes the pernicious enrolment benchmark adjustment, which has so awesomely discriminated against the 70-plus per cent of our children who attend government or state schools around this nation; and, secondly, it puts into law our pledge to remove the massive funding increases given by this government to wealthy category 1 schools. Our pledge is to spend that money on schools on the basis of need. Since the parliament last sat, the government have caved in to community outrage and changed their position on the EBA. But, despite the impression the Minister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs has tried to create, they have not in fact adopted Labor's policy of abolishing the EBA. They have changed it: they will continue to calculate the EBA and they will pass over the amount of money that is calculated as being within it to the state systems only on terms and conditions that they mutually agree. Although this has undermined primary schools, although it has undermined sport in schools, although it has undermined technology in schools, although it has undermined literacy in schools and although it has undermined mathematical capabilities in schools, money will finally be disbursed to them only on whatever narrow agreement is reached between the minister and the states. It is the equivalent of racing into somebody's house, stealing their wallet, going out of the house and then picking up a bullhorn and saying, `Yah, yah! I've got your wallet. If you come out on the front lawn and dance for me, you can have it back.' That is the equivalent of what the government have done with the enrolment benchmark adjustment.But what they have done is like their reversal on the BAS. The government only changed their stance after receiving the electoral equivalent of a cattle prod. This change on the EBA is yet another example of policy panic by a government that will do anything to stay in power. They have had to change the EBA because they know that, like their tax on a tax on petrol, this policy has bred mass resentment from ordinary families across Australia who have watched their children be denied properly funded schools that will give them a good start in life. It has done more than most other things to emphasise this growing perception in the public that the Howard government govern for the big end of town. If you happen to be an ordinary, average Aussie with ordinary, average Aussies' aspirations and life chances, you do not feature on the people meter of this government.Just last week we had a major report from the primary schools principals' peak body stating that they had had enough of underfunding of state schools. Here is what their report said: 85 per cent of principals thought that the divide between rich and poor schools is widening; 26 per cent of principals say that their classrooms and facilities are inadequate; literacy and numeracy programs were underfunded and had to be targeted to the very weakest students, to the neglect of the many who also need help; and schools do not have enough money to install IT equipment and retrain staff. It could have added to that `and also to provide maintenance for that equipment once they have it in place'. All-up, 90 per cent of primary school principals believe that insufficient funds are being allocated to early schooling and are pessimistic about the future.What greater indictment could there be of this minister's policies as reflected in the EBA? What greater tragedy than to let down a whole generation of children during the most formative learning stage of their lives? We had to endure years of the minister for education telling us why the EBA was needed, why we were economic illiterates in asking for it to be abolished, why we did not understand the need to take millions from state schools and deliver it to the wealthiest category 1 private schools. As I said, the minister is still clinging to the fictions that he hurled at us when he was in a state in this debate of what used to be, in his mind, grace. He is not really abolishing the EBA; he is giving directives to state schools to spend the money as he decides the money ought to be spent, that money having been originally removed through the EBA process. Parents are not fooled. They know when they are being taken for a ride. They are being given with conditions money they could have got had the EBA never existed. The only schools that get funding from this government without any strings attached are category 1 private schools. Ordinary parents can see through the minister's web of lies. They are not going to be forgiving. This is the education roll-back we had to have on the EBA, but it is just the start. We now challenge this government to really abolish the EBA and to roll back the funding increases to the wealthy category 1 schools, and that is the second major component of this bill.Since the school funding bill passed through the parliament last year a large number of wealthy category 1 schools have effectively given the lie to the minister's claim that his new funding model would lower fees and make private schools affordable for everyone. Can't we now recollect those debates at the end of last year—the minister's bleeding heart at the dispatch box about the poverty stricken character of the students who went to those schools and the parents of the students who pay their $11,000 and how vastly greater numbers would be able to aspire to and march into the serried ranks of those schools if by a couple of hundred dollars those schools' fees would be reduced?And we were assured in this place that it would inevitably be the case, and he had quotes from a number of principals about it, that were this money to come across to them then clearly those fees would be lowered—a laughable component of his proposition which suggested that that type of education would then become affordable as far as the average Australian was concerned. Nevertheless, this was deep in his heart and deeply he believed it. I do think that sometimes your background renders you blind, and the fact that the government has a cabinet full of people who attended the schools that only one per cent of Australians are privileged to be able to go to is part of the blind spot as far as this government is concerned.But the folk who go to those schools do not become wealthy by being embarrassed. They did not get themselves into that situation by being prepared to take backward steps for the likes of David Kemp or, for that matter, anyone on this side of the House. They know full well how to look after themselves. And as soon as the bill passed—obscenely soon; within days of the bill passing—a number of private schools started raising their fees: Sydney Church of England Grammar, up 10 per cent, to more than $13,000 per year; SCEGGS Darlinghurst, up 8.5 per cent, to $13,250. The King's School will raise fees by $900, or 7.4 per cent, next year despite being handed $1.4 million, or $1,351 per student, extra by the Howard government. St Andrew's Cathedral School fees will rise by $766, or seven per cent, despite being given $884,000 extra, or $1,070 extra per student. The fees of Scotch College in Melbourne will rise by $828, or 6.9 per cent, despite getting an extra $1.04 million, or $576 extra per student. At Presbyterian Ladies College in Melbourne fees will rise by $840, or seven per cent, despite receiving an extra $1.8 million, or $1,526 extra per student.And this is despite the fact, as I said, that the Prime Minister and the Minister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs, Dr Kemp, claimed that the new private school funding formula would lower fees and increase school choice for parents. The fact is that, despite the minister's claim that his new funding formula would lower fees and increase choice, fees have risen substantially and choice has been narrowed even further. The only response the minister could make was the feeble claim that, because the 2001 fee rises were announced in December 2000—days before the new formula came into effect on 1 January—they were there as a result of the old formula. Tell it to the marines, Minister.The schools decided that they saw a mug coming and that they would take with both hands, and that is precisely what they did. I ask this question: what other schools around this nation confronting an inflation rate, as we do, of some three per cent per annum have had an adjustment by the government of up to about 50 to 60 per cent on top of what they have been receiving to this point and have then made another adjustment of their own from seven to 10 per cent on the fees that they are charging anyway? This is a huge shift of resources to the end of the market that a very small number of Australians are privileged to access, and it will continue to be a very small number of Australians who are privileged to access it. As one of their marketing directors said, many category 1 schools are going after the `Mercedes end' of the market. Why should ordinary Falcon and Commodore driving parents fund this extravagance? It is a disgrace that the Howard government's new funding changes gave no corresponding rise in funding for public schools. We have pledged to reverse the trend that has seen a rising proportion of Commonwealth education funds going to the wealthy non-government end of the school process. This bill is our first step in that process. Our alternative will be to give improved opportunities to all children.So far—and it is what this money will be going to—we have pledged to establish education priority zones to target resources to schools in most need; we have pledged the creation of a learning gateway to ensure all schools can make the very best use of online learning; we have pledged teacher development contracts to help teachers improve their expertise in critical subjects such as maths, IT and science; and we have pledged teacher excellence scholarships to encourage high achieving school leavers and graduates to enter teaching. We are going to make higher education more affordable, too, through initiatives such as offering courses through the University of Australia Online at half the rate of HECS.The government have already started poaching some of these policies, such as the learning gateway. As I have said many times, we welcome such poaching. Education and research are key issues for the nation in the 21st century. You raise the stakes and we will match them. After we have seen what they have done on BAS and we see what they are about to do on petrol and what they did in this statement on education and science, I am beginning to think that we so-called policy-lazy folk in the opposition just cannot create policy fast enough for them to adopt it. We have got to lift our game and get those policies out faster and faster so that the government can implement them in the six months that remain to them. So we will continue, as I said, to provide that assistance to the public by giving this government suggestions they can implement in their remaining few months.But let us be clear about these things: there is always a sleight of hand. There is a sleight of hand on the EBA. It is not abolished, despite what Dr Kemp says; it is continuing in calculation and it is only there if the states agree with him on how it should be spent. Thus it was with that science and education statement they brought out recently in which those EBA changes were announced. $2.9 billion sounds like an awful lot until you contemplate what they have taken out of education and science research and development—$1 billion a year. That is a $5 billion shortfall, given that it was a five-year process. That is point 1. Point 2: if you take a look at that belated $2.9 billion, which is approximately half what has been taken out to this point, you find something else interesting about it: 60 per cent of that $2.9 billion occurs in years 4 and 5. That is two parliaments away. That has all the makings of a non-core promise.We mean our commitments and we mean to be able to fund our commitments. We believe a substantial step will be made towards improving our capacity to fund those commitments by redistribution within this education program, by taking those additional resources off the category 1 schools—enormous amounts, if you look through the out years of what that will produce—and spending them instead on those areas of need for the less well off students of this society, the students that constitute some 98 per cent of it. (Time expired)Bill read a first time.10000Nehl, Garry (Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER)Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Nehl)—In accordance with sessional order 104A, the second reading will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. Private Members' Business243302433013:20:0024330Andrews, Kevin, MPMr ANDREWSHK5MenziesLP10—I move:That this House:(1) notes that stroke is the second highest cause of death in Australia;(2) notes that there has been a slowing down of the decline in stroke death rates in recent years;(3) notes that the number of people dying from stroke and those surviving with a permanent disability is likely to increase in the future;(4) notes that the risk factors for stroke include high blood pressure, tobacco smoking, heavy alcohol consumption, high blood cholesterol, being overweight, and insufficient physical activity;(5) notes that the length of stay in hospital for stroke is twice as long as that for other cardiovascular conditions;(6) notes that while more women are affected by stroke, the proportion of men who suffer a stroke is 30 per cent higher than for women, and that for people aged 25-64, those from the lowest socio-economic group are twice as likely to die from stroke as those in the highest socioeconomic group with indigenous death rates from stroke in the same age group being eight times the rate in the rest of the population; and(7) urges the Government to continue to support public awareness about the high risk factors associated with stroke. Stroke is the nation's most neglected health problem and, notwithstanding the impact of stroke on the lives of Australians, it does not receive the attention it should. Stroke costs us around $2 billion annually. It affects 40,000 Australians each year and is Australia's second greatest single killer after coronary heart disease. According to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare and the Heart Foundation of Australia, 12,000 Australians died of stroke in 1997, which was around nine per cent of deaths from all causes. The Australian stroke death rates for males were still one-third higher than those recorded in the United States. Females in France and Switzerland have the lowest death rates for stroke and Australian females have 1.4 times their rate.Stroke interrupts blood flow to the brain and occurs when a blood clot blocks a blood vessel or an artery or when a blood vessel breaks. The stroke kills brain cells. When brain cells die the body loses control of the abilities that that area of the brain once controlled, which include speech, movement and memory. Someone who has a large stroke may be left paralysed on one side or in a coma. Here is the account of one of Britain's most renowned publishing editors Robert McCrum, who had a stroke on the morning of 29 July when he was aged just 42:It was just another bright summer Saturday morning and here I was in bed, unable to get up—alone at home, a four storey townhouse in Islington, North London ... I was supposed to drive to Cambridge that morning to visit my parents. So, time to get up. But there it was—I could not move. More accurately, I could not move my left side. Overnight, my body had become a dead weight of nearly fifteen stone ... Why should I, who had just sailed through a medical examination, be unable to do as I pleased? ... With what I now see must have been an extraordinary effort, I dragged myself under the frame of our big brass bedstead with my good right arm ... and then squirmed commando-style over the carpet to the head of the stairs ... Again my dead weight took control and I found I was sliding helplessly and painfully head first down the stair carpet to the mezzanine landing ... I vividly remember this part of the day on the landing at the angle of the stairs. For some hours, I lay on my back staring up at a framed brown green school map of French colonial Indo-China, a souvenir of that trip to Phnom Penh in 1993. Then I had been longing for adventure. Now I seemed to be caught up in one. I had crossed by night from what Susan Sontag calls `the kingdom of the well' to `the kingdom of the sick' and though I still had no name for this new country I was in, it was dawning on me that I was no longer the person I'd been twenty-four hours ago.That is a description that unfortunately and tragically fits so many Australians because of stroke.From the late sixties until the last few years, deaths from stroke were declining. Between 1986 and 1997, the death rate from stroke declined at the rate of 3.2 per cent per year among males and 3.5 per cent per year among females. But now we are witnessing the beginnings of a new trend in the slowing down of the decline in the stroke rate. The number of people dying from stroke and those surviving with a permanent disability is likely to increase in the future. This may, at least in part, be due to the ageing of the population. So the expectation is that we will see an acceleration in this trend with the result that in the future more people will die from stoke and the number of those surviving with a permanent disability will increase. It is estimated that there will be at least 70,000 new stroke patients each year by 2016. The risk of stroke in the next 40 years for a 45-year-old will be one in four for men and one in five for women.The risk factors for stroke include high blood pressure, tobacco smoking, heavy alcohol consumption, high blood cholesterol, being overweight and insufficient physical activity. The variation in cardiovascular disease rates for different countries may be put down to different diets and lifestyles. Australia has a similar risk pattern to other Western countries. Smoking is a major risk factor for stroke. The proportion of adults who regularly smoked in Australia was 24 per cent in 1995, quite low by international standards. It is, however, not generally understood that smoking is a very real trigger of stroke. High blood pressure is another major risk factor for stroke and around 17 per cent of the population are rated as having high blood pressure. High blood cholesterol is also a risk factor—43 per cent of Australians have high blood cholesterol. Being overweight is another very strong risk factor for stroke. In developed countries, being overweight and obesity are increasing problems. In Australia, more than half of the adult population—some 56 per cent—was rated as overweight in 1995, a figure similar to that for the United States. Other risk factors are excessive alcohol consumption, a history of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, meat consumption more than four times per week and adding salt to food.The length of stay in hospital for stroke is twice as long as that for other cardiovascular conditions. It is the leading cause of long-term disability in adults and the cause of nearly 25 per cent of all chronic disability in Australia. The 1993 Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers found that, among Australians with a disability, an estimated 31,700 had stroke as the main cause of that disability. Paralysis and physical activity restrictions affected one in three stroke sufferers and almost two in three needed assistance for mobility.In 1996-97, there were 51,854 hospitalisations for stroke; that is, one per cent of all hospitalisations. Stroke accounted for 12 per cent of all hospitalisations for cardiovascular conditions. Males were 31 per cent more likely to be hospitalised for stroke than females. This too is related to age, with over three-quarters of such cases being aged 65 and over in 1996-97. The average length of stay in hospital for stroke was twice as long as that for other cardiovascular conditions—10½ days compared with 5.3 days.While more women are affected by stroke, the proportion of men who suffer a stroke is 30 per cent higher than for women. For people aged 25-64, those from the lowest socioeconomic group are twice as likely to suffer from stroke as those in the highest socioeconomic group, with indigenous death rates from stroke in the same age group being eight times the rate of the rest of the population. Males are more likely to die from stroke than females across almost all age groups. Males aged 45 to 74 had death rates 1½ times those of females in 1997. Although the age-specific death rates from stroke are generally higher among males than females—the exception being the 85 and over age group—the actual number of deaths is greater for females. This is explained by the much greater number of females than males who live to old age, where death rates from stroke are considerably higher. While stroke death rates increase dramatically with age—with 87 per cent of all deaths from stroke occurring amongst those aged 70 and over—there is another group in the population we also need to consider. In 1991, people aged 25 to 64 from the lowest socioeconomic group were twice as likely to die from stroke as those in the highest socioeconomic group. Indigenous males and females, who overwhelmingly also belong to the lowest socioeconomic group, also evidence this trend. Indigenous people, male and female, died from stroke at a rate three times and 1.7 times, respectively, the rate of other Australians in 1995-97. The difference is even greater amongst adults aged 25 to 64 where indigenous death rates were eight times those of other Australians. The annual cost of caring for stroke victims is at least $1.67 billion a year and this will continue to rise because of our ageing population. There is a pressing need to increase public awareness of brain attack across the community. The fact is that strokes are preventable. Much has been achieved through the population approach to community medicine, which has communicated the need for lifestyle changes for the whole population. Thanks to these, there was a 60 per cent drop in the incidence of stroke over the last 30 years. The push for greater stroke awareness in our society has received a considerable boost in recent years, with greater involvement of governments in promoting awareness and facilitating educational programs. This is seen, for example, in the establishment of the National Stroke Foundation. However, we cannot rest on our laurels. Much still needs to be done, particularly with regard to low socioeconomic and indigenous groups. Therefore, I urge the government to continue to support public awareness about the high risk factors associated with stroke.AE4Nehl, Garry, MPMr Nehl—Is the motion seconded? 84FWasher, Dr Mal, MPDr Washer—I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.13:30:0024332Burke, Anna, MPMs BURKE83SChisholmALP00—I am pleased to be speaking today on such an important health and social issue, and I commend the federal member for Menzies in raising this important subject. As has been mentioned previously, stroke is the second highest cause of death in Australia. It affects 40,000 Australians yearly. One-third of stroke victims die, another one-third remain permanently disabled and one-third make a reasonable recovery. We all know that the incidence of stroke is one of the critical health issues facing this country. I am sure everyone present has experienced stroke in some way or another, through family members and friends. The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare in its report in May 1999 issued the following facts. Stroke costs the health system resources up to $630 million a year. This is mainly due to hospital in-patient costs of $269 million and nursing home costs of $265 million. The average length of stay in hospital for a stroke victim was 10.5 days in 1996-97, twice as long as that for other cardiovascular disease. Stroke is the cause of nearly 25 per cent of all chronic disabilities in Australia. Around 50 per cent of strokes occur in people aged over 75 years of age. For a 45-year-old, the risk of having a stroke before the age of 85 is one in four for men and one in five for women—a sobering thought.These are all shocking statistics in their own right, but what is really shocking is the real trauma this causes in people's lives. Survivors of a stroke, or a `brain attack', can often be some of the most isolated people in this country. A healthy 60-year-old one day can be transformed into a person who is unable to dress themselves, eat or take themselves to the toilet the next day. The symptoms are worth listing, if only to raise the awareness of all of us about the debilitating effects of a stroke. As reported in the NHMRC publication `Prevention of stroke: a consumer's guide,' they range from: poor coordination, unsteadiness and loss of balance, slurred speech, swallowing difficulty or a complete inability to speak, spatial and perception problems such as difficulty getting dressed, partial and full paralysis, difficulty seeing in the right visual field, incontinence, depression and, in some cases, a total lack of consciousness. Of course, there are many other effects. One of the things I want to focus on today is the need for a strong and coordinated response from both the health system and the community at large. Acute in-patient rehabilitation provided in rehabilitation hospitals includes nurses, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, speech language pathologists, psychologists, social workers and recreation therapists all working together with the goal of rehabilitation. They greatly assist stroke victims. When a patient is discharged, they will need to be under the care of a GP or a physician to manage their multiple needs for medicine and ongoing rehabilitation. More than many other illnesses, stroke requires a very thorough and closely managed response from health specialists, and we need to ensure that adequate funds are available to make this happen. The second important ingredient in recovery is the love and support of relatives and friends. This cannot be underestimated. There is much anecdotal evidence that a caring and understanding family can help a stroke survivor come to terms with their reduced mobility and changed lifestyle. The impact on a carer is also significant, and we need to make sure that there are proper structures in place to provide support to carers who can suffer from isolation and depression themselves. This brings me to the third point, which is the involvement of community organisations in nursing stroke survivors and their carers and/or families back to a higher degree of health.I have a wonderful group in my own electorate of Chisholm, known as the Stroke Support Group, and they are a fantastic organisation. They have been in existence for 15 years. They are a voluntary group of individuals who are carers for stroke victims. The chief coordinator of the Stroke Support Group in Box Hill is a phenomenal woman who, at the age of 45, quit her full-time work to look after her friend who had suffered a stroke at the age of 40. She has now been the full-time carer of that woman for the past 15 years of her life. It was not someone that she was related to, it was not someone in the family—it was actually her best friend. Unfortunately, her best friend suffered a very severe stroke and 15 years down the track is still confined to a wheelchair, has difficulty speaking and needs the support of her friend to ensure her some quality of life. The friend gave up work because she did not want to see her friend confined to a nursing home at the age of 40. It was a wonderful gift of life, and out of that she created this support network because she found herself, at the age of 45, totally isolated and felt let down by her own family who thought this commitment was relatively unrealistic. In lots of respects we would all think it was unrealistic, but she has devoted her life to the care of her friend and she has kept her out of a nursing home for the last 15 years. We need to remember those people; we need to sing their praises. In this International Year of Volunteers, we need to commend all those people who give so tirelessly of themselves. We often talk about family support, but this is just a caring girlfriend who has had to struggle with the ups and downs of all this. The greatest problem she has is getting respite care, and that goes to other issues of nursing homes that I will not go into now. That is her greatest need and I have been tracking the needs in my local area in order to support those carers.It is often said that stroke victims need to find new ways of doing old things. A lot of this will depend on the state of mind of the stroke suffer and the resultant support they receive from the medical team and their loved ones. As a community at large, it is also important that we take the extra time to listen to the needs of people who have survived strokes. We must be aware of their needs, and ensure they are not victims of discrimination. Stroke victims can often present with symptoms consistent with a severely retarded person and hence they are often ignored as it is presumed that they are no longer able to understand or think. It is critical that we teach everyone in the community more about the illness in order to break down the barriers that stroke victims face when trying to settle back into society with their new and changed circumstances.So what about prevention? The text of the private member's bill outlines some of the high risk factors for stroke: high blood pressure, high blood cholesterol, diabetes, obesity, smoking, alcohol and lack of exercise. If a person has more than one of these risk factors then the risk increases substantially. By far the most seriously at risk are people who suffer from diseases of the arteries and the heart condition arterial fibrillation. Some of the risk factors cannot be altered by lifestyle changes but it is important, particularly for people who are getting older, that these are monitored regularly. There are of course changes that have been promoted for many years that can assist with lowering risk—such as exercise, less fat in the diet, encouraging smokers to quit and alcohol in moderation. These four things are already national health goals but they are particularly important when looking at cardiovascular disease. It is a sobering thought to remember that every dollar spent fighting smoking saves nearly $3 in public health costs, according to a new report by the federal government's anti-smoking campaign. That was in June 2000. I think it is a really frightening factor that still, in the health area, the greatest spend of our health dollar is on tobacco related illnesses, and stroke is a very good example of this. Other prevention strategies, particularly for people at high risk, involve a complex usage of anticoagulant drugs ranging from aspirin to warfarin and in some cases surgery to reduce severe stenosis. The Blood Borne Disease Centre at the Box Hill hospital in my electorate is doing phenomenal work in researching blood clotting. They have come up with some remarkable breakthroughs in the last year, and I want to commend them for the work they are doing now and the ongoing work they will undertake.There have been many advances in the approach to stroke in the last few years such as: a decline in stroke incidence due to effective preventative measures; the emergence and application of severe stroke prevention strategies for people in high risk categories; and the key role governments have taken in stroke prevention, culminating in the establishment of the National Stroke Foundation in my home state and the endorsement by the Australian health ministers of heart, stroke and vascular disease as one of the five national health priority areas.Despite this progress, there is still much work to be done. This issue will only increase in significance with the ageing of the population and the influx of baby boomers into the aged care bracket. Not only will we need to look at better ways to prevent strokes and inform the community, we will also have more people surviving strokes. We will need to deal with the extra pressures on the public health system and nursing homes, which often nurse stroke survivors after they leave hospital. I think this is one of the greatest problems we have at the moment with the revolving door of hospitals to nursing homes back to hospitals for stroke victims. We need to look at this seriously.There is also evidence that the elimination of delays in presentation, referral and investigation of stroke symptoms will lead to further improvements. This will add more weight to the argument that we must ensure our emergency rooms are properly staffed and funded to deal with stroke victims at early onset of symptoms. In conclusion, I want to echo the sentiments of the member for Menzies in calling for us all to redouble our efforts in raising community awareness through government programs and through local community groups and carers to ensure that the risk of stroke is lessened and that we deal more appropriately with those people who have suffered stroke in their lives.13:40:0024334Washer, Dr Mal, MPDr WASHER84FMooreLP10—I do not think there is any doubt in this House about the serious nature of stroke as a habitual killer and disabler of many Australians each year. It is an event that brings untold misery upon the families of its victims. Previous speakers have already addressed the vital issues of stroke prevention, and I thank them. I want to touch upon the subject of the treatment of a stroke victim, particularly the importance of how treating specialists act within the first vital three hours after a stroke.This is an issue I have been concerned about since our success in treating myocardial infarction—ischaemic heart attack—with thrombolytics. I am now pleased to report that there is an exciting new treatment in the United States that looks very hopeful. Why shouldn't we treat stroke victims with the same method as that we use for a patient who has had a heart attack? The urgent treatment of a stroke victim can make the difference between a patient making a full recovery or suffering permanent brain damage. Accident and emergency wards in the US now have stroke teams that are called upon when they are presented with a stroke patient. This team assesses the patient and determines the condition of the brain in order to decide what drugs should be administered on an emergency basis. It is essential to determine and estimate the time the patient had the stroke. Thrombolytic or clot-dissolving therapy should be administered within three hours of the event. The first thing that needs to be done is a CT scan to make sure there is no bleeding in the brain and to ensure there is no other reason for not beginning clot-dissolving therapy. The drug used is called TPA, which stands for tissue plasminogen activator. The family's consent is sought before using this therapy so they can weigh up the benefits against the risk of intracerebral haemorrhage. Studies have shown that stroke victims without a haemorrhage who received TPA had a 33 per cent chance of making a full recovery within three months, compared with only 20 per cent of patients who are treated with traditional methods. In other words, they are increasing the patient's chances of a full recovery by an extra 13 per cent, and I think this will grow due to other factors I will mention in a minute. There is a risk, however, of the patient suffering an intracerebral haemorrhage due to the treatment and studies have put this risk at six per cent of patients treated with TPA. I think that most of us, presented with such a dire situation as a stroke, would take every opportunity for full recovery.Ischaemic strokes or strokes that cut off the blood supply to the brain account for 80 per cent of all strokes, so the bulk of stroke victims would be receptive to this treatment. Standard treatments, other than using this anticlotting method, include: stopping hypotension, or low blood pressure; avoiding hypoxaemia, or lack of oxygen; avoiding hyperglycaemia, or excessive blood sugar levels; and, hyponatraemia, which is low salt levels. All of these things can make the swelling of the brain worse. Elevating the head of the bed also helps. We currently use CT scans to differentiate between ischaemic and haemorrhagic strokes but in the future MRI scans or MRA—which is magnetic resonance angiography—will be used, as they will be far more accurate, but of course are currently very expensive.Cardiac disease and stroke tend to go hand-in-hand as half of stroke patients also have heart disease, and one out of six deaths from stroke is caused by a heart attack. More accurate diagnosis with the use of stroke teams and MRI or MRA, along with new agents currently being studied that will keep neurones alive in a stroke victim for much longer by using glutamate antagonists, will increase the chances of the patient making a full recovery.Further accuracy in determining between ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke will also decrease the six per cent chance of haemorrhaging, and make the family's decision to go ahead with the treatment less agonising. I am looking forward to the medical fraternity in Australia assessing this method of treatment when they are presented with an ischaemic stroke patient. However, this method of management is still not being widely used in Europe, where many of the original studies were performed.10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—Order! The time allotted for the debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. It being 1.45 p.m., I call on statements by members.Statements by Members243352433513:45:0024335Ellis, Annette, MPMs ELLIS5K6CanberraALP00—I want to take the opportunity today to talk about a favourite subject in my electorate at the moment: banks. A businessman contacted me last week. He had, along with the rest of the community in Wanniassa, been very upset to see the Wanniassa branch of the Commonwealth Bank closed on 12 January, with notice of about five weeks. There was a certain amount of cynicism about the fact that it was closed in the middle of the school holiday period. The community at Wanniassa are still attempting to recover from the removal of that branch. That same businessman has been in touch with me because he has now learnt that there is a cash handling fee to be put upon him by the very same bank, the Commonwealth Bank, of 0.25 per cent per $3,000 of cash to be put into the bank. I have to say that I never thought I would live to see the day when a bank charged you money for putting money into it. I think the time has come when the community really must stand on its hind legs and say to the banks, `Enough is enough.' We on this side are prepared to do that, and we are prepared in fact to force them to adopt whatever social obligation we believe they must adopt should they not do it in a voluntary fashion. In the meantime, we simply must stop the banks from ripping off their customers in the way that they are. Sure, make a profit and look after your shareholders, but do not do it at the risk of completely forgetting the customers, the very core of your business, who have seen you grow to billions of dollars of profit. (Time expired)2433613:46:0024336Lawler, Tony, MPMr LAWLER834ParkesNP10—There was a fantastic night held in Dubbo on Saturday night. It was a fundraiser for the Royal Flying Doctor Service. Howard Lawton and Lorraine Thomson were charged some months ago with trying to raise $300,000 to complement the $4.5 million that the federal government put in to get the base up and going and to provide some ongoing support. It included a raffle of a car which was generously donated by Nissan, which raised about $40,000; an auction of memorabilia which was also supplied by Nissan, which raised $36,000; and a holiday from Qantas, which was sold for about $9,000. The total amount raised by this group of people was $460,000 for the flying doctor base in Dubbo. Other people need particular mention. Trevor and Pauline McAllister from Adaws Hire worked tirelessly, giving up their time and through their hiring business providing chairs and tables. Judy Jakins, who has been a long-time supporter of the Royal Flying Doctor Service, was working hard as well, along with Douglas and Barbara Webb. Nightingale Wines from the Hunter Valley donated wines for the night and the beer, every last drop, was donated by Carlton and United Breweries. Because of the generosity of these individuals and groups, the night was a fantastic success. The support locally for the Royal Flying Doctor Service, with about 400 people paying $110 a ticket to attend the ball, shows how much the community of Dubbo, the Central West and the far west is behind this service. It really is a bonus that the federal government has contributed, as I said, $4.5 million over four years to get this fantastic service for the people of western New South Wales up. (Time expired)2433613:48:0024336Sidebottom, Sid, MPMr SIDEBOTTOM849BraddonALP00—On Saturday, 24 February I had the great pleasure of opening in Burnie Park a Centenary of Federation playground specifically designed for under-five-year-olds. In actual fact, it was dubbed the `Apt Railway for little ones'. This was auspiced by the Playgroup Association of the North-West Coast in conjunction with the Burnie Council. The Playgroup Association of the North-West Coast has some 900 families as members. I could not think of anything better to celebrate the Centenary of Federation than to celebrate it for young people and the future. I must put on the public record my thanks to Caroline Osborne and Lois Cameron from the playgroup association, Patrick Earle, Bill Walker, Andrew Sneesby and John O'Boyle from the Burnie Council and Andrew Smith and Garth Murphy from Bullock Consultancy Design. I know the little ones there absolutely enjoyed the play equipment and the railway equipment—so much so that they were not interested at all in my opening it, which is a sure sign that it must have been successful. I tried the slide and could not get down it, but I am sure many young ones will in the future. 2433713:49:0024337McArthur, Stewart, MPMr McARTHURVH4CorangamiteLP10—I wish to raise the matter of the Cressy fires caused by the Great Southern Railway on 6 February. It raises the issue of liability and the concern in the heartland of Corangamite, where fires in the summer period are the worst in the world if there is a hot north wind. The Adelaide-Melbourne rail at 9.30 in the morning caused a fire in three places, and that burned approximately 2,000 hectares, with the loss of about 500 sheep. The fundamental problem that I raise with the parliament is: what is the liability of the rail operator, the Australian Railtrack Authority, and what is the ability to burn breaks along the line? It raises the issue of who will be responsible and what will be the future that we face on this important interstate line. Will the authorities burn a break along the railway line so that we do not have a catastrophic outcome, something that we nearly had on 6 February? I will be writing to the various parties raising this issue with them in the hope that we will never have the terrible fire that we could have had on this day.2433713:51:0024337Danby, Michael, MPMr DANBYWF6Melbourne PortsALP00—In early December some 300,000 Victorians marched for reconciliation. They did that through my electorate of Melbourne Ports. The march was led by the Premier of Victoria. In recent days many of us in Melbourne Ports, and I am sure throughout the country, will have been distressed about the controversy involving the semantic problem of whether Aboriginal elder and respected person Lowitja O'Donoghue was removed or stolen. I think most of us around Australia who support reconciliation would be particularly upset by the Prime Minister's role in all of this and the fact that he regarded this semantic difference of words as highly significant. I do not think it is, and I do not think most Australians think it is. I want to draw the attention of the Australian people to what I think is a scandalous misuse of public money by this government in this matter of reconciliation. The response to a question of mine of 7 September 2000, question No. 1964, that will appear in the Hansard of this day, shows that as at 30 September 2000 the Australian government had spent $8½ million in its defence of the Gunner and Cubillo matter in the Northern Territory, which relates to two stolen generation people in Darwin. It had further spent $770,000 on private detectives in this case, which involved only two people. Tens and hundreds of thousands of Australian people—indeed, the vast majority, according to opinion polls—support reconciliation with indigenous Australians. We regard this expenditure as a waste of money. (Time expired)2433713:52:0024337Billson, Bruce, MPMr BILLSON1K6DunkleyLP10—A balmy Sunday in Canberra yesterday provided the closeness and atmosphere appropriate for a great annual sporting challenge—the annual coalition versus the press gallery cricket match. With athleticism and performances as varied as the bounce and grass cover on the patchy wicket, the press gallery prevailed for the second year running—a sad but true reflection of the simple fact that they scored 28 runs more than we did from the 40 overs available. After reeling at 4-29, Andrew Probyn from the Herald Sun and Nigel Blunden from the Nine Network combined for a 98-run partnership to rescue the gallery and sink our prospects. Probyn finished not out for 60. Blunden stood on his own stumps to be out for 40. The 22 from Channel Nine's Jeff Martin and the 24 from Ben Haslem from the Australian contributed to a greatly challenging yet do-able score for the gallery of all out for 200.Without a tremendous bowling spell from Steve Galilee from Minister Abbott's office with a bowling activity statement of 5.1 overs, one maiden, 5-11, and pollster Simon Berger's 3-25 off five overs, great fielding from Matt Brown from Minister Hill's office and Sue Brough, spouse of Minister Mal Brough, the coalition's run chase would have been much tougher. After hitting the gloves hard with his pace bowling, Brough's 14 helped get us off to a good start. Senator Chapman's 51 not out was a highlight of the coalition innings. Simon Berger's 35 was sensational and very much needed. Senator McGauran and the member for Page, Ian Causley, were solid defenders of their wicket but rotten scorers with no prolific runs anywhere to be seen while they were at the wicket. So, 8-172 off 40 overs was simply not enough. Our total was frustrated by Mark Ludlow from News Limited with for 2-14 and good bowling from Steven Lewis. (Time expired)2433813:54:0024338Mossfield, Frank, MPMr MOSSFIELDMK6GreenwayALP00—I rise to congratulate a resident of Greenway, Doreen Ross, on being awarded an Australia Day Order of Australia medal, an OAM, for service to the community, in particular to the Schofield Bush Fire Brigade. The bush fire brigade has been part of Doreen's life since early childhood. Her grandfather and father were founding members and as a child Doreen would go with them to fight fires. Doreen has been a member of the bush fire brigade for 35 years. In the 1970s she was driving the fire truck and fighting fires. For 25 years, Doreen was secretary of the brigade. Doreen and her husband Ernie operated an after-hours radio station for the brigade between 1970 and 1995 and for 20 years Doreen was also the canteen manager. One would think that that would be more than enough, but Doreen's voluntary work extended to other areas within the community. For 35 years, Doreen has been a swimming teacher at the Riverstone Council swimming pool. Doreen is also a founding member of the Riverstone neighbourhood centre and was volunteer centre manager for 10 years. She has worked on the restoration and revegetation of Riverstone Park and has also participated in the fundraising programs for the Riverstone ambulance service. Congratulations to Doreen Ross, OAM on an award greatly deserved.2433813:55:0024338Lloyd, Jim, MPMr LLOYDIK6RobertsonLP10—I rise to pay tribute to four outstanding residents of my electorate of Robertson who were recently awarded Order of Australia medals. Mr Robert Bell of East Gosford was recognised for his service to veterans through the British Commonwealth Occupation Force Association. Mrs Gwen Bolton of Peats Ridge was rewarded for her service to the community of Peats Ridge, particularly through youth and service groups and for her service to international humanitarian relief as a supporter of the Save the Children Fund. Mr Kenneth Graham of Kincumber has been recognised for his service to rowing, particularly through the Sydney Rowing Club. Finally and most importantly, Chaplain Eric Trezise of Kincumber has been recognised for his service to the community in the areas of suicide prevention and grief counselling. I supported the nomination of Chaplain Eric Trezise. He is a great man who has made a tremendous contribution to suicide prevention on the Central Coast of New South Wales. He was instrumental in initiating the Suicide Safety Network, which has had tremendous results in reducing the number of youth suicides on the Central Coast. In the year 2000, there was not one suicide by a person under the age of 20 on the Central Coast of New South Wales—a major improvement. There is of course still much concern, particularly in the older age group, and we will continue fighting that problem.2433813:57:0024338Gerick, Jane, MPMs GERICK83WCanningALP00—Today I want to wish Kurt Drazic all the best for his birthday which took place yesterday and to pay tribute to the great work he has done in our community of Canning in assisting many others. Kurt has emphysema and at the moment is suffering a great deal. Kurt has been a volunteer for Hills Home Help for a number of years and has not allowed his own disability to stop him making a great contribution to improving the lives of others. Kurt's work has included delivering hampers, picking up and delivering items for Hills Home Help and taking our seniors to their medical appointments. At Christmas each year, Kurt has made a special contribution. He has brought a great deal of joy to many families as Father Christmas. With his supportive wife, he has shown concern and care for others. Last year, in recognition of all the great work he has done, Kurt was awarded a seniors award. Kurt, you and your family should be so very proud of the work you have done. You are in our thoughts and prayers and we hope that you feel better soon. Many thanks from all of those you have helped. 2433913:58:0024339Gambaro, Teresa, MPMs GAMBARO9K6PetrieLP10—I am very pleased today to commend the wonderful work being done by the Anzac Day Commemoration Committee of Aspley which have just received, through the Department of Veterans' Affairs, a cheque for $7,370 towards the cost of reprinting a wonderful publication, Simpson and Duffy, which deals with the history of Gallipoli and is to be distributed through primary schools. It is a wonderful book. I found it a delight to read. I know that school children in Queensland will thoroughly enjoy it. I will be launching Simpson and Duffy in a few weeks time at one of the local schools.The illustrations done by Mary Small and Ester Kasepuu are magnificent. I congratulate them on their wonderful work. This book will serve as fantastic reference material which will enable children to understand the wonderful, rich Gallipoli history. I commend the committee on yet another wonderful publication and for their fantastic web site. This is probably the tenth publication they have produced. They have produced books on the Anzac Day spirit, war and identity and also a number of hero books. Congratulations once again to the wonderful people on the Aspley Anzac Day Commemorative Committee.Ministerial Arrangements2433914:00:0024339Anderson, John, MPMr ANDERSON4K4GwydirNPActing Prime Minister10—I inform the House that the Prime Minister will be absent from question time today. As he is visiting New Zealand for the annual trans-Tasman talks, I will take questions normally addressed to the Prime Minister and any others that you may choose to direct towards me.Furthermore, as you will recall, the Prime Minister advised the House on 6 February this year of ministerial changes consequent upon the resignations of the Hon. John Moore, Senator the Hon. Jocelyn Newman and Senator the Hon. John Herron. I now advise the House that the ministerial changes foreshadowed on 19 December last year have been completed with the appointment of the Hon. Mal Brough as Minister for Employment Services on the 14th of this month. Congratulations. For the information of honourable members, I table an updated list of the full ministry.Condolences243392433914:01:0024339Anderson, John, MPMr ANDERSON4K4GwydirNPActing Prime Minister10—I move:That this house records its deep regret at the death on 25 February 2001 of Australia's greatest cricket legend, Sir Donald George Bradman. The House extends its profound sympathy to his family in their bereavement.Mr Speaker, in the words of musician Paul Kelly, `He was more than just a batsman.' That was his legend. In a sense, it was also his burden. Many millions of words will spring from the announcement of his death. They will record the many things that Donald Bradman was to many people around Australia and in the rest of the world. For some, the lad born in Cootamundra in 1908 and brought up in Bowral was a shining example of a country boy made good. In India, a country of many deities, he is revered as one. And in the West Indies, which gave us the only cricketer who can truly be spoken about in the same sentence, Sir Garfield Sobers, he was no less admired. England indeed devised a whole new form of cricket to try to beat him, but loved him nonetheless. Older Australians will recall his inspirational cricket during the dark days of the Great Depression, his postwar return to cricket and the famous `Invincibles' tour of England in 1948. Indeed, in times when we really needed a hero, every Australian learned that they could rely on Donald Bradman. As a player, he was so popular that, after 1930, on average 7,000 more people would attend the already packed pavilions and hills to watch him each day of a test. To any devotee of the game, numbers come instantly to mind when you think of the Don—his extraordinary record-breaking test innings of 334 at Leeds in 1930, or the then first-class record of 452 he scored for New South Wales against Queensland earlier that same year. Then, of course, there was the magic 99.94—the batting average so despairingly, so narrowly, short of cricketing perfection and which only serves to highlight how far he was ahead of those who went before him and all who have come since, and how this game is bigger than all its parts. As he was an accountant and company director in his non-cricketing life, many might think that numbers would be of great importance to Donald Bradman, but the remarkable thing was that, given his supercompetitive nature, they were not. Sir Donald dealt with scoring a duck in his last innings as only a man of his stature could. He bristled when it was suggested that bowler Eric Hollies had got lucky; he had been beaten fair and square, he insisted. He was a man who always enjoyed his personal privacy. He found it difficult to avoid the spotlight, even after his public life was over. I can imagine how difficult it must have been to have met expectations when you are the leading light in the national game and when sports people are placed at such a pinnacle by Australians. It is a further credit to the man that he was prepared to put so much back into the sport. He was a state and test selector. He twice chaired the Australian board of control for international cricket. Perhaps most of all, he was a custodian of cricket, encouraging players to recognise their responsibility to preserve the spirit of the game and protect its noble aspects.So, on this sad day, there are very many reasons to rejoice in the life of Sir Donald Bradman—his love of the game of cricket, his independent spirit and his rejection of shallow materialism are just some. Perhaps the one that touches me most, and I am sure it touches many people in this place, was his great and enduring love for his wife, Lady Jessie Bradman, who died in 1997. As he himself said, she never complained about his long absences from home while on tour. If you add it all up, those absences came to some seven years. Their innings of 65 years together, or what he called his `greatest partnership', is one that the rest of us can only aspire to. I pass my respects to his two surviving children and his three grandchildren. We have lost a great Australian, but all of us have gained from his life. 14:05:0024340Beazley, Kim, MPMr BEAZLEYPE4BrandALPLeader of the Opposition00—I support the remarks made by the Acting Prime Minister and agree with the sentiments that he has expressed on behalf of the nation on this sad occasion. There has been right around this country, as we have met in this chamber over the course of the last few hours and as we have gathered in Canberra, a national outpouring of sorrow and remembrance and celebration of a very great Australian life. From radio station after radio station, people have been pouring out their tributes, and some making it in practical ways. Today in Tamworth, for example, the 11-year-old boys who are playing the state public school competition have prepared for themselves black armbands which they are wearing. The people who have been ringing in tributes are of course old colleagues, people who have been inspired by him as cricketers, people who have been inspired by him as a man, people who have been inspired by him as an Australian and a world figure, people who are in their 90s and people who are not yet 10. He has had a capacity to enter into the imagination of people not only in this country but all over the world. He has particularly entered the imagination of Australians and has assumed iconic status, heroic status, exemplary status—all that for a very humble man indeed. His death, for all of us here, is a death in the family. All Australians feel a sense of connection to the man—his record, his achievement, his aspirations and what he did for us. It is an extraordinary thing that we as a people should all feel that way. The Acting Prime Minister went into many aspects of his record. I would like to say one or two additional things about his life. As the Acting Prime Minister said, he was born in Cootamundra but it is Bowral with which he is most associated. The image of Don Bradman is of a lonely boy in Bowral throwing a golf ball against a tank and hitting that golf ball with a cricket stump to improve his hand-eye coordination. As somebody who tried that frequently in their youth, let me tell you that it does not work. There must have been more to the man than simply that.A marvellous corrective has been given to the early understandings of his life by Rod Cavalier, a resident of Bowral, who has made a study of the early Bradman. A very different picture emerges from that. It is a picture of responsibility and balance; a picture of understanding and maturity. He did, in fact, join the Bowral Cricket Club at the age of 12. He attended their meetings and moved motions. He became at that age their social secretary. Contemplate ourselves as 12-year-olds. We are talking here about a senior club and, at the age of 12, he was assuming those levels of responsibility within it.He was magnificently nurtured by his family who, though recognising that they had on their hands a genius, ensured that he was treated in exactly the same way as the other children and ensured that his sport would not take over his life. They insisted that he achieve a good education. He achieved his certificate at the age of 14 and, when he left school, already a triple century maker, he joined a real estate firm for two years and quit cricket. It is suggested that his father obliged him to do that, but this was something that he willingly undertook himself. When he resumed cricket and left Bowral at the age of 20, he was a man who had all the political skills, the administrative skills and the cricketing skills that foreshadowed not only a great career as a cricketer but also a great career as a sporting administrator with a deep understanding of the social milieu in which he operated. He also left with his partner for life identified at that stage. So it was a mature, balanced man who left Bowral and subsequently dominated the world stage.I think it is important to understand that because, in doing so, we understand some of the reasons for this enormous outpouring of public grief and public celebration of his life. He could not have achieved that iconic status merely by being, as he was, the world's best cricketer. There had to be something more to him. Indeed, when he was on his way to making his world record at that stage—334—he was 309 overnight and, whilst the other members of the team were celebrating, he returned to his room, listened to music and responded to the next challenge in his life, and that was to become a good stockbroker, a position which he accepted in Adelaide, on the basis that he would be a real one and that his life would have a dimension to it that dealt with skills in that area as well. It was in Bowral that he met, though subsequently much later married, the person whom he described, as the Acting Prime Minister said, as providing the greatest partnership of his career, his partner for life. One cannot escape the impression that, in many ways, since her death he has been marking time.The records are well known: over 50,000 runs in all classes of cricket; over 200 centuries in all classes of cricket, 117 of them in first-class cricket; 41 partnerships of 200 and more; 164 partnerships of 100 or more; and the greatest average of any cricketing batsman anywhere in the world. I read one biography of Bradman which did an analysis, I thought, totally appropriate to establish his world status and the claim that he is probably the world's greatest athlete of last century. The measurements that achieved that were to establish the distance between himself and all the other great achievers, and the distance between the greatest in the other sports and the achievers closest to them. There is no gap of 50 per cent, which is the effective gap between Don Bradman and the people like Viv Richards, Jack Hobbs and Sir Garfield Sobers—the plethora of great cricketers, great entertainers and great men in their day. The gap between them is simply enormous. The gap between him and the best Australian cricketers is even greater and speaks of that massive athletic ability that he enjoyed. But he was also a great social being and a humble social being; a person who responded personally to every letter that he received. There was not a Bradman industry focused around him. There was just Sir Don. He not only responded; he also initiated. I was the beneficiary of that myself as a very young person when I had polio at the age of five. My parents never met Don Bradman; they never knew Don Bradman. Nevertheless, he had seen the fact that I had polio—it must have been mentioned in one of the newspapers—and he sent my father a list of exercises for me to pursue. I did pursue those exercises—I absolutely hated every minute of them—and I am grateful for his care and concern, because they actually worked. But there are hundreds and thousands of other Australians who can record similar stories, because he did not just write to be an inspiration on cricket; he wrote to be an inspiration in people's lives or because he was moved to write. He was absolutely determined that his signature would be generously available. It was not to be a signature sold for thousands of dollars but a signature available to the community as a whole and in support of the community.The humility of the man was reflected in what I remember was a favourite gift of an old friend of mine, the late Mick Young. For about two or three years, Mick gave everybody a cricket bat. That cricket bat was part of a process of raising funds for Bradman scholarships and the Bradman Museum. Sir Don would write on a cricket bat—which you would acquire for $500, a deal more than the actual value of a bat—anything that you asked him to write. I saw one that said, `To Eric, we all long remember your great innings of 13 against the St Aloysius Second Eleven. It will live in the memory of all who sat in the outer on that occasion. Yours sincerely, Sir Donald Bradman.' In order to raise resources for your museum, a charity or something like that, it required an enormous humility to so render heroic the folk, insubstantial as far as cricketing was concerned, who were the recipients of those cricket bats. That was a feature of the man and a feature of his contribution. Of course, he was a great cricket administrator as well. Australian cricket still bears his stamp. Long years after he was a cricket administrator he was willing to continue to attend and provide advice to administrators, players and captains, all of whom, the Australian ones certainly, and many foreign as well, accepted that advice.He was also a contributor to Australia in times of stress. The 1930s, the between the war period, were without question the worst years we have experienced last century. It was Bradman's games and innings which provided that distraction which kept so many sane and relatively cheerful during the worst of those times. Having done that for Australia in the thirties, he did it for England in the forties when he took the 1948 Invincibles team to England—after years of greyness in English life as the English bore the burden of the struggle of World War II, a greyness which continued in the impoverished state of England in the immediate aftermath of the war. Bradman and his team provided that entertainment which lifted them. It lifted English cricket as well. It lifted the reputation of a completely non-memorable spin bowler, W.E. Hollies, who got him out in his last innings, and it provided inspiration in a way that sporting teams in a plethora of sports these days probably could not hope now to provide.His name goes beyond cricketing shores. He goes into the heart of everywhere where sport is loved. Any true baseball fan in the United States knows Don Bradman as the greatest player in a competitive sport that they see as their equivalent elsewhere. At Nelson Mandela's first interview with the media, when he was released from gaol and allowed out of Robben Island, a question that he asked the press was: `Is Sir Donald still alive?' It was prominent in his mind as he left his incarceration. So, there will be enormous grieving, not just in this country but around the world. But more than the grieving, there will be celebration—celebration of a great life, celebration of great achievements, celebration of the humble man and celebration of what so many of us in Australia aspire to be but can never be. At least we have contained within our hearts the small hope that some of that iconic status and some of that great character will rub off on all of us. I join the government in expressing my condolences to the family.14:18:0024343Costello, Peter, MPMr COSTELLOCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—There is no doubt in my mind that no-one will ever capture the imagination of Australians like Sir Donald Bradman—nobody in the past and nobody in the future. He was our icon above all others. He was our tallest poppy and he was never cut down. He was never cut down in his sporting career; he was never chopped down as a husband or as a father; he was never chopped down as a character and a role model. He was a humble man who stood as a shining example to all of us. As the Leader of the Opposition has just remarked, I too can recall as a six-year-old boy standing at the back of my house with a stump and a golf ball, hitting the golf ball against a weatherboard house in the belief that if I could only do it long enough I would be another Bradman. The truth is that most of us were not destined to reach the heights of Bradman. He stands alone and he will never be equalled. He was respected as a man and a role model so much that he inspired, I believe, generations of young Australians who deserved to be inspired by his legacy and who ought to be inspired by his legacy. His legacy comes first, of course, from his sporting prowess—not just his domination of the game of cricket but his domination of an international sport in a way that perhaps nobody has ever dominated a sport before or since.In fact, over Christmas I read a book by a fellow called Charles Davis, called Best of the Best, who tried to benchmark cricket against other sports. He tried to benchmark the achievements of Bradman in cricket against those who have dominated other sports. He said that a basketballer today would have to score 43 points a game to match Sir Donald's record of an average of 99.94. Michael Jordan, commonly regarded as the best ever basketballer, has only averaged 32. He said that a golfer would have to win 25 major titles to equal Bradman—no-one ever has. A tennis player would have to win between 15 and 20 Grand Slams in 10 years—no-one ever has. A soccer player would have to score 100 goals in international competition—no-one ever has. It was not just the number of runs that made him a legend; it was almost that fairytale end to his career when he needed, I believe, four runs to get an average of 100 and he finished his career with an average of 99.94. Perhaps, in that final innings, the game of cricket had the last word and proved that the game was greater than any one individual.He was a man who I believe had the respect of all Australians. He contributed after his retirement as a selector and administrator to the game that he loved and to the country that he loved and he had the pride to represent. We will never see his like again. He was a much loved father of Ross, deceased, John and Shirley and grandfather of Greta, Tom and Nicholas. His wife, Jessie, whom he married in 1932, died in 1997. Our thoughts and our condolences are with the family and we thank them for a great life.14:22:0024343Crean, Simon, MPMr CREANDT4HothamALP00—I join with the earlier speakers in this condolence motion. I think it is fair to say that most countries idolise their political or military heroes, those who gave their nation its freedom or a modern identity, people such as Washington or Lincoln in the US, Churchill in the UK or de Gaulle in France—names that every school child in those countries would know off by heart. In Australia, though, it was not a politician, a military leader or even a scientist who filled that position; it was a cricketer. It was Sir Donald Bradman. Perhaps it says something about the culture of our nation and our national identity because Australians do love their sport, but I think it says a lot more about the person who filled the position, the Don. It was interesting that when the numerous polls which marked the end of the millennium about the greatest Australians of the century were taken these prompted a great deal of controversy about the worth of the many that were named. But over one name at least there was no dispute, because Sir Donald Bradman transcended all boundaries, be they sporting or political, and not just here but overseas. He was easily the best known Australian in India, Pakistan or just about anywhere that cricket was played. The Leader of the Opposition mentioned one of Nelson Mandela's first statements on being released from prison, wanting to know whether Sir Donald Bradman was still alive. It was his greatest wish, on the two occasions that he visited Australia, to meet the Don, a wish that sadly could not be fulfilled because of the Don's failing health. Mandela said in Australia last year:In the 1930s we regarded Sir Donald as one of the divinities, so great was his impact on cricket.Even in America, where cricket never really got a foothold, he was acknowledged as one of our greatest sportsman. I was interested to read this morning, in researching, as all of us in this place have done, an article in the Baltimore Sun whichsaid:Bradman is the original, the greatest sporting star of a sports-obsessed country, cricket's first knight. Some would even argue he is the country's most famous citizen.It went on:More than a half-century after he last played, Bradman remains the mythical figure of Australian sports, the starting point in a line that goes to such modern stars as swimmer Ian Thorpe, runner Cathy Freeman, tennis player Patrick Rafter and golfer Greg Norman.Bradman was Babe Ruth without the swagger, Joe Dimaggio without Marilyn Monroe, Michael Jordan without the endorsements. With a cloth cap, flannel outfit and scuffed wooden bat, he became a star of sport's golden age in the 1930s, raising spirits in a country wracked by the Depression and grieving for a generation of men lost in the trenches of World War I.He has now gone from living legend to immortality, but his records will never be broken. In a sport where a test average of 50 is considered a remarkable performance, his average of 99.94 was so far ahead of the pack that statisticians have rated him the greatest sportsperson of the century. The next highest average to date is 60.97 runs, by Graeme Pollock of South Africa.Having also read the references of Charles Davis, I was interested in another interpretation as to how he put superlatives on what this sportsman was. Mr Davis developed a unique system of allowing statistical comparison of the greats of different sports by measuring cricketing performance on a bell curve where the number of sportsmen at each level of achievement varies in a statistically predictable way. There was one exception to this rule—it was Don Bradman—because his performance placed him so far along the bell curve that, statistically speaking, his career should never have existed. For example, the greatest basketballer on this scale was Michael Jordan, with a score of 3.4. The greatest soccer star was Pele, with an outstanding score of 3.7. Don Bradman's was 4.4.He is the only Australian cricketing knight, the only Australian to have his own museum while still alive, and that infamous average of 99.94, due to that second ball duck in his last innings, has become the post office box number for the ABC. The vast majority of Australians would never have seen him play, except on grainy footage on television, and then only from his final days. Yet how many of us know someone—like my father, for example—who still have as one of their proudest moments having seen Don Bradman play. Yet as a person he was a humble man. He never sought to exploit his fame for personal gain. He died in the same house that he moved into with his beloved Jessie when they were first married in the 1930s. When he finally did agree to lend his name to commercial products, the money went to the Bradman Museum and to charities aimed at promoting cricket, sport in general, and purchasing his childhood home.His death takes from us not just a great Australian but a living legend, someone who in the Australian mythology was up there with the Anzacs, Kingsford Smith and Banjo Paterson. In the same way that we have watched with sadness the original Anzacs pass away, gradually breaking that living link until just two remain, so too does the passing of Sir Donald Bradman end a connection all of us felt with a time when the deeds of a single batsman could lift the hearts of a nation in the depths of depression. Now he joins the immortals, and his passing saddens all of us. I join with the previous speakers in extending my condolences to his son John and daughter Shirley. 14:29:0024345Downer, Alexander, MPMr DOWNER4G4MayoLPMinister for Foreign Affairs10—I join with other members in expressing my deep regret and sorrow at the passing of Sir Donald Bradman. Like all of the other members of the House, I acknowledge his true greatness as a sportsman—more than that, he was one of the greatest Australians to have ever lived. Although, as others have said, Sir Donald Bradman was born in the New South Wales town of Cootamundra, he moved from New South Wales to Adelaide in 1934 with his wife and two children, and they lived in the suburb of Kensington Park in the electorate of Sturt. To a very significant extent, South Australians regard Sir Donald Bradman as one of their own, because he was such a dominant figure in our state after he moved there all those years ago. His achievements as a cricketer have been well recorded by others, and I think that one of the most dramatic statistics about Sir Donald Bradman is not just his batting average of 99.94 but the fact that others came nowhere close to reaching his average. For example, Greg Chappell's average in 87 tests was 53 and Steve Waugh's average in test matches is 51. We all hold both of those players, past and present, in the very highest of regard, but the fact that their averages are only slightly more than half that of Don Bradman says something about the true greatness of the man as a cricketer. He was apparently the last living playing member of either side involved in the infamous 1932-33 `bodyline' series. Of course, England's infamous attack in the bodyline series was significantly motivated by Sir Donald Bradman's dominance and indomitable performances.It is said that, before World War II, Sir Donald Bradman was the best-known man in the British Empire—better known than the King—and I am sure that that is true. I, too, have reflected on whether there are any other sportspeople in history who have been quite so dominant over their sport as Sir Donald Bradman, and it is hard to imagine that there was another. I was interested in the analysis from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition of some well-known sports players. The only one I can think of is Heather McKay, the squash player, who was completely dominant for many years. I think she only ever once lost an international championship, so perhaps she is somewhere close to Don Bradman in terms of her dominance over her sport. But Sir Donald Bradman certainly was an extraordinary cricketer, with talent that I suspect is never to be repeated. Interestingly enough, he was very good at a number of other sports. He was a scratch golfer. He was twice the champion of the Mount Osmond Golf Club, and he also played frequently at Kooyonga. Talking of squash, he was the South Australian squash champion in 1938. Not surprisingly, he displayed an all-round sports ability and succeeded in all the sports he played. After he retired from cricket, he became a successful stockbroker with a chair on the Adelaide Stock Exchange from 1942, and he held a number of company directorships, including that of Rigby, the well-known publisher. Importantly, Don Bradman was a tireless worker for disabled children. He was the Patron of the Crippled Children's Association and an active fundraiser. He received tens of thousands of letters each year and, as the Leader of the Opposition reminded us, used to reply to all of them himself. My own memories of Sir Donald Bradman are not great in number, but I sat with him in 1995 during the Ashes test between Australia and England at the Adelaide Oval. It was an extraordinarily interesting experience listening to him talk about the individual players who were playing before us. The best story that I have heard of Sir Donald Bradman from that particular England tour comes from the then British High Commissioner, Sir Roger Carrick, whom many here will know. It underlines the fact that Sir Donald Bradman was a man with a very fine sense of humour. Sir Roger Carrick and Don Bradman were sitting at the test watching the likes of Darren Gough bowling to the Australians—it was a test, by the way, which England won—and the British High Commissioner turned to Sir Donald Bradman and said, `Tell me, Sir Donald, if you were playing in a test match today against the sort of bowling you can see here at the Adelaide Oval, how many runs do you think you would make?' Sir Donald thought for a moment and said, `Well, I'd probably make between 60 and 70—that sort of number.' The British High Commissioner said, `That's very modest of you, Sir Donald. Do you mean that you think the players are better today than they were in your time?' `Oh no,' he said, `you've got to remember that I am 86!' I think that pretty much summed up his sense of humour. He was a really fantastic guy, and I know that he will be missed by all Australians. Along with others, I want to extend my sympathy to his son John and his daughter Shirley. I know that Sir Donald Bradman's memory will live forever. 14:35:0024346McMullan, Bob, MPMr McMULLAN5I4FraserALP00—I rise to support the motion moved and the remarks made by the five preceding speakers. I will seek, in doing so, to support their remarks but not to repeat them. Everybody knows that there are measures of how outstanding a cricketer Sir Donald was—they have been well outlined by others, and I will not repeat any of that. We all know that, when we meet to talk about great cricketers, we discuss who was the second-best; there is no point in discussing who was the best because we all know the answer. But there is an interesting modern indication of that: Sir Donald's batting average is better than the average of the Waugh brothers combined—the No. 4 and No. 5, who have been the mainstay of the most successful team in the memory of anybody in this room, I suspect. He was better than the two of them put together, statistically. It is a fairly outstanding contribution, and the remarkable thing is that the Waugh brothers would not be offended by the comparison. They would not be either surprised or offended. I will not speak any more about that because others have said more than enough, and there will be other chances for colleagues to speak later in the day. But his significance arises in some other ways. There are very few players in any sport for whom the way the game is played and the way the rules are written are changed as a consequence of their dominance. Sir Donald Bradman was one, and we saw it in `bodyline' and in its response. Walter Lindrum was another. There are very few others when you think across the range of sporting achievement where the game is played differently as a result of that person being so outstanding.His significance to our nation is really based on the comments that people on both sides have made about the fact that he was outstanding at a time when the nation needed that inspiration, during the period of the Depression and the years immediately after it and the years immediately after the war. And his significance is reflected in the fact that there are songs written about Sir Donald—I would have to say perhaps not some of the greatest songs in the nation's musical history but nevertheless significant in their way.MG4Lee, Michael, MPMr Lee—Paul Kelly's song is pretty good.5I4McMullan, Bob, MPMr McMULLAN—Yes. And there was a television series not just about him but which revolved around his dominance and the response to it. And there is that phrase that everybody in Australia knows the meaning of. When you talk about `the Don' it may mean something else in other countries but it means something very specific and particular in Australia, and everybody knows whom you are talking about. He was clearly a dominant sporting figure, a significant figure at an important time in our history when we needed that inspiration. He has inspired people beyond the cricketing arena for years, during his active sporting career and for years since. I think as a nation we Australians ask too much of our sporting heroes. We ask them to be as great in every aspect of their lives as they are as sporting people, and that is a very big and unreasonable call very often. We see outstanding sportsmen and sportswomen, particularly in these days of great public scrutiny, criticised because they fail to meet in their private lives the standard they set in their sporting career. But why should they have to? We should not expect of them things which are unreasonable. Certainly I think people expected of Sir Donald more than any human being could have provided.But he provided a lot to our country, and the inspiration that he provided through his sporting prowess, through his skill, through the contribution that he made to Australia in the recovery from the Depression and after the war was important. He set a standard to which all others might hope to aspire, even if they all know they will not actually get there. Like the Treasurer and the Leader of the Opposition, I tried to hit a golf ball with a stump. I might have been disadvantaged by the fact that the tank was a corrugated iron tank—it made it a little bit harder—but it certainly proved how impossible it was for us mere mortals to achieve that standard, and it has been reflected in my cricketing performance for 45 years since. But it was just an indication that he could do things that others could not even imagine and when they imagined could not do. We are enriched by his unsurpassed prowess and performance.I conclude with a quote that was attributed to Bill Lawry on the AAP wire today. He said, `We're just lucky he was born an Australian.' I think that is true in a number of ways when you reflect upon it. I am pleased to have the opportunity to join with the Acting Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition and others in supporting this motion.10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—I understand it is the wish of all honourable members of the House to signify at this stage their respect and sympathy by rising in their places.Honourable members having stood in their places—10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—I thank the House.14:41:0024347Reith, Peter (Leader of the House)Mr REITHWI4FlindersLPLeader of the House10—I move:That the debate be adjourned to a later time this day.I appreciate that many members will also wish to speak on this condolence motion. For the information of members, we expect that opportunity to be provided just after the dinner break, perhaps 8.30 or thereabouts, and with ample opportunity through to the close of business if that suits the convenience of the House.Question resolved in the affirmative.Distinguished Visitors2434710000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—Order! I should indicate to the House that during the appropriate condolence motion being expressed about the late Sir Donald Bradman I did not have the opportunity to recognise in the gallery members of the delegation of parliamentarians from Portugal and of the Ambassador-elect from Portugal. They have since had to leave us, but I do believe it is appropriate that the Hansard record should indicate how pleased we were to see them here. It also seemed to me appropriate to acknowledge the presence in the gallery of Sir Alastair Goodlad, the British High Commissioner, and his wife. Thank you, Sir Alastair, for joining us with your guests on this occasion.Honourable members—Hear, hear!Questions Without Notice243472434714:43:0024347Beazley, Kim, MPMr BEAZLEYPE4BrandALP00—My question is to the Acting Prime Minister. Acting Prime Minister, are you aware that your fellow National, the member for Page, said this morning:Rural people see John Anderson as just another Liberal.Minister, isn't he right?24348Anderson, John, MPMr ANDERSON4K4GwydirNPActing Prime Minister10—I thank the honourable Leader of the Opposition for his question. It gives me the opportunity to make— CE4O'Keefe, Neil, MP10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—Member for Burke!4K4Mr ANDERSON—a very succinct rejoinder, which is, as I am sure the Leader of the Opposition is also aware, that Mr Causley expressed his full confidence in my leadership.Opposition members interjecting—CE4O'Keefe, Neil, MP10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The member for Burke has already been asked to exercise some courtesy.2434814:45:0024348Lawler, Tony, MPMr LAWLER834ParkesNP10—My question is addressed to the Acting Prime Minister and Minister for Transport and Regional Services. Is the minister aware of suggestions that there has been a shortfall in the funding of the Commonwealth roads budget? Does this contrast with the many council letters of support for the Roads to Recovery Program that I have received from the electorate of Parkes? Would the minister advise the House of the true position.24348Anderson, John, MPMr ANDERSON4K4GwydirNPActing Prime Minister10—I thank the honourable member for his question. As it happens, I am aware of mistaken suggestions that the government have short-changed road funding by $2.9 billion through the Australian Land Transport Development Act and its special account. In particular, I am aware of comments from the Leader of the Opposition suggesting that the government have misled people and that we are trying to conceal something on this matter. The only person doing some serious misleading here is the Leader of the Opposition. He is the one trying to deceive people on this matter, because claims that the government are short-changing motorists on road funding are clearly wrong. There has been no funding shortfall for roads.As the opposition know only too well, the ALTD Act is simply one of the mechanisms used by the Commonwealth for road funding. Since 1991 a number of major roads programs have been moved out of the ambit of the ALTD Act. Actual expenditure by this government and by others on roads and other eligible expenditure, including on rail, which could have been funded under the ALTD Act have substantially exceeded the notional amounts generated under the ALTD Act funding mechanism. For example, the $1.2 billion Roads to Recovery package the member referred to, which has been so widely welcomed around Australia, has not been funded through the ALTD Act as funds provided are being channelled direct to local councils.In fact, since 1994-95 the Commonwealth has actually spent $2.9 billion, coincidentally, more on roads and related expenditure than would have been spent if we had used only the notional amount generated by the default rate provided for in the ALTD Act. I table a letter dated 14 February 2001 from the secretary to my department setting out the true position on this matter. This is $2.9 billion of real money on real roads for real people, not some auditor's technical accounting issue.Let me come to the issue of integrity on this matter. While the Leader of the Opposition may have floundered and fluffed on the issue of this act, the opposition spokesman on transport knows full well the distinction. At the Northern Rivers Community Economic Forum earlier this month, he himself was quoted as saying—MG4Lee, Michael, MPMr Lee—Who wrote this?4K4Mr ANDERSON—Not who wrote it; who said it. Who wrote it? That is not the question. It is who said it. I am quoting directly from what the member for Batman had to say. He told the truth. He said:Look, there is no $2.9 billion that wasn't spent. It's an accounting issue.He then went on to say:You've got to tell these people the truth. It might be easy to exploit the issue and score points ... but to win the respect of people you have to be honest.That is what he said. Of course it took the opposition spokesman five days to come clean on the issue, but the truth has always been a commodity in short supply over there. It is a great pity that the shadow spokesman's belated honesty does not rub off on his leader, especially on the question of fuel excise. We saw earlier this month the Leader of the Opposition ducking and weaving and turning and waffling on the Neil Mitchell program on 3AW when asked directly what a Beazley government would do in regard to fuel excise. It finally came out in admissions that he would keep both the excise and the GST on fuel. That is what he would do. This weekend he was at again, this time with Laurie Oakes. Again he was asked directly what a Beazley government would do. Laurie tried three times but all he got was waffle. Even Laurie thought it was waffle, and he told the Leader of the Opposition so. We have this great exchange: REPORTER: ... you're waffling.BEAZLEY: No, I'm not waffling.REPORTER: Yes, you are.BEAZLEY: No, I'm not.The one thing the Leader of the Opposition does not want people to remember is that when he was in government fuel excise increased by 500 per cent.2434914:50:0024349Beazley, Kim, MPMr BEAZLEYPE4BrandALP00—My question is to the Acting Prime Minister and Leader of the National Party. Will you rule out the government introducing, and the National Party supporting, legislation to fully privatise Telstra?SJ4Tuckey, Wilson, MPMr Tuckey—That is asking for policy.Opposition members interjecting—\8I4Martin, Stephen, MP10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—If the member for Cunningham and other members on my left want me to in fact establish order in the House, I will do so very quickly.24349Anderson, John, MPMr ANDERSON4K4GwydirNPActing Prime Minister10—The Leader of the Opposition knows full well that we have had, and can demonstrate quite clearly that we have had, a real commitment to delivering what rural and regional Australia really needs in telecommunications terms, which is better service outcomes at more affordable prices and better repair times when things go wrong. In that regard, we have a proud record to tell. Indeed, just a few days ago we were able to reveal the outcome of putting out to tender our $150 million program for remote area coverage. Eighty per cent of the landmass of Australia—some 40,000 subscribers—now has a level of service that the ALP never even thought about. The results of the tender are absolutely outstanding, and calls within an extended zone or to an adjacent extended zone will be untimed at a maximum local call rate of 22c per call.PE4Beazley, Kim, MPMr Beazley—On a point of order, Mr Speaker: my point goes to relevance. It was a very, very short, simple, specific question: are they going to be supporting legislation to fully privatise Telstra?10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—It was a very short, simple question; I was conscious of it. The Acting Prime Minister has the call and will keep it relevant to the question asked.4K4Mr ANDERSON—I seek to establish the very important point that it is not a question of your cheap approach to ideology here but a question of outcomes for rural and regional Australians that really matters, and the National Party and the government have a far prouder record to sell in that regard than you do. That is the point. To move on, what I have to say is this: we sought and put in place the Besley inquiry to establish, amongst other things, what shortfalls there were in the provision of services for rural, regional and remote Australians. The Besley inquiry, which carried out its task with a great deal of integrity, identified a number of areas of concern that need to be addressed, and our position is that there will be no further sale of Telstra until and unless those issues are fairly and squarely addressed. I cannot think of a stronger position in terms of what we need to deliver here, which is outcomes for rural and regional Australians. I want to close on this point: I have not met anybody out there who does not believe that your real agenda here is to sell Telstra.2435014:54:0024350May, Margaret, MPMrs MAY83BMcPhersonLP10—My question is addressed to the Treasurer. Has the Treasurer seen reports that the government is reducing pensions by two per cent? Would the Treasurer advise the House of the veracity of these reports and the measures which will benefit pensioners under the new tax system.24350Costello, Peter, MPMr COSTELLOCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—I thank the honourable member for her question, because I did see reports on the weekend that somehow pensioners would not be receiving the full value of CPI inflators on their pensions. Those claims, which are echoed by the Labor Party, are entirely false. As per usual, the Labor Party will stoop at nothing in its efforts to try to put falsehood out into the Australian community. On 1 July of last year, this government increased pensions, in real terms, by two per cent, which means that, after full indexation, pensions were nonetheless increased by two per cent in real terms. The indexation which is coming up in March would normally take into account the indexation from the September and the December quarter—that is, the indexation twice a year is always done in arrears. If we had not changed the indexation arrangements, the March indexation would have taken into account the September and the December quarter. We did two things on 1 July: we increased pensions in real terms by two per cent and we paid a two per cent indexation in advance so that pensioners would not have to wait for the price rises of September and December and then get the indexation; they would get the two per cent in July in advance before having to wait back until March. Even the member for Hotham, not considered a very reliable source when it comes to government policy, put out an information kit saying:The real increase in the pension will therefore be two per cent.So it was a two per cent increase—a two per cent advance on the March indexation. If this government had not reformed the taxation system, pensioners would be two per cent worse off in real terms than they are today. On 1 July, when the pension was then $372—1 July was not an indexation date—the government's arrangements increased the pension fortnightly to $386.90. So the $14.90 increase on 1 July, which was not an indexation date, was a real increase of $7.45 and an advance on the March 2001 indexation of $7.45. In addition to that, the government increased the income and assets test by 2½ per cent, making more Australians eligible for the pension. Aged pensioners with income from savings and investments became eligible for up to $1,000 in a one-off, non-taxable savings bonus. The pensioner rebate was increased so that single pensioners can earn up to around $14,400 per annum and couples $24,250 per annum without paying income tax and part-rate pensioners were given a more beneficial taper rate so that their pension was not withdrawn at 50 per cent for additional income but only at 40 per cent. They were real benefits to pensioners—paid in advance. When the Labor Party was running the CPI at eight per cent per annum, they never once paid an indexation in advance. When the Labor Party was increasing all wholesale sales tax, they never once increased the pension in advance. When the Labor Party legislated to lift petrol excise by 5c a litre after the 1993 election, the then Leader of the Opposition boasted about it. He said, `Oh, you didn't catch us during the campaign; we were entitled to lift it by 5c a litre.' They never once indexed in advance of the CPI. The government put that indexation in in advance and it increased pensions by two per cent in real terms, and any suggestion that pensioners are worse off as a result is absolutely false.24350NaN:59:002Smith, Stephen, MPMr STEPHEN SMITH5V5PerthALP00—My question is to the Acting Prime Minister and Leader of the National Party, and it follows from his answer to the previous question from the Leader of the Opposition on the full privatisation of Telstra. Given that he has advised the House that no further sale of Telstra will take place unless and until service shortfalls and areas of concern are fairly and squarely addressed, and given that the Acting Prime Minister said on ABC radio on 14 February that this would not occur prior to the next election, when will the government take the proceeds of the full privatisation of Telstra out of the budget, and, if you will not take it out, why not? 24351Anderson, John, MPMr ANDERSON4K4GwydirNPActing Prime Minister10—I thank the honourable member for his question, but you can never rely on the ALP when they feed back your words. You really cannot. I was asked what my personal view on timing was in terms of how long it would take to address the issues raised in the Besley inquiry. I expressed an entirely legitimate view that I did not think it could be done overnight. I was asked whether it was likely it could be completed in the course of this year, or words to that effect, and I indicated that I did not think it could be.5V5Smith, Stephen, MP10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The member for Perth is defying the chair.5V5Smith, Stephen, MPMr Stephen Smith—Mr Speaker, I seek leave to table a transcript of an interview with the Acting Prime Minister on ABC radio on 14 February.Leave not granted.2435115:01:0024351Thompson, Cameron, MPMr CAMERON THOMPSON84CBlairLP10—My question is to the Treasurer. Would the Treasurer inform the House of recent changes that will ease the compliance burden for taxpayers in the pay-as-you-go system and simplify and streamline GST payment and reporting arrangements for small businesses?24351Costello, Peter, MPMr COSTELLOCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—I thank the honourable member for Blair for his question. The government announced a number of changes last week for the purpose of improving the simplification of the PAYG system, and also in relation to GST. First of all, individuals, companies and superannuation funds with a turnover of under $1 million can, if they elect to, under the PAYG system pay quarterly instalments inflated by a GDP factor which will relieve those people of filing quarterly returns. This will free up over two million taxpayers, if they decide to take that option, from the requirement of quarterly returns under the PAYG system.In addition to that, under the GST system we are introducing a new option for those companies which have a turnover of $2 million or less. The number of companies or businesses that have a turnover of $2 million or less amount to about 95 per cent of Australian businesses, so a new option has opened up for about 95 per cent of Australian businesses. I stress that, for those that wish to remain in the quarterly reporting system and have adjusted their systems and come to grips with that system, there is no need to change. There are many businesses which would prefer to pay actuals on the basis of a quarterly return. But those that wish not to do a quarterly return and are happy to pay estimates will have the ability to take the payment that they made under their December GST payment and to pay that in relation to the next two instalments in April and in July. All they need to do is file an annual return and, on the annual return, reconcile the instalments which have been paid against their annual liability for GST. It will mean that, if they wish to take up this option, they need not do further quarterly returns but do an annual return. In addition to that, the annual return need be filed no earlier than their annual income tax return or 28 February 2002, whichever is the earlier. That gives those businesses the opportunity, when they do their annual income tax return, to also do their annual GST return. They will have paid their instalments, the instalments will have been paid out to the states as the government is obliged to do under the Commonwealth-state agreement, and those businesses can settle up on an annual return.These arrangements have been warmly welcomed by the small business community. The chartered accountants, for example, said on 22 February, `We endorse the flexibility introduced into the new system,' and `Chartered accountants applaud government BAS changes.' The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry said, `BAS changes welcome. It is clear from the government's announcement today that they have been listening to the concerns of the business community.' The National Farmers Federation said, `BAS win for farmers and small business.' The CPAs said, `CPA Australia welcomed the Treasurer's statement on BAS this afternoon hailing it as a victory for small and medium-sized business.' I stress again that this is open to all businesses that have an annual turnover of $2 million or less. Those that are happy to pay actuals can continue to do so, but for those businesses that want to take up this option it is a very dramatic improvement, a very dramatic reduction in paperwork and I think it will be warmly welcomed by the small business community. 2435215:06:0024352Crean, Simon, MPMr CREANDT4HothamALP00—My question is to the Acting Prime Minister, and it follows the answer just given by the Treasurer. Acting Prime Minister, was the government's decision to roll back the GST compliance burden a result of (a) the revolt of Australian small businesses, (b) the revolt of voters in Western Australia and Queensland, (c) the revolt of your own backbench, or (d) all of the above? Now that you have rolled back for small business, when are you going to roll back for Australian motorists on petrol tax?3K6Cameron, Ross, MPMr Ross Cameron—I raise a point of order. The question was simply a series of arguments and implications. I ask you to rule it out of order.10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—There can be no argument that there was both argument and imputation in the question, but the question was consistent with other questions that have been allowed to stand, and for that reason I allowed it to stand.24352Anderson, John, MPMr ANDERSON4K4GwydirNPActing Prime Minister10—The fact of the matter is the government took into account concerns that were expressed to us and we sought to do what any sensible government would do in the face of suggestions that there were some simplifications that could be made. We on this side are sincere about trying to ensure that small business has the best possible line through meeting what were very important needs in terms of tax reform in this country. We heard the concerns and we moved—I think, comprehensively—in a way that has been widely welcomed, to address those issues. We do not run away from the fact that there are some issues over and above BAS that are concerning people in the Australian community. Certainly, my own party, as we moved through regional areas last week, picked up on some of those, and I have highlighted what they are. Petrol is plainly one of them. I reiterate that we have done a great deal in relation to fuel excise, a great deal. Do you remember all the help we got from the ALP when we wanted to remove fuel excise on rail? Do you remember that? Then there was all the help we got when we wanted to reduce—DT4Crean, Simon, MPMr Crean—Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of relevance. He might like to phone a friend or ask the audience, but he has to answer the question.10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—There clearly has been no interest on my left in the reply given by the Acting Prime Minister.2435215:09:0024352Hawker, David, MPMr HAWKER8H4WannonLP10—Mr Speaker, my question is to the Minister for Defence. Would he inform the House of progress with the Collins class submarines.24352Reith, Peter, MPREITHWI4FlindersLPMinister for Defence00—I thank the honourable member for his question. I am pleased to be able to advise the House that, together with the parliamentary secretary, Dr Nelson, I attended the commissioning of two new Australian submarines at HMAS Stirling on Friday. It was an important occasion for the families after whose next of kin the ships were named—the Dechaineuxs and the Sheeans. I know the Sheeans are a Tasmanian family. That ship is named after Teddy Sheean, the first ordinary seaman to have a ship named after him in recognition of his heroic undertakings during World War II. The occasion was also an important milestone in the government's determination, basically, to fix up the submarines we inherited from the previous Labor administration, particularly the now Leader of the Opposition. Members of the House should be reminded of what the independent report said back in 1999—the Prescott and McIntosh report. When talking about the deficiencies of the Collins class submarines they said, `We have been astonished at how many there still are some six years after the first boat was launched, the range and extent of them, the seriousness of some of them, the areas in which they have occurred and how slowly they are being remedied.' So said the independent report. As all members now know, the cost now being visited upon the taxpayer is literally hundreds of millions of dollars to fix up the problems we inherited from the Leader of the Opposition and the Labor Party and their failure to properly manage this important project when they were in office. 4T4Melham, Daryl, MP10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The minister will resume his seat. The member for Banks is warned.WI4Mr REITH—This is an additional cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. The Australian people were told, way back in 1987 by the now Leader of the Opposition, when asked by an opposition member whether or not the cost would blow out from $2.6 billion to $4.5 billion, that:There will be no more funds for defence other than those that are being budgeted at the moment. The Government plans on that basis and the submarine program is planned to fit in with it.So he said back in 1987. Mr Speaker, you can imagine my surprise, when trawling through the Labor Party's current defence policy, to see that they have a policy commitment to two additional submarines. In 1987, when they were asked about the costs, they said there would be no additional costs, it would all be fitted in within the existing Defence budget. Eleven years later, when they issued their 1998 policy, they made a promise of two additional subs and, would you believe, they spun the same line that there would be no additional costs to the taxpayer as a result of that commitment. I have the policy here. The Australian public effectively were mislead about the costs and when we come to their policy today, here it is: `Acquire two further submarines.' In the four forward-years, nominating the additional amounts of money, it has nought, nought, nought, nought for a total of nought additional cost. This is Labor's Defence policy today—additional submarines, but it will not cost you a zack. This is the same story you were told back in 1987 but, today, we know, by independent report and by the additional costs which we will have to meet, that the opposition, and in particular the Leader of the Opposition, cannot be trusted with the taxpayers' dollar. It is about time we had a clear statement from the Labor Party—not the usual waffle, not the usual lazy policy position. It is about time we had a clear statement from the Leader of the Opposition about where the money is coming from.2435315:14:0024353Beazley, Kim, MPMr BEAZLEYPE4BrandALP00—Mr Speaker, we cannot make policy fast enough for them to implement it.10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—If the Leader of the Opposition refers to my last statement in the House, he will know that I ought to oblige him to resume his seat. PE4Mr BEAZLEY—My question is to the Acting Prime Minister. Given that you are refusing to discount petrol tax for the impact of the GST on inflation, why are you planning to discount pensions for the impact of the GST on inflation?84GWilkie, Kim, MP10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The member for Swan is almost denying his side the right to an answer. 24353Anderson, John, MPMr ANDERSON4K4GwydirNPActing Prime Minister10—We are not. The fact is that you have got full indexation plus two per cent real—a real increase. You really have to wonder. All that can really be said is that the Leader of the Opposition ought to take a leaf out of the member for Batman's book when he said that if you want any credibility, if you want to be respected, you need to tell the truth.2435315:16:0024353Gambaro, Teresa, MPMs GAMBARO9K6PetrieLP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs. Would the minister inform the House about the government's ongoing commitment to raising literacy and numeracy standards? Is the minister aware of alternative approaches in this area, and what is his response? 24354Kemp, Dr David, MPDr KEMPBT4GoldsteinLPMinister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service10—I thank the honourable member for Petrie for her question and acknowledge her concern for advancing literacy standards in her electorate. The government is determined that every young Australian who can learn to read and write adequately will do so. The appalling legacy of the Leader of the Opposition when he was education minister was that 30 per cent of young Australians could not read and write properly. As a result of the National Literacy Plan, which involves the assessment of every student in years 3, 5 and 7, we are now seeing the first improvements in literacy standards in over two decades. This year we have established a $1.4 billion strategic outcomes program which rolls together a number of existing programs to provide greater flexibility for states and schools to target the students who need most help. This is part of $9 billion for government schools over the next four years. This year also the national literacy goal that every child will be able to read and write adequately by the time they finish grade 3 will be embodied in law and given legal force.There is a dramatic contrast between the clear policies which this government has initiated to address this issue and the lack of policy on the Labor side. The Leader of the Opposition has never committed himself to national literacy standards. He has never committed himself to the assessment of every child. When he was minister, he sought to conceal the problem by suppressing the results of surveys which had been done at the behest of the unions. As an article in the Sydney Daily Telegraph said on Saturday, writing about what it called Beazley's policy black hole:The Federal ALP urgently needs its own economics and tax policy. It needs a welfare policy. It needs an education policy, and so on and so forth.This is not me speaking; this is the article in the Daily Telegraph on Saturday. It went on to say:Its front bench contains too many “Labor Lords”, union and party apparatchiks with no capacity to communicate with voters. The time has come to eject some of the grey men like Wayne Swan and Robert McClelland and the excess baggage like Cheryl Kernot and Laurie Brereton.This is the view of informed people about the Labor Party. The Leader of the Opposition has spent the last two weeks dining out on the performances of Geoff Gallop and Peter Beattie, election winners, but the man who sits on the other side of the table is Kim Beazley, serial non-performer, the man who stands for nothing, the man whose plan for Australia is an outsized postage stamp. As the Telegraph article said, `No-one has a clue which way Beazley will jump on any issue.' This government has given the lead on the most important social justice issue in education. Kim Beazley has nothing to say.2435415:21:0024354Swan, Wayne, MPMr SWAN2V5LilleyALP00—My question is directed to the Minister for Community Services. Minister, will you be kicking and screaming to ensure that the 16,897 age pensioners in your electorate receive the full four per cent indexation in their pensions next month in line with the recent cost of living increases or are you happy that they are having two per cent of their initial compensation clawed back?24354Anthony, Larry, MPMr ANTHONYXJ6RichmondNPMinister for Community Services10—It looks as though the member for Lilley has learnt nothing from being in the sin-bin. He twists the truth as much as he can, and we know that. We know that, aided and abetted by the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Lilley wants to use the elderly as political footballs to make cheap points. The fact is that the Labor Party actually voted for this. In June 1999, you actually voted for the increases that went through with the new tax system. We stated that, on 1 July last year, elderly Australians, pensioners or social security recipients—particularly pensioners—would receive a two per cent real increase above the CPI and a two per cent advance for nine months. Did the Labor Party ever give an advance when they introduced wholesale sales tax? Did they ever increase pensions when they whacked taxes up two per cent or four per cent? Absolutely not.The government was very clear and transparent that there was to be a full two per cent real increase on 1 July last year, plus a two per cent advance. The interesting point is that this government also tied pensions to 25 per cent of male average weekly earnings. Did the Labor Party ever do that? Absolutely not. That was an extra $13.60. The fact is that this government compensated older Australians for the introduction of the new tax system. That is something that you never did, silly Simon, in the 13 years of Labor stewardship. The biggest change is the age savings bonus. Over two million Australians have received on average over $700—again, a compensation that the Labor Party never introduced. This government has given pensioners a two per cent increase, through a nine-month advance—and there will be another adjustment on 20 March where not only will MTAWE play a role—but also there was a two per cent increase, guaranteed in legislation, to stay ahead of the CPI. 2435515:25:0024355Andrews, Kevin, MPMr ANDREWSHK5MenziesLP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for Health and Aged Care. Would the minister inform the House how the federal government is tackling the grave problem of illicit drugs in the community? Is the minister aware of any alternative approaches in this area?24355Wooldridge, Dr Michael, MPDr WOOLDRIDGE8E4CaseyLPMinister for Health and Aged Care10—I thank the honourable member for his question. Illicit drugs are something which the government has taken very seriously and is an issue on which the Prime Minister has taken particular leadership. Our Tough on Drugs strategy commits half a billion dollars over a four-year period to a mixture of demand reduction, supply reduction and educational programs. In demand reduction, $60 million is going to 133 community based treatment programs, which is a full allocation of the funds. 83ZIrwin, Julia, MPMrs Irwin—How much did Cabramatta get?8E4Dr WOOLDRIDGE— There are 87 community based projects on prevention initiatives, one of which went to Cabramatta at my personal intervention.83ZIrwin, Julia, MP10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The member for Fowler is warned!8E4Dr WOOLDRIDGE—The $7.5 million has been going specifically to educational research projects allocated through the National Health and Medical Research Council. We will shortly be launching the largest and most comprehensive educational information program ever undertaken in Australia aimed at assisting parents in dealing with illicit drugs and what help is available. Four states—Tasmania, New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia—have already signed up to the illicit drugs diversion initiative, something never before tried in Australia and a particularly progressive initiative. Those states will receive nearly $70 million in extra federal government funding. This all stems from the Tough on Drugs program released in November 1997. You could perhaps understand, therefore, Mr Speaker, that I was a bit surprised on Sunday morning to find the Leader of the Opposition on the Sunday program saying:We've had the Liberals adopt a portion of our drug policy, after ignoring it for the course of the last couple of years. Given that we released Tough on Drugs in November 1997, I assumed he must be talking about his 1996 election policy, so I reread it. How much do you reckon was in it about illicit drugs? Not a single word. There was nothing in their 1996 election policy on illicit drugs.Just in case I had missed something, I went to their 1998 election policy on illicit drugs and, true to their word, they had done much better—five lines, going to about 50 words, promising $3 million a year for an educational program covering tobacco, alcohol and all the range of illicit drugs. This is what we are being claimed to have copied. I am delighted that the opposition has finally released some policy—albeit uncosted, confused and waffling—on this very important issue. Far from stealing our policies, they are simply trying to catch up on five years of policy laziness.2435615:29:0024356Beazley, Kim, MPMr BEAZLEYPE4BrandALP00—My question is to the Acting Prime Minister and refers to a previous answer to a question on discounting pensions. I refer to that answer in which you claimed that you are not discounting pensions. Are you aware that the Prime Minister last night said:The discount that is occurring merely ensures it is not paid again.Acting Prime Minister, are you discounting pensions or aren't you?4G4Downer, Alexander, MP10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—Minister for Foreign Affairs!4G4Downer, Alexander, MP10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—Minister for Foreign Affairs!4G4Downer, Alexander, MP10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—I warn the Minister for Foreign Affairs!24356Anderson, John, MPMr ANDERSON4K4GwydirNPActing Prime Minister10—Mr Speaker, the fact is that there is an attempt here to portray us as having cheated or gone back on our word in relation to pensions. That is not the case. As has been explained by the Treasurer and the responsible minister, there has been a two per cent real increase in addition to existing indexation arrangements and a two per cent advance on March 2001 indexation to offset expected price increases. It was well advertised, well publicised. People were told well in advance what the outcome would be. The only point to be made here when it comes to integrity is to go to the ALP's performance in 1993. If you really want to know how to judge the ALP, do not listen to what they say; look at what they do. In the 1993 election, we were promised endlessly that we could have tax cuts without a GST. We were told there was no need to increase the wholesale sales tax. We were told that there was not going to be any need to increase fuel excise. Of course, the reality was that, as soon as they were back in government and looked at the figures, they had to increase particularly indirect taxation very substantially. Did they compensate? Did they try to explain to the Australian people what they were doing?CT4Costello, Peter, MPMr Costello—Did they balance the budget?4K4Mr ANDERSON—A very good point. With all of that, were they able to balance the budget?PE4Beazley, Kim, MPMr Beazley—Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. It goes to relevance. The question was: is it a discount as described by the Prime Minister?10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—Has the Acting Prime Minister concluded his answer?4K4Mr ANDERSON—Yes.2435615:32:0024356Lloyd, Jim, MPMr LLOYDIK6RobertsonLP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business. Can the minister advise the House of the latest outcomes relating to industrial disputes released by the ABS? How do these figures compare with previous experience and are there any alternative policies in this area?24356Abbott, Tony, MPMr ABBOTTEZ5WarringahLPMinister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business10—I thank the member for Robertson for his question. I am pleased to inform the House that the latest ABS statistics show that the level of industrial disputation in Australia has now dropped to an all-time low. In fact, under the coalition government, industrial disputation has averaged just half the level of the previous Labor government. That is very good news for workers because, generally speaking, strikes cost jobs. I regret to say that developments in Western Australia show that, as soon as Labor politicians enter ministerial offices, the union heavies fan out into workplaces. According to the West Australian on Friday:Car loads of up to 30 union heavies at a time have been doing the rounds of sites, closing them and intimidating workers. A rigger on one of those sites is quoted as saying:It was intimidation. It was intimidation big time.It is going to get worse because the ACTU, with the full support of members opposite, is now taking its war against BHP out of the courts where it was and into the workplace. The problem is that Labor governments everywhere support industrial peace in theory but never in practice, because they are owned and operated by the ACTU. When it comes to caving in to the ACTU, the Leader of the Opposition has got more form than Saturday's race guide. He wants to go even further than his Western Australian colleague in abolishing workplace agreements; he wants to abolish the Employment Advocate who stands between workers and industrial thuggery. If the Leader of the Opposition had any leadership at all, he would emulate Tony Blair and abolish the union bloc vote. If he had any ticker at all, he would immediately tell Bill Ludwig to resign as national vice-president of the ALP. The very least he could do is condemn the industrial thuggery now taking place in his own home town. The Leader of the Opposition was the worst defence minister ever, the worst employment minister ever, the worst finance minister ever, and now the `minister for failure' wants to be Prime Minister. It just does not make sense. ET4Bevis, Arch, MP10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The member for Brisbane is warned!2435715:36:0024357Swan, Wayne, MPMr SWAN2V5LilleyALP00—My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Community Services. Minister, I refer to your previous assertion that pensioners were made aware of the two per cent clawback when the GST package was announced. I also refer to the assertion of the Acting PM that this was well publicised. Minister, could you please tell me on which page of the new tax system booklet that was distributed to every household in this country prior to the last election the two per cent clawback is mentioned? Where is the transparency and where is the publication?24357Anthony, Larry, MPMr ANTHONYXJ6RichmondNPMinister for Community Services10—It is interesting that the member for Lilley should ask these questions considering that his party helped vote on it. They voted on it in June 1999. It is interesting that they ask, `Where is it?' because I have the Age Pension News here—and I think over two million publications get sent out—for March and April.2V5Swan, Wayne, MPMr Swan—What page?10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The member for Lilley!XJ6Mr ANTHONY—Page 9 of the Age Pension News of March-April. You might want to read this.2V5Swan, Wayne, MPMr Swan—Before the election.10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The member for Lilley is warned.XJ6Mr ANTHONY—David Ross is reading it. You would be better off spending more time in your electorate than masquerading down to Melbourne, my friend; but we will come back to that. Also, in the June-July edition—maybe I can read this, Mr Speaker, with your indulgence, because the Age Pension News goes to all pensioners—Opposition members—When was that?XJ6Mr ANTHONY—March-April 2000.Opposition members—Ha, ha!XJ6Mr ANTHONY—It has always been stated—10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The minister will resume his seat. With some reluctance I issue a general warning. Every member of this House is entitled to be heard—and heard in silence. The member for Lilley has asked his question. The minister is responding.RH4Kerr, Duncan, MPMr Kerr—Not very well!10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The member for Denison!XJ6Mr ANTHONY—Thank you, Mr Speaker. The member for Hotham was also extremely good at outlining to his electorate what the real increases were, and this was back in March of last year. I quote:The age pension will go up on 1 July 2000 when the GST comes in. The pension rise on 1 July will be four per cent, or about $7.25 a week for single pensioners and around $6 a week for each member of a pensioner couple. The real increases in pensions will be two per cent rather than the four per cent claimed by the government and the Democrats.Even they acknowledged it, and they also voted on it beforehand. The bottom line is that we made a commitment and we have stuck to that promise, and that was that we would give a two per cent real increase beyond the rate of inflation and, furthermore, we would give a two per cent nine-month advance to March, or whenever the next indexation point was—20 March. We were very clear and very categorical. 2435815:40:0024358Nairn, Gary, MPMr NAIRNOK6Eden-MonaroLP10—My question is to the Minister for Employment Services. Has the minister seen recent reports on the Work for the Dole program? Can the minister advise the House of the benefits of the government's mutual obligation policy and Work for the Dole program for both job seekers and local communities?24358Brough, Mal, MPMr BROUGH2K6LongmanLPMinister for Employment Services10—I thank the member for Eden-Monaro, who has been a strong supporter of Work for the Dole and of the many participants across his electorate. As we know, 90 per cent of the community support Work for the Dole as being a strong part of the government's mutual obligation policy and for how it is assisting people who are out of work to be able to get reconnected into the work force. In a recent article in the Canberra Times, Jenny Stewart, a lecturer in public policy, had some very interesting comments to make in support of Work for the Dole. I quote:In a study on the effectiveness of the Work for the Dole ... It was found that working for the dole has a positive impact on participants. They reported greater self-esteem, and improved motivation towards eventually finding a job.This raises the question, Mr Speaker, of why it is that those opposite continue to flip-flop about on whether or not they are going to support this system.XW4Kernot, Cheryl, MP2K6Mr BROUGH—The member for Dickson says, `We are not going to support it.' There we go! From her interjection we know that they are not going to support the program. On the one hand they say, `Yes, we are going to support Work for the Dole,' and on the other they do not. When they can make a decision and stand up here at the dispatch box and tell us exactly where they stand, the Australian public will know what they are about.The fact is that not only is Work for the Dole well accepted by 90 per cent of the community, but also 80 per cent of job seekers support Work for the Dole. But it is not the only program that has been successful with the mutual obligation processes of this government. In fact, there are some 16 different opportunities, Work for the Dole being just one, that people can undertake to meet their mutual obligation requirements. It was only last week that I launched a new service—the Australian volunteer web site—which will allow the great volunteering attitude of Australians to be fully benefited, with great institutions across Australia putting onto one web site many opportunities where unemployed people can meet the mutual obligation requirements of this government and also assist themselves. It assists the community and also those groups. I had the great pleasure to launch that with the State Emergency Service in Victoria, which is doing a fantastic job.The lesson for everybody here, including those opposite, is that when governments support unemployed people, like we have, through initiatives like the Job Network and Work for the Dole, you see unemployment coming down. When you get the flip-flop of the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Dickson, who continually interjects with nothing but riffraff, you find that you have no direction, you have no certainty for the Job Network, you have no certainty for those people on Work for the Dole—hence you find them wondering what it is that you actually stand for. This government is committed to the unemployed people of this country. Work for the Dole and mutual obligation are proving the success that we thought they would be and are, in fact, being well embraced by the wider community.2435815:44:0024358Ferguson, Martin, MPMr MARTIN FERGUSONLS4BatmanALP00—My question is to the Acting Prime Minister. Minister, isn't it true that your goal for rural transaction centres is to get 500 in place over five years with a budget of $70 million? Minister, can you confirm that two years after setting that goal you only have 19 rural transaction centres operating? Minister, isn't it also true that only $7.6 million of the $70 million allocated for the centres has been spent but that you have just allocated an extra $6 million to employ field officers to promote them? Minister, given that you are spending almost as much promoting the centres as you are delivering them, is it any surprise that your popularity in rural and regional Australia has sunk so low? 10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The minister will ignore the last part of that question.24359Anderson, John, MPMr ANDERSON4K4GwydirNPActing Prime Minister10—The government has, of course, a very large number of very worthwhile initiatives in rural and regional Australia which are being rolled out, making quite a difference. I do not normally bring newspapers in here and I would hate to offend the traditions of the place, but I would like to make the point that today's Queensland Country Life does make a point: to keep things in perspective rural Australia should recognise the `long list of good things the Nationals have achieved for the bush'. Of course, rural transaction centres are one of those. There are many others. I could go on—whether it has been the economic fundamentals of getting interest rates down. I remember five years ago when we were competing with you and the Leader of the Opposition had been part of a government that had really decimated rural and regional Australia—10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—I would remind members of their status in the House.PE4Beazley, Kim, MPMr Beazley—I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker, and it goes to relevance. He was asked specifically about this incredible performance on rural transaction centres—10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. The Acting Prime Minister, I had presumed, was making a statement about rural initiatives and I expect him to include rural transaction centres among them.4K4Mr ANDERSON—I certainly will, but I just wanted to touch briefly on the fact that the reforms that we have initiated in rural and regional Australia are enormously valuable. We have also delivered a whole range of new service opportunities, such as the Regional Solutions fund, for which there have been some 600 applications and a very large number of successful, high-quality programs already funded.In relation to the rural transaction centres, it is in fact the case that a limited number only of them have been rolled out. They have been, if you like, progressed reasonably well where communities have wanted them, but a number of things have happened. Perhaps the most significant, though, is that in many cases now the private sector, recognising the challenge, has stepped into the breach with a very significant number of worthwhile initiatives—often carried forward with state governments. That is a good thing. I think it has been largely driven by the fact that we put a good initiative on the table. But the roll-out that we have put on the ground and the opportunity for state governments, local government and the private sector to have been very active mean between them that in many cases—as I say, I think this is a good thing —there has not been quite the demand for rural transaction centres that we might have expected. Having said that, let me make it plain that, where we have put them in, they have been an absolute smash hit.2435915:48:0024359Cadman, Alan, MPMr CADMANSD4MitchellLP10—My question is addressed to the Treasurer. Would the Treasurer inform the House of increases in the government's help for pensioners?Opposition members interjecting—10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—Before I recognise the Treasurer, I remind members that a general warning has been issued.24359Costello, Peter, MPMr COSTELLOCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—I thank the House for the opportunity to state the facts in relation to pension increases. In March 2001, the indexation for pensioners would take into account the movement in the CPI for the September and December quarters—that is, whatever the movement in the September or December quarters under normal indexation arrangements, you would get no increase in your pension until March 2001. The government's decision when implementing the new taxation system was not to wait until March 2001 for an indexation in relation to the September and December quarters. We have said that we would, in advance of the March 2001 indexation, pay two per cent in advance—that is, nine months early. The original policy, incidentally, was to keep the pension after paying an advance of 1½ per cent in front of the CPI. It was only after negotiations and the changing of the package in the Senate that it was decided that the government would keep it at two per cent in real terms in advance of the CPI. There was never any confusion whatsoever on that point. If the government had just given a two per cent increase, it would have increased pensions by two per cent and waited until March 2001 to pick up the September and December quarters. The government said it would do it in advance. That is why it has not been done a second time: two per cent was paid in advance and has been held for nine months longer than pensioners would ever have got it—something that has never been done before. This was explained in the booklets that went out before the election as a 1½ per cent real increase. It was explained in the mail-out after the arrangement with the Senate. In fact, there was never any doubt about it, because the old member for Hotham himself—a person who will misrepresent if he is given the slightest chink of light—put out a document which said:When will the age pension go up and by how much? The age pension will go up on 1 July 2000 when the GST comes in. The pension rise on 1 July will be 4 per cent. But from March 2001, when the pension is automatically adjusted for inflation, half the initial—that is the two per cent in advance—4 per cent increase will be taken back. The real increase in the pension will therefore be 2 per cent.I table the member for Hotham's document. He is now trying to walk away from what even he understood at the time. The suggestion out there is that somehow pensioners have not had a real increase. They have had two per cent in advance of the CPI, and a real increase as well. It has never been done before in Australian history. There has never been an increase in advance of the CPI. And, in addition to that, this government said that we would even tie the increase by legislation to male total average weekly earnings if that were in advance but that the supplement would always be guaranteed to pensioners. If that had not been paid in advance, that $7.45 which would have been coming in March would not have been received back on 1 July; it has been paid since 1 July for nine months. So $7.45 has been paid nine months early. That was the two per cent increase in advance of the CPI factor in March 2001. These arrangements were fully explained. They are fully understood.DT4Crean, Simon, MPMr Crean—No, they weren't.CT4Mr COSTELLO—The member for Hotham says, `No, they weren't.' They were so fully explained even you understood them.10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The Treasurer will respond to the question.CT4Mr COSTELLO—Even you understood them—DT4Crean, Simon, MPMr Crean—They weren't understood. What about your ANTS package?CT4Mr COSTELLO—and in an otherwise totally misleading book even you were forced to put them into writing. They are arrangements which have fully compensated in advance and led to a real increase. I say this to the pensioners of Australia: if the Labor Party had had its way, if there had been no tax reform, pensions would have been two per cent less in real terms.Opposition members interjecting—CT4Mr COSTELLO—If Beazley had had his way, every pensioner in Australia would have been worse off. This is the government that increased pensions and paid indexation in advance.4K4Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson—Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.Personal Explanations2436015:54:0024360Mr BEAZLEY,MPMr BEAZLEYPE4BrandALPLeader of the Opposition00—Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation.Honourable members interjecting—10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—I remind members of a general warning that has been issued. Does the Leader of the Opposition claim to have been misrepresented?PE4Mr BEAZLEY,MPMr BEAZLEY—Yes.10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The Leader of the Opposition may proceed.PE4Mr BEAZLEY,MPMr BEAZLEY—In the course of an answer given by the Minister for Defence, he suggested that I had misled the Australian people in relation to the costings of the submarines at the last election. The Department of Finance cleared the costings of the Australian Labor Party at the last election—game, set and match.Honourable members interjecting—10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The Deputy Leader of the Opposition and the Leader of the House!4I4McLeay, Leo, MPMr Leo McLeay—On a point of order, Mr Speaker: earlier today you gave a general warning. The Minister for Foreign Affairs has now defied you for five minutes. Will you take action against him?10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The Chief Opposition Whip will resume his seat. The Chief Opposition Whip is absolutely right, and precisely the same situation applies to the Leader of the House: a general warning has been issued. Precisely the same situation, however, applies to a number of people on my left. There was a chorus of interchange across the parliament and the choice for me was to name a number of people or to assume that common decency would ultimately prevail. The Chief Opposition Whip would have a very valid point had in fact there been interruption, defiance of my ruling, from only one side of the House.4I4McLeay, Leo, MP10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—I am sorry to say the Chief Opposition Whip is now inviting me to treat him in the same way as he has challenged me to treat the Minister for Foreign Affairs.4I4McLeay, Leo, MPMr Leo McLeay—Mr Speaker, I do not want to challenge it—10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The Chief Opposition Whip has not as yet been recognised. I call the Chief Opposition Whip.4I4McLeay, Leo, MPMr Leo McLeay—Mr Speaker, you said that I was challenging you in the same way that the Minister for Foreign Affairs did. I sat here and said nothing. He prattled on for five minutes while you looked at him in a very disapproving manner. To suggest that I was doing the same is a reflection upon me and letting him get away with murder.10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The Chief Opposition Whip will resume his seat. The Chief Opposition Whip will know from a comment that I have made to him on previous occasions that it was in fact the comments he made that were not audible to Hansard that prompted my last remark. Chief Opposition Whip, the matter is closed.4I4McLeay, Leo, MPMr Leo McLeay—I said nothing.10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—Chief Opposition Whip, the matter is closed.15:59:0024361Mrs DE-ANNE KELLY, MPMrs DE-ANNE KELLYFK6DawsonNP10—Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation.10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—Does the member for Dawson claim to have been misrepresented?FK6Mrs DE-ANNE KELLY, MPMrs DE-ANNE KELLY—I do.10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The member for Dawson may proceed.FK6Mrs DE-ANNE KELLY, MPMrs DE-ANNE KELLY—I draw the attention of the House to an article in the Sydney Morning Herald of 17 February 2001 entitled `Fractured nation' by Mike Seccombe. In this article, I am quoted as saying that Mr Graeme Samuel, President of the National Competition Council, in the course of a meeting I had with him said in relation to dam construction, `Oh, dams should be funded by private enterprise.' During this conversation, there is no doubt that the consensus amongst Treasury and other bureaucrats that infrastructure such as dams should be funded by private enterprise was certainly discussed. However, the attribution of this specific comment to Mr Samuel may be incorrect. This serves as background to the matter I wish to raise.10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—The member for Dawson will come to the point where she has been misrepresented or I will oblige her to resume her seat. FK6Mrs DE-ANNE KELLY, MPMrs DE-ANNE KELLY—I am coming to that rapidly, Mr Speaker. Let me turn to a letter written by Mr Samuel to the Sydney Morning Herald on 19 February 2001. In this letter, Mr Samuel says:De-Anne Kelly MP claims to have had a conversation with me in relation to farm dams.He goes on to say:This conversation is a figment of her imagination and utter nonsense.I wish to assure the House and my colleagues that this is untrue. A meeting did take place in my office in Parliament House between Mr Samuel, me, a member of his staff and a member of my staff. We had the discussion; it certainly revolved around the impact of competition policy on rural Queensland, and it certainly raised the question of the public funding of infrastructure, particularly dams.Questions to the Speaker243622436216:01:0024362O'Keefe, Neil, MPMr O'KEEFECE4BurkeALP00—Mr Speaker, my question to you relates to the issue of reflections upon members in statements made by other members. As was reported earlier in question time today, the member for Page is said to have described the Deputy Prime Minister as `just another Liberal'. I am wondering whether a comment like that should be regarded as an offensive reflection.24362SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER10000PON/A10—The member for Burke will resume his seat.2436216:01:0024362Murphy, John, MPMr MURPHY83DLoweALP00—Mr Speaker, on 28 November, question No. 2179 concerning Commonwealth public funding for dental care appeared on the Notice Paper in my name addressed to the Minister for Health and Aged Care. As it is nearly three months since that question first appeared on the Notice Paper, I would be grateful if you would write to the minister to seek an early reply to that question.24362SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER10000PON/A10—I will follow up the matters as the standing orders provide.243621The ClerkThe Clerk—Petitions have been lodged for presentation as follows and copies will be referred to the appropriate ministers:24362102ET4LS4XS48I4IJ4Mr Bevis;Mr Martin Ferguson;Dr Lawrence;Dr Martin;Mr SnowdonTo the Honourable the President and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:The petition of the undersigned shows:(1) our strong support for our independent national public broadcaster, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation;(2) the sustained political and financial pressure that the Howard Government has placed on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), including:(a) the 1996 and 1997 Budget cuts which reduced funding to the ABC by $66 million per year; and(b) its failure to fund the ABC's transition to digital broadcasting;(3) our concern about recent decisions made by the ABC Board and senior management, including the Managing Director Jonathan Shier, which we believe may undermine the independence and high standards of the ABC including:(a) the cut to funding for News and Current Affairs;(b) the reduction of the ABC's in-house production capacity;(c) the closure of the ABC TV Science Unit;(d) the circumstances in which the decision was made not to renew the contract of Media Watch presenter Mr Paul Barry; and(e) consideration of the Bales Report, which recommended the extension of the ABC's commercial activities in ways that may be inconsistent with the ABC Act and the Charter;Your petitioners ask the House to:(1) protect the independence of the ABC;(2) ensure that the ABC receives adequate funding;(3) call upon the Government to rule out its support for the privatisation of any part of the ABC, particularly JJJ, ABC On-line and the ABC Shops; and(4) call upon the ABC Board and senior management to:(a) fully consult with the people of Australia about the future of our ABC; (b) address the crisis in confidence felt by both staff and the general community; and(c) not approve any commercial activities inconsistent with the ABC Act and Charter.6Mr BevisET4Mr Bevis (from 6 citizens),9Mr Martin FergusonLS4Mr Martin Ferguson (from 9 citizens),6Dr LawrenceXS4Dr Lawrence (from 6 citizens),28Dr Martin8I4Dr Martin (from 28 citizens) and53Mr SnowdonIJ4Mr Snowdon (from 53 citizens).243631283YMs HoareTo the Honourable the President and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:The petition of certain citizens of Australia draws the attention of the House to:(1) our strong support for our independent national public broadcaster, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation;(2) the sustained political and financial pressure that the Howard Government has placed on the ABC; and(3) our concern about recent decisions made by the ABC Board and senior management, which we believe may undermine believe may undermine the independence and high standards of the ABC including:Your petitioners therefore ask the House to:(1) protect the independence of the ABC;(2) ensure that the ABC receives adequate funding;(3) call upon the Government to rule out its support for the privatisation of any part of the ABC; and(4) call upon the ABC Board and senior management to:(a) fully consult with the people of Australia about the future of our ABC;(b) address the crisis in confidence felt by both staff and the general community; and(c) not approve any commercial activities inconsistent with the ABC Act and Charter.12Ms Hoare83YMs Hoare (from 12 citizens).24363879383S83YUU583E3J4IJ4Ms Burke;Ms Hoare;Mr Horne;Mr Ripoll;Mr Sawford;Mr SnowdonTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament.The petition of certain motorists of the state of Western Australia draws to the attention of the House the continuing increase in fuel prices caused by the indexation of fuel excise following the introduction of the new tax system on 1 July 2000.Your petitioners therefore ask the House to freeze excise on diesel and petrol at its current rate.45Ms Burke83SMs Burke (from 45 citizens),210Ms Hoare83YMs Hoare (from 210 citizens),7236Mr HorneUU5Mr Horne (from 7,236 citizens),1021Mr Ripoll83EMr Ripoll (from 1,021 citizens),188Mr Sawford3J4Mr Sawford (from 188 citizens) and93Mr SnowdonIJ4Mr Snowdon (from 93 citizens).243634619283P7V5Ms Julie Bishop;Mr WilliamsTo the Honourable the Speaker and the Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:The petition of certain citizens of Australia draws to the attention of the House the extremely high price of petrol and other fuels and the increase in the amount of tax on fuel due to:The Government's failure to keep its promise that the price of petrol and other fuels would not rise as a result of the new tax system, by reducing the excise by the full amount of the GST;The fuel indexation increases on 1 August 2000 and 1 February 2001, which will be significantly higher than usual because of the inflationary impact of the GST; andThe charging of the GST on the fuel excise, making it a tax-on-a-tax.Your petitioners therefore request the House to:Hold the Government to its promise that its policies would not increase the price of petrol and other fuel;Support a full Senate inquiry into the taxation and pricing of fuel;Consider the best way to return the fuel tax windfall to Australian motorists.1Ms Julie Bishop83PMs Julie Bishop (from 1 citizen) and4618Mr Williams7V5Mr Williams (from 4,618 citizens).2436428HH4Mr JenkinsTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled:Whereas the 1998 Synod of the Anglican Diocese of Melbourne carried without dissent the following Motion:That this Synod regrets the Government's adoption of procedures for certain people seeking political asylum in Australia which exclude them from all public income support while withholding permission to work, thereby creating a group of beggars dependent on the Churches and charities for food and the necessities of life;and calls upon the Federal government to review such procedures immediately and remove all practices which are manifestly inhumane and in some cases in contravention of our national obligations as a signatory of the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.We, therefore, the individual, undersigned Members of All Saints' Anglican Church, Greensborough, Victoria 3188, petition the House of Representatives in support of the abovementioned Motion.And we, as in duty bound, will ever pray.28Mr JenkinsHH4Mr Jenkins (from 28 citizens).2436433QK6Mr SercombeTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled:Whereas the 1998 Synod of the Anglican Diocese of Melbourne carried without dissent the following Motion:That this Synod regrets the Government's adoption of procedures for certain people seeking political asylum in Australia which exclude them from all public income support while withholding permission to work, thereby creating a group of beggars dependent on the Churches and charities for food and the necessities of life;and calls upon the Federal government to review such procedures immediately and remove all practices which are manifestly inhumane and in some cases in contravention of our national obligations as a signatory of the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.We, therefore, the individual, undersigned Members of Christ Church Anglican Church, Keilor, Victoria 3036 and St Luke's Anglican Church, Sydenham, Victoria 3037, petition the House of Representatives in support of the abovementioned Motion.And we, as in duty bound, will ever pray.33Mr SercombeQK6Mr Sercombe (from 33 citizens).2436475383PMs Julie BishopTo the Honourable the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:The petition of certain residents of the State of Western Australia draws to the attention of the House.Osteoporosis is a debilitating disease resulting in fracture with consequent disability, pain and, in some cases, death.Your Petitioners therefore:Support the widespread availability of pharmaceutical agents on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme to be used before the fracture occurs.75Ms Julie Bishop83PMs Julie Bishop (from 75 citizens).243642094K6Mr CausleyTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament.The petition of certain electors of the Division of Page draws to the attention of the House the increasing price of fuel.Your petitioners therefore pray that the House regulate the price of petrol such that no matter where, each consumer pays the same price be that rural or metropolitan.209Mr Causley4K6Mr Causley (from 209 citizens).2436410215009CWMs CorcoranTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:This petition of certain residents of the State of Victoria draws to the attention of the House the increasing concerns about the quality of care for residents of nursing homes and hostels. Your petitioners believe that all residents in Aged Care Facilities deserve only excellence in care, and are concerned that current staffing levels seriously compromise the delivery of such care.Your petitioners therefore ask the House to, as a matter of extreme urgency, immediately review staff/resident ratios in Aged Care Facilities.10215Ms Corcoran009CWMs Corcoran (from 10,215 citizens).2436433NV5Mr ForrestThe undersigned, being residents of the town of Culgoa, in the State of Victoria, and all being electors residing in the Federal Electorate of Mallee, humbly petition members of the House of Representatives with our request based on our complaint that:Australian Broadcasting Corporation's television transmissions are not satisfactory, because of poor quality reception. Expert technical advice has been provided to your petitioners that reception quality is low because of signal strength in this reception area being weak.Request: Your petitioners request that every possible step be taken to rectify the poor reception until reception is of a quality not less than that provided by the commercial transmissions available in this locality. 33Mr ForrestNV5Mr Forrest (from 33 citizens).243652683NMs HallTo the Honourable Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament.We the undersigned request that the government reopen Belmont Medicare Office as there is no Medicare office between Charlestown and Lake Haven and there has been a drastic decline in the numbers of general practitioners bulkbilling.The closure of Belmont Medicare Office has caused great hardship to many local residents particularly the elderly and those with young children.Your petitioners request that the House of Representatives do everything in their power to ensure that Belmont Medicare Office is reopened as a matter of urgency.26Ms Hall83NMs Hall (from 26 citizens).243653183YMs HoareTo the Honourable the Speaker and the Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:The petition of the undersigned shows:our deep concern at the Australian Government's decision not to ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) which provides a significant opportunity for women who have suffered from discrimination to seek justice through the United Nations;our disagreement that improvement and reform of the Human Rights Treaty System is best achieved by Australia restricting its participation in the system.Your petitioners therefore ask the House to call upon the Australian Government to:review its decision not to ratify the Optional Protocol to CEDAW:seek improvement and reform of the United Nations Human Rights Treaty System without restricting Australia's participation in it. 31Ms Hoare83YMs Hoare (from 31 citizens).243655BT4Dr KempTo the Honourable the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:The petition of certain citizens of Australia draws to the attention of the House the risk of fire blight contamination from New Zealand apples. It is the foot and mouth disease of horticulture.Your petitioners therefore pray that the House stop their goods being imported. We have never been short of apples in Australia. New Zealand does not even have a pear industry. The director of our world famous botanical gardens in Melbourne has warned of the dangers to gardens in general. We are known as the Garden State.5Dr KempBT4Dr Kemp (from 5 citizens).2436561XS4Dr LawrenceTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:This petition of certain citizens of Australia draws to the attention of the House that the people of East Timor have overwhelmingly voted to become an independent and sovereign nation and the Indonesian Government has failed to fulfil its responsibility to maintain security in East Timor during the period of transmission to independence.We therefore petition the House to require the Government and all responsible Ministers to:(a) Withdraw Australia's de jure recognition of Indonesia's annexation of East Timor;(b) Sever Australia's remaining military ties with Indonesia;(c) Support calls for international institutions including the IMF and the World Bank to suspend all assistance to Indonesia;(d) Call upon Australia's regional neighbours to bring all possible pressure to bear on Indonesia at a bilateral and regional level including through the APEC forum; and(e) To act urgently to establish a peacekeeping force to end the military created anarchy that exists in East Timor and to protect the security of all citizens of East Timor.61Dr LawrenceXS4Dr Lawrence (from 61 citizens).243651906JK6Mr McClellandTo the Honourable Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:The petition of certain residents of Barton is to register our concern that residents in nursing homes are receiving insufficient care and protection, and that there is not enough staff to ensure their physical, medical and emotional wellbeing. We draw to the attention of the House that despite 4,000 complaints about aged care facilities in the last two years not one surprise inspection was conducted. Your petitioners therefore call on the House to:Amend the Aged Care Act to provide better protection for residents in aged care facilities;Ensure that surprise inspections are carried out on all residential aged care facilities;Provide the Aged Care Standards and Accreditation Agency with adequate resources so it can accredit and review nursing homes, conduct surprise inspections and investigate serious risks to residents;Ensure that the complaints system deals with complaints promptly and effectively and that serious matters are immediately referred to the Agency for investigation, andRequire that aged care facilities employ the numbers of staff needed to provide proper care.1906Mr McClellandJK6Mr McClelland (from 1,906 citizens).24366164T4Mr MelhamTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:This petition of certain citizens of Australia draws the attention of the House to the fact that whereas there have been many recent demonstrated irregularities in the conduct of elections by the Australian Electoral Commission including:An Australian Electoral Commission 1988 audit of the 1987 federal election results in 6 non-marginal seats, found an average loss of 445 votes due to irregularities, which, if allowed, could affect results in marginal seats;an electoral roll house check by Jim Lloyd MP for Robertson before the 1998 election identified some 4,000 objectionable names of people on the roll. The Australian Electoral Commission, at first dismissive, removed them;415 absentee votes were declared informal, because absentee voters were misdirected to vote for the wrong seat in the 1993 election for the federal seat of Macquarie, which its sitting member lost by 164 votes.votes for the House of Representatives were 53,000 less than for the Senate in the 1993 federal election, when usually they are more, due to simplicity of the ballot paper. Votes may have been misdirected, mislaid or ruled informal;an Enterprise Council audit of multiple different surnames enrolled at a single street address on the electoral roll for the 1993 Dickson by-election found 813 had more than 5 listed there. Many had moved. 49 were on vacant caravan lots;Your petitioners therefore pray that the House amends the current Ombudsman Act 1976 (Commonwealth) to provide for the appointment of an ombudsman with special powers under separate legislation to investigate Parliamentary elections and referenda, includingcomplaints made by any elector about the conduct of elections and referendairregularities in the preparation of the electoral roll, polling and counting and to charge such an ombudsman with a positive obligation to investigate and recommend appropriate action to the Parliament.amends the current Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918to empower courts of disputed returns to challenge the electoral rollto extend the time for disputing an election before courts of disputed returns.16Mr Melham4T4Mr Melham (from 16 citizens).2436617674T4Mr MelhamTo the Honourable Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:The petition of certain electors of Australia draws the attention of the House to the Federal Government's decision via the Department of Defence that their Army Operational Distribution Service cease to exist as at 31/10/2000 replaced by a contractor charging commercial rates. Refer Department of Defence File Reference. BM197/00 dated 27/10/00. More importantly is Garden Island's decision to significantly, if not completely, reduce free transport to East Timor.Due to the well-documented and proven duplicity of Australian governments in the past, East Timor must rely sadly on donations and aid from the people of Australia.There is no way organisations like A.E.T.A. and A.F.A.P. can afford to transport protein food etc to East Timor.The Catholic Education Office NSW and the State Education Office NSW have enthusiastically agreed to allow us to collect food, etc for East Timor. The above decision then has effectively stopped donations of tonnes of food and essential supplies to the needy. In fact many tonnes of supplies are lying in warehouses and homes in Sydney unable to be moved. Your petitioners condemn the Government's cold-shouldering, callous, penny-pinching attitude to our wartime allies and request a complete reversal in the case of East Timor of charging for transport of donated goods to East Timor.1767Mr Melham4T4Mr Melham (from 1,767 citizens).2436711083DMr MurphyTo the House of Representatives and the Federal Members of Parliament there assembled:We the undersigned Citizens of Australia petition the Members of the House of Representatives of the Federal Parliament to implement reconciliation with the Aboriginal peoples of Australia and social justice for all Australians in 2000—the year of jubilee and reconciliation.We note that:Mandatory Sentencing is denying many Australians, especially aboriginal peoples and children in the Northern Territory and Western Australia, basic Human Rights to a fair trial in their own languagesAboriginal People do not have adequate legal and linguistic representation at trials and often do not receive a fair trialAboriginal people are disproportionately represented in Australia's jailsThe Land Rights of Aboriginal Australians, enjoyed since time began, have yet to be recognised in a TreatyWe call on the Australian Government to honour international treaties and obligations and to take action to repeal Mandatory Sentencing in the N.T. and Western Australia.110Mr Murphy83DMr Murphy (from 110 citizens).243672584SMs O'ByrneTo the Honourable Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:The petition of the undersigned residents of Tasmania draws to the attention of the House the current attacks to the programming and independence of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.Your petitioners request that the House act immediately to protect the programming and independence of the ABC.25Ms O'Byrne84SMs O'Byrne (from 25 citizens).2436720796J4Mr SciaccaTo the Honourable the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:This petition of certain citizens of Australia draws to the attention of the House that current legislation is insufficient to protect the health of the people of Australia from the dangers of microwave radiation emitting from mobile phone telecommunication towers.Your petitioners therefore request that the House amend current legislation to:(a) Safeguard the people of Australia against health threatening electromagnetic non-ionising radiation emitting from mobile phone telecommunication towers and installations, by restricting the siting of these facilities to zones of no less than 800m from residential areas.(b) Stop the location siting of mobile phone telecommunication towers and installations, including company-location and multiple siting areas close to residential areas (i.e. homes, schools, hospitals, aged care centres and other such facilities), until major research identifies conclusively a safe distance for each tower or installation to be located;Implement immediately a major medical and technological research program, by recognised and independent organisations, into the potential adverse health effects of this radiation.2079Mr Sciacca6J4Mr Sciacca (from 2,079 citizens).24367986J4Mr SciaccaTo the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:This petition of residents and visitors in North Stradbroke Island draws to the attention of the House that communications via mobile phone and two way radio in the area are tenuous, and life saving messages are at risk because of poor transmission and reception.Emergency Services such as Ambulance, Fire, Marine Rescue depend on Mobile Telecommunications and many residents and most visitors rely on their mobiles for linkage.Your petitioners therefore request the House to call on the minister to rectify this deficiency immediately.98Mr Sciacca6J4Mr Sciacca (from 98 citizens).2436714UK6Mr Kelvin ThomsonTo the Honourable the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:The petition of certain citizens of Australia draws to the attention of the House, their support for the Private Members Bill `Corporate Code of Conduct Bill 2000', introduced to the Senate by Senator Bourne in September, 2000. The Bill is currently subject to a Parliamentary Joint Statutory Committee on Corporations and Securities Inquiry. The issues being addressed in this Bill are also currently being addressed by the European Parliament, the United States Congress and the OECD. An Act such as this sends a signal to the global market that dealing with Australian companies means they are dealing with reputable companies that are concerned about human rights and environmental sustainability and can be relied upon to act in the interests of all stakeholders. This is essential for the long term health of Australian business interests.Your petitioners therefore request the House support the passage of this Bill through Parliament.14Mr Kelvin ThomsonUK6Mr Kelvin Thomson (from 14 citizens).24368110SU5Mr VaileTo the Honourable Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:This petition of the undersigned residents on the electoral roll in Australia (1) Deplores the proposed funding cuts to the ABC and the consequent major cuts to staffing and programmes.(2) Commends to the Parliament the Coalition's national and community broadcasting policy which states: `The ABC must be an independent, truly national, publicly funded broadcaster devoted to excellence and objectivity and offering a clear alternative to the commercial broadcasting sector. The ABC should reflect the broad spectrum of interests, values and views in the Australian community.'(3) Reminds Parliament that the policy includes the following unqualified promises:The Coalition will maintain existing levels of Commonwealth funding to the ABC and retain triennial funding.The Coalition will maintain the current prohibition on advertising and sponsorship on ABC television and radio.The Coalition will `Cease the politicisation of the ABC Board' and `will ensure that future appointees to the ABC Board not only possess the broadcasting, management, and financial skills needed to guide Australia's pre-eminent broadcaster into the next century but also reflect a broad cross section of the Australian community'.The Coalition will insist upon strict managerial and financial separation of the ABC's Charter broadcasting activities from its commercial ventures.The Coalition `will encourage and support the ongoing expansion of ABC radio, including the extension of the highly successful Triple J network into regional Australia'.The Coalition will `maintain current levels of financial support for the orchestras'.(4) Reminds Parliament that the Prime Minister made an unqualified commitment to keep his promises.(5) Calls upon Parliament:(i) to oppose any weakening of the comprehensive Charter of the ABC, and(ii) to honour these unqualified commitments which we, the undersigned, regard as core promises to the Australian people.110Mr VaileSU5Mr Vaile (from 110 citizens).Petitions received.Private Members' Business243682436816:06:0024368Emerson, Craig, MPMr EMERSON83VRankinALP00—I move:That this House:(1) expresses its alarm at large-scale tax avoidance by unscrupulous company executives;(2) expresses its disappointment that the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) has issued a series of favourable private binding rulings in support of schemes that the ATO itself has likened to the infamous bottom of the harbour schemes;(3) condemns the Treasurer for refusing to legislate against the abuse of executive share schemes and for obfuscating on promised legislation to crack down on tax avoidance through the use of family trusts; and(4) calls on the Government to act against tax avoidance schemes wherever they emerge, using both legislative and judicial means.Tax avoidance has flourished in Australia under the stewardship of the present Treasurer. The Treasurer has paid lip-service to cracking down on tax cheats but when it comes to action the Treasurer is conspicuously absent. The Treasurer's trick is to boost the bottom line of the budget forecasts by announcing anti-avoidance measures, by talking tough, only to accommodate the pressures these tax cheats inevitably put on the Liberal Party. For this Treasurer, the integrity of the tax system takes a back seat to his leadership aspirations, and he knows he cannot be leader without the backing within the Liberal Party of those corporate high-flyers at the big end of town who rely on the government to maintain their tax rorts. In announcing a cut in the company tax rate the Treasurer told this parliament he would implement a set of so-called integrity measures, on time and in full. But he has squibbed those reforms to the point where the income tax system lacks all integrity. Let us take a look at what has happened to the integrity measures the Treasurer announced. The Treasurer watered down his commitments on the alienation of personal services income. The Treasurer watered down his commitments on non-commercial losses.Another measure was announced in the ANTS package that appeared to be aimed directly at the notorious tax cheats who claim to have no money but still enjoy a conspicuous lifestyle of luxury and opulence, generally through benefits provided by trusts or companies with which they are associated. Page 50 of the ANTS document promises that the government will be:... extending FBT to benefits in excess of $1,000 a year provided by companies to their shareholders or by trustees to trust beneficiaries, where the benefits are currently not taxed.Of course, the Treasurer has slid away from this commitment as well. There is some measure of this concept taken up in the entities bill, but we all know that he will be squibbing on that legislation in due course. It is difficult to escape the conclusion that the Treasurer is a friend of the tax cheats when five times in five years he has announced a crackdown on trusts but has failed to do anything about it. First, he backed down on taxing widely held trusts as companies. Then he backed down on taxing fixed trusts as companies. And now he is backing down on taxing discretionary trusts as companies.Despite the Australian Taxation Office indicating in its latest annual report that the entity taxation reforms are needed to `address major weaknesses in the current tax system', the Treasurer has all but abandoned them. And why wouldn't he? A large number of his frontbench colleagues hold discretionary trusts, family trusts. The National Party said that they would kill this in cabinet, and the Treasurer said, `No, they won't; I'll prevail over them.' He has not prevailed over them, because a large number of his frontbench and a significant number of his backbench hold family trusts and he is sliding away on his commitment to crack down on the abuse of family trusts.Let us be reminded that the Taxation Office said in its annual report—and I will repeat it—that such reforms are needed to `address major weaknesses in the current tax system'. So the Treasurer is going to preside over major weaknesses in the tax system because, contrary to what the tax office said in its annual report when it confidently felt that the Treasurer was going to do something about it, he is sliding away from it. He made that promise more than a year ago, but no legislation has been introduced into the parliament.In fact, he made another promise, and that is that he promised as one of his integrity measures to toughen the general anti-avoidance rule. This is a rule that is supposed to be used to crack down on blatant contrived tax rorts. But the rule has not been effective in recent years in doing that, as recognised by the Treasurer in statements that he has made and in a press release that he made towards the end of 1999. He said, `We'll toughen the general anti-avoidance rule.' That was more than a year ago and no legislation has been introduced into this parliament to deal with that problem. Obviously, he is under pressure from his backers at the big end of town.It is difficult to escape the conclusion that the Treasurer is a friend of the tax cheats when he continues to refuse to legislate against the abuse of employee share plans by company executives. It is difficult to escape the conclusion that the Treasurer is a friend of the tax cheats when as shadow Treasurer he blocked Labor's attempt to legislate against these rorts, when he boasted he was opposing Labor's anti-avoidance legislation `root and branch', when he boasted on the third occasion when Labor sought to legislate against the abuse of employee share schemes by company executives: Wrong the first time, wrong the second time, wrong the third time. Three strikes and you are out.That was the shadow Treasurer boasting about how he defeated Labor's anti-avoidance legislation when it comes to rorts by company executives. The Treasurer has had before him since September of last year a recommendation of a government dominated parliamentary committee that company executives be allowed to defer tax on their shares indefinitely. His colleagues the Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business and the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts are pretty excited about the prospect of company executives being able to defer tax indefinitely on their share options. They told the Australian Venture Capital Association on 15 February that they will be taking the fight up to Treasury in what would effectively be the legalisation of the present tax avoidance activities.So we have got two senior ministers plus a government dominated parliamentary committee saying, `Look, it's not enough that we have in the law at present provisions which allow company executives to defer tax for up to 10 years on their share schemes.' `That is not generous enough,' they are saying, `what we really need is to be able to defer tax indefinitely.' So the government dominated committee says, `Let's do that. We'll put the recommendation to the Treasurer.' The Minister for Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business says, `That's a great idea.' The Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts says, `That's a great idea.' The corporate executives at the big end of town are celebrating, because they see that they are going to have the opportunity to be able to defer their tax indefinitely. Why pay tax at all if you are at the big end of town and you have got a Liberal government in power?No wonder the tax office has not got much stomach for taking tax cheats to court when the Treasurer has boasted about how he personally defeated Labor's anti-avoidance legislation. These executive scams have been condemned by the tax office as blatant rorts. According to the Second Commissioner of Taxation:Some of the arrangements that have emerged over recent years smack very much of the ingredients that were tax avoidance paper scheme rorts of the 1970s and early 1980s.Yet the Treasurer refuses to legislate against them, claiming that they will be dealt with by application of the general anti--avoidance rule, which the government itself has said is not good enough. There needs to be a toughening of that anti-avoidance rule, but they will not bring it into the parliament. Not one case has gone to court. Not one. And I understand my colleague the member for Lalor will be talking about the conspicuous absence of litigation in dealing with these contrived paper rorts.And today's Sydney Morning Herald exposes large-scale tax avoidance by some of Sydney's highest profile barristers. It reports the tax office as claiming that nearly one-quarter of the state's barristers—about 500 of them—owe the tax office money, with a total debt of $50 million. The favourite technique of these tax cheats appears to be to bankrupt themselves and transfer their assets to their wives rather than pay their taxes. What is the Treasurer doing about these scams? We already know that he has abandoned his own pre-election proposal to impose fringe benefits tax on the usage of these assets. He has let the cheats off again.While tax cheats from the big end of town parade around as pillars of society and go off to church, the Treasurer trains his guns on the little people. He burdens them with the GST compliance nightmare and a business activity statement that he boasted in this parliament was a cinch to complete. He ridiculed Labor's suggestions for simplifying the business activity statement—before adopting them! And what about the Treasurer's Perth declaration of 18 May last year when he said:I don't think anybody will go to the wall as a consequence of the GST ... I don't think there will be businesses that founder because of the GST. With his trademark smirk, the Treasurer refuses to accept that any businesses will go to the wall as a result of the GST. Thousands of businesses around Australia are closing because of the GST. Yet, while the Treasurer inflicts heartache on the small end of town, he appeases the big end of town by allowing their rorts to continue.The tax office has estimated that one wealthy Australian alone has concealed more than $1 billion in income tax over the last five years, paying only $12 million in tax. We ought to have a debate here about whether we should be naming these people, these high-flyers, who are avoiding their fair share of tax—going to church and to all the functions; high pillars of society—and cheating the tax system while the small people, the pensioners who are going to get their pensions discounted, and small business get hit. The small end of town suffers while the big end of town prospers through the condoning of tax avoidance by the Treasurer of this country. It is a complete and utter disgrace. There is plenty of evidence around that tax avoidance in this country must be costing taxpayers of the order of $10 billion a year. Where is the shortfall being funded from? Out of the GST that is hitting ordinary Australians. (Time expired)10000Jenkins, Harry (Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER)Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Jenkins)—Is the motion seconded?83LGillard, Julia, MPMs Gillard—I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.16:16:0024371Barresi, Phillip, MPMr BARRESIZJ6DeakinLP10—It is a pleasure to speak on this motion. One cannot help thinking that the member for Rankin's motivation in bringing this motion forward is purely self-interest, this is obviously one of many we will have in the lead-up to the next election. The member for Rankin must be saying, `I have to get myself noticed by the frontbench. I have been pushing this barrow on tax avoidance for a number of months now since the report by the parliamentary committee came down and I must keep it going. Hopefully this is one way that I will get noticed among the backbench of the ALP.' This is a self-serving motion. It has been dealt with in question times and in the presentation of the report by the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Workplace Relations.Obviously the member for Emerson subscribes to the practice so prevalent in the Australian Labor Party that if you repeat an untruth often enough it will be believed. Throughout his talk this afternoon he constantly repeated untruths about the Treasurer and his relationship with what the member for Emerson terms `tax cheats'. He also talked about the integrity of the tax system being watered down when in fact there have been a number of measures introduced to enhance the integrity of the tax system, which I will go through very shortly.One thing the member for Emerson did avoid in his presentation was the fact that the ACTU itself supports the indefinite tax deferral of shares until disposal. That was in a report commissioned by the ACTU at the time when the member for Batman was president of the ACTU. So his own union affiliated organisation supports the very measure which he says is abhorrent to him. He also does not believe that talented people, particularly those in high-tech industries, should be retained in Australia. Of course we know, from the various research that has been done, that we are losing a lot of very talented Australians to overseas competitors because of our inability to offer legitimate share ownership plans.As a member of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Employment, Education and Workplace Relations, I participated in the inquiry into employee share ownership and it is clear that 95 per cent of the Australian work force in businesses with fewer than 20 employees have little or no opportunity to take part in the shared ownership of their employer's business. Employee share ownership should continue to be encouraged. I am pleased to hear that Minister Abbott and his cabinet colleagues are reviewing the committee's recommendations. We await their announcement with anticipation. Very few in our community would disagree with the notion that having an ownership stake provides an incentive to take interest in the performance of the business and its fortunes. These employees, as shareholders, as part owners, are likely to experience a greater level of emotional and financial reward. As to the member for Rankin's specific points regarding tax avoidance by company executives and the ATO's private binding rulings in support of scams, let me address some of these points. The government has recently introduced legislation to address aggressive tax planning, and that should be acknowledged by the member for Rankin. Despite the Commissioner of Taxation's view that the scams are ineffective under existing laws, these arrangements are still being promoted. As a result, the government has acted. The government is acting to remove deductibility for contributions to non-complying super funds, including offshore super arrangements. Why? Because these funds are not used for retirement income purposes and are not subject to prudential regulation. The government is also clarifying the law. For the purposes of deducting superannuation contributions, an employer and an employee cannot be the same person. These measures are enhancing the integrity of the tax system.The bill implementing these provisions is currently in the parliament. These provisions will remove any doubt about the application of the law. In regard to private rulings it would be worth noting that the ALP is criticising a mechanism under which taxpayers can get advice from the ATO which it itself introduced in 1992. Part 3 of the member for Rankin's motion condemns the Treasurer for refusing to legislate against the abuse of executive share schemes and for obfuscating on promised legislation about tax avoidance through family trusts. Let us have a look at this.It is amusing that the opposition accuse the government of this when, in the 13 years that they were in office, they did not seek to pass legislation relating to the way trusts are taxed. They did not even seek to pass legislation and yet here they are condemning us. Since the government established the review of business tax, it continued the highly consultative process of business tax reform begun by Mr John Ralph. Part of the approach is the publishing of exposure draft legislation. Interested peak bodies, businesses and members of the community can make submissions to the government on these proposals which are in the legislation. This is what has happened with the entity taxation proposals. In October last year, the Treasurer released exposure draft legislation on the entity taxation proposals. The government also called for submissions. Those submissions and the suggestions that they contained are currently being considered. The member for Emerson is saying that we are doing nothing but, in fact, there are measures being undertaken and we are consulting. Of course, part of the meaning of that word `consultation' is listening—listening to what the community is saying. The community is not just simply a vested interest behind the Australian Labor Party.I would also like to note that the government has recently released exposure drafts of other legislation for public comment, including the simplified tax system and the new capital allowances regime. The legislation for the simplified tax system was introduced into the parliament last December after a number of changes were incorporated. Once again, we have acted on bringing greater integrity to the tax system. Point 4 calls on the government to act against tax avoidance schemes wherever they emerge, using both legislative and judicial means. Following the Review of Business Taxation, the government legislated significant business tax reforms. Together these will provide Australia with an internationally competitive taxation system and one that also has greater integrity. The government has cut company tax from 36 per cent to 34 per cent for this income year.83VEmerson, Craig, MPMr Emerson—That is not an integrity measure.ZJ6Barresi, Phillip, MPMr BARRESI—You will have to listen, Member for Rankin. From 1 July 2001, it will fall to an internationally competitive 30 per cent. The capital gains tax rate for individuals has been cut in half and imputation credits are refundable to lower income Australians, such as self-funded retirees, providing real incentive. The government has also legislated particular CGT breaks for investment in small businesses, farms and venture capital. This will promote investment and jobs growth. The government's business tax package also contained a number of other key integrity measures. These include a measure which limits the extent to which non-commercial losses can be written off against wage and salary income from 1 July 2000 and the restriction of individuals to reduce tax through the alienation of personal services income. The measure that the member for Emerson seems to object to in the alienation of personal services is the fact that we are protecting the small businesses. 10000Jenkins, Harry (Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER)Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Jenkins)—Order! The honourable member for Deakin will resume his seat. The honourable member for Rankin has a point of order, which I think I might be able to pre-empt. Throughout the course of his speech, the honourable member for Deakin has been referring to the honourable member for Emerson. He should refer to honourable members by their correct titles. I call on the honourable member for Deakin.ZJ6Barresi, Phillip, MPMr BARRESI—There will probably never be an electorate called Emerson. Another key integrity measure is the limited use of tax shelter arrangements from 11 November 1999. Other measures recommended by the Review of Business Taxation and now legislated include those dealing with loss duplication and the creation of artificial losses. These measures are inclusive of previous legislation that the government has passed since it came to office.What we need to do is look at the entire package of measures that the government has introduced since it came to office. The way the member for Rankin seems to present the case is in terms of small parcels of legislation. Put all the measures together and we are increasing integrity measures. We have the closing down of the infrastructure borrowing scheme—do you remember that one, Member for Rankin?—and the cracking down on the abuse of research and development syndication, which is the `deals in the back of the Roller' example that we have heard about and which was certainly attributed to some members on the other side. Of course, the Australian business number and the new withholding arrangements also give Australia's tax system greater integrity.The government has made the tax system fairer by delivering the largest income tax cuts in Australia's history and by increasing pensions, allowances and family assistance, particularly to one-income families. These are measures which are creating incentive for individuals to be part of a legitimate tax system and also to crack down on avoidance measures. From 1 July 2001, we will also see other measures being introduced as part of the new tax system.It is no understatement to suggest that the issues surrounding employee share ownership and our committee's recommendations are rather complex. In examining these, the coalition is committed to making work more financially rewarding for everyone. (Time expired)16:26:0024373Gillard, Julia, MPMs GILLARD83LLalorALP00—It is with pleasure that I second this motion moved by the member for Rankin—as desirable as it may be to have an electorate named Emerson. This was, of course, moved by the member for Rankin. It is a motion that actually deals with the tax avoidance crisis that this government is facing and is absolutely in denial about. I listened with interest to the contribution of the member for Deakin. Obviously, the watchword now on the back bench of the government is `listening'. They have all suddenly discovered that they are supposed to be out there listening. The problem with this issue is that the people whom they are listening to are at the top end of town. Where there is something that might affect the top end of town, like the family trust proposals, they dance around, consult, get out an exposure draft and cannot take too much care to make sure that they accommodate those interests. But when it comes to the other end of town, when it comes to imposing a GST on people, when it comes to imposing a business activity statement on businesses that almost drives them broke, when it comes to imposing a complicated instalment activity statement on people, there is not much listening until you actually get dragged, kicking and screaming, into a backflip or a forward flip or whatever the Treasurer is calling it today. They are listening to the big end of town. You do not want to offend them on tax avoidance questions, do you? I would like to say to the members opposite, particularly to the member for Deakin, with regard to the merriment that erupted when the member for Rankin suggested that businesses had closed as a result of the business activity statement: if he is unaware in his electorate of businesses that have closed due to the business activity statement, he is not looking hard enough, because there are hairdressing shops and food shops all around this country that have closed because of the business activity statement. 10000Jenkins, Harry (Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER)Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Jenkins)—The honourable member will resume her seat. The honourable member for Deakin on a point of order.ZJ6Barresi, Phillip, MPMr Barresi—Mr Speaker, we are debating a motion on tax avoidance and not the business activity statement.10000Jenkins, Harry (Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER)Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER—The honourable member will resume his seat. The honourable member for Lalor will continue.83LGillard, Julia, MPMs GILLARD—I will continue directly on the motion. Whenever we have raised the issue of tax avoidance using employee share schemes in this House—and we have raised it in question time and said to the Treasurer, question time after question time, `What are you going to do about this huge revenue problem?'—what do we get from the government? We get the smirk and the snarl—I understand that they are trying to train him out of it but they have not quite succeeded—and we are told in patronising tones that we do not understand the nature of the Westminster system, that there is a law that prohibits these schemes, the part IVA anti-avoidance provision, and that the tax commissioner says that all of this is before the courts; and that it is going to be fixed up in the courts.Quote after quote we have the Treasurer in Hansard—in fact, the Hansard is littered with them—saying that all of these problems will be fixed in the courts. I have a problem with that, because if that is actually true then you would think that this Treasurer, who would be desperate to have a success, I would have thought, against the litany of failures he has chalked up lately, would be dancing into this House in question time, responding to dorothy dixers from government backbenchers and telling us all about these very successful court cases. If they are there, I would have thought that that is what the Treasurer would be doing. But when you actually ask him about these successful court cases, when you try to get him away from the general flourishes, `We are going to fix this all in court,' and ask, `What are the details of these court cases?' you get, very surprisingly from this Treasurer, deafening silence as a reply. For example, the shadow Treasurer asked him about this issue on 6 September:... could you tell the House the number of employee benefit tax avoidance court cases on employee benefit arrangements that were instituted and determined in 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999 and this year, 2000?With his great faith in court cases you would have thought that the Treasurer would either know those figures or would be desperately sending a runner from the advisers box to get them. But no, he says that he does not have the figures and does not produce them. He is then asked the same question on notice and comes back with the endearing:The ATO is taking the necessary action against abusive employee benefit arrangements. This action is ongoing.He does not tell us whether a court case has succeeded; does not tell us whether any revenue has actually been produced out of these court cases that he is vaunting all the time. Then, his Assistant Treasurer, in an answer to a question from Senator Cook in the other place, basically says the same thing: If any announcements are to be made, the honourable Senator will be aware of them when they are made.The ATO is taking the necessary action against abusive employee benefit arrangements. This action is ongoing.Frankly, that sort of bureaucratic speak, those sorts of attempts to obscure what is going on, is not good enough. We know that, two years ago, there was $1.5 billion in these schemes. Tax is due on them and tax should be paid. (Time expired)16:32:0024375Bartlett, Kerry, MPMr BARTLETT0K6MacquarieLP10—No-one here would support aggressive systematic tax avoidance by the wealthy, be they company executives or anyone else—especially when the vast bulk of employees subject to PAYE tax, and on much lower incomes than many executives, have no access to tax avoidance measures. Yet, typically, the opposition takes a premise on which we would all agree and then totally distorts it in an attempt to try to score some cheap political points. The fact is that this government has acted and is acting to address aggressive tax planning, including in many areas ignored by Labor when they were in government—ignored over their 13 years. In short, this is just another transparent stunt from these two members of the opposition.Hypocrisy abounds in this motion. In point 2 they talk about the problems with private binding rulings and, yes, there have been problems with private binding rulings and, in the past, some of those have been doubtful indeed. But the point the members opposite do not acknowledge is that the system of private binding rulings was introduced under the Labor government in 1992 and they did nothing in subsequent years to try to address the avoidance that occurred under that system. We have seen hypocrisy as well in their comments about the deferral of tax on employee share ownership until sale, yet this is a policy, as the member for Deakin has already said, still currently held by the ACTU. Again, this is hypocrisy from members on the other side who want to make a point that has no substance in fact.On the more general issue of tax avoidance, Labor members have a hide even in presenting this motion to this House. They accuse the Treasurer of obfuscating on legislation regarding family trusts, yet for 13 years of Labor government they did nothing. They did not a thing to address tax avoidance through family trusts. What Labor say in opposition and what they do in government are two totally different things. For 13 years they did not address it; now they somehow pretend that they would address it. Labor in government is a totally different animal from Labor in opposition. As we know, they turned a blind eye to the systematic rorting of R&D grants by the use of syndication as a tool for tax avoidance. They did nothing about it, subverting the real intention of those systems.This government is addressing tax avoidance and tax planning systems. For instance, a number of integrity measures have already been introduced. These include limits to the extent to which non-commercial losses can be written off against wage and salary income, ensuring that only losses genuinely occurring from commercial activities can be used to reduce the tax paid on other income. Secondly, there are limits to the use of tax shelter arrangements by replacing immediate deductibility with a much longer period of eligibility. Thirdly, there are measures to prevent loss duplication and tax avoidance through the creation of artificial losses. Fourthly, there are measures to tighten thin capitalisation rules to address tax minimisation by foreign companies, and measures to close the infrastructure borrowings scheme. These are measures that, in 13 years, Labor did nothing at all to address and yet, hypocritically, they come in here and try to suggest that now it ought to be done, when they could not do it. There are measures, as well, to address the alienation of personal income, yet without penalising—and this is the important point—genuine tradesmen and genuinely self-employed people. If you listen to the member for Rankin, he would be happy to throw out the baby with the bathwater, to take a sledgehammer to a walnut, and to destroy many of those self-employed tradesmen in order to try to crack down on tax avoidance by those whose tax avoidance can be addressed in other ways. The introduction of the ABN and new withholding arrangements will also increase the integrity of the tax system. The other point that needs to be made when we are talking about taxes is that Labor's constant approach—and we have seen it from the two members opposite—is full on rhetoric, full on empty negative point scoring but nothing on the positives. This government has introduced in the last couple of years $12 billion in income tax cuts, so that 80 per cent of Australians are now on marginal income tax rates of 30 per cent or less. This government has removed the hidden wholesale sales tax system. This government has reduced by 50 per cent the capital gains tax for individuals on capital gains. This government has reduced the company tax rate from 36 per cent to 34 per cent, with a further four per cent reduction coming on 1 July this year. On 1 July this year, also, the iniquitous financial institutions duty will be abolished. This government has brought good news and positive measures on tax reform and tax reduction—a contrast to the negative, empty rhetoric of the members opposite. (Time expired)10000Jenkins, Harry (Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER)Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Jenkins)—Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.2437616:37:0024376Hawker, David, MPMr HAWKER8H4WannonLP10—I move:That this House:(1) recognising the increasing demands being placed upon Australia's armed forces;(2) welcoming the widespread community support for our armed forces; (3) accepting the need for the Parliament to be as well informed as possible on all aspects of the operation of the forces but recognising that fewer Members and Senators now have direct experience of service in the forces; agrees that a Parliamentary Armed Forces Scheme be introduced to enable Members and Senators to gain first hand knowledge of service life and to enable service personnel to gain an insight into political life.I think the time has come, and I am sure the minister at the table would agree, for this parliament to set up a parliamentary armed forces scheme. If we look at the professionalism of our defence forces today, and at the dedication that goes into what they are doing, and at the commitment, the skills and training, we see there are some very professional soldiers, sailors and airmen. But how many people know it these days? In 1962, 96 out of the 184 members and senators in the parliament had armed forces experience—in other words, more than 50 per cent had had direct experience. In the current parliament, only 22 out of 224 have had experience in the armed forces—in other words, less than 10 per cent. So in just under 40 years we have gone from more than 50 per cent to less than 10 per cent of members of parliament who have had armed forces experience. In 1951, 86 parliamentarians, including 10 ministers, had spent time serving their country. In 1961, it was a down to five ministers. In 1998, there were only three ministers who had had experience in the armed forces—the Hon. Tim Fischer, who has since left the ministry of course, Senator the Hon. John Herron and the Hon. Jackie Kelly. Currently, of course, there are only two—Jackie Kelly and the Hon. Mal Brough, the member for Longman—who have had direct experience in the armed forces.Despite all of this, our Defence bill to the taxpayer—what parliament allocates every year—is one of the major budget items. More than $16 billion—sixteen thousand million dollars—was allocated in the last federal budget to the Department of Defence and with the defence white paper that was released just before Christmas there is a commitment to increase the allocation to Defence. Clearly, it is time, I think, for more members of parliament to get first-hand experience and a better understanding of just what goes on within the armed forces. The United Kingdom parliament faced a similar situation and took a decision over 10 years ago to introduce an armed forces parliamentary scheme. In 1989, they found that only four of their members of parliament had first-hand experience. I will talk a little more about their scheme in a moment. While people might conjure up images of members of parliament dressed up in fatigues, and all the colour that goes with it, nonetheless, this proposal is a serious one and it will show, if we proceed, and I believe we will proceed, that we can give members of parliament better understanding, better knowledge and better skills with which to handle the debates on Defence issues.Under the proposed guidelines, it is suggested that members and senators would have the opportunity to volunteer to take part in the program. During the year—because it would be a commitment for a year—they would have the opportunity to be attached to a unit or a ship or an Air Force base and they would go out to sea or go out in the field with soldiers. The idea is that members would break their time up into several stints during the year. In the United Kingdom, the commitment is for a minimum of 21 days—whether we choose to go as far as that is a matter that still has to be decided but, clearly, they believe that is what is necessary. It would be a commitment and the member of parliament would be kitted out with a full uniform and they would carry the equivalent rank of major.In the United Kingdom, the scheme was introduced in 1989 and so far 90 members of the Lords and House of Commons have participated. They have significant costs because they take their MPs to places where the troops are serving overseas as well as domestically. They had some major sponsors in their defence companies—such as Rolls Royce, British Aerospace and Vickers. Incidentally, the UK parliament also operates a similar scheme for members to get involved in major industries to get an understanding of what goes on in industry. Back to the armed forces scheme, I was fortunate to have the opportunity when I travelled to England at the end of last year to meet with Major General Kevin O'Donohue at the Ministry of Defence, with Paul Keetch, the Liberal Democrat, a member of the House of Commons and spokesman on defence, and with Sir Neil Thorne, who was an MP and was the father of the scheme, and who still very much guides it today even though he is no longer in parliament.One thing that really struck me was their enthusiasm. They were really keen on the program and they had this contagious enthusiasm. The other important point of course is that their scheme has bipartisan support and I think it is very important for our scheme to have bipartisan support. I was delighted that the member for Cunningham, the Hon. Dr Steve Martin, agreed to second the motion. It is also significant to note that our Department of Defence now has Air Vice Marshal Brendan O'Loughlin working on this proposed scheme with the idea of helping to introduce it into the Australian parliament. It is also significant that the Chief of the Defence Force, Admiral Barrie, and his chiefs of the services are all enthusiastic supporters of the proposal. It is worth reinforcing the enthusiasm shown by so many of the members of the UK Armed Forces Parliamentary Scheme, and I will quote from the 1999 annual report. Firstly, the Hon. John Spellar—who was then the parliamentary Under Secretary for Defence and has now been made a minister—in his foreword, and I think these words are quite telling, said:There is nothing like first hand experience to equip Members of Parliament for the task of speaking with authority on any subject. This is especially so with the armed services who have such important roles to play in both defending UK's interests and the ability to respond quickly and effectively to humanitarian problems anywhere in the world, making the world a safer place.He goes on to say:It is for this reason that time and again I hear Members tell me that this is one of the best and most rewarding experiences that they have had in the time they have been in the House, and that the sacrifice of time has been well worth while. That is a fairly strong endorsement. I go on to some of the other comments. I can assure all honourable members that Paul Keetch was a very enthusiastic supporter. He did his time with the Navy. He said:I thought I knew about the Navy, but the [Armed Forces Parliamentary Scheme] showed me how little I really knew and how much I had to learn ... But for me, the most astonishing thing about the year has been talking, not to the top brass—although drinks with the First Sea Lord is impressive—but by talking to the men and women who really run the Royal Navy, the officers and crew. They explained, vividly and frankly, the real concerns they had. How they felt about gays at sea; how they worried whether the new carriers would ever be built, how they felt about overstretch, which to them meant less time at home with their families. There are a number of other quotes in that document from members who have been involved, all of them very enthusiastic in their support for the Armed Forces Parliamentary Scheme, all of them speaking very warmly of their experiences and all, I think, showing that they are very much the better for that opportunity to get involved. I think this is the sort of scheme that we very much want to get into Australia. I have been very encouraged by the number of people who have responded very positively when I have discussed it with them. It must be a bipartisan proposal, and I am delighted that the opposition spokesman is supporting it. I think the member for the Northern Territory will be seconding the motion now.IJ4Snowdon, Warren, MPMr Snowdon—I am happy to do it.8H4Hawker, David, MPMr HAWKER—Good. The member for Cunningham initially agreed to second it. I think the real benefits of this program are that, first of all, the parliament will benefit and, secondly, the armed forces will benefit. Through this, of course, Australia will benefit. It is clear that through a better understanding of defence we will have better informed members and senators, which undoubtedly leads to better decision making and as a result better use of taxpayers' money. This can only lead to a safer and more secure Australia in a region that is becoming increasingly volatile. So it is with great pleasure that I commend the proposed armed forces parliamentary scheme to the parliament. (Time expired)10000Jenkins, Harry (Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER)Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Jenkins)—Is the motion seconded?16:48:0024378Snowdon, Warren, MPMr SNOWDONIJ4Northern TerritoryALP00—I second the motion. In opening my remarks, I would like to welcome two prospective candidates for the armed forces parliamentary scheme who are sitting on the Labor side of the table. I know that the Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence, who is at the table, will take note of their names.Some might ask what the member for the Northern Territory is doing seconding this motion. The reason is very simple. Despite the fact that I have been labelled with all sorts of things over my life in politics, including some rather extreme ones, I think that what the previous speaker has said has highlighted a deficiency of knowledge in the federal parliament about defence related matters and the ignorance that is reflected in many of the debates in the parliament about the way in which the Australian Defence Force works, and particularly about the way in which Australian Defence Force personnel undertake their duties, the hardships that they confront, the difficulties they have in doing their job and the importance of their job to the Australian community. I should point out that as a young person I was a member of the Air Training Corps. Later I joined the CMF. To counterbalance that, in my years in education I was an activist for the peace movement and was the co-author of a peace curriculum which was accredited and taught in schools in the Northern Territory. But my vision has never been clouded or misled by any underestimation of the importance of the Defence Force to the Australian community. Living in Northern Australia, where we had only last week the commemoration of the bombing of Darwin in 1942, what we see is the importance of defence in a policy and a strategic sense to the Australian community. What we see are large numbers of Defence Force personnel undertaking their daily duties, without complaint by most of them, and under great sacrifice. Whilst members of parliament experience great difficulty in their family lives, being separated from wives and children in particular for much of the year, the same is true for many in the Defence Force. I do not think that is commonly understood by the wider community, let alone by people in this place. This scheme will provide an opportunity for members of parliament to gain in their understanding of the defence forces and the way they work so that they can come back to this place and be informed and able to be participants in debates in the parliament, whether on developing policy or talking about budgets, whether or not they are supportive or critical. In this particular instance, it is just as important to have knowledge if you are critical as it is if you are supportive. From my experience, I know that there are about 30 different ADF units in the Top End of the Northern Territory, covering all three services. We see the importance of those units to Australia's defence, to Customs and to the breaching of our borders. There are currently six patrol boats based in Darwin. They are at the cutting edge, involved in the interdiction of foreign vessels in our waters. They confront illegal immigrants on a weekly basis, in difficult circumstances. Some might argue that those vessels are almost past their use-by date, but they carry out a very important role very efficiently. People like me who observe their operations still do not fully understand what goes on on board those vessels and how the crew are involved when they confront a difficult situation. It seems to me that this proposal provides a capacity for people like me, or indeed even you, Mr Deputy Speaker Jenkins, with rank, to go onto one of those vessels to experience the daily lives of the officers and sailors as they undertake activities on behalf of us all. When we have seen the hardships they work under and the difficult circumstances which they confront, we would come to this place with a much better understanding. Recently, the Defence Subcommittee of the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade was in Timor. Among other places, we visited Suai, where we had a lengthy conversation with Brigadier Gillespie. We were there for only half a day. Brigadier Gillespie said that he would like us to have spent more time at Suai so that we could learn about the way in which their work was being undertaken. This scheme would provide an avenue for that to happen. Not only that; you would go in around the rank of major, which would give you the capacity to be involved with all ranks and you could have conversations with privates right through to the officers commanding. You could then give youself a better understanding of the different issues which go across the ranks, although there may be many common issues. In the Northern Territory, we have the 1st Armoured Regiment, 2nd Cavalry Regiment, 5/7 Royal Australian Regiment, 8/12 Medium Regiment Artillery, Combat Engineer Regiment, 161 Reconnaissance Aviation Squadron and Norforce, to name a few, which would provide an opportunity for members of parliament to get a very good understanding of what goes on. Down the highway at RAAF Tindal, we have our fighter squadron—the FA18s and the 75 Squadron. These are the key units in implementing our defence strategy which, as the member has said, was amplified in the government's white paper, and which, as our leader has indicated, is in effect pinched Labor Party policy.I have been a critic and continue to be a critic of many aspects of the way in which the government administers Defence. As the minister at the table, the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, knows, we have a running battle over a number of these issues. That should not cloud the fact that we have a common purpose, which is to make sure that Australia has a competent, able, professional Defence Force. What we are about is ensuring that it has the capacity to do the job we want it to do. I am not sure what this project is going to be called—an armed forces parliamentary scheme or exchange scheme of some description. Despite the fact that we might have grave differences on the floor of the parliament, this scheme will mean that those of us who are lucky enough to participate will at least come here with an informed position. It has been a concern of mine for some time that people who come into this parliament are expected to debate all manner of issues, often without any great knowledge or experience of the circumstances which they are debating. This seems to me to be something we should be addressing—the way we induct people into the parliament as to what is provided by the parliament and by the government—to ensure that people in this place have the knowledge they require. I think this initiative goes some way to addressing the shortfall of knowledge that exists across the parliament in terms of the defence forces and how they operate. I am very pleased to be able to support this proposal. It has the potential to ensure that a large number of members, even my two comrades at the table here, the member for Watson and the member for Grayndler, will sign up as volunteers when this scheme is proposed, to do short stints and perhaps undergo some training. That would be of great assistance to all of us, including me. (Time expired)16:58:0024380Hull, Kay, MPMrs HULL83ORiverinaNP10—I stand today to offer my full support to the member for Wannon for the parliamentary armed forces scheme to be introduced to enable members and senators to be as well informed as possible on all aspects of the operation of the defence forces. I do not have experience as a member of the armed forces—I think I was too short. However, the Australian Defence Force plays a very important role in my electorate of Riverina, as it does in our whole nation. The government defence white paper was constructed after extensive consultation with the greater Australian community, demonstrating the general understanding and appreciation of the armed services among average Australians. The Riverina, in particular Wagga Wagga, is home to the Kapooka Army Recruit Training Centre and the RAAF base Forest Hill, both of which are centres of training excellence and bring many young recruits into my electorate. Getting to know these recruits is one of the more enjoyable aspects of my role as the member for Riverina, and seeing the transformation of these young men and women is a humbling experience. I would dearly love to see my parliamentary colleagues struggling with this transformation. Most residents of Wagga Wagga would have some connection to either facility, be it through family, friends, work or recreational means.Every year, the people of Wagga Wagga welcome new recruits into the city and into the community. The armed forces are so much an integral and accepted part of everyday life that the sight of many young men and women and their close-cropped counterparts, both in and out of uniform, rarely warrants a second glance. Both the RAAF and Army contribute significantly to the local economy with the provision of employment to the Riverina. The RAAF and Army base combined provide about 460 employment opportunities through contractors and contribute an estimated $55 million annually to the economy of Wagga Wagga. The freedom of the city was first granted to RAAF base Wagga Wagga in 1961 and to Kapooka in 1962. The defence forces of Wagga Wagga are among the few organisations to be granted this honour. In fact, this Thursday, Kapooka will be granted this honour as part of the Army's 100th birthday celebrations. About 500 troops are expected to march throughout the city of Wagga Wagga, followed by the renowned Australian Army band Kapooka. The purpose of the march is to remind the community of the close linkage between the citizens of the city and the Army. The procession will start in the north end of Wagga and travel to the Wollundry bridge where the troops will be stopped and challenged by senior police. The troops will then be granted entry to the city and will continue to march to the old council chambers where the mayor of Wagga Wagga will inspect the soldiers. They will then carry on along the main street in front of crowds of Thursday night shoppers and onlookers. The Australian Army band Kapooka members have supported valuable local charities by raising tens of thousands of dollars through their various concert programs. These include over 100 engagements annually for the civilian population—thus bridging the gap between community and Defence. Adding to the educational and cultural life, the band members have branched out to form a concert band, a big band, a Dixie band, a brass choir, woodwind and brass quintets and vocal ensembles. Many of the members also volunteer their off-duty hours to assist in the development of regional musical and social organisations. Another area of community involvement with the defence forces is through the local service clubs. At present, both the commandant of the Kapooka Army base and the base commander from the RAAF at Forest Hill are members of the Wollundry Rotary Club. It appears that, for many years in Wagga Wagga, an unofficial duty statement has existed, encouraging officers to become involved in service clubs in the city. This association allows service personnel to blend with business people on an even footing in the community, in a non-threatening environment for both the military and the civilians. Over many years, many members of the armed forces have been involved with the service clubs in Wagga Wagga. As a result, the residents consider their presence in the city as an asset rather than a liability. With such close ties as these to the Defence Force, I reaffirm my support for this motion as it is a means by which we can encourage people to better understand what our Defence Force is all about. I invite to my electorate of Riverina all future participants in the scheme to partake in bonding with the defence forces. It will be an experience that I am sure they will never forget. The city of Wagga Wagga epitomises a true Defence city. We are proud to be part of the defence of this great country. We are proud to partake in any area where we can be of assistance in bringing this to fruition.17:03:0024381Mossfield, Frank, MPMr MOSSFIELDMK6GreenwayALP00—I am pleased to join in this debate on the proposed parliamentary armed forces scheme and confirm, as the motion says, that there is widespread community support for the Australian Defence Force units. It is important that members of this parliament be as well informed as possible on all aspects of the operation of our modern defence forces. While I am aware that a number of members of this parliament have served with distinction, that number is not great. The parliament as a whole would be well served to be made more aware of the demands on today's Australian service men and women. I believe one way that we can show our support is by the treatment we give to those who have already served in the defence forces. This debate, therefore, gives me another opportunity to refer to a case concerning a constituent of Greenway, Mr Keith Harrison. Keith served aboard the HMAS Hawkesbury during the 1950s. The ship was anchored only a handful of miles from the blast site for the atomic tests at the Monte Bello Islands. Keith is now suffering from leukaemia, but he is unable to get any preferential medical treatment or service pension because he is not considered a veteran under the Veterans' Entitlements Act. In my submissions on behalf of Mr Harrison, I am seeking to have his service in the Australian Navy recognised as service under the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1980, and I am pleased that the Minister for Veterans' Affairs is in the House to hear my remarks on this issue. Most of the ex-servicemen who served aboard the Hawkesbury also served in other combat zones and are therefore covered by the Veterans' Entitlements Act. I am sure few post-Second World War military engagements, with the exception of Vietnam, would have had the potential to create long-term health problems such as those from the atomic testing exercises. So to downgrade the medical entitlements of these ex-servicemen is plainly unjust. This debate gives me the opportunity to refer to the related matter of national service. The nashos march on 11 February in Sydney will celebrate the 50th anniversary of the commencement of the national service program which saw 18-year-old males called up for service in the Army, Navy and Air Force. Between 1951 and 1952, a total of 227,000 young men were called up to be trained in the three services. Most national service personnel of that period would have fond memories of their service, where they were taught discipline, respect and mateship. Some, however, may still be suffering from injuries incurred during this national service training. I served my national service in the RAAF at Rathmines, New South Wales which, during the Second World War, was a Catalina flying boat base. My father served at this base also during the Second World War. My intake also experienced operational duties at Richmond and Williamtown. In 1952, naval nashos saw active service at the atomic testing site at Monte Bello, and in 1956 Army national servicemen participated in the Maralinga experiments. Many have since died of cancer or related illnesses. I am aware that representations have been made to the government for a medal to be struck to recognise national service, and I support this claim. The reintroduction of national service in 1965 heralded a bleak period in Australia's history when 19,450 nashos were conscripted to serve in Vietnam. 10000Andrews, Kevin (Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER)Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Andrews)—Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.Grievance Debate24382Question proposed:That grievances be noted.2438217:07:0024382Danby, Michael, MPMr DANBYWF6Melbourne PortsALP00—According to the 1996 census, as reported by the very competent people in the statistics group in our Parliamentary Library, my electorate has some unusual characteristics. We have one of the highest—although I must say that it is not the highest—numbers of people who have changed address in the country. We also have the highest proportion of people living in rented dwellings and the highest number of people living in units, flats or apartments. This particular characteristic of my electorate makes even more urgent my consideration of some recommendations, put forward to this parliament by the government dominated Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, which would wish to change our electoral legislation to include the following recommendation:That section 155 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 be amended to provide that for new enrolments, the rolls for an election close on the day the writ is issued, and for existing electors updating address details, the rolls for an election close at 6.00pm on the third day after the issue of the writ.It is my contention that that could very badly affect people in my electorate and other electorates around Australia, particularly younger people who choose the time after the election is announced to enrol. Many younger Australians, first time voters aged 17 and 18, do not have politics at the front of their mind. Quite understandably, they use the five days after the election is announced to enrol. In a compulsory voting system as we have in Australia it is an important democratic right that they have that time to enrol. We should be doing everything we can to make sure that young people do enrol.In my electorate, in one electoral cycle we will have 30,000 of some nearly 90,000 voters changing address. I note that recommendation 3 of the report that was noted by the parliament. Thank heavens it has not yet been taken up by the government as legislation. This report would have people who have changed address having only three days after the issue of the writ to re-enrol. Again, this would affect a very large number of people. Apart from disenfranchising younger people, it would, I believe, affect 350,000 people who enrol to vote in the five days prior to the electoral rolls closing. This proposal emerged from a paper put to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters by, as you would expect, the Liberal Party. Mr Lynton Crosby came to the committee and made a strong recommendation, opposed by many members of the committee, which was ultimately passed on a divided vote. I believe it is a recommendation that this parliament should definitely not proceed with.I now turn to some other developments in electoral matters in Australia that I believe give some context to this extraordinarily special investigation into electoral rorts that was passed on to the committee by Senator Ellison. If anyone looked at the long history of recommendations to joint standing committees by government ministers, this reference by Senator Ellison, the then minister responsible for these matters, would have to have been the most politically biased and `loaded' reference ever given to a committee. It was designed with short-term political interest in mind and to give some benefit to the government over perceived difficulties to the Labor Party in Queensland. The people of Queensland were too smart to be fooled by that political manoeuvre, by the political stunt of this committee, and they ignored the committee's activities. The Premier of Queensland addressed the serious matters concerned with these issues. Together with the Shepherdson inquiry, he addressed these matters as they should have been addressed. I will not go into the `hissy fit' that the member for Sturt had over some rude words that were said to him in a public bar. But I would say that the member for Batman and the member for Werriwa are generally right—that what is said in a pub should stay in a pub. However, I do want to address the general context of the so-called issue of electoral rorts in Australia. The Australian Electoral Commission, in its submission to this electoral rorts committee, did say that in the last 10 years some 71 cases of proven electoral fraud had taken place. I asked the chairman of the Australian Electoral Commission how many elections had taken place over that period, how many referenda, and he explained to me that there had been six occasions on which the Australian people had voted—four elections, one Constitutional Convention and one referendum. This meant that there had been a total of 72 million votes—12 million votes per time cited by the chief of the Electoral Commission.In that time we had 71 cases of proven electoral fraud. I note that Senator Ferris made a great fuss about a cat that was enrolled in 1990. Even if one were to include the cat—the cat, by the way, never voted in the 1990 election and was discovered by the system to have been falsely enrolled—there would be 72 proven cases of electoral fraud identified by the Electoral Commission in a period of 10 years when we had 72 million votes. That is an outstanding record of good electoral activity in Australia and, I think, something for which the Australian Electoral Commission, and indeed the Australian people and the Australian parliament, should be commended. In my view, we are doing a lot better in these matters than even friendly democracies like the United States.Also emerging from the hearings of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters is the attempt by the current chair and the committee to focus solely on Labor Party people. I find it very regrettable that this kind of committee that is meant to consider matters in some kind of bipartisan way is constantly having issues decided on casting votes and the committee totally split about whether people of both sides should be called before it. I think it goes to the fact that this was an extremely biased reference that was given to the committee. The current committee has not been able to consider things in a non-partisan way, as it could prior to this particular investigation being set up. Altogether, the performance of this election rorts committee has been politically `loaded' and biased. I believe the government should announce that this committee reference has been a total political failure. It has been a political stunt from the beginning, and it should be wound up.The idiocy—and that is the only word I can use to describe it—of some of the submissions in support of the government has led to one fact that I think has been unreported to the wider Australian public, and that occurs in a major appendix to the Liberal Party submission to this election rorts committee. That appendix was some 2,700 pages long, and each one of those pages contained 60 names. Who were those people mentioned on those 2,700 pages? These were people suggested by the official Liberal Party submission as perhaps being involved in election rorts in Queensland. They were ordinary Queenslanders whose names appeared at one address, with more than four different names at that address. The fact that they might have been nursing homes or the fact that there might have been students living together were good reasons for there being different names at that one address, and to denigrate people who have different names and to suggest that they were rorting the electoral roll is disgraceful. (Time expired)2438417:17:0024384Wakelin, Barry, MPMr WAKELINHV5GreyLP10—Much has been said in recent weeks about issues in regional Australia. In October 1999, the Deputy Prime Minister's great initiative known as the Regional Australia Summit brought together people from all over Australia to look at the issues which, in a rather disjointed way, the media are endeavouring to address at the moment. I thought it would be useful today to remind the House and regional Australia of some of the achievements of this government and the focus that it brings to regional Australia.Some of the priorities and areas for change were in community empowerment—that is, creating regional communities with a greater capacity to have a bottom-up approach rather than this top-down, rather patronising approach that our opponents would insist should apply in regional Australia. An initiative should be sufficiently flexible to cater for the particular circumstances and needs of various regional, rural and remote communities. Another very important strategic area is the economic and business development in regional communities. That includes investing in regional infrastructure, fostering business innovation and rural industries in regional Australia and encouraging sustainable natural resource management—very much a focus particularly since the launch of the Natural Heritage Trust some four years ago. Another issue that is of great importance to regional communities is the matter of equity in the delivery of services. That includes improving education and training, improving health outcomes—and that is through the provision of better professional advice and support—improving communications and improving family services.One initiative that has flowed out of the Regional Australia Summit addressing those general strategic areas was a clear and cooperative approach, despite all the rhetoric, for improving services to people living in regional Australia. That has already been agreed to by regional development ministers from the states and territories, local government and the Commonwealth. The Foundation for Rural and Regional Renewal, announced at the summit, finalised their first round of funding in August 2000. The $240 million for the Stronger Families and Communities Strategies that was announced in April 2000 directly addressed a number of summit recommendations. Health was a key theme featured as a major budget item, with an allocation of $562 million. The Community Development Employment Program, with another 1,500 extra participant places, provided new employment opportunities for indigenous people in remote and isolated communities. A very important extension, a $309 million extension, of the Agriculture—Advancing Australia package has been provided, including a $167.5 million program, Skilling Farmers for the Future. And, of course, a very important historic announcement late last year was the $700 million National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality. That amount is to be matched by the states, totalling an allocation of $1.4 billion over the next decade.Much is made of how tough it is in `the bush', as it is known. I prefer to call that part of Australia `the regions'. Coming from the regional areas of Australia, I do not take that easily to the terminology `the bush'. It is, to many people, a slight denigration of those of us who live out there. Therefore, to those of us who live in regional Australia, it is very important that the summit has addressed many of these issues.I could add to those that I mentioned before the $90 million Regional Solutions program, which really acknowledges that it is very important to have a locally focused solution and that one solution does not fit all. Of course, as for that infrastructure program of the government, it would be remiss of me not to recall the $1.6 billion boost to the national road network. There has been quite a furphy around the $2.9 billion that allegedly had not been spent by the previous government and by this government because of some technicality in the legislation, but never before in my time in this place—and not, I think, for at least a couple of decades—has there been an allocation along the lines of that $1.6 billion to the nation's road network. Sustainable natural resource management is part of all this. I have mentioned the water and salinity quality program, the largest ever announced in this country and very important to these issues. Our government is supporting the Natural Heritage Trust, which is investing $1.5 billion over six years, with $700 million already approved—believe it or not—in 6,400 projects which address issues like biodiversity, conservation and sustainable agriculture in an integrated manner. We have the Cape York Natural Heritage Trust Plan, which has provided up to $40 million to protect the outstanding natural and cultural values of Cape York. The $264 million renewable remote power generation program, which began in July 2000, provides a rebate of up to 50 per cent of the capital cost of converting diesel based remote off-grid electricity supplies to renewable energy technologies. The greenhouse gas abatement program is providing $400 million over the next three years.Equity of services in regional committees is essential. It sends a message to regional Australia that we are as good as anyone else and that we expect to be treated as well as anyone else. To acknowledge that, the government has brought in, through policy change, better access to the youth allowance, a family assets test to 75 per cent and increased allowances for the isolated children's scheme and Abstudy. It has continued to fund the country areas program and increased incentives for employers to help apprentices gain higher skill levels. I have mentioned Skilling Farmers for the Future under Farmbis for property management planning. Networking the Nation is very important. We have some way to go there, but there has simply never been a greater investment by any government in communications infrastructure.Encouragement for rural doctors is very important and it is worth going through where the government is trying to improve health outcomes: increasing the number of new general practitioner registrars, $100 million; increasing the range of allied health services, $50 million; providing rural specialists through an outreach program, almost $50 million; and providing work force support for rural general practitioners, $10 million. New clinical schools is a big and very long-term visionary project by this government and this minister: $117.6 million goes to nine clinical schools, building on the successful departments of rural health established by this government three or four years ago. We could go on: providing scholarships under the RAMUS scheme, the Regional Health Service program, $70 million; pharmacy services, et cetera. A very important one I should not miss is ensuring appropriate aged care facilities in regional Australia—$30.8 million. Considering that our opponents spent $10 million for the whole of Australia in their last term of office, I think that shows the generosity of this government.In conclusion, I simply remind the House and particularly regional Australians that this government has given very solid and very strong consideration to regional Australia. Let us remember that it inherited high interest rates and big debts. It has got on top of that, it has the Charter of Budget Honesty, it is strongly in control of the Treasury and now it is able to put into place in regional Australia those sorts of programs that will serve regional Australia well in the future. (Time expired)2438517:27:0024385Irwin, Julia, MPMrs IRWIN83ZFowlerALP00—On 13 December last year, the Minister for Transport and Regional Services announced, `The government has decided to make Bankstown airport available as an overflow airport for Sydney,' and also that the operator of Bankstown airport `will be encouraged to extend the main runway so it can handle jet aircraft'. That was a declaration of war to the people of south-western Sydney. It was a declaration that drew an immediate response from the surrounding councils. Bankstown, Liverpool, Canterbury and Fairfield councils pledged to fight the proposal and set up a campaign to unite public opposition to the expansion of Bankstown airport. Local community action groups, including those which had successfully opposed the Holsworthy airport proposal, and the Bankstown Airport Community and Environment Forum mobilised their forces to go into battle once again. All local, federal and state members of parliament have joined the campaign, with one exception, the member for Hughes. While the community and its elected representatives have rallied to the cause, the member for Hughes has gone into her bunker. As I told the parliament on 8 February, the member for Hughes `seemed deaf' to the true feelings of her constituents if she believed they supported an expansion of Bankstown airport. I also suggested that she should attend the rally planned for the following Sunday if she wanted to hear the true feelings of residents of Moorebank and Chipping Norton. Sadly, the member for Hughes was not at Bankstown Paceway on 11 February to hear more than 3,000 people express their opposition to the expansion of Bankstown airport. But, if the member for Hughes thinks that she can retreat to the leafy suburbs of Menai and Alfords Point, far away from the jet noise at Moorebank and Chipping Norton, she is in for a very big surprise. Maps prepared by consultants to Bankstown council show that jets taking off and landing at Bankstown would also fly over the heart of the Hughes electorate. Perhaps the member for Hughes will hear the views of residents of Alfords Point and Menai a lot louder than she hears those of residents of Moorebank and Chipping Norton in her electorate.The decision to expand Bankstown airport comes as a result of some of the most muddle-headed thinking ever seen in transport planning. The government faces a dilemma: Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport is limited by law to 80 movements per hour and has a night curfew on jet aircraft. Thirty per cent of aircraft using Sydney airport are small regional aircraft, and their movement restricts the operation of larger aircraft. Faced with increasing demand for landing slots at peak times, the government's options are limited to diverting either small regional aircraft or larger, interstate jet aircraft such as Boeing 737s to another airport. With regional centres demanding access to Sydney airport, the minister has taken the second option—that is, to open Bankstown airport to passenger jet aircraft—but this decision has all the markings of policy-making on the run. It is a knee-jerk reaction, taken without considering the impact and certainly taken without consulting the people most affected.Let us take a closer look at the impact of allowing passenger jets to operate from Bankstown airport. The biggest concern for residents surrounding the airport is the noise levels generated by jet aircraft. To get some idea of the noise impact, I looked at the data provided in the second Sydney airport draft environmental impact statement. Chapter 12 of the statement gives details of the maximum noise levels during landing and take-off for a range of aircraft, including Boeing 737-300 aircraft. The study considered the affected areas which would suffer noise levels of 70 `A' weighted decibels—the level at which normal conversation would be affected. Taking the data for Boeing 737 aircraft, it is clear that noise levels of more than 70 decibels would be felt up to eight kilometres from the runway for aircraft taking off, and up to 10 kilometres away for aircraft landing.When you look at a map of the areas surrounding Bankstown, it is clear that many residential areas will be subjected to these unacceptable noise levels. To take some examples, areas of Georges Hall, in the electorate of Blaxland, would be less than one kilometre from the runway and could experience noise levels in excess of 90 decibels. That is four times louder than the 70-decibel standard. The same would apply in areas of Condell Park. Areas less than four kilometres from the runway would include areas such as Lansvale and Warwick Farm in my electorate of Fowler and areas of Moorebank and Chipping Norton in the electorate of Hughes. These areas would expect noise levels of up to 80 decibels—that is twice the noise level of 70-decibel areas. Looking at other parts of the Fowler electorate, areas such as Cabramatta and Canley Heights would suffer noise levels well over 70 decibels, and suburbs such as St Johns Park, Edensor Park, Bonnyrigg, Mount Pritchard, Wakeley and Liverpool would experience noise levels above 70 decibels. These are all densely populated suburbs, and I have only looked at areas at the western end of the runway; other areas to the eastern end are equally affected. The residents of these suburbs have had no warning of the expansion of Bankstown airport. While residents have tolerated a level of noise from light aircraft using Bankstown, the noise levels of jet aircraft are much greater. Bankstown airport has been ruled out as a major airport in every study conducted into Sydney's airport needs since 1946. Bankstown was rejected as a major airport site over 50 years ago. Only this desperate government would select such a site for meeting Sydney's second airport needs. When you take a closer look at Bankstown airport, you can see how bad this plan is. The longest runway at Bankstown is only 1,400 metres—that is less than half the length recommended for aircraft such as Boeing 737s. But there is no land available to extend the runway beyond even 1,800 metres; even that would require buying up properties in the Georges Hall area, and you would still be 1,000 metres—that is, one kilometre—short of the indicative take-off runway length for Boeing 737s.This was all known back in 1946 when Bankstown was rejected as a major second airport for Sydney. So why does the Minister for Transport and Regional Services think it is a good idea now? Because he needs a quick fix. He wants to be able to tell people in regional New South Wales that they will not be shoved out to Bankstown or Badgerys Creek. This is a decision that smacks of political opportunism and that has nothing to do with good government decision making. There are many questions that need to be answered in relation to the expansion of Bankstown airport. One question that needs to be answered is the effect of passenger jet aircraft on the capacity of Bankstown airport. Bankstown is the major general aviation airport for Sydney. With over 400,000 movements per year, it is the busiest airport in Australia and is reputed to be the fifth busiest airport in the world. So where will the extra capacity come from? We know that the movement of aircraft such as 737s will reduce the number of light aircraft which can safely use Bankstown. When you realise that almost half of the movements at Bankstown involve flight training, you have to consider the dangerous mixture of passenger jets and L-plated pilots in a very congested airspace. So where will the overflow from Bankstown go? If you take the slip of the tongue that the Prime Minister made in a radio interview, the overflow will go to the Hoxton Park and Canberra airports—no, not Camden airport but Canberra. Hoxton Park airport is restricted to mostly single-engined aircraft. It has no control tower, and it is already close to capacity. Camden airport is in—wait for it—the marginal electorate of Macarthur and is also close to capacity, so it is not even considered for expansion.That leaves only one site to take up the general aviation overflow from Bankstown. The government already owns an airport site in Western Sydney, of more than 1,700 hectares—that is six times the size of Bankstown—a site for which a $20 million environmental impact statement has already been completed, a site which would have far less noise and other impacts on surrounding residents. The government know this. They know that you cannot put jets into Bankstown without another airport in the Sydney basin to take general aviation. So where will that airport be? Badgerys Creek, of course. That is why they will not sell the site. (Time expired)2438717:37:0024387Cameron, Ross, MPMr ROSS CAMERON3K6ParramattaLP10—I suppose on this occasion, in giving a contribution in the grievance debate, there is really only one question on the national landscape, and that is a sober one for those of us on this side of the House following the results of the state polls in Western Australia and Queensland. There is a question about whether the engagement between this government and the community is one of mutual understanding or whether there has been some kind of a break, a discord, a dissonance in the relationship in which we are not listening to or not hearing or not understanding what the community is saying, and it boils down to the issue of whether this government really deserves to be re-elected. It is to those issues that I wish to address my remarks in the next 10 minutes. There are maybe half a dozen words that continually come up in the discourse as people are trying to understand what it is that people are unhappy about out there in the community and particularly out in the regions. Those words include `globalisation', `competition policy', `deregulation', `foreign investment' and `foreign ownership'. It is fair to say, I think all of us recognise, that there is quite a deep level of apprehension about the implementation of policies in these areas in the general community. A number of those issues can be boiled down to a concern about what people call `national sovereignty'. They express a concern that the Australia which they loved is disappearing and they have a feeling that the key economic assets of the nation are constantly being lost to rapacious foreign interests. I do not wish in any way to mock or deride this anxiety that people feel, which perhaps too often has been the response of the political elites to the genuinely expressed concerns of the community, but I also think that the answer is not today somehow to do a U-turn, to turn around, to abandon the policies because they are too hard or too difficult, if in fact they are right for Australia.Petrol prices has perhaps been the most frequently articulated emblem of this community apprehension and cited by the Premier of Queensland as the principal reason for his victory, along with the statement that `the bush is burning'. Can I just say that my instinct is that, aside from the actual cost of paying for petrol at the bowser—which is such a democratic experience in this country, wedded as we are to the motor vehicle, with a small population on a vast continent—there is a sense in which the cry of anger on petrol prices is also an expression of frustration at the impotence which Australians can feel and which consumers around the world, I suspect, can feel in purchasing a product or a commodity where they have no control over the price. They see petrol prices rising and falling with rapidity and apparent capricious arbitrariness, and they get angry about that, because it has this implicit message that somehow the individual is powerless, that the individual is a mere pawn and subject to these vast invisible anonymous global forces.But I just want to affirm in this House the enormous benefits which this country derives and which my constituents in Parramatta derive from Australia's engagement with the rest of the world. For just as there are commodities in which Australia consumers are price-takers, there is also an opportunity in the global market for Australians to be employed in a competitive race to deliver goods and services to people in other countries all over the world. We have to keep asking ourselves, `Do we want to engineer the Australian economy purely to meet the needs of the 19 million-odd Australian citizens who reside here or do we have the guts and the vision to really have a crack at penetrating the world market, the six billion people who reside in the other 180-odd countries, protectorates and dominions recognised by the United Nations?' In a country which, for example, in the agricultural sector produces four times as much product as the Australian people can consume, the answer is a starkly simple one: that we have no choice but to constantly seek to gain access to the markets of other countries around the world if we are going to be able to unload the 75 per cent of our agricultural product which cannot be consumed in this country.I want to say to the people in my electorate of Parramatta there is—there and more widely—a concern about what people say is the erosion of national sovereignty that comes from Australia's engagement with multilateral organisations, among them the World Trade Organisation. They feel that the dice is weighted against us, that there is somehow an unfair engagement and that these bureaucrats down here in Canberra, and we politicians acting as their puppets, if you like, are constantly signing away Australia's interests to allow foreign products and foreign services to be flooded into the Australian market. I just want to root this argument in a few key facts. The first of those is that in the past year exports grew 25 per cent Australia-wide, taking them to $142 billion or 24 per cent of our gross domestic product. That means that one dollar in every four in our economy is being generated by providing goods and services to people who do not live in Australia. One job in every four is being generated by Australians engaged in export. If we seek to deny others fair access to Australian markets, we also have to be prepared to turn around to those one in four and explain to them what we are going to do for them when foreign markets around the world say to Australians, `You cannot have access to our market.' In the United Kingdom, for example, this year, for the first time, Australian wine will be the most consumed of any foreign wine in Great Britain. The reason for that is that we have a fantastically productive group of vignerons in this country. They are doing a tremendous job of producing a great product and of marketing it effectively. If we are going to turn around and say to the English that they cannot have access to our markets, all of those jobs—all of that activity—are in jeopardy.There are 14 local government areas in Greater Western Sydney. Those 14 local government areas generate over $3.5 billion a year in exports. Of those 14 local government areas, Parramatta has the highest proportion of export oriented businesses. In fact, fully 250 businesses in Parramatta are engaged primarily in export. Those 250 businesses are all employing one, two, three, five, 20 people. Rod Hunwick, at Northmead, has just produced the Hunwick Harrop motor cycle, Australia's first domestically produced motor cycle for many, many years. He is looking to penetrate the United States market with a spectacular motorbike that is competing with Harley Davidson and taking the place by storm. Am I going to turn around to Rod and say, `Well, because we don't want foreign investment in this country, you are going to be denied the opportunity to take a crack at the American market?' What am I going to say to those 250 other businesses who are employing Australians, making a contribution to the gross domestic product, because Australia is engaged in this open economy?We can cite example after example of other countries being forced to give greater access to Australia for our products. In competition policy, another bugbear, I note that the introduction of Aussie Home Loans—based in Parramatta—to the mortgage originator market saw a 1.5 per cent reduction in the rate of home loans being charged to the average Australian, which meant savings of $250 a month to Australian families. That is competition policy. It may be unpopular in some parts of Australia, but we have to remember Australians are consumers as well as producers; every time we put capital into a sector which is non-competitive over the long run, we deny capital to these newly emerging businesses, to those having a crack at new markets who are really building Australia. I want to ask the Australian people to think through these issues and not simply react to words and slogans. (Time expired)2438917:47:0024389Byrne, Anthony, MPMr BYRNE008K0HoltALP00—I rise today to highlight what I consider is extraordinary behaviour within the car insurance industry by some of its major players. When I say `extraordinary behaviour', I mean standover tactics, bullying and the ripping off of motorists and the accident repair industry. This extortion must be investigated by the ACCC. To date, they appear reluctant to do so. Many motorists are suffering because of their inaction, and many small businesses are hitting the fence because of the practices of large insurers in the car repair industry, especially the Royal Automobile Club of Victoria. I want to detail some of the examples of some of these dodgy practices later, but I will first provide a framework of the industry. The car repair industry itself has 1,500 accident repair centres in Victoria. Seventy per cent of the moneys for the repair of cars comes from insurance companies. Accident repair centres have received no increase in payments from the insurance companies for the last three years, even thought the costs of parts and other things have increased by some 23 per cent. With the introduction of the GST there was no increase in payments to accident repairers as well. Deloittes estimated that a $400 million to $500 million windfall came to insurance companies through not allowing an increase for these accident repair centres. Insurance companies told the ACCC that they would pass this on to consumers. I believe the consumers are still waiting for this. There have been long-running battles between car manufacturers and insurance companies over the costs of spare parts. Car manufacturers have a mark-up of between 100 per cent and 1,000 per cent on spare parts for cars. The ACCC in its former guise looked into this in the eighties. Insurance companies appeared to be cutting on quality and on paying accident repair centres to address this cost problem. There is, however, in the midst of this, a David of the industry who has brought these matters to light. He is Gerry Raleigh, who is the owner of Kerry Panels. He has an excellent reputation in the industry, being an approved repairer for Ferrari, Eunos, Toyota and Audi. Gerry lost over $90,000 in turnover last year because he fought the RACV over their policies. He has beaten the RACV many times in court when rectifying cars previously repaired in their accident repair centres or RACV approved repairers. He is a small man fighting a Goliath in the industry.As a result of his victories when seeking proper repairs for clients of the RACV, they have reacted by bullying him, removing business from his shop and then having the audacity to check over 14 repairs he had previously done for them to try to find faults. They found nothing. David Herford of the RACV has continuously slandered him on 3LO and 3AW but never produced evidence. Mr Herford knows that Mr Raleigh and Kerry Panels cannot afford to sue him for defamation. Let me give some indication of the support or lack of support for these claims. The ACCC has been approached numerous times by the VACC; the state minister for small business, Marsha Thomson; Tony Robinson; the AWU Secretary, Bill Shorten; and Don Nardella. To date, it appears too difficult for the ACCC to look into. They want nice easy examples from persons reliant upon insurance companies for their livelihood. Both Peter Reith and Louise Asher thought it was important that small business was protected from unfair practices, but they have done nothing about this. The report by Jack Hammond QC into the practices of the RACV and like companies on behalf of the Victorian Automobile Chamber of Commerce stated that in his opinion the RACV had breached the Trade Practices Act by using contracts that limited competition, misusing market power, exclusive dealing and unconscionable conduct. The ACCC, in its response to Jack Hammond, in February this year said:While, on balance, RACV's actions may be considered inflexible, unfair or unreasonable, they are unlikely to be viewed as being so against conscience as to warrant a court's intervention.They are telling us that something is not quite right but that they do not wish to push it further. It appears to me that the only way we will catch crooks in the car insurance industry is to have a private inquiry undertaken by the ACCC where the insurance companies simply are not able to find out who put in submissions. In this way, we could stop retribution against good people like Gerry Raleigh. Only in this way will the ACCC fully understand the practices of these insurance companies. In the time I have available, I would like to give some instances of abuse which I think prove that the RACV and others are simply not playing according to the rules. I am actually going to use the words of Mr David Herford, General Manager of RACV Insurance, and others, such as the Insurance Council of Australia, to compare the way in which things are meant to be done to how they actually are done. I will give you the example of a large eastern based city council in Victoria. A council car ran into a third party insured by the RACV. Through the diligent work of the safety and insurance coordinator and Mr Gerry Raleigh, they inspected the car and found out that the RACV was charging for work never done. Further, they asked for photos of the accident, but the RACV told them that, unlike other insurers in the industry, they did not take photos. Finally, after doing due diligence on the RACV, the council decided to pay a lower amount to them. The RACV never complained. I wonder why! Were they trying to rip off local government or were they just incompetent? Listen to the words of Mr Herford having a go at Gerry Raleigh:Now along the way we often come to grips with ... repairers who perhaps try to take money where they shouldn't be taking money.Like the RACV.There is also this fine document, utilised by the RACV, that came across my desk called a `Potential fraud indicator'. Let me comment on this document. It is racist, discriminatory and downright dangerous. This is a sign of a company out of control. On this fraud indicator the signs of a potential fraudster include the ethnicity of the insured, whether or not the vehicle was stolen from the western suburbs, whether the nationality of the parties is similar, whether or not the person is unemployed and whether or not the claimant is aged between 21 and 25 years of age.To illustrate the malignant nature of this process, I came across a case in my office of a Mrs K. Mrs K. was 21 years of age and was driving her mother's car. She happens to be Turkish. She crashed her mother's car and then rang the RACV to get it towed to a repair centre. The RACV told her that they would not do this. When she went back to get the car with her father, it was stolen. So what was the RACV's reaction? Stonewall the family, interrogate the young lady and tell the family: `We know you stole it.' After six months of these threats they finally settled.So you may pay the premium and be honest in your dealings, but getting money from the RACV is like getting blood out of a stone, especially if you are Turkish and young. Obviously, only people of English origins should be trusted—particularly according to this document.I will give you the case of a Bill Gommers. Mr Gommers crashed his car and then tried to take it to his panel beater, Mr Gerry Raleigh. All he got was the run-around by the RACV. No such thing as choice if you want to go to Mr Raleigh! Mr Gommers got three quotes and Mr Raleigh was the cheapest. When the assessor from the RACV came to look at the car, Mr Gommers was told that he could have his own panel beater but that he would have to pay for the repairs himself and they would pay after 30 days. Not only did they do this but they also accused Mr Gommers of being a mouthpiece for Mr Gerry Raleigh. Finally, Mr Gommers rang the complaints unit of the insurance industry. The RACV changed its mind and paid out in five days. He was never aware that to have choice with the RACV, you have to go to their repairers. You would not know it, however, if you listened to what Mr Herford said on 3LO in April 1999:Well, you know, we do, as being fair, allow customers to have complete freedom of choice in the sense of where the car is fixed. It is enshrined in the policy document that we actually sell.Let me give you another example of a Mrs Duncan of Box Hill South. Mrs Duncan had an accident and the car was taken to the RACV's repair centre in Rooks Road, Nunawading. After one month, the car was collected and Mrs Duncan had Mr Raleigh check the car. The list of faults was long and included a bent chassis. She took the car back for further repairs. All that the people at the RACV told her was that she was wrong about the further repairs required. It took her six trips back to the RACV repair centre to have everything rectified. This is what the Sun Herald said in May 1999:Mr Herford said that the RACV was the leading car insurer in the state and he defended the RACV's two crash repair centres at Cheltenham North in Vermont as the finest in the business. I wonder if Mrs Duncan would agree. I do not think so, after reading her letter to the RACV, which said, amongst other things:There is a slogan on your wall in the reception area `Just like sending your car to a private hospital.' Does it not matter that people may end up in hospital due to endless follow-up procedures caused by RACV's poor work practices regarding the repair of their vehicles?I could give you many other examples but, unfortunately, time does not permit me to detail them. But what we have heard tonight is an example of vulnerable motorists being ripped off with shoddy work practices, panel beaters being driven to the wall unless they comply with the insurance industry and a weak ACCC not willing to conduct a proper investigation. The RACV puts itself forward as a defender of motorists' rights. On what we have heard tonight, we know that this is simply not believable. These insurance companies, including the RACV, should take up their concerns over repair costs with the car manufacturers instead of beating panel beaters into submission and dropping the quality of repairs for their customers, supposedly their most important asset. (Time expired)2439217:57:0024392Secker, Patrick, MPMr SECKER848BarkerLP10—Thank you for the opportunity to raise some matters of genuine interest to my electorate of Barker and the general community in relation to the political landscape. The recent state elections in Western Australia and Queensland have given all members of federal parliament a chance to ponder on what the people of Australia want and demand from their representatives, and in both of these elections there were many such demands.Leadership, stability and consistency were, I believe, the paramount reasons for the re-election of a Labor government in Queensland with such a huge majority. It did not seem to matter that the Labor frontbench in Queensland seemed to consist of one man with a broad grin wherever he went and no-one else was to be seen. It did not seem to matter that the Labor government had presided over the worst unemployment record of any mainland state, when `Jobs, jobs, jobs' was Beattie's catchcry to get elected in the first place. And it did not seem to matter that Queensland Labor was endemically affected by electoral rorts within its own ranks. All that mattered to the Queensland voters was that the coalition was seen as divided over preference deals with One Nation and that its leadership was seen as unstable, unfit to govern and unlikely to perform.Similar things happened in Western Australia, although not to the same extent. There was a feeling that the Court government was not travelling perfectly, that elements within were not totally supportive of Premier Court and that there had been too many backflips, especially on such things as regional forest agreements, where, in actual fact, nobody ended up winning except the Labor Party and the loony left element of the environmental lobby. So there are lessons to be learned for all of us, but the biggest lesson is to treat One Nation for what it is and not flirt with their crackpot ideas, which I will address shortly.It is interesting to note that the three seats that One Nation appear to have won in Queensland were won with National Party preferences, but that One Nation did not deliver any seats to the coalition, which must serve as a timely reminder to anyone of a mind to flirt with this extremist party. Unfortunately, there are many good people out there who have voted for One Nation, for lots of different reasons which range from the notion that the major political parties are not listening—often reinforced by populist night time talkback radio, whose main aim is to keep people awake and listening—to other reasons, including the idea of sending a message to the major political parties, or of making a protest vote on some issue dear to their hearts, simply because a voter is not sure who to vote for so they vote for someone who has not got a chance of winning government. It is ironic that many of these good voters who want stability end up voting against stability by a vote for other than a majority party. Do not get me wrong, it is everyone's right to vote for whomever they want and for whatever reason they want, just as it is my duty to represent all those people who do not vote for me for whatever reason. I am sure that everyone in this House will attest to the fact that they spend more time listening than anything else. But, of course, there are many different views out there and if we support some views we rarely get the accolade of listening but if the group with the opposite view does not get its way, then, ipso facto, that means we are not listening. Such is the lot of an MP, but I am sure all sides of the political spectrum in the House realise this and know that we just have to get on with the job of trying to do the best we can.It is worth returning to the subject of Pauline Hanson and One Nation and the effect it is having on Australia and the way we, as politicians, need to deal with it. The major political parties have, under their leadership, strongly urged placing One Nation last, and Hanson hates this because it does not give her the credibility she craves. But more of this later, when I intend to point out her obvious failings. At least Rob Borbidge had the leadership integrity to call for putting One Nation last, which strongly contrasted with that of Premier Beattie, who, to my knowledge, never had the gumption to do so and, of course, escaped any great scrutiny from the media on this lack of integrity and this short-term political expediency. At least Bob Carr, another Labor leader, was not prepared to follow this tacky strategy. The more people who expose Hansonism for what it is, the less people will be inclined to support her dangerous ideas.It is a disappointment to see the way that the federal Leader of the Opposition, Kim Beazley, treats her misguided mantra on the so-called evils of globalisation. His pathetic attitude was to say that we should just try to treat the effects of globalisation more kindly, whereas a real leader would debunk her ideas as dangerous, and argue all the benefits that come from the access to world markets for our farmers and exporters. Do we ever hear this from Beazley? Of course not, because he wants to surf in on the disaffected voters who support Hansonism, without really attacking her cuckoo land ideas. It is a shame that that course of action has been taken. Frankly, I do not think he will ever be the leader of this country because he is not showing any signs of being a leader so far.We should be caring, of course, about those who suffer from the effects of the deregulation and globalisation, but also point out the folly of supporting outdated and dangerous answers such as the banning of imports and tariff taxes on our consumer goods. To stop globalisation we would have to go back to the horse and cart, as a former member of this House, Bert Kelly, would say, and this country owes a lot to the sometimes laconic but always modest former member for Wakefield. Of course, the world is getting smaller and, without banning the use of computers and the Internet, it will continue to get smaller. But globalisation has many benefits, and when our farmers are so efficient that we produce five times what we can consume on our home market, it stands to reason that we need to export 80 per cent of what we produce. Hanson's silly answer is to ban imports, but what do we do with the other 80 per cent of what our farmers produce? Of course, she has never had an answer to that.Do we really think that other countries will stand idly by while we ban their exports and hope they will not ban ours? Of course not. The answer is to encourage world trade and open access to our products, which also means a reciprocal opening up of our markets, provided there is no threat to our clean green image, of our food especially. We need only to look at those agricultural products that have benefited from globalisation and greater access. The wine industry, which is a very important industry to the electorate of Barker, is booming thanks to greater access to world markets, especially Europe. This came about through World Trade Organisation negotiations, yet Pauline Hanson and her League of Rights cousins continually attack the WTO as something evil.The lamb industry continues to do well because of greater access to world markets, and it was the World Trade Organisation that ensured that the shoddy action taken by the US market to restrict our lamb was seen for what it was. But apparently for Hanson and the League of Righters, it is evil and hurts our farmers. In fact, the opposite happens. The beef industry is doing extraordinarily well due to the greater access gained to world markets by, firstly, Tim Fischer and, since then, Mark Vaile, as coalition trade ministers. There is no doubt that our freedom from exotic diseases, such as mad cow disease, scrapie and foot and mouth, gives confidence to our consumers and overseas importers. We might all remember that, at the last election, the pork industry, strongly supported by Hanson and the League of Rights, suggested that the answer to falling prices was to ban the import of pork. No matter that this would lead to reciprocal bans on other Australian farm products worth eight times as much. Of course, it was a stupid, short-sighted non-answer, and the action we took to encourage the exports of pork has proven to be most beneficial—to the point where the pork industry is now thriving. Do we hear these sorts of arguments from the Leader of the Opposition? No, we do not because he does not have the ticker to take it up to Pauline Hanson. He does not understand farmers and no amount of phoney bus tours will ever convince them otherwise. Rural leadership was shown by Senator Ron Boswell who has taken Hanson head-on by showing how loony One Nation and the League of Rights were by promoting the Port Arthur massacre as some sort of United Nations conspiracy to take our guns away. If Hanson had her way she would be putting semi-automatic guns back into the community. Even the Sporting Shooters Association of Australia has rejected this loony tune. We must reject Hanson and her League of Rights cousins and do it forcefully. She has no credibility and we must not give her any if we want our system to survive with stability and credibility. (Time expired)2439418:07:0024394Swan, Wayne, MPMr SWAN2V5LilleyALP00—I rise to outline the circumstances that have led to me being given a clean bill of health by the Federal Police in relation to untrue allegations contained in a fabricated re-enactment broadcast on 27 November 2000 on the ABC regarding the 1996 federal election. I would like to commend the police officers I dealt with in the Australian Federal Police for their professional conduct in this investigation. This was a not a matter that in the first instance should have been referred to the Australian Federal Police because there were on the public record categorical denials from national Labor and Democrat spokesmen disproving these false allegations and thereby removing any hint of illegality. However, given the media attention focusing on the 7.30 Report's fabricated re-enactment, I believe the Australian Federal Police investigation was the only way I could have ever cleared my name from the untrue smear contained in the program.The replay of this re-enactment on news broadcasts, the references to and repetition of the image of brown paper envelopes, the government's referral to the Australian Electoral Commission and ultimately to the Australian Federal Police, all called into question my standing in the community. The repetition by senior government ministers of these untrue allegations and stunts like that performed by the member for Sturt have all been aimed at sullying my name. These false allegations were part of a vendetta by a bitter individual and were conveniently packaged in a fabricated re-enactment by an unprofessional journalist that was broadcast across Australia.Today I want to set the record straight. The re-enactment was of an event that never happened. I do not want to spend much time on the false allegations themselves, but I do want to say this: the campaign contribution made to the Democrats was not an illegal secret inducement. The $500 campaign contribution was given, and used, to buy election signs and was completely unrelated to preferences. It was not in a brown paper bag or brown envelope, and, most importantly, had nothing to do with the preference decision that was taken at a national level, by national negotiators who all rejected the allegation prior to the 7.30 Report screening the re-enactment. The re-enactment on the ABC was in breach of the ABC's own editorial policies, the ABC Code of Practice and the journalists' code of ethics. It was irresponsible sensationalism adopting the McCarthyist attitude `know nothing, suspect everything'. Unsupported and denied allegations should never be put to air, but when they are done in such a way as to create a dramatic image, they leave a lasting impression, long after the real facts have come out. Of critical relevance has been the unethical and unprofessional conduct of the journalist who reported this story.Mr Wayne Sanderson ignored all of the evidence put to him by Mr Ian Roland, the Democrat campaign director, and my own categorical denials, and he proceeded with a story that had been completely denied by the two central people critical to the allegation. Mr Sanderson also ignored the denial of Senator Andrew Bartlett, who told him there had been no local Democrat influence in the national preference decision, and the denial of Senator Robert Ray, the national ALP negotiator. Instead, Mr Sanderson relied upon the evidence of Mr Lee Bermingham, a person with a longstanding personal grudge against me since his sacking from the Labor Party in 1997. Mr Roland has also been grievously slandered by this program. Since the program went to air, he has said to me and others:Despite me refuting the scurrilous allegations made by Mr Bermingham on at least 6 occasions during our meeting—which was prior to the program going to air—he—that is, Sanderson—still seemed obsessed by pursing the Bermingham lies as matter of fact. I warned Sanderson he was walking on dangerous ground. And Senator Bartlett has had a similar experience. Senator Bartlett, who was also misrepresented on the 7.30 Report, directly denied to Mr Sanderson, before the story went to air, key elements of the story which eventually went to air. Mr Sanderson told the Senator he was `going to get Swan', prior to the program going to air. The only person the 7.30 Report relied upon for its factual content, Mr Bermingham, now appears to be walking away from the original story by the comments he made in the Courier Mail on 21 February this year, when he said:I have never disputed there may have been an innocent explanation for what took place.Further to this, Mr Sanderson never at any stage prior to putting the program to air, when talking to me or my legal adviser, outlined the details of the re-enactment so I could respond. Mr Speaker, Mr Sanderson and the 7.30 Report are in breach of the ABC editorial policy section 4.3, `Accuracy, impartiality and objectivity', as well as section 4.8, relating to re-enactments. They are also in breach of the ABC Code of Practice sections 4.1(a), 4.1(c), 4.2(a) and 4.2(b). Mr Sanderson has, repeatedly, on ABC radio, denigrated, ridiculed and misrepresented events regarding me. He has a hatred and an obsession with any person seen to have been close to or involved in the Goss government.On one occasion prior to the 7.30 Report re-enactment, Mr Sanderson claimed on ABC radio that I was a political buffoon because in 1995 I was responsible in some way for the `koala road' which he said led to the downfall of the Goss government. In 1995, I was the member for Lilley and spent 18 months opposing the then transport minister, David Hamill, and his attempts to build new roads, including one right through my electorate. On another occasion, Mr Sanderson put to air an accusation I was a sympathiser with the One Nation Party—an accusation I entirely reject—without even bothering to seek a response from me. This type of misrepresentation has at times occurred on a daily basis on Brisbane ABC radio and never has Mr Sanderson bothered to call me to check the accuracy of such assertions. Since my clearance on Friday, 16 February, I have not been contacted by the Andrew Carroll morning show in Queensland or by any other ABC radio current affairs program in Queensland to address the imbalance created by the continuous airplay of these malicious allegations prior to Christmas. Mr Sanderson is part of a small clique of people pursuing political vendettas against me, and his journalistic conduct has been both unethical and unprofessional. It was this prejudice that led Mr Sanderson to fabricate the image of a secret transfer of money in a brown envelope. He knew this would translate in the wider media into images of the brown paper bags of the Bjelke-Petersen era. It is a matter of common knowledge in and around the ABC and throughout Brisbane's political circles that Mr Sanderson and his boss Mr Steve Austin regularly joke about getting Swan and other prominent Labor identities in Queensland. This is in breach of all of the editorial policies and codes of ethics previously mentioned. But Mr Sanderson in particular is in breach of section 2.4 of the Code of Practice relating to discrimination by the presentation or portrayal of people in a way which is likely to encourage denigration because of their political belief.I believe the ABC must immediately investigate all of these matters under sections 8.1 and 8.2 of their Code of Practice. There is a very important point of natural justice and fair play here. I say to all those in the gallery here and other journalists who give Mr Sanderson credence and who have been swept up in the hysteria: just remember the immortal lines from Emile Zola, defending Dreyfus:But it is with this poisoned bread that the unclean press has been nourishing our poor people now for months. And it is not surprising if we are witnessing a dangerous crisis, for when folly and lies are thus sown broadcast, you necessarily reap insanity.I ask all working journalists to think seriously about the issues involved in this re-enactment. Think about it like this. What if you were accused by somebody you had worked with as a journalist and this person no longer worked with you because they had been sacked from your bureau? What if this former colleague was now alleging they had seen you being improperly influenced by a source to write or put to air a particular story? What if a 7.30 Report journalist who had a longstanding grudge against you convinced his superiors to put to air a re-enactment of the event starring your former colleague? What if the 7.30 Report reporter failed to ask you about any of the details of the proposed re-enactment, ignored your denials, ignored the denials of your most senior colleagues and broadcast the story? What if that re-enactment was rebroadcast across all of the commercial channels in the country, with your friends, family and supporters viewing the image of an event that never happened? What if you were stood down for 80 days? What if your friends and family were harassed and ridiculed? What steps would be available to you to secure some justice?Let me say that this episode has been hard on me and my family, and I thank them for their support and their love during this period. It has also been hard on Mr Roland and has severely affected his health. I feel very sorry for him for being dragged into this public humiliation because of a journalist's personal hatred of me. In closing, let me say this: for me, the first step towards justice is today to ask the ABC to do the right thing: to have a proper investigation. This man has politically stalked me, my friends and my family because of his political obsession. He has done this as a public employee in the ABC and he has done this despite clear evidence that his story was wrong. But then Mr Sanderson did not want to hear the truth. He certainly did not want to broadcast the truth. I have the highest regard for the ABC—I am one of its strongest supporters in this parliament—but, if it is to retain its respect and standing, it must immediately investigate the activities of one or two individuals and do something about the injustices that I have outlined here this evening.2439718:17:0024397Kelly, De-Anne, MPMrs DE-ANNE KELLYFK6DawsonNP10—I want to refer to an article that appeared in the Queensland Country Life of 25 January 2001. This article was entitled `Why single desks are failures' and it was written by Mr Graeme Samuel, the president of the National Competition Council. This article has caused great disquiet amongst cane farmers throughout Queensland. I would like to quote from the article, if I may. It started:If it wasn't so incredibly serious, government intervention in agricultural marketing in the year 2001 would be very, very funny—a cross between the keystone cops and big-brother style government.Later on in the article Mr Samuel goes on to say:Deregulation is all about choice for the grower and competition is all about performance by the marketer. For example, if Queensland's sugarcane growers were unhappy with the management decisions of the Queensland Sugar Corporation (which last year meant that growers received no benefit from the doubling of world sugar prices between March and August), they would be free to investigate other marketing options.I would like to take up the point that Mr Samuel made about Queensland Sugar Corporation, now Queensland Sugar Ltd, and his assertion that growers received no benefit from the doubling of world prices between March and August. The fact of the matter is that, if Mr Samuel had stirred himself from his ivory tower in Melbourne and knew a little bit about the production of sugarcane in Queensland, he might in fact have had the facts to hand. The reality is that Queensland Sugar Ltd had to satisfy long-term contracts. All those in rural Australia know that most products are sold under long-term contracts. Queensland Sugar Ltd, understanding that our sugar industry has a reputation as the most consistent supplier of raw sugar in the world, quite rightly places great importance on keeping faith with its long-term contracts. The difficulty is that, instead of five million tonnes of raw sugar being produced in Queensland, there was only 3.86 million. Once it had fulfilled its long-term contracts, there was simply no surplus left to be able to take advantage of the rising price. Ian White, the chief executive officer of Queensland Sugar Ltd, has always said that QSL is not a speculator. QSL tries very hard to maintain its excellent reputation for quality production and consistency. So Mr Samuel next time might check a few facts before he goes into print. There has been disquiet caused by Mr Samuel's denigration of Queensland Sugar Ltd, which, as I said, have done a magnificent job over the years maximising returns to millers and growers. The disquiet is caused by the suggestion that there should be another review of the Queensland sugar industry single-desk arrangements just four years after the last review was completed. That last review in 1996 cost the industry some $2 million in consultancy. There were 46 recommendations emanating from the review, including one that there should be no further review for at least a decade. I might say that the farmers very reluctantly gave up their tariff at that time, which amounted to some $1,500 per farm on average—an amount that, with the industry now on its knees, would have been very welcome. Nonetheless, the farmers kept faith with the recommendations, and so did the government, in full. I believe that they now look to the federal government to ensure that Mr Samuel's hasty recommendation that a mere four years after the completion of that review the single desk should again be up for grabs must be rejected. We have had an assurance, in fact a guarantee, from the Deputy Prime Minister that their expectations will be met, as will the expectations of wheat farmers, that the single-desk powers of Queensland Sugar Ltd and the Australian Wheat Board will be retained. I think it is a matter of great regret that a few short weeks before the Queensland election Mr Samuel chose to try to undermine not only the coalition opposition in Queensland but also the federal coalition government by frightening farmers. The sugar industry in Queensland are rightly very appreciative of the sugar assistance package and the assurances they have been given. They have kept their side of the bargain that was made following the sugar industry review. I do not think it is appropriate for bureaucrats such as Mr Samuels to decide that they can enter political debate and override commitments made by governments. If Mr Samuels wants to do that, he should nominate for a federal seat. He would be very welcome to do that in North Queensland. There are any number of federal seats for which he could nominate. In doing that, he could explain to the growers there why he believes the statutory marketing arrangements are very funny. I think he would get a very warm reception in North Queensland. I just hope he keeps his motor running when he does!The government will not be swayed by a one-year performance of Queensland Sugar Corporation—taking into account that they have kept the reputation for consistent supply—which of course was due to a massive decline in sugar production caused by poor weather and crop disease. The predictions for the sugar price for the current crop are such that growers can expect a considerably higher return this year. We are looking at prices of around 10.24c per litre, a considerable improvement on 4.86c two years ago.I would like to move on to the Productivity Commission report into the impact of competition policy reforms on rural and regional Australia. This makes very interesting reading. In fact, I got my copy out again to refresh my memory. I remind the President of the National Competition Council of some of the recommendations that the Productivity Commission made and of some of their findings. The key messages were as follows. The early effects of national competition policy have favoured metropolitan areas more than rural and regional areas and there is likely to be more variation in the incidence of benefits and costs of NCP among country regions than in metropolitan areas. They concluded that the dismantling of statutory marketing arrangements would disadvantage producers. In fact, they said there would be a channelling of resources and income from producers to consumers, predominantly in metropolitan areas.I pick up on a point made by the member for Parramatta: for Australian producers, exports are absolutely vital. For once I agree with the member for Parramatta. He is absolutely right. A small country with a large surplus in agricultural production has to export. May I assure the member for Parramatta that 92 per cent of Australia's sugar is exported. We really do know how to compete on a corrupted world market where every other sugar producer is subsidised. If that is not competition, I do not know what is. I am glad to accept the advice of the member for Parramatta. I assure him that the sugar industry is taking it to heart and exporting. I would like to continue with the Productivity Commission report. They went on to say about primary producers and the dismantling of statutory marketing arrangements that the impact on producers may be large and regionally concentrated and could pose adjustment difficulties for affected communities. One of the arguments constantly put by Mr Samuels is that there should be assistance. He is correct in saying that, under national competition policy guidelines, they call for assistance to affected producers. Farmers do not want to become a charity case. They do not want to be given a handout. They want to be able to do what they do well, which is to produce. They do not want to be adjusted out of the industry—read for that `removed'. They would simply like to be able to keep their marketing arrangements, compete in a highly corrupted world market and sell their produce for Australia. The National Competition Council has been instructed by the Productivity Commission that they should no longer be asked to conduct legislation reviews. Presumably, this would include legislation which involves statutory marketing authorities. The results of national competition policy are not as glowing as they would appear. Residential users of electricity are paying three per cent less for electricity, while commercial and industrial users are paying 22 per cent less. In Mr Samuels's home state of Victoria, gas prices for residential customers have risen by seven per cent while prices for industrial users have fallen by 22 per cent. (Time expired)Question resolved in the affirmative.Committees24399243992439910000Mossfield, Frank (Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER)Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Mossfield)—The Speaker has received a message from the Senate acquainting the House that Senator Abetz has been discharged from the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund and that Senator Mason has been appointed a member of the committee.Bills24399S27924399Bill 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. Sitting suspended from 6.28 p.m. to 8.00 p.m.Bills24399R120224399Debate resumed from 8 February, on motion by Mr Hockey:That the bill be now read a second time.upon which Mr Kelvin Thomson moved by way of amendment:That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:“whilst not declining to give the Bill a second reading, the House condemns the Government for its treatment of Medicare and effective Americanisation of the health system and its taxation indexation policies and their effect on the community and calls on the Government to get behind Labor's plans to rebuild Medicare”.20:00:0024399Cox, David, MPMr COX83UKingstonALP00—I rise to speak tonight on the Medicare Levy Amendment (CPI Indexation) Bill (No. 2) 2000. I have spoken on a number of occasions about the crisis in our public hospitals. These problems are a consequence of the underfunding by both state and federal Liberal governments that has resulted in the closure of wards for safety reasons because there are simply not enough staff. After seven years of a Liberal state government in which the public hospital system has been afforded the lowest priority, Premier Olsen has announced that he will cancel next year's Le Mans car race in Adelaide because the choice, according to him, is a car race or 200 nurses. It seems that Mr Olsen has been looking at the reports from his pollsters. He has at last noticed what he would have known years ago if he had been listening to the South Australian public and their concerns about the indulgence of his government. There have been a lot of car races, as well as the financial debacle of the Hindmarsh soccer stadium, since former Premier Dean Brown first cut $140 million in a single year from the state's hospital system. Since then, the Howard government has refused to adequately fund South Australia's public hospital system. What most people want is for their government to put the priority on maintaining basic services such as public hospitals and schools. The question is: will the money saved from the cancellation of the Le Mans car race translate into any improvement in our public hospitals? We will have to wait and see whether he means an additional 200 nurses or not having to cut 200 more. The poor state of South Australia's public hospitals relative to the rest of the country is spelt out in the Productivity Commission's Report on Government Services 2001, released this month. The report singles out South Australia as among the worst performing states on health care. The report covers emergency department waiting times across five triage categories from resuscitation to non-urgent. Patients in category 1 are in cardiac arrest or need resuscitation. Patients in category 2 are emergency cases and need to be seen within 10 minutes. In this category, we are talking about patients suffering chest pains and possible heart attacks, strokes, trauma to the head and severe shortness of breath—that is, patients whose condition could rapidly deteriorate while they wait. The report shows that, in 1998-99, 28 per cent of emergency patients waited longer than 10 minutes. Patients in category 3 are urgent cases and need to be seen within 30 minutes. Typically, urgent cases include abdominal pain, trauma or renal and biliary conditions. The report shows that 37 per cent of patients with these conditions waited longer than the prescribed 30 minutes. Patients in category 4 are semi-urgent cases. The prescribed waiting time of 60 minutes for these patients was exceeded in 35 per cent of cases. These figures confirm the pressures on our emergency departments, and every other bit of evidence suggests that these pressures have worsened since 1998-99. Our medical staff are working harder than ever to limit the wait of sick South Australians and are having to do more with the inadequate resources provided by the Olsen and Howard governments. I was alarmed by the Productivity Commission's findings that South Australia has the highest rate of hospital acquired infections anywhere in Australia. More than three per cent of patients were infected following surgery, as a result of their hospital visit, while the Australian average was about two per cent. The rate for post-operative infection following contaminated surgery—that is, surgery that breaches the gastro-intestinal, respiratory or urinary tract—was higher than other states at 4.6 per cent. South Australia is also the leader in unexpected readmissions to hospitals. More South Australians return to hospital within 28 days of their initial discharge than do patients in any other state. That means patients are often being discharged sooner than is clinically desirable, to free up beds.The Productivity Commission scores the health performance of Australia's states and territories across a range of indicators. Its report is damning evidence that the Olsen and Howard governments are guilty of neglect of South Australia's health care. It is no wonder that South Australia is the only state not to undertake patient surveys and feedback. Every other state conducted patient satisfaction surveys in the year 2000. In fact, patient feedback has not been sought in South Australia in any of the years included in the report. The South Australian government advised the Productivity Commission that it will undertake a telephone survey of patients in March of this year. I wonder whether it is going to release the results of that! There can be no argument that South Australia's public hospitals are suffering deliberate neglect from the Olsen and Howard governments. The statistics are clear and the victims are numerous. Every week I am meeting South Australians who deserve care but are not getting the care they need. I want to briefly share the experiences of three constituents whose cases are typical of many. Mrs Margaret Knox of Port Noarlunga South needs her knee replaced. She has needed it replaced since October 1998 but has had to endure worsening pain and diminishing mobility for over two years. Her operation was scheduled for 12 January this year, but an infection caused its cancellation. After a further six weeks wait, Mrs Knox's re-scheduled operation was for 23 February, but it was again cancelled—this time due to industrial action by the hospital's nurses. Mrs Knox was advised of the cancellation at 7 o'clock on the night before her admission. The hospital tried to do the surgery as soon as possible because Mrs Knox's case was now considered semi-urgent, but the demand for accident and emergency beds and the nurses' industrial action to ensure minimum staffing levels forced its cancellation. Mrs Knox is due for admission again on 13 March. Meanwhile, her daily dosage of morphine has been increased from four five-milligram tablets to eight tablets a day. She was taking the dose of four tablets a day late last year, when she first came to see me. Mrs Knox wants it known that she supports the nurses' industrial action. Mrs Knox's experience at FMC is a classic reflection of the blow-out in waiting lists for elective surgery. As our hospitals attempt to meet increasing patient demand without commensurate increases in funding, new fees and charges are being levied. Another constituent has brought to my attention the decision by FMC to supply only one breast prosthesis to mastectomy patients. Breast prostheses need replacing once a year and cost $150. Previously the supply of breast prostheses at FMC was free. This is one of the hard decisions the hospital has had to make in cutting its budget to provide essential health services. The third case is from a teenager, Rachel Vandersluys, who sent me an email yesterday. She has a major cyst in the joint of her wrist that has stopped her participation in her chosen sports for a season and threatens her matriculation studies because, unless it is treated, she will have great difficulty writing long essays. She wrote:I cannot train. I have lost my spot in my sports. I know I will have to work extra hard to regain my fitness. I am trying to do my matriculation with a ganglion on my writing hand. I have been under care at Flinders Medical Centre since November. It took a month before I could see a specialist in the plastics unit. I was told in November I had a 3 month wait. I was devastated! I wanted nothing more than to return to my sports. I wanted to be fit and to be able to write long essays required in matriculation. Being a plastics unit, skin cancers get high priority and I have no problems with that as I understand the dangers being an outside person. My father is on a disability pension and my mother cares for him. They are unable to spare the $500 to go private.There are so many disrupted lives as a result of waits for elective surgery.Another symptom of the crisis in our public hospitals is the growing number of ambulance diversions. Ambulance diversion occurs when hospitals are unable to cope with more patients and instruct ambulances to drive past their hospital and go to more distant facilities. I wrote to the state minister for emergency services on 13 October seeking the number of occasions and the length of time that each hospital in Adelaide was on ambulance diversion for each month this last year. In his letter the minister admitted that:... hospital diversion, which was spasmodic in 1999, has become a more frequent and regular occurrence in 2000.Although my letter requested information for every month this last year, the minister only provided figures for September and October. For September, there were 36 instances of diversion, totalling 304 hours. For October, there were 56 instances of diversion, totalling 665 hours. The letter highlighted a new and growing problem:In the month of October, the most lengthy periods of diversions were initiated by private hospitals (532 hours out of a total of 665 hours). During those hours, approximately 700 patients were diverted from their preferred destination, with approximately 30 to 50 per cent being received by the public health system.By the minister's own admission, the problem is worsening; yet he did not commit to fixing the problem—only to `monitor the situation keenly'. Since receiving the minister's letter, I have been monitoring the situation myself. The South Australian Ambulance Service have advised me that they had not tabulated statistics for ambulance diversions before September 2000, indicating that this is an emerging problem. The figures I obtained from them reveal that there was a large increase in ambulance diversions at the end of last winter. There were 36 instances of diversion, totalling 304 hours, in September last year. For October there were 56 instances of diversion, totalling 665 hours. During the quieter month of December—when there is less elective surgery—our hospitals were on ambulance diversion 39 times for a total of 398 hours. In January, South Australia's hospitals switched to ambulance diversion on 41 occasions for a total of 417 hours. January is usually a quiet period. I have real fears for the busy winter months that are approaching, given our health system cannot cope now.Flinders Medical Centre, the main hospital servicing the southern suburbs, has the second busiest emergency department in Australia. Since September last year it has been on ambulance diversion 13 times for 135 hours. The QEH has been on ambulance diversion 16 times for 193 hours. The crisis last month that forced the RAH to send ambulances on diversion back to the QEH demonstrated that deterioration because, under current arrangements, the RAH is expected to always be open to receive ambulance diversions. Hospitals generally get busy at the same time and, therefore, hospitals are commonly on ambulance diversion at the same time. According to information I have obtained for the month of October, there were eight occasions when three hospitals were on ambulance diversion, at least two occasions when four hospitals were on ambulance diversion and one occasion when five hospitals were on ambulance diversion. Wakefield Hospital and St Andrew's Hospital were both on ambulance diversion at the same time on 15 occasions. It is important to make the point that there are only nine hospitals in the Adelaide metropolitan area, some of which are not suitable to receive emergency patients.The ambulance service has also provided me with examples of where patient care could have been jeopardised or major stress caused to families by ambulance diversions. In November last year, an Aldinga Beach resident suffering chest pains was taken by ambulance past the FMC, which was on diversion, and on to the Royal Adelaide Hospital. Suspected heart attack patients need urgent hospital care. Patients in these circumstances could easily be having a silent myocardial infarction which would not be detected on the three-lead electrocardiograph in the ambulance. Accurate diagnosis requires a 12-lead ECG. Such patients also need urgent blood tests to determine whether enzymes have been released into the blood stream, indicating the degree of injury to the heart and the appropriate treatment. Drugs to treat blood clots need to be administered as early as possible—preferably within the first hour of the event—and bypassing a major hospital means increasing the time before treatment and reducing the effectiveness of the treatment.In another incident, an Elizabeth woman who had been assaulted and was unconscious was diverted past the Lyell McEwen and Modbury hospitals to the RAH. The confusion caused police officers to take the woman's children to the Lyell McEwen Hospital where they thought she had been admitted. In another case, a psychiatric patient living at Somerton Park required immediate assessment. The patient should have been assessed by a psychiatrist at Flinders and readied for transport to Glenside. Instead, the patient was diverted to the RAH. By the time the ambulance arrived there, the patient was out of their acute psychotic phase and then spent eight hours in the emergency department, utilising scarce bed space when that could have been avoided.In another incident, an elderly patient from Victor Harbor requiring hospitalisation for a chronic condition was diverted past Flinders Medical Centre. For those unaware of Adelaide's geography, they would already have been travelling for an hour. As the patient had private health insurance, arrangements were then made to go to Ashford. On arriving, the crew were advised that Ashford was also on diversion. The crew then headed for another private hospital—St Andrew's—but, en route, were advised that St Andrew's had gone on diversion. Ultimately, the RAH accepted the patient. However, you can imagine how stressful this was, not just for the patient and the ambulance crew, but also for relatives following the ambulance in a car. The other consideration with diversions is that it ties up ambulances for much longer on each call, reducing the response time for other patients in the areas they are supposed to be servicing.20:15:0024402Horne, Bob, MPMr HORNEUU5PatersonALP00—Every picture tells a story. When you look at the speakers list for this small piece of legislation—this amendment to Medicare—isn't it amazing to see that there was one speaker from the government and half a dozen speakers from the opposition? On this side of the House we are quite passionate about Medicare, what it does and what it offers. Contrary to that, of course, the only speaker from the government's side in our last sitting week was the member for Indi, and he took the opportunity in the debate to raise a general taxation issue. He spent his speech talking about the taxing of petrol. That is enough to make any Australian sick, so I guess you could say in a way that it was related to Medicare. It is very disappointing that government members do not want to come in here and talk about what is happening or, more specifically, what is not happening to Medicare. On this side, we can give you many stories about why Medicare is languishing in the doldrums, why it is being ignored by a Prime Minister and a minister who make it quite clear at every occasion that they want to destroy Medicare. Obviously we will support—I support—the amendment moved by the member for Wills, but we also support the amendment of the government because it follows a precedent that has been long established by the Labor Party when it was in government to adjust the Medicare rebate according to the CPI. Because we are talking about Medicare, I would like to point out the Prime Minister's track record with respect to Medicare and the track record of the current Minister for Health and Aged Care with respect to private investors in the health industry, be it MRI, private hospitals or the drugs that are being approved for the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. All of them have been a complete tragedy and a travesty of justice. Unfortunately, I know the difficulty people in the electorate of Paterson, the electorate that I represent, have in accessing health services. It is a large area made up of small towns. There is no large public hospital; there are a lot of smaller public hospitals that no longer carry out surgical procedures—like a lot of country towns have these days—and medical practices that no longer bulk-bill. It is very difficult for pensioners living in those circumstances and for people living in those towns. Add to this the fact that I represent whole communities—large communities like Forster and Tuncurry, and Nelson Bay on the Tomaree Peninsula—of about 15,000 people, with a high percentage of pensioners. In both of those communities, there is no Medicare office.To the bureaucrats who make the decisions, that may seem all right—after all, there is a number of pharmacies where you can go and put in your Ezyclaim application and, within 10 working days, you will get your Medicare rebate back. But, if you are pensioner that has just spent a couple of hundred dollars on a medical bill and pharmaceuticals, that couple of hundred dollars is money to live on; that couple of hundred dollars is a couple of hundred dollars you do not have. They cannot wait those working days for that money to come back to them. By not having a Medicare office locally and not receiving their rebate, what it means is getting to the end of their pension fortnight and going without. To the bureaucrats and to the minister, that is obviously not of importance.The other thing about both of these areas is that they are rapid growth areas—some of the fastest growing areas of Australia. They are typical retiree areas. They have higher than the average percentage of pensioners in their community. They are the sorts of people that rely on Medicare more than any other single group in the whole of Australian society. Pensioners, in particular, need Medicare and they need it to be efficient. Because it is a retirement area, we are getting a higher percentage of growth. The demographics show that they have a much higher than average number of pensioners per capita, yet they do not have a Medicare office. Surely it is not unreasonable to expect that both of these communities should have a Medicare office. Tonight, I call on the government to ensure that Medicare offices are provided in both of those communities, both in the interests of Medicare being ongoing and efficient and in the interests of the people who live there and need it—that is, in Forster and Tuncurry, Tomaree Peninsula and Nelson Bay. Another point I would like to make today is the gigantic con that has been played upon the Australian community by this government. That of course was the rebate to con people into private health insurance. We will see the minister up here at the dispatch box at question time reminding us of how many millions of Australians have taken up the opportunity. He likes to remind me that in the Paterson electorate 47 per cent of people now have private health insurance; 53 per cent do not. But of that 47 per cent that do how many are happy with the service they get? I guess my electorate office is no different from any other member's electorate office and that all other members are getting the same numbers of calls that I am getting from people who are really dissatisfied and feel they were compelled to get private health insurance, only to find out that it is not working. Many Australians have found they do not have the cover they thought they signed up for. I recently made representations on behalf of a lady who joined a private health scheme. She was in her 50s and she thought, `Here's the opportunity: for the first time in my life, because of the rebate, I will join.' She thought she would have the Rolls Royce of health insurance, so she paid the highest rate and she believed that from signing up she had full cover. Being in her mid-50s, she did not think that pregnancy would be a problem, and it was not. But after a couple of months of membership she visited her GP, who recommended she visit a gynaecologist, who in turn recommended a hysterectomy.Believing she had cover, she agreed to the operation and had it. When she had recuperated she applied for her rebate. Surprise, surprise! She got a letter back saying, `Sorry, you do not qualify. This was a pre-existing condition.' I suppose that could have been said if she had had her big toe or her thumb removed or an ingrown toenail out too! Because of the fact that piece of body was there and had to be removed, it was a pre-existing condition! As a result of probably the biggest surgical operation in her life, that woman now finds she did not have the private health cover that she thought she had. She is also in financial difficulties because she has had to pay cash to the hospital and to the doctor for that service. That is the con that is being played upon countless thousands of Australians and that, unfortunately, is the sort of thing that this government stands for. I went and visited this lady at her home. We went through the ads that the health insurance company had placed in newspapers and magazines. We had a look at the literature that they had put out. I agree with her. I believe that she was covered right from the day she signed up. I wrote to this company and finally they said, `Sorry, but no.' This is not an uncommon story. This situation needs to be fixed up.It is interesting that the ACCC is challenging a number of our well-known health insurance companies over their advertising. Their advertisements have been well documented and shown on television, and I think anyone who has paid attention to them would be absolutely disgusted that the recipients of some of the biggest hand-outs in the history of Australian government hand-outs to business could deliberately mislead Australians in that way—but that will be for the courts to decide. In concluding, I simply say that this government's track record on Medicare and on health services to the Australian people is not good enough. The people of Australia deserve better. They deserve a government that will be honest and up front with them. With this government they are certainly not getting that.20:26:0024404Hall, Jill, MPMs HALL83NShortlandALP00—The Medicare Levy Amendment (CPI Indexation) Bill (No. 2) 2000 is one of the few pieces of legislation introduced by the Howard government that actually supports Medicare rather than undermines its. For that I give the government credit. I, along with all members on this side of the House, support the annual indexing of the Medicare levy thresholds. Unfortunately, the Howard government has shown very little commitment to maintaining Medicare. As the member for Paterson has most ably demonstrated, every which way that this government goes it undermines Medicare. It takes every opportunity to do so, despite giving lip-service to supporting and maintaining Medicare in its entirety. It takes every opportunity to undermine it and to try to dismantle this wonderful Medicare system we have here in Australia. I think that the problem starts with the Prime Minister. He has never liked Medicare.DH4Hollis, Colin, MPMr Hollis—Hates it.83NHall, Jill, MPMs HALL—Yes, he hates Medicare. He hates what it stands for and I think that comes first of all from a philosophical position. I have said before in this House that members of the government believe that if you can find it in the phone book the government should not provide it. There are private hospitals in the phone book, so obviously that is where we should go when we look for a hospital. They are very committed to the user of the service paying for it. They do not see that, if you are a pensioner or unemployed or are finding it just a little bit hard, you should be able to access a quality service, because that is what Medicare does: it gives every Australian the opportunity to have quality medical care. That is not a privilege; that is a right. It is argued that Medicare leads to overservicing. If a pensioner can go along and see their doctor and if that doctor bulk-bills, surely they are going to go every day! Every time they feel that they need to see a doctor, every time they get an ache or pain, they will be off to the doctor! No, that is not right, but that is what the government think. They feel that it should be made difficult. They feel that it should be a privilege to go and see a doctor. They believe that health care is only for those people that can afford it. If you have a good income, it means that you must have worked hard in your life and therefore you deserve to be able to get quality health care. Those people that do not have much money, well really—it is obviously their own fault. That is what this government believes.They would like to see a two-tiered health system develop, the same sort of system that they have in the US. In the US system, if you have private health insurance you can get the best treatment that is available, the absolute Rolls Royce of health treatment, but if you are down and out, if you are finding it hard, if you are in between jobs, if you are just an ordinary, average American person, then you cannot afford health insurance. That is the system that they would like to see here: a system where if you have money you get the Rolls Royce treatment but if you have not you get a second-class type of health care—no money, no treatment. As the Leader of the Opposition has said, before you hop into the ambulance, you have to take out your credit card. Before you get any medical treatment, it will not be your Medicare card that they ask for but your credit card. To me, that is absolutely un-Australian. Medicare has made health care that right that I was talking about. The Prime Minister has always opposed universal health care. He opposed Medibank right back at the time of its inception, and as Treasurer he actually dismantled Medibank. In the Fightback proposal in 1993, he was declaring, `Let's get rid of this evil Medicare.' But time has shown that the Australian people really like Medicare. They know the benefits of Medicare; they know what it does for us as a community. But, unfortunately, the government—and the Prime Minister leading the government—is a party with a long history of opposition to any form of universal health coverage. As I have already said, that party is led by our Prime Minister, who not only opposed Medibank and Medicare but led the charge.I think it is very important that the government's `commitment' to Medicare be examined and be examined in great detail. If, as the Prime Minister, the Minister for Health and Aged Care and the parliamentary secretaries say, they are genuine in their commitment to it, then Medicare and our private health system should be strong and growing. So let us look at a few facts and let us examine the government's performance in this area to see whether there really is a commitment to Medicare. I will let you into a secret: I think they are going to get an `F'; they are certainly not going to get an `A'.Let us look at their first budget in 1996. Wouldn't a government that was committed to Medicare put some money into it or at least keep it at the level that it was at? No: $800 million was ripped out of our public hospitals. Foisted onto the states was the responsibility of maintaining our hospitals at the level that they were operating at—a real exercise in cost-shifting. At that time, I was a state member of parliament and I saw on the ground how this affected the people. It increased the times that people had to wait to get into hospital; there were longer delays. The government says, `That's the state governments' problem; they are responsible for the public hospitals.' But they are not being truthful, they are not being honest, they are not telling the truth. When $800 million is ripped from a system, how are the state governments able to maintain the system at the same level? Surely a government committed to Medicare would maintain their funding to our wonderful public hospitals, hospitals that are centres of excellence, hospitals that link into the universities, hospitals where you get the best possible medical treatment. That is definitely an `F'. The Commonwealth dental scheme is another area that we should visit: $400 million was cut out of their budget in 1996, which saw the end of the Commonwealth dental scheme. Once again, at the time I was a state member of parliament and I saw the effects on the ground. Previously, people could go along and get dental treatment pretty quickly. Do you know what the waiting time now is for a pensioner who wants to get a new set of dentures? They have to wait in excess of two years in the Hunter—and that is not good enough. The Commonwealth says, `Dental health is a problem for the states.' I have news for them: it is a problem for the pensioners who cannot eat their food, who have to live on soups, who have to have everything pureed because they cannot eat, because their dentures are broken. This is Australia; this is a country where everybody should be able to have those basic health aids. Once again, I think that is an `F' for the government—it certainly does not show any commitment, to my way of thinking.Then we go to GPs: $1 billion was saved by freezing the GP rebate and restricting provider numbers. You could say, `That's a good way to go—it's saving some money and we still have GPs out there.' But in my area and in the area of the member for Paterson we are seeing the effects of that every day, and so are the pensioners and so are the other people in our areas. There are so few doctors that people have to wait long periods of time to see them, and those doctors that are still there are not bulk-billing. They are not bulk-billing because there are so few doctors in our area. It all comes back to actions of this government in freezing their rebates, restricting provider numbers and having a formula that does not look at regional areas properly. Once again, what do we get? An `F'.Maybe they might have improved a little bit in 1997? No. Wrong. This time they cut $673 million out of the budget and Medicare offices around Australia closed. The member for Paterson was saying that Forster, Tuncurry and the Tomaree Peninsula were areas where a Medicare office is needed. I agree with him, because I know the area very well. In 1997 the Belmont Medicare office was closed, and it was one of the busiest Medicare offices in New South Wales. The nearest Medicare offices—it was between two—were at Lake Haven on the Central Coast and at Charlestown. There is a high pensioner population in that area, and a number of people that live in Swansea within that electorate are elderly. The area is designed to cater for older Australians. Many of them do not have licences and if they do they have got restricted licences. It takes an hour by bus to Charlestown.At that time we collected in excess of 10,000 signatures calling for that Medicare office to be reopened. But their pleas fell on deaf ears. The government did not listen. They did not care for the pensioners of that area. They did not care for the young families of that area. But at least at that time their other policies had not bitten. There were still a few doctors that were bulk-billing in that area. But not so any more. In Swansea there is now only a part-time doctor that bulk-bills. It is not good enough—all of these elderly people have no access to doctors that bulk-bill and no access to a Medicare office.I mentioned that the nearest Medicare office was at Charlestown, quite a large commercial centre. But, guess what, last week the Charlestown Medicare office was closed. It is being renovated. There is a Medibank Private office just opposite the Medicare office that was opened when they closed the office at Belmont. I might say that the Belmont office staff were transferred up there. So there was no loss of staff, no great saving in that area, no great saving in rent, because I am sure the rent was higher there and they had to pay out a lease in Belmont. This Medibank office at Charlestown could have been used to look after the Medicare clients that went to Charlestown. But, no, in the whole of the Newcastle area there were two Medicare offices open last week, one on the west side of the lake and one in Newcastle. Tell me how that helped the pensioners and the people with young children that needed to get their rebates to be able to afford their medicine? Then we have the 30 per cent private health insurance rebate. The way that the government bribed people to join and take private health insurance was a disgrace.DH4Hollis, Colin, MPMr Hollis—They blackmailed them.83NHall, Jill, MPMs HALL—They blackmailed them—blackmailed them, bribed them, forced them into a situation where they had to take an insurance out that they could not afford. The scheme has blown out by $500 million. I think it costs around $1.8 billion now. And, yes, the private health insurance companies are doing well. The government made a decision in the area of health care to subsidise private health insurance companies—insurance companies—instead of putting that money into public hospitals. The rationale was that it encouraged people to use the private system and take the strain off the public hospitals. But wouldn't putting $1.8 billion into the public hospital system be much more effective than forcing people to take out private health insurance? Wouldn't it be much more affordable for people? Wouldn't people be in a position where they got the best quality health care in the public hospitals that are attached to the universities, where you have got the latest technology, rather than being forced to go to a private hospital and then be faced with a gap between what they get back from the health insurance companies and what they have to pay for their treatment?Once again, this government's philosophy is that if it is private it must be better and therefore everyone would want to go to a private hospital as opposed to a public hospital if they could. They do not give any thought to the fact that it is actually more expensive to run a bed in a private hospital than in a public hospital, which really makes a lie of the claim that private hospitals are more efficient.Not only has this government been opposed to Medicare but it really is opposed to bulk-billing. It would like to see bulk-billing dismantled. John Howard on many occasions in the past has said that, and his action in addressing the problems that I have had in my area, that the member for Paterson has had in his area and that many other members have had really proves that there is no commitment to bulk-billing and no commitment to Medicare. Health care costs are skyrocketing.Then you put that together with the GST—the GST that is hurting all those pensioners, all those ordinary Australians out there that are now being confronted with GST on their electricity, their gas, the enormous effect it is having on their petrol—and those pensioners that have got to hop in their cars and drive all the way to Charlestown to be able to get their Medicare rebates, or at the moment into Newcastle, are really feeling the pinch. Then when they find out—even though they were told at the time—that the four per cent they thought they were getting is two per cent—DH4Hollis, Colin, MPMr Hollis—They were blackmailed.83NHall, Jill, MPMs HALL—Yes, once again they were being misled. Today in question time—DH4Hollis, Colin, MPMr Hollis—Ripped off again.83NHall, Jill, MPMs HALL—Ripped off again, as the member for Throsby says. Today in question time, the Treasurer said, `If it were not for this government, pensioners would be two per cent worse off.' Hey, I have news for the Treasurer: if it were not for this government, pensioners would not be paying GST on their petrol, pensioners would not be paying GST on their electricity, pensioners would not be paying GST on their gas, and pensioners would not feel that they had to have private health insurance and then have to pay an enormous gap. The people of Australia are hurting. This government is not listening. You really need to get out there and talk to people in the shopping centres, listen to what they are saying. Do not justify your position, but listen and hear what they are saying. Australians support Medicare. They want to retain it. They do not want to have it dismantled by stealth—dismantled by a mean, miserable government that is more interested in looking after its friends in big business than families with sick children and pensioners who, under this government, have to choose between going to the doctor or putting food on the table. Medicare made health care a right, not a luxury. It must continue to grow and flourish.20:46:0024408Slipper, Peter, MPMr SLIPPER0V5FisherLPParliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance and Administration10—I would initially like to thank all honourable members who have participated in this debate for their contributions, although speeches given by Labor members have been particularly irrelevant to the terms of the Medicare Levy Amendment (CPI Indexation) Bill (No. 2) 2000. There have been two main issues in this debate, and neither of them has been particularly relevant. The first is the issue raised by the second reading amendment, the allegation that this government does not support Medicare. In fact, this government is committed to a viable and universal publicly funded health care system, known as Medicare. Honourable members opposite have misled the House in the way that they have suggested that this government does not in some way support Medicare, that we do not support bulkbilling, that we are not at all interested in the health of Australians. I want to publicly reject the comments made by members of the opposition.It is the simple fact—and no-one can contest this axiom—that the government has given some incentives for private health insurance, but this does not mean that the government does not continue to support Medicare. The government has no intention of allowing Australians to opt out of Medicare. Medicare will remain a universal system available to all Australians. All that is happening is that the government is restoring the balance between the public and private systems to what it was when Medicare was introduced. I have to be honest and admit that I do not often quote Graham Richardson, former Labor health minister, but I will on this occasion. He said:Medicare was always intended to coexist with the private health system, not replace it.The very fact that we are debating this bill tonight is evidence of the ongoing support by the government for the Medicare system. In fact, the bill has the effect of exempting more people from the Medicare levy without in any way limiting the access of those people to health services. Under the coalition, Medicare has received its highest level of funding ever. The coalition will continue to improve Australia's health system by reforming Commonwealth-state relations and emphasising quality care and preventative treatment. The coalition will also continue to provide Australians with the choice of private care combined with a quality public hospital system. The honourable member for Shortland ought to listen to those words and ought to come into the House and apologise for the speech that she has just given. The policy of the government means that Australia will have an affordable, high quality, world-class health system for the 21st century. The debate also raised the issue of fuel excise. There are a few points on this question which bear restating. With the cuts to fuel taxes and increased grants under the new tax system, the Commonwealth government will receive less in fuel taxes in the 2000-01 financial year than last year. The Commonwealth does not benefit from higher petrol prices. The excise rate is a flat per litre rate. This means that the Commonwealth receives no additional excise when the price of petrol is higher. Everyone knows that all GST revenue goes to the states and territories. It does not—I repeat, not—go to the Commonwealth. In response to the High Court decision which struck down state franchise fees in 1997, the Commonwealth began collecting a levy on behalf of the states and territories. The Commonwealth guarantees to pay amounts collected by the levy to the states and territories. The Labor Party bleats about fuel indexation. Indexation of fuel excise was introduced by the then Labor government in 1983. When it was introduced by Labor during the period of office of that particular government, it was hiked. UU5Horne, Bob, MP0V5Slipper, Peter, MPMr SLIPPER—It was hiked for the reason that the Labor Party wanted to increase government spending in other areas.UU5Horne, Bob, MP0V5Slipper, Peter, MPMr SLIPPER—On five occasions, the Labor Party legislated to increase the petrol excise over and above the inflation adjustment. The member opposite ought to apologise for those comments that he is making. These five increases amounted to around 10c per litre, with 5c of that—7c for leaded fuel—announced in the infamous 1993 tax hike budget after promising in the election no increases in taxes. Excise is indexed because it is a flat or volumetric tax which does not increase as the price—of fuel in this case—increases. Because the amount of excise collected does not increase as prices rise, the rate has to be indexed to the CPI to ensure that it maintains its real value. Just as the government indexes pensions, benefits and many other payments to the CPI to maintain their real value, so excise is indexed.It is not correct that this indexation provides a windfall gain to the Commonwealth. For every extra dollar of revenue that is raised through indexing excise, around $2.40 is paid out through higher pensions and other government allowances. If there were no indexation of pensions, the Commonwealth would be billions of dollars ahead. But the coalition believes that pensions should continue to be indexed and, to assist with funding these increases, excise continues to be indexed.The member for Kingston sought to criticise the South Australian government and also the federal government. He claimed that we were not, in some way, adequately supporting health. I want to place on record that the coalition is providing the states and territories with $6 billion this financial year for the public hospital system. That is a very tangible level of support for this important part of government service.The member for Shortland attacked the government over the Commonwealth Dental Scheme. The Dental Scheme was a temporary Keating scheme brought in following the 1993 election to help fill gaps in state programs, target funding and patient numbers which were reached by the end of the program in December 1996. It is interesting that the member for Shortland is being somewhat hypocritical in so far as Labor made no commitment to keep the program in its last budget or in its 1996 election policy.These people come into the House, they seek to mislead members of the chamber and, in addition, they seek to mislead the Australian public. They have the hide to move this pious second reading amendment. The government rejects that second reading amendment and seeks the support of all members of the chamber to this very important bill, the Medicare Levy Amendment (CPI Indexation) Bill (No. 2) 2000.Amendment negatived.Original question resolved in the affirmative.Bill read a second time.24409Leave granted for third reading to be moved forthwith.Bill (on motion by Mr Slipper) read a third time.Condolences2441024410Debate resumed.20:56:0024410Worth, Trish, MPMs WORTH8V5AdelaideLPParliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs10—On behalf of the people of my electorate of Adelaide, my friends and my family, I am pleased to have the opportunity to honour the life of Sir Donald Bradman and to extend my sympathy to his children, Shirley and John, and to his grandchildren, Greta, Tom and Nicholas.Donald George Bradman was born at Cootamundra in southern New South Wales on 27 August 1908. He died in Adelaide, peacefully at home, on Sunday, 25 February 2001, aged 92 years. Sir Donald grew up in Bowral, where he met the girl who was to become his wife, and where, from a young age, he developed superb cricket skills.In December 1927, he made his first-class debut for New South Wales against South Australia at the Adelaide Oval. He scored 118 and 33, batting at number seven. Three more centuries the following season ensured his first test cap against England. In 1934, Sir Donald transferred from New South Wales to South Australia and Adelaide became his home. In 20 years of test cricket, he amassed 6,996 runs, with 29 centuries from 52 tests at an incredible average of 99.94. No other batsman in the world has come anywhere near reaching this figure. In first-class matches, Sir Donald scored 28,067 runs at 95.14, with 117 centuries—one century in every 2.8 innings that he played. The 1930 tour of England was one of personal triumph for Sir Donald. In 1936, he was appointed Australian captain and led his country to victory in all five series between 1936 and 1948. His 1948 tour of England with his team known as the `Invincibles' did not lose one match.But Sir Donald was not only a run-making machine and great sportsman; he was a successful businessman and cricket administrator. He put a lot back into the game of cricket. He drove Australian and South Australian cricket. He served as a selector and as a member of the Australian Board of Control—including the position of chairman, which he held for two terms. In 1949, he became the only Australian cricketer to be knighted. On receiving the award he said:This was an honour that I never sought or dreamt about. If there had been nobody else to please but myself I would have preferred to remain just plain mister. But it was an honour for the game of cricket and in that context I accepted the responsibility of the title conferred by knighthood ... but one thing I do feel very proud of and that is that few people have ever carried the title of `Lady' as graciously as my wife has and that if ever a woman deserved to be called a `Lady', she did.At the opening of the Bradman Museum in October 1989, Sir Donald recalled that he and Jessie walked to school every day for 12 months across the cricket ground. He said:She didn't know it, I think I was then, not sure whether it was eleven or twelve, but I decided to marry her. I didn't ask her, I was too shy. But eventually I got around to it after another ten years and so formed the best partnership of my life.In a retrospective of the 20th century, Sir Donald was selected Australian Sportsman of the Century, Wisden Cricketer of the Century and in the top 10 of world sports figures of the century by the World Confederation of Sport. He was also one of two Australians to be selected in the top 100 world figures of the 20th century. Sir Donald has not been seen about a lot since Lady Bradman died in 1997, but he has been a lot more accessible than most people realise. It is well known that he replied to all his own correspondence until recent times. I recall meeting him at the South Australian Cricket Association committee room at my beloved Adelaide Oval on a number of occasions. I particularly remember attending a board room lunch with a number of interesting guests when I had been a member of parliament only for a short period, probably about seven or 7½ years ago. Imagine my delight at finding that, when I checked the place names, Sir Donald was to be sitting on my right. This was going to be my chance to chat to the great man and to ask him lots of questions. I recall him being particularly charming and he asked most of the questions. On another occasion I visited Sir Donald at his home, because he had agreed to write in a book that I was giving to a friend. He was again charming, in no hurry, and I particularly recall that he insisted on using his own pen. Sir Donald guarded his privacy but, even in later years, enjoyed playing golf or bridge with his friends. I have had real grief expressed to me today: an early morning telephone call with a simple question, `Have you heard the news?' and then an explanation, `I'm grieving.' A few minutes later there was yet another phone call along the same lines. It is a reminder of how Sir Donald gave a sense of calm, security and optimism to a nation during the dark days of depression and to nations recovering from World War II. My friend Rex Sellers, who himself played cricket for South Australia and Australia, said to me today that Sir Donald was an icon. He explained that, when you talk of kangaroos or meat pies, people know you are from Australia—mentioning the name Bradman conveys the same message.For fairly obvious reasons I never saw Sir Donald play cricket; I am grateful for the video film. My father and his brothers saw Sir Donald play, and well remember the bodyline series. Just as my grandfather took his children to the lovely Adelaide Oval, so my father took his children. It was a special treat. So a love of the game was handed down from one generation to another. I, too, have continued the tradition—taking my children to the oval. Only last year in what proved to be his last public message, Sir Donald said, `Cricket will survive and remain our most noble game.' I know that many of my constituents will be remembering Sir Donald today—there are few people who are so well regarded. It does not matter whether you say Sir Donald, Don, the Don, the great man or the man himself, it is well understood who is being referred to—just as those newspaper headlines of `He's Out' left no-one in doubt. There are lots of Sir Donald stories—like his answer when asked how he kept fit and he replied, `I batted.' Then there is the reason why the ABC postal address in every state in Australia is Post Office Box 9994—an address thought up because Sir Charles Moses was a cricket fan. Sir Donald Bradman was one of the most powerful figures in South Australia. In January 1990 the Sir Donald Bradman Stand was opened at the river end of the Adelaide Oval. His achievements will transcend time. Whenever we reflect on the sporting greats who have graced this nation, there are heroes and then there is the Don.21:03:0024411Hollis, Colin, MPMr HOLLISDH4ThrosbyALP00—On the occasion of the death of Sir Donald Bradman, I would like to add a few words to the many that have been spoken, not only in this parliament today, but throughout the world. At a time when cricket has been subject to some controversy, it is rewarding to reflect on the contribution that Sir Donald made to the game as a player and as an administrator. Like most Australians, I knew of the life of Sir Donald from an early age and, on being elected to parliament, was pleased that Bowral, where part of the early Bradman legend was established, was part of my electorate. I also knew of him when I was a student many years ago at Kempsey High School where the headmaster's claim to fame there was that he had actually played cricket with Sir Donald. Having represented Bowral, though, which is part of my electorate, where much of the legend was established, it must be admitted that Bowral is not a Labor stronghold.0V5Slipper, Peter, MPMr Slipper—Hear, hear!DH4Hollis, Colin, MPMr HOLLIS—I agree. The low vote I always received in the Bowral booths was more than compensated for by the knowledge that I represented in the federal parliament the area where the Don spent his early years, especially his early cricketing years. It was in 1911 that the Bradman family moved to Bowral from, as my colleague will elaborate on, I am sure, Cootamundra. At the age of 12, Sir Donald played his first competitive game of cricket on the ground that was later to bear his name. On that day he scored 115 not out and took eight wickets. I think that was against the team from Wingello. I recall in the early 1980s that a committee, led by Gary Barnsley from Bowral, came to see me about assistance in establishing the Bradman Museum on the oval opposite the family home in Bowral. I followed with interest the developments and remember that, at one time, I organised a dinner in Old Parliament House with representatives from the then not constructed Bradman Museum and the Indian High Commissioner at that time, Mr Ansari, a great cricketing fan, and his deputy. I know that the passing of Sir Donald will be as keenly felt in India today as it is in Australia and in the cricket loving nations around the world. Ironically, India was one country that Sir Donald did not tour. The Bradman Museum was eventually opened in 1989 in the presence of Sir Donald, and at that time I had the great honour of meeting him. The museum since that time has considerably expanded, but its commitment is still very much as Sir Donald wanted—to quote him at the opening of the museum:The Museum complex is primarily for the youth of Australia. It is a symbol of what cricket has meant and will continue to mean to the people of our nation.The museum is committed not only to the youth of Australia but also, through cricketing scholarships, to the youth of the developing world. Wherever cricket is played, the name of Sir Donald Bradman will continue to live.As well as a memorial service to be held in Adelaide, a memorial service will be held at St Jude's Anglican Church in Bowral, which I most certainly will attend. Bowral is no longer in my electorate; it is in the electorate of the honourable member for Macarthur, the minister for finance, the Hon. John Fahey, who is not here with us for obvious reasons tonight. But I know that if John Fahey were here he would express the feelings of the people in Bowral on this sad passing. As a former member for this area, I thought it appropriate that I also make some brief comments. Sir Donald wrote recently to the Bradman Foundation:In the twilight of a long and happy life, I still think cricket is the finest character builder of all our sports.Mr Deputy Speaker, who would disagree with this? As so many others have said, he truly was a great Australian. It is not likely that we shall ever see his equal again.21:08:0024412Kemp, Dr David, MPDr KEMPBT4GoldsteinLPMinister for Education, Training and Youth Affairs and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service10—I grew up in a household where Don Bradman was the great Australian hero. Cricket to my father was more than a game. It was an approach to life, and Don Bradman embodied in his career and his life the philosophy which lay behind that approach. Cricket was particularly about sportsmanship and teamwork but it was also about strategy and the development of supreme skill. It was about love of sport. It was about Australian success internationally. During the bodyline tour, it was about heroism under fire and it was certainly about winning, but honourably and by the rules.Don Bradman, as a supreme cricketer, embodied cricket. The values for which Don Bradman stood were the values my father sought to inculcate in his children: doing the best of which you are capable; practising and honing skill; being modest about success and standing firm against the worst others can bowl down to you. I always respected my father's words on cricket, for he had played and analysed the game so that he spoke with great authority to my young mind. I remember him warning us that Bradman's technique was not always to be copied, because he was so fast and so keen sighted that he could do things, and get away with shots, that would be fatal to an ordinary cricketer. This was certainly not a criticism of Bradman. It was rather an acknowledgment of his almost superhuman talents, and a recognition that we lesser mortals were best advised to simply stand back in awe of something so extraordinary.During the Depression my father had just left school. It was not an easy time in his own life, and he was one of the millions of Australians who had their spirits lifted by Don Bradman's remarkable performances. Bradman's brilliance provided a rare spark of enjoyment in the hardest times. He inspired the nation in a time of national crisis and Australians repaid him with their undying regard and affection. As I grew to adulthood and saw Sir Donald Bradman himself commenting on cricket and speaking on official occasions what impressed me was his enormous commonsense and wisdom, his honesty and integrity. He did not mince words but he never set out to affront or upset others. He was a leader whose leadership set standards for a sport and a nation. He lived simply and spoke plainly, and remained true to himself until the end. I have taken my own boys to see the museum at Bowral, and tried to pass on to them something of the remarkable life which has just ended. Not to know about Don Bradman is not to know about what makes Australia tick. We are fortunate to have known the Bradman era. 21:11:0024413Murphy, John, MPMr MURPHY83DLoweALP00—When the rollcall of great Australians is finally read surely the name Don Bradman will be at the top of the list. When I was growing up during the 1950s in the small New South Wales country town of Dunedoo the only reference to cricket at that time that I can recall was the expression of the great admiration held by my parents for Sir Donald Bradman. My parents lived through the tough times of the 1930s and 1940s and often spoke to me about how the only affordable source of entertainment at that time was listening to the ABC cricket broadcasts on the wireless and the heroic deeds of Don Bradman both on and off the cricket field.Today I spoke very briefly with one of my dearest friends John Flitcroft who could only be described as a great lover of the game of cricket. John has an encyclopaedic knowledge of the game of cricket and knows as much about the life of Bradman as anyone I know. Of the many tributes paid to Don Bradman today perhaps the one that stands out in John Flitcroft's mind is the fact that Bradman played the game of cricket purely for the love of the game and his country—not for the money. Even after he retired from the game he worked full-time in cricket administration for no financial gain. He never sold his autograph. What a great human being was Sir Don Bradman. What a hero. Which member of the Australian cricket team today could say that he plays for the love of the game and our country, Australia, and not the money? Which member of the Australian cricket team today will devote his retirement years to the game of cricket and Australia, and for no financial gain?Today we have witnessed an outpouring of both grief and celebration of the life of one of Australia's finest, Sir Donald Bradman. When so many have said there will never be another Bradman you can believe it. What an example, what a role model to the youth of today is Sir Don Bradman. Excellence seems an inadequate word when one contemplates Bradman's truly amazing records on and off the cricket fields, from Lords to the SCG. If that level of excellence, sportsmanship, pride and humility were exhibited today by all cricketers, the game would not have the shadow which has been cast upon it today.Bradman sits at the apex of sporting and human achievement and endeavour. What a pity he could not have made it to the age of 99.94 years. Perhaps his greatest innings was his 65 years of holy matrimony to his beloved wife, Lady Bradman. Tonight, we know he has been reunited with her and is in God's arms. The lights may have dimmed in Australia today but let us hope out there, in Cootamundra or Bowral, perhaps in Dunedoo, there is a dawning of a talented young lad or lass who will grasp and embrace the ideals of Don Bradman and once again capture our imagination. I, too, offer my deep sympathy to the Bradman family and may you, Sir Don, truly rest in peace.21:15:0024413Schultz, Alby, MPMr SCHULTZ83QHumeLP10—I too join with my parliamentary colleagues in this condolence motion to the great man, the Don, Sir Donald Bradman. I want to reflect a little on the Bradman family's link with Cootamundra. Charles Andrew Bradman, the grandfather of Sir Donald, emigrated voluntarily to Australia from Suffolk, England, in 1852, aged 19 years. In 1860 he married Elizabeth Biffen at Berrima, New South Wales. In 1873 Charles and his wife left Mittagong to settle at Jindalee, Cootamundra, where they lived until Charles's death on 26 October 1907, just 10 months before his grandson Donald George was born. At the time of his death he was survived by his wife, Elizabeth, who died on 23 December 1924, four daughters and two sons, George, the father of Donald, being the youngest. Both Charles and Elizabeth, as well as two of their daughters, Lucy and Eliza, died in Cootamundra and are buried in the Cootamundra Cemetery. George Bradman, Sir Donald's father, was born in Cootamundra on 29 November 1875 and lived with his family at Jindalee. It was at Jindalee that he met Emily Whatman, who was visiting from Mittagong. He was 18 years old when they married on 16 December 1893. By 1901, it was recorded that they had three daughters. In 1906 George took up land at Yeo Yeo near Stockinbingal, still in the Cootamundra area. Four of the five Bradman children were delivered by Granny Scholz—no relation to me, of course—in the private hospital at 89 Adams Street, Cootamundra. Donald, the youngest, was born on 27 August 1908. Sir Donald was born at Granny Scholz's home, which was then a small hospital in Cootamundra. As a note of trivia, it might also interest the House to know that the great-nephew of Granny Scholz was none other than the former member for Hume, Mr Wal Fife. Granny was 62 when she delivered the boy who would become the world's greatest batsman. She died in 1939, living long enough to see many, but not all, of the considerable triumphs of the boy she had nursed. In an interview with Sydney's the Pictorial newspaper, Mrs Scholz said:Bless my heart and soul, I brought the dear little chap into the world, it was at my hospital in Cootamundra. Don was always a good boy and a bonny baby. He was a sturdy little chap ... His father was a great cricketer, too, but never had a real chance.Of course, compared with his son, none of us had a chance. She also noted that Sir Donald always sent her a telegram on her birthday—another trait that would remain with him: that of a man of letters. He was a prolific writer who would answer every letter. That is quite a task, as members of this House can attest.In 1911 the family moved to Bowral due to the health of Mrs Bradman, and also to improve their children's educational opportunities. Sir Donald led a normal childhood, his time taken up with school, Sunday school, choir and music lessons. It goes without saying that he had an interest in cricket, but he also played tennis and rugby league. His cricketing prowess was evident even at age 11, when he made 55 not out in a school sports afternoon. In the summer of 1920-21, after being selected to play against Mittagong High School, he scored his first ever century. Displaying a habit that would characterise his cricketing career, the young Don made 115. It should be said he made 115 not out—115 out of his team's total of 156 runs. It was the start of the world's greatest cricketing career.On 30 April 1932 Don married his childhood friend, Jessie Menzies, in St Paul's Church, Burwood. There has been much said about the Don, and it is fitting that in every reference to his remarkable life there was always a reference to Jessie. Throughout their 65 years of marriage, his public speeches nearly always carried a message of thanks for the support she gave. One can only imagine the terrible grief he must have felt when she passed away in 1997. The strength of their marriage, and the commitment he always showed to their strong union, is one of the reasons he transcended from being a great sportsman to being a great Australian. And I echo the sentiments of many Australians when I say he is possibly the greatest Australian, for not only his sporting talents but his off-field nurturing of cricket and commitment to fair play. It should be remembered that the tied test during the 1960-61 West Indies tour was due in no small measure to Sir Donald. As a test selector and chairman of the Australian Board of Control, Sir Donald stressed the need to play bright, attractive cricket to bring spectators through the turnstiles. He said that the selectors would look kindly on those players who played to win by playing positive cricket. It was not just that he wanted Australia to play for the win; he wanted them to play for the game and to secure its future as an exciting sport where the excellence of sportsmanship was as great as the excellence of the men playing the game. Essentially, that is how we shall remember this giant of a man whose humility was greatly tested by his greatness: he personified excellence. In the township of Cootamundra, which also has a Sir Donald Bradman museum, he has been part of a historical occasion where the town saw fit to honour Australian captains with a Captains Walk, and a life-size bronze effigy of Sir Donald Bradman is going to be the centrepiece of that Captains Walk. Today flags flew at half mast in Cootamundra and shopfronts displayed the feelings of the township and the shop owners about a wonderful man that the township of Cootamundra has an affinity with. It is on this sad occasion that I urge the Australian parliament to embed his legacy forever in the fabric of our democracy by naming a federal electorate Bradman after the great Don—a fitting tribute to a great Australian who embodied all attributes that young Australians aspire to achieve and most certainly admire. Vale, Don Bradman. You are already sorely missed. In closing, I offer my sincere condolences to the Bradman family on behalf of my constituents.21:23:0024415Adams, Dick, MPMr ADAMSBV5LyonsALP00—I was very sorry to hear on the news this morning that Don Bradman's amazing and inspiring life had come to an end. His life had been very full and satisfying, although he had lost his partner, his wife, Jessie. Despite having other family, I guess he felt that time had come for him to pull up his stumps. His name is already a legend. Everyone in Australia has heard of the Don. To some of our young citizens, he appears somewhat godlike as their elders revere his name. As Stephen Waugh said in the book celebrating the Don's 90th birthday:He is a symbol of Australian cricket; the heartbeat; the inspiration; the image of all that is good in sport and life in general.His achievements on the cricket field from 1928 to 1948 are the world's best, as has been mentioned here today. His skills are still touching Australians to this day. We compare, we watch and we encourage our cricketers in the Don's shadow. Although not playing cricket seriously until he was 16, when he started to play it was not long before he was picked up by the New South Wales cricket selectors. In 1928, he was selected to play for Australia against England when he was just 20 years of age.His achievements since then have been well documented. He had to cope with the nastiest tactic cricket had ever seen. The English developed bodyline bowling in 1932 where bowlers aimed at the batsman's body, basically to try to keep the Don's batting average down. It worked in part and Australia lost the series. But his story was only just beginning and he went on to the most incredible career, bettered by none. The statistics are awesome. He was technically just about as perfect as it is possible to be. He had an insatiable appetite for runs, scored them very quickly and dominated any kind of bowler on any kind of wicket for over 20 years. In the 1929-30 season, he made 452 not out in a first-class match and set the record for the individual score which has since been beaten by Hanif Mohammad and Brian Lara. In 52 tests, he scored 6,996 runs and hit 29 centuries, with the highest score in a test match of 334. I learnt that figure as a very small boy. Bradman played for New South Wales from 1927 to 1935 and then moved to South Australia where he captained South Australia from 1935 until 1948. In his Sheffield Shield career, he scored 8,926 runs at an average of 110.19. He led Australia in 24 tests. He won 15, lost three and drew six. Don Bradman gave to cricket as much as he received. He served as chairman, administrator and selector for more than 35 years for Australia and South Australia and he sat on the Imperial Cricket Conference. Knighted in 1949 for his services to cricket, Sir Donald Bradman has been described as the perfect cricket ambassador and his views on the rapidly changing game were sought right until the end of his life. Yet there is much more to that life than cricket. The Don was a successful stockbroker, a tireless worker for disabled children and a formidable golfer. He was an accomplished pianist, a witty after-dinner speaker and a lifelong letter writer. But it was his extraordinary success and dedication to the purpose on the field that inspired me as a small boy living and growing up at Cressy in Tasmania. My Uncle Ray introduced me to the game of cricket and the tales of Bradman and the Australian team. I can remember sitting up late during Tasmanian winters listening on the radio to test cricket being played in England. My Uncle Ray Adams was secretary of the local Cressy Cricket Club for about 23 years. Because it was a country team, it held some resemblance to the Don's beginnings at Bowral. In Cressy, I served on the committee at 15. The Don practised by batting with a stump and a golf ball up against the water tank. I was encouraged to practise with an old cricket bat and a golf ball behind the milking stalls in the dairy. It was a walk-through dairy with a concrete wall at the bottom end. I can remember finding in the school library a book entitled The Art of Cricket, as my love for cricket grew. This book had an enormous number of pictures. I can remember reading what I could of it and learning a lot from the book. Richie Benaud wrote almost 40 years ago that, when first produced, The Art of Cricket was acclaimed as the most brilliant coaching book every written and illustrated. In some ways, that might not be surprising because the young cricketer, Don Bradman, had the most incisive mind and was the clearest thinker I found in the time I was a player and a captain. It was no coincidence that he was able to put down in such a concise manner his thoughts on the matter of coaching and the need or otherwise for it. Although the finest batsman the world has ever seen, he played his cricket with the creed of keeping it simple, and that line of thinking has continued throughout the pages and photographs in his book.I practised for hours to learn how to play a straight bat backwards and forwards when I was not doing my farm work in the dairy. Although I could never confess to having come anywhere near the standard of my hero, Don Bradman, it helped me to become a handy opening batsman and gave me the feeling of dedication needed to become a sportsman. I think it has been said by others that cricket has a certain character building aspect about it. I can remember opening the batting for my association when I was 15. With people bowling reasonably fast at you, you have a tendency to draw on your own courage and convictions to get you through those early days of being an opening batsman. That is what we should remember the Don for: his ability to be an inspiration to all young cricket players, especially those who come from the bush. I know that all the cricket clubs around my electorate in Tasmania would want to express their condolences, as I do, to his family. I also want to thank Don Bradman for his inspirational life and career. He will never be forgotten while cricket is played in the world. There will be many young people, both girls and boys, who will be dreaming of one day becoming another player of his calibre. While those dreams are there, so will be the Don. Vale to a great and wonderful man.21:31:0024416Slipper, Peter, MPMr SLIPPER0V5FisherLPParliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance and Administration10—Author Patrick White once said that sport was Australia's god, with Don Bradman providing the voice-over. We have recently learned that Don Bradman has done something he so successfully avoided during his marvellous cricket career—he has surrendered his wicket. For Australians, Bradman's name stands above all others as the man whose achievements were beyond comparison in their time and are unlikely ever to be bettered. Sir Donald Bradman's death yesterday is one of the saddest and most important days in the history of this nation. It marks the end of the wonderful life of one of Australia's first true heroes. Don Bradman became the first absolute world-beater that Australia as an independent nation had produced. He was the first man from this country to engage in an activity common to many countries and to rise a class above anyone else in the world. The word `Bradman' will be echoed around the world today as one of modern days' sporting greats is mourned. From Liverpool to Calcutta, from Durban to Jamaica, from New Delhi to Auckland, Bradman will be remembered with affection and admiration. Nowhere will that mourning be stronger than in the New South Wales country town of Bowral, where the man simply known as `the Don' grew up and played his early cricket. Bowral rests under Mount Gibralter, and Bradman has been a rock to which Australians have clung for more than 70 years, lifting our spirits during the Depression, nurturing our independence as a nation and reviving our hearts after the Second World War. It has been said that Bradman helped define and shape our sense of what it is to be Australian. Bradman is on the top shelf of Australian icons, right up there with the diggers of Gallipoli and with Phar Lap.This country has produced many outstanding athletes who have held their own on the world stage. What made Sir Donald Bradman different from other athletes? What was it about him that made Australians open their hearts and welcome him in with such admiration and deep respect? Quite simply, apart from being the greatest cricketer the world has ever seen, Donald Bradman was a gentleman of the highest order. A devoted father and husband, he maintained throughout his life an air of dignity and grace which enthralled those from all walks of life. In the second test of the Ashes series of 1932 at the Melbourne Cricket Ground, Bradman returned from health problems which had precluded him from playing in the first test. After two early Australian wickets, the scene was set for Bradman, who came in with a smile playing around his mouth. The 65,000 people packed into the grounds like sardines—hanging onto the balconies, railing posts, trees and every other vacant spot—looked forward to seeing the young champion stop the rot. Bradman started slowly but eventually got on top of the English attack. As he approached his century, only the Australian tail enders were left. People could hardly retain their anxiety. Barmen, gatekeepers, groundsmen, cashiers and policemen joined the huge crowd, which was ready to burst into one almighty cheer. Finally, Bradman shut his teeth and crashed the ball over the leg fieldsmen, holding the game up for some considerable period of time. The Don compiled runs totalling 6,996 in 52 tests—an average of 99.94—with a relentless precision that has remained unequalled.Sir Donald married his childhood sweetheart, Jessie, in 1932—the year of that great Ashes series. Together, they lived and raised their family in the same modest Adelaide house for many years, until the death in September 1997 of Lady Bradman, his wife of 65 years and who was herself known as a lovely person. Bradman called his marriage to Jessie his `best partnership ever'. Sir Donald added to the mystique surrounding him by maintaining a low public profile, despite his stature in, and influence on, the game of cricket worldwide. In fact, he was even admired in countries which did not play much cricket. The New York Times—a leading newspaper in a nation where, regrettably, little cricket is played—editorialised on the occasion of Bradman's knighthood in 1949. But it has been Sir Donald's genuine plea for privacy which has seen his legend grow. He resisted the opportunity to comment publicly on the many changing aspects of the game he dominated for so long. As the writer John Benaud wrote:This discipline and the intrigue it perpetuates helps sustain, 70 years on, memories of the moments Australians first celebrated the rise of a boy from the bush who had learned cricket by taking a stump to a golf ball rebounding from a water tank.It has been suggested that Bradman's undiminished standing owes something to a yearning for a simpler era when sportsmen and the contest in which they were engaged somehow seemed more pure—when there was less concern for contracts and politics in sport, when the game had not become submerged in commercialism.In closing, there can be no better way to illustrate the great man's depth of character and commitment to the Australian people than to use his own words from his 1950 autobiography Farewell to Cricket:The game of cricket existed long before I was born. It will be played centuries after my demise. During my career I was privileged to give the public my interpretation of its character in the same way that a pianist might interpret the works of Beethoven. It is a comforting thought that only happiness and inspiration to one's fellow men could result. Without doubt the laws of cricket and the conduct of the game are a great example to the world. We should all be proud of this heritage which I trust may forever stand as a beacon light guiding man's footsteps to happy and peaceful days.On behalf of the people of the Sunshine Coast, I would like to pass on my deep condolences to the family of Sir Donald Bradman. A great Australian has called stumps in his 93rd year, but the game will go on and Donald Bradman will be forever its champion.21:40:0024418Snowdon, Warren, MPMr SNOWDONIJ4Northern TerritoryALP00—I am very pleased to be able to participate in this debate. It is not my intention to give a chronology of Sir Donald Bradman's life in the way that others have. I just want to relate one small experience of no consequence to Sir Donald Bradman, I am sure, but of great consequence to a young bloke in short pants with his school cap on who went to see Sir Donald Bradman at Manuka Oval in 1961. You will recall, Mr Deputy Speaker Quick, that that game was against the great West Indies side under Sir Frank Worrell. I was that lad at Manuka Oval to watch the Prime Minister's XI. Sir Donald Bradman walked out in his creams with his bat and had a hit. I do not remember the score. I do not remember what Sir Donald Bradman made, but I remember approaching Sir Donald Bradman and Sir Frank Worrell with my box brownie camera and getting this magnificent photograph of these two great cricketers together on the Manuka Oval. The Bradman Pavilion was built on that oval to commemorate a great Australian and a great sportsman.To me—and I was never a great cricketer—that underscored what life was about in those times, and no doubt what it is like for my son who is the same age as I was at that time—11. I look out the front of my house and watch my son playing cricket with his mates in the driveway and over in next door's driveway, emulating the feats of the great cricketers. I am sure you recall, Mr Deputy Speaker, going out in the local paddock, naming yourself Rohan Kanhai or someone and saying, `I'm Rohan Kanhai for today' or `I'm Donald Bradman for today' and of course making no runs, getting no wickets, but having a great time.The inspiration that Sir Donald gave to those generations of young Australians—to go out and swing the bat, bowl the ball and roll the arm over—is something which we should be very proud of. His family should know that Sir Donald was the inspiration behind many of these games. They did not have to be at the MCG or the SCG, at Lords or at the oval. They could have been down in 21st Street, Narrabundah, or in some gully at Murrumbateman or in the ovals around Darwin or Katherine—young people playing the game, emulating the great Sir Don.One of the best tributes to Sir Donald Bradman—and I know there are a number of poems about Sir Donald—is in the form of a song by Paul Kelly on his album Hidden things. It is just entitled Bradman. I approached a couple of my colleagues today. I am not sure what the standing orders say about members speaking simultaneously, but I did suggest that a few of us should get together and at least try and sing this song to the House. I did not get many positive responses. I will not regale the House with my own voice, at least in terms of its musical qualities, but I do want to read some verses of this song. I will not start from the beginning. I will start about two-thirds of the way through, just to give members a flavour of this great poetry from Paul Kelly and his dedication to a great Australian—a dedication which I think reflects adequately and appropriately the importance of this great man to the Australian sporting ethos and, in particular, his role and the size of his legend, if you like, in terms of cricket. I quote: England 1930 and the seed burst into flower. All of Jackson's grace failed himIt was Bradman was the power.He murdered them in Yorkshire, he danced for them in KentHe laughed at them in Leicestershire, Leeds was an event.300 runs he took and re wrote all booksThat really knocked those gentsThe critics could not comprehend this nonchalant phenomenonWhy this man is a machine they said, even his friends say he isn't human.Even friends have to cut something.He was more than just a batsman, he was something like a tideMore than just one man, he was half the sideFathers took their sons 'cause fortune used to hideIn the palm of his hand.Summer 1932 and captain Douglas had a planWhen Larwood bowled to Bradman it was more than man to manAnd staid Adelaide nearly boiled overAs rage ruled over sense.When Oldfield hit the ground, they nearly jumped the fence.Now Bill Woodfull was as fine a man as ever went to wicketAnd the bruises on his body that day showed that he could stick itBut to this day he still quoted and only he can wear itThere are two sides out there today and only one of them is playing cricket.He was longer than a memory, bigger than a townHis feet they used to sparkle, and he always kept them on the groundFathers took their sons, who never lost the soundOf the roar of the grandstand.Now shadows grow longer and there's so much more yet to be toldBut we're not getting any younger so let the part tell the wholeNow the players all wear coloursThe circus is in townI can no longer go down there, down to that sacred ground.He was more than just a batsman, he was something like a tideMore than just one man, he was half the bloody sideFathers took their sons 'cause fortune used to hideIn the palm of his hand.That, I think, reflects the feeling of many Australians, at least the great bulk of Australians who are lovers and followers of cricket. My condolences to Sir Donald's family. I am sure, when expressing these few words this evening, I express them on behalf of all sporting and cricket fans in the Northern Territory.21:46:0024419Barresi, Phillip, MPMr BARRESIZJ6DeakinLP10—Today is a day which many in Australia knew with heavy heart would eventually come. It is a day of sadness for all Australians, let alone cricket lovers throughout the world. The Don is gone, out just eight short of yet another ton. So, as we rise as one to cheer his final walk to the pavilion, we cannot help but feel our lives have somehow changed. He has been batting all of our lives. Now he leaves us for the last time—the tallest of Australia's tall poppies, a person who no-one sought to, or could, cut down to size. This, though, was a century he did not seek, as the death of his beloved wife, Jessie, left him without such ambition. Those who played with and against the Don will tell you that it was the only time he ever surrendered his wicket.His ruthless determination to perform at his best every time he went to the crease saw him amass a test average nearly double that of players we rightly regard as greats of the game. It was not only in test matches that Bradman sought to excel. He made huge scores in Shield cricket and in grade cricket too. I heard a story that once Bradman played and missed a couple of times early in an innings for his club in Adelaide. The wily young lad fielding in the gully gave some vocal encouragement to his bowler, something about, `You'll get him next time.' As you might expect, there wasn't a next time, as Bradman slaughtered the bowling from then on to notch another huge score and finish the day undefeated. The size of the stage never mattered to him, because he regarded his wicket as almost sacred. It came as no surprise that Sir Donald was also successful in business, a champion squash player and a scratch golfer. In everything he did, he displayed a mental toughness not seen in many others in any walk of life. We, as members of parliament, could certainly learn from some of these qualities and adopt them in our own performance and representation. The name Bradman is one that has been with us all since our childhood. For most, he was perhaps the second cricketer who invaded our consciousness. The first might have been a Harvey or a Chappell—or in today's era perhaps a Waugh, or some lesser light thrilling us on television with their batsmanship—only to be reminded by our curmudgeonly elders that our new hero `isn't as good as Bradman'. The truth is that no-one has ever been better, and perhaps no-one ever will be.Don Bradman long ago transcended the mere role of sporting hero. He was a man against whom Douglas Jardine's English tourists conjured up `bodyline', bringing diplomatic relations between Australia and Britain to the brink. He was the inspiration of a nation during the Depression, when his hunger for runs gave some distraction and satisfaction to battlers who hungered for jobs. He was the skipper of the 1948 Invincibles at 40 years of age, leading the team unbeaten through a long tour. In his retirement, he was a man who personally answered thousands upon thousands of letters and requests for autographs. His popularity never waned and his legend only grew.In the Deakin electorate, from Blackburn right through to Croydon, like elsewhere in Australia, there are a multitude of excellent cricket clubs which, each in their own way, will be expressing sorrow over the next few days but which are equally proud that Don Bradman was an Australian. Each club having aspiring young cricketers being coached by old cricket masters on how to be `the next Bradman', a noble aspiration, particularly if it embodies those other Bradman qualities not usually associated with the playing field.When death visits a person of advanced years, those who are close sometimes console themselves with the old cliche, `He had a good innings.' In Bradman's case, he had a great one. On behalf of the people of Deakin, I offer my sincere condolences to the Bradman family. In the words that former Canberra press gallery scribe and Australian team-mate Jack Fingleton used as the title for his book on the 1948 Ashes series: `brightly fades the Don'. 21:51:0024420O'Keefe, Neil, MPMr O'KEEFECE4BurkeALP00—I would like to add to the comments made by all other members and try to bring to this discussion some aspect of my own individual thoughts as they relate to Sir Donald Bradman. They come at two levels. I have to say that sport has played a great part in my life. It has created many opportunities for me. I played cricket and football until I was 35 and loved every minute of it. So on one level there is your enjoyment of sport and what Don Bradman means to you as a boy in the creation of that. On another level there is the national significance. Most of us of the baby boomer era—I was born in 1947, so I am in that era, as many of us here are—recall significant events. We know where we were when JFK was assassinated. We know where we were when Princess Diana was killed in the car accident. I dare say that, in many years to come, people in Australia will talk about when they heard that Don Bradman had died because, when the news came to us, today became a hugely significant day, certainly for those to whom his legend has been part of their lives.As small boys, as we grew up, Mr Deputy Speaker Quick—and you are the same age as me, so you have been through this; I know you were a cricket umpire for many years, so you love the game and all the things that go with it—I can remember three claims that our fathers and grandfathers made to us. If you were into football in Victoria, they all said, `We saw Coleman play.' They all said to us, `We saw Phar Lap win the Melbourne Cup,' and `We saw Don Bradman play for Australia.' I never saw that of course: he had finished his career before I was able to even go to look at cricket as a kid. But there were four books that I can remember that we all talked about as kids. One was Reach For The Sky, the Douglas Bader story, one was The Dambusters, another was Biggles and all those things, but the one Australian book right in the middle of all that was The Don Bradman Story. Countless contributions to this discussion today have talked about throwing the ball at the tank and hitting it with a cricket stump—and where did we all find out about that? It was in the story about Don Bradman's life, and it became something to us. We have all tried it, we have all found we could not do it and we all know that that was Don Bradman—the cricket stump and the water tank. I had an interesting experience that, looking back now, tells me what it was like in those days. There are actually two things that helped me form this view. One was that at a stage in his life my father worked in the floor coverings game and he brought home to me, about 15 years ago, part of an old newspaper for Christmas Eve 1932 that he had found under the kitchen lino of a house—because in the Depression they used newspapers to line the floor. In the newspaper was a Ginger Meggs cartoon, which had Ginger really downhearted because his family did not have enough money to enable him to go to the cricket at the Sydney Cricket Ground and watch Don Bradman. So Ginger went along, stood outside and watched his hero go into the ground and all his mates with more money go in to watch the cricket. Ginger noticed Don Bradman's wallet fall out of his back pocket and he raced over and picked it up. It had a lot of money in it and Ginger had the choice between using the money to buy a ticket or handing the wallet in. Of course, the message of the cartoon was that Ginger was a good young fellow, so he handed the wallet in and went home despondent that he did not get to see Don Bradman. That was the end of the cartoon—to be continued next week.Would you believe that, about five years later, in another house on the other side of Melbourne my father found under another lino floor the next week of the cartoon. In the next week's issue Ginger had handed in the wallet and Don Bradman, who was ever grateful, came out to Ginger's house and gave him an autographed bat signed by Don and all the members of the Australian cricket team to reward him for having handed in the wallet. So Ginger lived happily ever after. They are the sorts of things that were the topics of cartoons—Don Bradman and Ginger Meggs setting the social standards of the day. I still have those cartoons, both framed, and I wish I had them with me in Canberra today because I would have shown them to the parliament. They are very special to me.At one point I went to a little town of about 400 people called Pyramid Hill in central Victoria, did some renovations to a house and found under the lino two letters which astounded me. They are not about Don Bradman—they are about one of his idols and one of his teammates, Bill Woodfull—but they set the scene for what it was like in those days. These two handwritten letters were replies from Bill Woodfull, then the captain of Australia in 1927, I think it was, to the secretary of the district cricket association, who had written to him asking for advice about how the boys should play cricket. One letter was about how they should play a square cut and the other letter was about how they should play a cover drive. Here were these handwritten letters from the captain of Australia back to the secretary of the cricket association, describing how the boys should practise these shots. I thought, `So that is how it was,' and Don Bradman has earned a reputation over the years of being prepared to write such letters. Despite all the demands upon him and all the things that went with his incredible talent and massive stardom, he did those things too. That to me was an interesting example. Those two letters from Bill Woodfull are now in the sports museum at the MCG.The reason that I particularly wanted to rise and make a contribution to this discussion is that there is a group of senior former cricketers around Australia called the Crusaders who put a lot of effort into sponsoring junior cricket and sponsoring young players, male and female, to go on overseas trips to prepare them for first-class cricket. There is quite a tradition in the leadership of the group. They enjoy the patronage of the Prime Minister. He is a patron. Bob Hawke, the former Prime Minister, is a patron. I am one of the trustees of the group. People in the group such as Swan Richards, who was the drive behind the creation of the whole thing, the test cricketers who are members and the first-class administrators and players who are members would all want me to record in this brief contribution in the federal parliament the enormous regard—there are no words to describe it, and I would not attempt to emulate words used by others in this discussion—in which Sir Donald Bradman is held. There are no words to describe it; it is a national feeling that we are talking about today. But I am sure that the Crusaders cricket group would want me to place on the record in the parliament not only our thoughts at this very special moment for all the members of the family of Don Bradman, this great Australian, but the thoughts of all people who have participated in and who love the game of cricket. They would also want their thoughts to be recorded in the federal parliament. So, on behalf of the Crusaders cricket group, I do that. That includes many former members of the chamber, former members of the group and current members—people who have played the game and who have helped to promote the spirit that was engendered so much by Sir Donald Bradman. In closing, I would also like to say that many of us had the great privilege of playing one of the first games on the Bowral ground when the museum was formed. The game was the Crusaders versus the politicians—I think that was just one of the many instances where the politicians received yet another drubbing! We all traipsed off to Bowral and enjoyed ourselves. To this day, I think we would all say that we were awe-struck to find ourselves in the pavilion at Bowral in the very formative stages of the cricket museum, thinking, `This is where Bradman started; this is where this amazing thing that happened in Australia started—here is the formation of the museum, and it will evolve,' and of course it did. Like every other member who has spoken, like every other member who feels the same but is electing not to speak, for me this is one of those moments in the history of our nation that command the time and the respect of the federal parliament. It commands the time and the respect of Australians right across the nation, and its commands above all the memories of so many young Australians—probably mainly boys and men in those days—to whom he was an extraordinary role model and national hero.22:04:0024422Hardgrave, Gary, MPMr HARDGRAVECK6MoretonLP10—I rise tonight following on from some really quite wonderful contributions from both sides. I thought about the contribution today of the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the way he related that wonderful story about the now late Sir Donald Bradman suggesting that he might be able to get 60 or 70 runs at the age of 86. I thought that that was a marvellous contribution today, but equally since there have been some really finely crafted speeches and some wonderful thoughts and recollections.In making my contribution to this motion, I thought that I should perhaps dust off my copy of Jack Pollard's wonderful book on Australian cricket—which I remember getting autographed and handed to me by Jack Pollard almost 20 years ago—and then I thought no, because there have been so many wonderful chronological contributions that it would not be right to do so. I rise in this debate because I, through the entire course of my life, knew Sir Donald Bradman. He did not know me; I never met him. I met Ray Lindwall and I met Clive Harburg, the ABC commentator of the great tied test of 1961. Before his wife, Jean, died, Clive and Jean were constituents of mine at Eight Mile Plains. I, like every other contributor to this debate, knew Sir Donald Bradman. I knew Sir Donald Bradman in the same way that my father knew Sir Donald Bradman through the entire course of his life. For most of his life, my grandfather knew Sir Donald Bradman, and for the last few years of their lives both my great-grandfather and my great-great-grandfather knew Sir Donald Bradman. Robert Hardgrave died in the early thirties in his house at Camp Hill, but for the last half a dozen years of his life he would have known of Sir Donald Bradman, as a great cricketer. Likewise his son, William, who died a few years later all too young, knew Don Bradman. My son, at the age of 8½, is struggling with a sense of commitment, which I want to share with the House, to get to know a lot about Don Bradman. We can all speak from the heart when we make these observations that Sir Donald Bradman, because of his longevity, provided a real multigenerational link for most families. He was a constant for us all. I remember celebrating when Allan Border became the cricket captain for Australia that there was somebody who was roughly my age. Greg Chappell was a bit older. When Mark Taylor became captain he was finally the first captain that was younger than I was, and Steve Waugh, and so on. But Don Bradman was more than just a cricketer to me; he was a man who was an inspiration to my grandparents' era, through the dark days of the Depression, when both of my grandfathers eked a living out of doing hard labour, doing it hard through those times when the simple joy of Don Bradman and his exploits as a cricketer was perhaps what kept them going.Donald Bradman inspired a decency and a style in public conduct and in his sense of charity and caring about others that so many others are obviously recognising today, 24 hours after his death, and that in its true meaning is his greatest legacy—not his 99.94 average, not his massive almost 7,000 runs in test cricket, but in fact his incredible decency and style, even in death, to suggest that moneys spent as a way of commemoration should go towards training another generation of cricketers, to give underprivileged kids, particularly underprivileged children of Aboriginal background, an opportunity to perhaps taste the sense of belonging, the sense of excitement and the sense of achievement which can come from playing a sport that you love.I guess that in so many ways he was the motivation for my late grandfather Allan McKinnon, who died about three years ago in a month or two's time. He was suffering in his final months from quite horrible dementia, yet this man Don Bradman was so firmly etched in his mind that one of the last things he ever sent to me was a small card that he had held for years, out of a cereal pack or whatever, which had a picture of Don Bradman in full flight and a little bit of a chronology of Don Bradman on the back of the card. His great sense of urgency in the last couple of months of his life was that my own son should know Don Bradman.Such is the folklore, the absolutely entrenched feeling of attachment that Australians from the Depression era had for this man and for his contribution and style since those years, that here you had my grandfather saying to his great-grandson that Don Bradman was a priority. I felt a great sense of wanting to make those contributions here today because, like others, I obviously would understand and feel and send my condolences to Sir Don's family and hope that they may get an opportunity to read this Hansard and to understand the full extent of the touch that their father offered.I know that in my own electorate at the various cricket clubs tonight—be it at Graceville or Yeronga or Macgregor—where junior Australians are doing their bit to be a Steve Waugh or a Shane Warne or maybe an Adam Gilchrist, in the back of their minds they are also being a Don Bradman, and that sense of encouragement is obvious. I think also about the Queensland blind cricket association, which plays in my electorate and which brought from all around the world cricketers who have visual impairments to play their own test series, quietly, out of the media gaze, a few years ago. Talking to them, they in their own minds are a Don Bradman—not just a Don Bradman the cricketer but a Don Bradman the gentleman, a Don Bradman caring about others, a Don Bradman who offered nothing other than a fine style of decency, caring and respect for others right to and beyond his dying day. So it is right, as the member for Burke said, on this day of great national importance for the federal parliament, to take the time to take stock of the loss of one of our favourite sons, and I was pleased to be part of the debate might. 22:11:0024424Secker, Patrick, MPMr SECKER848BarkerLP10—Like many others before me who could quote figures at large, and no doubt there are many more to come, I was very interested to hear the heartfelt condolences given by members opposite such as my good friends the member for Lowe and the member for Lyons. You could genuinely see their care and concern for the family and their love for the game of cricket and their absolute iconisation of Sir Donald Bradman. I too played for the Crusaders with the member for Wills and the member for Burke and also the member for Dunkley and the member for Longman. They were very enjoyable games, because we all went out there and wanted to play this great game of cricket and we did enjoy the game and we all thought we might in some way like to take after Sir Donald Bradman.I remember that in the previous match that I played for a parliamentary team I actually top scored. But in this last game that I played with the members for Wills, Burke, Dunkley and Longman, I unfortunately ended up scoring the same as Sir Donald Bradman did in his last innings. But, needless to say, it was a great day and it did raise funds for future cricketers. And I think that one of the great parts about Sir Donald Bradman's life is that he always wanted something for the game to go on. He wanted the future generations to get the enjoyment out of it. There is no doubt that cricket is the greatest game that I have ever had the pleasure of playing. The thing about cricket is that it actually teaches you to be a better member of society, because of all of the different types of traditions that are involved in playing cricket—that old saying `That's just not cricket' goes with the game—and Sir Donald Bradman of course was the greatest of them all.In the short time that we have, I wish to extend my condolences to the family of Sir Donald Bradman and, it could be said, to express condolences to all of Australia, as it feels as though we have lost a member of our own family. I remember reading some years ago that Sir Donald's son, John, had changed his name. That is very understandable, because, if you were Sir Donald Bradman's son, you would obviously be asked often whether you were related to Sir Don. Because everyone knew Sir Don, he was probably answering that question 20 times a day. Sir Donald fully supported him. That would have been for many people a particularly hard decision, but Sir Donald supported his family all the way through. I am sure that when his son, John, changed his name back to Bradman Sir Donald greeted that with great glee. Sir Donald was loved. He was revered, respected and idolised not only by every Australian but by millions across the world. He was probably loved, revered and respected by more people outside Australia due to the fact that India almost put him up as a god: there are nearly a billion people in India and they have a great love for cricket. I wish to correct a statement by the member for Fisher earlier; I am being a little bit pedantic. He said no cricket was played in the United States of America. I would like to relate a story from 1986, when I was there on a Rotary group study exchange. I was invited to play for a team in Texas who regularly got together. So there are a few colonials, I suppose we can call them, in America who still like to keep playing the game. I know the member for Fisher meant there is no real first-class cricket played there.I want to also relate a story about my own father, who, in 99 per cent of the words that we spoke, talked about sheep, cattle or the farm. But the one thing he could be drawn out on was cricket, including Sir Donald Bradman. That is where I learned a lot of my legends about Sir Donald, and I thank my father for that. I think we politicians would give anything for even one-tenth of the respect with which Sir Donald Bradman was held in the community, and I have no doubt that, if he had ever been silly enough, like us, to stand for politics, he would have created some sort of record for the number of votes he would have attracted, no matter where he stood and what party he stood for or even if he stood as an independent. That is because he was held in such high esteem. The Don was a genius both on the field and off the field. I can only go on what people have told me, but in anything he did, whether it was in cricket, in administration or in his business dealings, he had an extremely sharp mind—not sharp in the sense of nasty, but sharp in the sense that nothing ever got past him. His humbleness, together with his shrewdness, was there for everyone to see, whatever he did, in the many forms of sport that he played and in his business dealings, where he showed the highest probity and the highest integrity. Certainly, the Don was a pillar of respectability not only for the game of cricket but in everything he did. Sir Donald's foresight was quite amazing. I think we can credit the international one-day game to what he did. I remember, I think in the early seventies, the first three days of the Melbourne test had been washed out. He went to the English and Australian captains and said, `People want to see some cricket. Why don't we put on a bit of fun for them? We'll have two one-day games, one after the other, and we'll give something back to those cricket lovers in Melbourne for whom this was a very important part of their lives.' It was a tradition for people to come to the Boxing Day test, and they had missed the first three days of cricket. From there, international one-day cricket was born. It was Sir Donald Bradman's decision, as the chairman of the Australian Cricket Board at the time, to encourage that. That went through his whole cricket administration. He said cricket was to be played, enjoyed and loved most of all by those who watch it, because if people did not enjoy watching the cricket they would stop coming to it and the game would die to a certain extent. Sir Donald always had that thing that cricket must go on and that it must be entertaining. Richie Benaud has often mentioned that he was encouraged that, even if it meant losing, Sir Donald Bradman would rather have an entertaining game of cricket than a dull draw.I often recall Sir Donald's advice to captains about taking the new ball when it was due. Sometimes there has been conjecture about keeping the spinners on for a little bit longer, as if you might get a little bit more spin out of a turning ball. Sir Donald Bradman's advice was that on four out of five occasions you took the new ball without thinking about it and on the fifth occasion, when you did think about it, you still took the new ball straightaway. In other words, you would think about it but always take the new ball when it was due. Obviously, you get more bounce, and are more likely to get that quick wicket and that quick breakthrough. They are very wise words indeed.We often hear about the supernormal feats of Sir Donald, and rightly so, because he is still more than 60 per cent better than anyone else in the history of the game. Not only that; it was achieved when there were uncovered pitches that allowed damage from moisture and the climate in general. It was also achieved when the English cricket team went out to abuse the rules of cricket by aiming their game plan to reduce the Bradman influence in the bodyline series. But he still averaged 50, a remarkable feat in any statistical analysis of cricket. Who knows how much greater he would have been if he had not been afflicted by the many ailments that he had when he was playing cricket or if he had been able to play cricket during the Second World War when he was arguably at his prime? As my father said, after the war Bradman certainly was not the same cricketer that he was before the war but that still did not stop him from going out and making a few centuries around the place. I think it relates to what the Minister for Foreign Affairs said earlier. Not only was he a superb batsman; he was a superb fielder. Many who had the pleasure of witnessing his cricket career have said that there has never been a better cover fielder. His athleticism is borne out by a state squash championship and by being a golfer with a scratch handicap. Not only was he the greatest batsman ever and a great fielder; he was also a pretty handy bowler. In fact, he has the enviable record as a bowler of taking six wickets in an eight-ball over without taking a hat-trick. When Ray Martin interviewed Sir Donald a few years back, I can assure you that I did not miss a second—nor did my son—and never was there any hint of superiority or anything but the proper way of living his life. When one is so great, you could reasonably expect some sort of ego to emerge but it never did. Like everyone else, I would have given just about anything to have spent five minutes of my life with Sir Donald Bradman. Of course, that is no longer possible but his interview was the next best thing. His judgment on players, past and present, was infallible. I remember him saying that the closest batsman to his style that he could remember was Sachin Tendulkar, the great Indian batsman. His passing will leave a hole in our lives but we can be happy that he will be reunited with his beloved Jessie, with whom he formed his greatest partnership. I, like millions of people, put Sir Donald Bradman on top of the pedestal and his family will know that this honourable man will never be forgotten.22:24:0024426Kelly, Jackie, MPMiss JACKIE KELLYGK6LindsayLPMinister for Sport and Tourism and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Sydney 2000 Games10—It is perhaps appropriate that the minister for sport of the greatest sporting nation that has just held the greatest Olympics ever closes this condolence motion on behalf of all sports men and women everywhere, not just in Australia but right around the world, on the passing of the greatest, Sir Donald Bradman. I have listened to all the speakers here tonight and to those who spoke before question time. In terms of a chronology of his life and career and events that have happened since his retirement, not much has been left out. There is perhaps one item that I think is worthy of inclusion and this tribute to the Don speaks volumes for the respect with which he is held today. The Don and Mark Taylor hold the equal record for the highest test score by an Australian. It is interesting to note that Mark Taylor declared rather than beat the Don's record. That speaks for the respect and esteem in which he is held, that Mark Taylor would rather have his name associated with that of the Don than have the record held in his own right.I mentioned that I speak on behalf of all sports men and women in the world, not just cricketers and not just male cricketers in Australia. I believe that the Don's performance has transcended cricket and provided an example for all sport. He was an inspiration. He was about how we want to see our own sporting careers. It is how we want the public to look back on our own contribution to sport; it is how we would wish to be regarded; it is about what we would like to have been able to put back into the sport that we got so much out of. He embodied those essential aspects of sport that Australian children take with them into the broader aspects of life: `you only get out what you put in'; `no-one is bigger than the game'; and `that's cricket'. Some of these sayings typify Australian life today. They are at the centre and heart of the Aussie indomitable spirit. They were absolutely personified in Sir Donald Bradman right through the trials and tribulations of our country throughout the Depression and the Second World War and on into our boom periods. Sir Donald Bradman provided an excellent role model for people. Mothers are attracted to the game and encourage their children to play cricket. Women have now taken up cricket in numbers. We are seeing Australia now producing world champion female cricket players.It is interesting to note that here, as we move a condolence motion in the House, the AIS houses Sir Donald Bradman memorabilia similar to that at Bowral. Those items were donated to the AIS's collection, which is open for display. It is important to note that his saying that no-one is bigger than the game really transcends the recent controversies that have surrounded cricket. I believe that cricket will win out—it will go on in the tradition that Don Bradman set for it—and that all sport is the better and the stronger for his example. Certainly it is a different environment; it is a more commercial environment. Our players in some sports are highly paid but, at the end of the day, they play for the love of the game and it is the essence of what Don Bradman personified that really makes sport such a great adjunct to the Australian culture. I offer my condolences to John and Shirley and all Australians who grieve for the passing of the Don. Question resolved in the affirmative, honourable members standing in their places.Adjournment24427Motion (by Miss Jackie Kelly) proposed:That the House do now adjourn.2442722:29:0024427Mossfield, Frank, MPMr MOSSFIELDMK6GreenwayALP00—I was pleased to attend the joint announcement by the Deputy Prime Minister, John Anderson, and the New South Wales Minister for Transport, Carl Scully, of the decision to proceed with the construction of the Western Sydney Orbital. The orbital is an issue that I have spoken on on a number of occasions in this parliament, so it was very gratifying to see an announcement finally made. I was pleased to share the occasion with two Liberal senators, three Liberal members of the House of Representatives—the members for Mitchell, Parramatta and Robertson—and one Liberal councillor from the Blacktown Council, and to join in the group photos that such events warrant. In fact, I have not seen so many Liberal members of parliament and senators at the one function since the opening of the Olympic Games. At one stage I was asked to move so that the Liberals could have a photo taken together. That was just about everyone except Carl Scully and me. No ALP representative was invited to the launch—the blame for this could be shared between both governments. However, when the Deputy Prime Minister is intending to visit Western Sydney, indeed the electorate of Greenway, you may have thought there would have been some prior notice given to the elected representatives of the region. This was, sadly, not the case. Even though the newspapers that morning and the Sydney radio stations were full of the impending announcement, no mention was made of the exact location where the announcement was to be made.In fact, the announcement was made at Troubadour Park, a beautiful bushland setting in the north-east corner of Greenway. The location was not signposted and you entered the park via what could only be described as a bush track. The location itself would be ideal if one wanted to get away for an hour or two from the more populated sections of the electorate. Maybe because of the secret location, not a lot of local residents attended the launch. Why the secret location for the Deputy Prime Minister to make this announcement concerning a major infrastructure project for Western Sydney that would impact on the whole economy of the state? It has been suggested that the organisers were concerned about a possible protest over the proposed toll—and well may they be. The 39-kilometre stretch of the Western Sydney orbital will form a vital link in the 18,550-kilometre national highway scheme, yet it will be the only section that will attract a toll. It will not be just one toll either. Rather, the government has decided that there will be at least two toll gates on the orbital. The public of Western Sydney are paying increased taxes through both increased levels of fuel excise and the GST, the revenue of which is supposed to partly fund road construction. The CEO of the NRMA, in response to the orbital announcement, said:Motorists have been burdened with a fuel excise which has seen the federal government achieve a windfall of $470 million in revenue annually.In total the additional 3 cents per litre collected post GST is yielding an extra $960 million in fuel excise annually. The federal government collects $13 billion annually in fuel excise, but currently returns only $1.5 billion or 11.5 per cent to road funding. In these circumstances the federal government's argument that it cannot afford to fund such a significant national infrastructure project is unjustified. Presently the motorists of Western Sydney who use the M2 to travel to work are charged $3.30 each way, or a total of $33.30 for the full week. If you add to this the new Western Sydney Orbital toll of a further $5, or whatever the going rate is at the time, people are going to be paying a weekly toll of well over $50. There may be some justification for a toll if the revenue collected were used to finance a public transport system such as a rail system to complement this highway development. The argument used by the government that, if the public wanted an immediate start on the orbital, a toll was necessary has been clearly refuted by the NRMA. The toll aside, there are many benefits to be gained by the general public and industry with the construction of the orbital, and I welcome the decision to commence construction on this project.2442822:34:0024428Gash, Joanna, MPMrs GASHAK6GilmoreLP10—I would like to respond to the member for Greenway. When Mr Carl Scully came to the electorate of Gilmore to try to big-note Main Road 92, which is a federal government initiative into which we put $34 million, not only did he not invite me but he did not invite the local mayor, who put in $12 million from his council. So it goes both ways.Today I rise to pay homage to the wonderful community spirit in the Southern Highlands in my Gilmore electorate, and to highlight a project that sprang from grief to make a positive impact on our young drivers. From an effective partnership between government agencies, business and the community, the U-Turn the Wheel program has grown. The secrets of this successful project are making room for all interested community members to participate in the way that suits their needs; personally inviting community members, government and business to participate; ensuring that everyone involved is given appropriate information and is encouraged to spread that knowledge; and regularly evaluating the program to review the positive feedback available and to learn more about the subject.It all began with an unhappy coincidence between the local Rotary Club looking for its next major community project, a tragic road accident and the death of the 21-year-old son of a Rotarian, and the local council road safety officer's unease at the rising number of young people involved in serious motor accidents. A local driving instructor Mark Simpson, who also happened to be a director of the Australian Driver Trainers Association, the Wingecarribee Council RSO Kim Davis and the then president of the Moss Vale branch of Rotary, Bruce Angus, met for a cup of coffee and a chat. The result is the young driver road safety initiative called the U-Turn the Wheel program.This program has two major components. The first is a one-day educational program for young people where each of the eight modules within the program targets a specific road safety issue that is relevant to young people. The first module, `Keeping your Ls and Ps,' is presented by a local police officer and has a focus on risk taking behaviour and the legal consequences. The second module, `How to purchase a good used car, and defective vehicle display,' has a focus on what is a safe vehicle and is presented by a local car dealership or the NRMA. The third module, `The physics of a crash,' is presented by science teachers and ex-aviation pilot instructors. It focuses on speed, safe braking distances and the consequences of not wearing a seat belt. `Safe celebrating' is presented by local health workers or a drink drive prevention coordinator. The focus is on the effects of alcohol and drugs on driving ability. `It could happen to you' is presented by Paralympian or brain injury group educators and focuses on the social, emotional and physical costs of a crash. `Insurance, you and accident fraud' focuses on consequences of risk-taking behaviour and insurance fraud, liability and exclusions. `Hazard perception simulations' focuses on the importance of hazard perception in driving. `U-Turn the Wheel: You Choose' uses interactive playback theatre, focusing on peer pressure and risk-taking behaviour, with a local drama teacher. Participants use role-play to identify and practice skills required to manage peer pressure and risk-taking behaviour. Two competitions are also conducted during the day—`Why is this dummy a dummy?' and `The cost of a crash'. The second major component is the log book run. In late 2000, the log book run was developed and implemented as a way of supporting young people and their parents and supervisors while gaining the 50 hours minimum supervised driving experience required under the new graduated licensing scheme. This part aims to provide access for young people to supervising drivers if this access is not otherwise available. It is an experiential, free-to-enter event in which all young drivers in the community are invited to participate. Young drivers and their supervising drivers register for the event and then, in a safe off-road environment, the driver completes a series of driving and parking-skill testing activities. Local police provide random breath testing opportunities for participants before they begin their on-road supervised experience. The on-road course has been set to provide experience in a variety of driving conditions and surfaces. What started as a gift to enhance the quality of life in our local community has now been adopted by Rotary clubs, RSOs and Safe Communities personnel in a number of areas of New South Wales including the Hills district, Frenchs Forest, Goulburn, Queanbeyan, Shoalhaven, Gundagai and Wollondilly. There have been expressions of interest from Queensland, Victoria, Western Australia, New Zealand and as far afield as Singapore.Two years ago, 600 students participated in the program and in 2001 we already know that there will be in excess of 5,000 attending the U-Turn the Wheel program. Well done, Rotarians, particularly those of Moss Vale, the police, the RTA, the schools, local businesses and the community. All in all, a very effective partnership.2442922:39:0024429Snowdon, Warren, MPMr SNOWDONIJ4Northern TerritoryALP00—I rise this evening to make known to this House and the people of Australia a scandal of national proportions and one which I think has international implications, and that is the failure of the Northern Territory government, for its own political purposes, to address high levels of renal failure in the Barkly Tablelands district of the Northern Territory. In 1997, a Deakin University report found: `Renal disease has now reached epidemic proportions in Central Australia.' In 1999-2000, a report by Dr Helen Carney of Anyingini Congress followed this up and found that the Yapakurlangu ATSIC region—that is, the Tennant Creek and Barkly regional areas—has the highest incidence of end-stage renal disease in Australia with 1,293 cases per million people per year. Dr Carney said:Renal failure has a high profile in the communities of the Barkly. Fear of renal disease and its sequelae, particularly having to relocate to Alice Springs to access treatment, negatively affects the community's acceptance of and involvement in treatment and screening programs...There can be significant social benefits in decreasing dislocation for families, reducing stress and fear which is likely to lead to improved outcomes for patients.On 23 February 2001, Mandy Taylor on ABC radio put this question to Dr Carney:To put it simply, Dr Carney, are people dying because there is no renal dialysis centre in Tennant?Dr Carney's response:To put it simply, the answer is yes. Dr Carney estimated that the cost of establishing a dialysis unit at Tennant would be around $360,000, or around the same amount as has been provided in Katherine. The attitude of the Northern Territory government is pathetic and puerile, one which diminishes all of us, because it demonstrates that human life in the Northern Territory is hostage to political patronage. The Northern Territory should be condemned for its callous disregard for its citizens. The Territory government has shown that it is happy to spend $43 million to purchase a power line from a company that pulled out of the Alice to Darwin railway, for around twice its value, but it is not prepared to spend less than $1 million on a dialysis unit for Tennant Creek that will clearly save lives. People are dying because of the Territory government's callous disregard for their lives. On ABC television on Friday, 23 February 2001 the President of the AMA in the Northern Territory, Dr Paul Bauert, was interviewed by Barbara McCarthy. He was referring to the establishment of a dialysis unit in Katherine and the need for a dialysis unit in Tennant Creek. In this interview he makes very clear the gravity of the situation in terms of the attitude of the Northern Territory government:Barbara McCarthy: And just finally Dr Bauert, should most Territory centres and towns have their own renal dialysis unit. We know about Tiwi, we know about Katherine and Alice Springs and Darwin. What about some of the other centres?Dr Bauert: There are guidelines which have been developed by the renal physicians working in the Northern Territory. Certainly Tennant Creek is the top of the list of those guidelines.Barbara McCarthy: Should it have got one before Katherine?Dr Bauert: Yes, it did certainly qualify before Katherine.Barbara McCarthy: Well, why was that?Dr Bauert: Well, I believe it was a political decision to put it in Katherine and there was a lack of political will to put it in Tennant Creek.Barbara McCarthy: When you say political will what do you mean?Dr Bauert: I'm quite concerned that the scepticism of some of these patients are actually mentioning that it's a Labor electorate and therefore the money's not forthcoming maybe valid.That illustrates what I think should be of concern to this parliament and the people of Australia. Here we have in the Northern Territory a government that has no regard for the lives of its citizens who live outside those areas that it wants to patronise. This issue should be of alarm to the government, because no doubt at some future point—perhaps this year, perhaps next—there will be representations made to the United Nations about the lack of performance of Australia in the area of Aboriginal health. They will be able to point to this example as to why there should be concern in the international community that our government, the federal government, should tolerate the fact that the Northern Territory government, for its own political purposes, is unwilling to spend money that it should be spending to save the lives of its citizens.We see, time and time again, the Northern Territory government bailing out its mates, shoving money by the bucket loads into the pockets of its friends. But it is not prepared to accede to the priorities set by the medical profession in terms of renal dialysis treatment in the Northern Territory—the worst area for renal disease in Australia—and address their concerns by putting in place an appropriate renal dialysis treatment service in Tennant Creek. (Time expired)2443022:44:0024430Lawler, Tony, MPMr LAWLER834ParkesNP10—Like the previous speaker, I would like to take to task the state government, though this time in New South Wales, for the callous disregard in which they hold some of our smaller rural centres. The first instance I draw the attention of the House to concerns the village of Lake Cargelligo, not far from Condobolin, which, as its name implies, is situated on quite a huge water resource. During January and in previous summers, in the middle of the hot weather, the town of Lake Cargelligo is unable to access water for its residents. During January the temperatures in the western part of New South Wales reach the mid-40s mark, and Lake Cargelligo is one of those towns which I understand hit about 45 degrees. They applied some years ago to upgrade their water system. Obviously it is in the realm of the state government to do this. They have been put off and put off for several years. Two or three years after they first made an approach, we have a situation in this town where old people are unable to flush their toilet, and their airconditioning is not working in these temperatures in excess of 42 or 43 degrees. Unbelievably, patients in the hospital were unable to be bathed and showered in Lake Cargelligo during this period simply because of the lack of interest of the state government in upgrading their water system. They have been told that now there is money available for a study and it will be approximately two or three years until a system is up and running. This is allowing something of the order of 50 weeks to actually complete the study of what is needed. Speaking to many local residents who have been working on this for some years and speaking to the shire, I am not quite sure what the government thinks needs to take so long. Certainly plans for other water purification systems that are up and running in other towns could be used as a model. That is one instance. The other one, which was only brought to my attention today, is again in the state government area. I must say that at this point it appears to be driven more by the Macquarie Area Health Service than the state government, but maybe I will be corrected on that in the next couple of days. In the area of medicine in rural and regional Australia the federal government is spending inordinate amounts of money to boost the attractiveness of small regional towns to doctors, spending money putting in place scholarships to educate country GPs. But we have a situation in the town of Nyngan, which is about 120 kilometres west of Dubbo, where the area health service in its wisdom has decided to charge a $25 fee to the local GP for using facilities to fix up what they call lumps and bumps. This is not where there is an anaesthetic applied; it is purely where the doctor sees a patient in his own surgery and he has not got sterilising equipment, dressings and a small minor procedures room and he has referred them to the hospital. They have seen fit to charge the doctor and therefore the patient $25 to actually use the facilities in this hospital. If this is not a disincentive for GPs practising in small rural and regional towns, I do not know what is. As well as that, amazingly enough, talking about one doctor towns—in Nyngan there is another doctor practising, but a large amount of the workload is carried by one—in small practices there clearly is not enough turnover in the practice for the doctor to fund their own ECGs, CTGs and various other scans. That is another service that up until now has been provided by the hospital. The doctor can send the patient to the hospital, have the trace done and then have the patient come back to the doctor for diagnosis. The same thing is happening with this service—the Macquarie Area Health Service has decided that there will be a charge for this to the doctor which is therefore passed on to the patient. In places like Dubbo there are often multiperson practices where there are several doctors in the same practice. They can afford to cover the cost of infrastructure needed to deliver these services. But in smaller towns that is simply not possible. I should correct myself: of course it is possible, but where does the money lie? Nyngan, for example, is a town with an ageing population. The local economy is not rosy and it has had a couple of years of bad harvests. That $25 will mean a lot to pensioners, people on welfare benefits and low income earners, and it would be financial suicide for many of the VMOs to absorb this fee. They are also concerned that the fee will only go up, not down, and will certainly not disappear. I have taken the liberty of contacting a few different people, including the area health service, the GP and Minister Wooldridge's office. I would hope that some commonsense will prevail in this matter, but I again reflect on the role of the state government in these two essential areas of health services and water supplies to rural towns. These services are completely ignored and completely irrelevant as far as the state government is concerned. (Time expired)2443122:49:0024431Corcoran, Ann, MPMs CORCORAN009CWIsaacsALP00—A petition I was given recently was tabled in the House this afternoon. The petition talks about increasing concerns about the quality of care available to residents of nursing homes and hostels. It maintains that current staffing levels are seriously compromising the delivery of good care. Over 10,000 people signed this petition. It is obvious to me that aged care is an urgent issue in my electorate. Judging by the response to the petition, it is an issue across all of Victoria and probably Australia. The petition was organised by a nurse working in an aged care facility in Melbourne. She has talked to me about her experiences and the dissatisfaction she has felt with the level of care that she and her colleagues are allowed, or able, to provide under current arrangements. There are two major aged care issues. The first is the level of care being provided to residents. The second is a lack of aged care beds, particularly nursing homes beds or high-level beds. The level of care issue impacts on both the residents and the staff. I have now heard from a number of staff in aged care facilities about the frustration they feel as they try to provide the care they know is appropriate. It boils down to a lack of time to do the little things that matter. The lack of time comes from inadequate staffing levels. The staff cannot afford the time to stop and provide the small services that make a difference, the small things that mean a resident is a person and not a bundle in a bed or a chair. Staff say they are not able to stop and talk to residents, they cannot hold someone's hand for a few minutes, they cannot stop to comfort or reassure a resident who is in tears, they cannot stop and brush someone's hair and they cannot even take the time to feed a resident with a degree of dignity. The residents are obviously missing out on the quality of care that they are entitled to expect. Implications for staff are serious too. These men and women are committed to caring for elderly people, something not all of us are comfortable doing. They tell me that they go home at night upset and distressed—upset that they have not been able to meet the human needs of the residents in their care. They feel they have not been able to do their jobs properly. I am told this stressful situation has led to a number of staff leaving the industry. They feel they cannot continue working in a situation where they cannot meet the standards that they know should exist. Recent announcements by the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow minister for aged care promise to turn this situation around. Under a Labor government, a national benchmark of care for aged care facilities will be established and, importantly, funded properly. The benchmark will clearly set out the level and quality of care required. In contrast to the present situation, owners of facilities will know exactly what they are required to provide. This benchmark will also become the basis for funding. Providers will know exactly what they need to provide and they will know that they will be funded appropriately. The benchmark will be developed in consultation with users, providers, employees and community representatives. Minimum staffing guidelines will also be established to ensure that the benchmark of care can be delivered. This will mean that the staff can give the residents the care the staff are trained to give, and the care the residents have a right to expect. The second issue in aged care is the lack of beds available. The government's standard for aged care beds is 90 beds for every 1,000 people aged over 70 years. By this standard the City of Casey, before the last round of allocations, had only 60 per cent of the beds it should have. In the latest round Cranbourne did not get one single bed; 88 beds were allocated in the Mentone-Chelsea area, but they are all low level beds. These beds are very welcome, but they are not enough. Not one high level bed was allocated in the seat of Isaacs. I have been approached by many constituents who are very worried about finding a nursing home bed if they need one. The aged people and families I speak to feel that, under present circumstances, they are able to do little more than hope that they can get a bed if they need one. No-one should have to go through that insecurity. I share this worry and I am looking forward to further announcements of Labor's aged care policy, particularly the part dealing with the shortage of nursing home beds.2443322:54:0024433Lloyd, Jim, MPMr LLOYDIK6RobertsonLP10—This evening I want to take the opportunity to highlight the difficulty and the suffering experienced by people in our community who suffer from cystic fibrosis. Several thousand people in Australia are afflicted with cystic fibrosis. Approximately one baby in 2,000 is born with cystic fibrosis and one in every 24 carry the mutated CF gene. Cystic fibrosis is an inherited genetic condition which mainly affects the lungs, digestive system and the sweat glands. It is most commonly a life threatening condition affecting young Australian children. Cystic fibrosis is a condition in which there is considerable variation in severity of the symptoms. Unfortunately, the life expectancy of people who have the severest form of cystic fibrosis is always shorter than most people in the Australian community would expect.There is no cure for cystic fibrosis. The aims of the treatment are to decrease the severity of symptoms and to prevent the development of complications such as infection. I did not know a great deal about cystic fibrosis until I was contacted by constituents in my electorate of Robertson. I received a letter from Mr and Mrs Vince and Kathy Bonic of East Gosford raising some concerns about the carer's allowance for their son Mathew. I met with both of Mathew's parents and was in some ways shocked and impressed by their dedication and the amount of effort taken by parents of children with cystic fibrosis just to keep them functioning at some basic level of health and fitness. It is a disease which takes a tremendous amount of time and effort from the parents and carers and from the individuals themselves. Each day they require physiotherapy and a regular routine, without which they become ill with chest infections and other complications. If they do not perform the physiotherapy and work very hard at keeping their lungs free of mucous, they very easily get an infection in their lungs. When infection becomes severe, people with cystic fibrosis are often admitted to hospital. One of the very debilitating things for children and young adults is that each time they have to go to hospital with a severe infection it requires from 10 to 14 days in hospital, disrupting their school and work life.I had the opportunity to visit the cystic fibrosis clinic at the Gosford Hospital and meet with many of the parents of children who suffer from cystic fibrosis and also to meet with some young adults who manage as best they can to carry on a normal life. I had the opportunity to speak to a young gentleman and a young lady, both in their early twenties, who were functioning in a normal life. He was running a restaurant and the young lady was holding down a job in Sydney and commuting every day. They explained to me the time consuming difficulties of just keeping themselves well and having to manage the physiotherapy and their lives as best they could. I said to the young girl, `You have to get up an hour earlier than anyone else to go through the physio and exercise routines. What happens if you don't do it?' She said, `I simply get sick and end up in hospital. So I have no alternative other than to go through the regime.' It was certainly an eye-opener for me. I believe many Australians do not realise the severity of cystic fibrosis, that it is a life-threatening disease. Even in Australia with the best care, life expectancy is unfortunately only 30 to 40 years. I want to emphasise the work that is being done by the Cystic Fibrosis Association and also the parents and carers and the people who are suffering to make their life and their qualify of life as best they can, and to assure those who are suffering that the government is pouring money into research into cystic fibrosis. Also, there was some concern about the carer's allowance. I want to assure people that the carer's allowance is there, available from the government.10000SPEAKER, MrMr SPEAKER—Order! It being 11 p.m., the debate is interrupted.23:00:0024433House adjourned at 11.00 p.m.Notices24433The following notices were given:QK6Sercombe, Bob, MPMr Sercombe—to move:That, in the light of the strong views of many Australians, and particularly those in provincial and rural areas, the House calls on the Government to: (1) clearly indicate that it will not proceed with the further privatisation of Telstra; and (2) remove the proceeds of further privatisation from its Forward Estimates.WI4Reith, Peter, MPMr Reith—to move:That, pursuant to the acceptance by the House on 26 June 2000 of the invitation of 10 May 2000 of the Houses of the Parliament of Victoria to meet in Melbourne on 9 and 10 May 2001 to mark the centenary of the first meetings of the Houses of the Commonwealth Parliament in 1901:(1) the House of Representatives meet with the Senate at 2 p.m. on 9 May 2001 in the Royal Exhibition Buildings, Melbourne;(2) the only business transacted at that meeting be: (a) introductory address by the President of the Senate; (b) address by the Governor-General; (c) addresses by the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition; and (d) concluding address by the Speaker of the House of Representatives;(3) at the conclusion of that business, the House stand adjourned until 10 a.m. on 10 May 2001;(4) the House meet at 10 a.m. on 10 May 2001 in the Legislative Assembly Chamber, Parliament House, Melbourne;(5) the only business transacted at that meeting be: (a) motion moved by the Prime Minister, seconded by the Leader of the Opposition and followed by the Leader of the National Party of Australia; and (b) concluding address by the Speaker; and(6) at the conclusion of that business, the House stand adjourned until 2 p.m. on 22 May 2001.Answers to Questions in Writing24435The following answers to questions were circulated:24435(Question No. 1513)151324435Thomson, Kelvin, MPMr Kelvin ThomsonUK6WillsALP00 asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 10 May 2000:(1) Has his attention been drawn to a report in the Australian Financial Review on 26 April 2000 headed Late GST decision software problem.(2) When will the Australian Taxation Office rule on how to convert foreign currency to Australian dollars under a GST.(3) When will the format of the Business Activity Statement be finalised.24435Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The Assistant Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) and (2) I refer the honourable member to ruling GSTR 2001/2 and to draft ruling GSTR 2000/D15. (3) The format of the Business Activity Statements was finalised in December 1999 after extensive consultation with business and tax professionals.24435(Question No. 1646)164624435Thomson, Kelvin, MPMr Kelvin ThomsonUK6WillsALP00 asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 20 June 2000:(1) What is the (a) membership, (b) role and (c) function of the (i) Management Board and (ii) Corporate Business Forum of the Australian Taxation Office (ATO).(2) What changes have there been to the structure of corporate governance at the ATO since 1995.(3) What will be the (a) membership, (b) role and (c) powers of the Board of Taxation.24435Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The Assistant Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) The Management Board and the Corporate Business Forum of the ATO are no longer functioning in the ATO's corporate governance structure.(2) In 1995 the governance framework of the ATO centred around the Management Board supported by various sub committees eg. Fraud and Audit Committees. The corporate governance process consisted of monthly reporting by each major division of the ATO together with six monthly review processes to meet external reporting requirements. Sub committees of the Management Board were responsible for evaluation performance reports prepared by external parties.The corporate governance process is now built on the principles of the ATO's Strategic Management System and the framework of the Integrated Planning System. The ATO reports on its governance arrangements each year in the Annual Report. Details of current arrangements can be found on pages 87-92 of the 1999/2000 Commissioner of Taxation Annual Report.(3) The Treasurer announced the membership and role of the Board of Taxation on 7 and 10 August 2000. I refer you to his press releases of those dates. The Board's charter is available on its web site at www.taxboard.gov.au.24435(Question No. 1710)171024435Andren, Peter, MPMr AndrenKL6CalareIND00 asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 28 June 2000:(1) Will a special input credit be available for wholesale sales tax paid on demonstration motor vehicles sold by motor dealers after 1 July 2000; if not, why not.(2) Is the Government aware of concerns expressed by motor traders, about the cost of the proposed treatment of demonstration vehicles to their businesses; if so, (a) what sum does Treasury estimate this treatment will cost (i) the motor trading industry as a whole and (ii) the average new car dealer and (b) how does the Government justify placing this additional cost on motor traders.(3) Is the Government aware of concerns expressed by some businesses at the cashflow implications of the Pay As You Go instalment system; if so, what is the Government's response to these concerns. 24436Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The Assistant Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) Where demonstration vehicles have been used for their intrinsic purpose as a means of transportation, they are regarded as second hand. Therefore, no special input tax credit is available for the sales tax paid on such vehicles held for sale or exchange at 1 July 2000.(2)(a) There are no such estimates.(2)(b) Tax reform will provide significant long term benefits to all members of the motor vehicle industry.(3) In the transition to the new PAYG system, the Government legislated to enable companies to defer all or part of their 2000 year income tax liability.Companies classified as large under the previous company installments regime are able to defer up to 20% of their 2000 year tax liability (payable in 10 quarterly installments). Companies classified as medium are able to defer up to 42% of their 2000 year tax liability (payable in 21 quarterly installments). Companies classified as small are able to defer up to 100% of their 2000 year tax liability (payable in 21 quarterly installments).Of course, from 1 July 2000, companies also benefited from reduced tax rates. The company tax rate fell from 36 per cent to 34 per cent on 1 July 2000 and will fall to an internationally competitive 30 per cent on 1 July 2001. Small businesses also benefited from expanded capital gains tax concessions.24436(Question No. 1878)187824436Thomson, Kelvin, MPMr Kelvin ThomsonUK6WillsALP00 asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 28 August 2000:(1) Has the Minister received advice from the Treasury or the Australian Taxation Office since March 1996 on the risk to revenue from employee benefit tax avoidance schemes.(2) If so, (a) when was each piece of advice received, (b) what course of action was recommended in each case and (c) what action did the Government take in response to each of these recommendations.24436Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:This question has been answered previously. I refer the honourable Member to my answer to question on notice No.1880.24436(Question No. 1879)187924436Thomson, Kelvin, MPMr Kelvin ThomsonUK6WillsALP00 asked the Minister representing the Assistant Treasurer, upon notice, on 28 August 2000:(1) Has the Minister received advice from the Treasury or the Australian Taxation Office since March 1996 on the risk to revenue from employee benefit tax avoidance schemes.(2) If so, (a) when was each piece of advice received, (b) what course of action was recommended in each case and (c) what action did the Government take in response to each of these recommendations.24436Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The Assistant Treasure has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question: This question has been answered previously. I refer the honourable Member to my answer to question on notice No.1880.24437(Question No. 1964)196424437Danby, Michael, MPMr DanbyWF6Melbourne PortsALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs, upon notice, on 7 September 2000:(1) How many (a) barristers, (b) solicitors and (c) administrative staff were employed by the Commonwealth of Australia in Darwin for the conduct of the recently determined Stolen Generation Cases (Cubillo v. Commonwealth of Australia and Gunner v. Commonwealth of Australia ('the Stolen Generation Cases')).(2) Other than barristers, solicitors and administrative staff employed by the Commonwealth in Darwin in connection with the Stolen Generation Cases, were there other barristers, solicitors, administrative staff and others employed by the Commonwealth in the conduct of the Commonwealth's case; if so, how many (a) barristers, (b) solicitors, (c) administrative staff and (d) others were employed by the Commonwealth in places other than Darwin in the conduct of the Stolen Generation Cases.(3) What has been the total cost to date, or if precise figures are not available, the approximate total cost, of the conduct of the Commonwealths case in the Stolen Generation Cases.(4) Who instructed counsel for the Commonwealth about the scope of their cross-examination of Mrs Cubillo, Mr Gunner and other witnesses called by the applicants in the Stolen Generation Cases.(5) Is it expected by superior courts in Australia that the Commonwealth will conduct all litigation in which it is involved as a model litigant.(6) Did the counsel for the Commonwealth in the Stolen Generation Cases suggest to Mrs Cubillo and Mr Gunner in cross-examination that they were lying and suggest to the Honourable Justice O'Loughlin in submissions that Mr Gunner and Mrs Cubillo were lying about their experiences; if so, what was the basis of such suggestions.(7) Did counsel for the Commonwealth submit to the Court that witnesses called by Mr Gunner who gave evidence of sexual abuse in St. Marys Home in Alice Springs were lying and had conspired to concoct false evidence; if so, what was the basis of such submissions.(8) Was counsel for the Commonwealth involved in passing on evidence given in the case of Gunner v. Commonwealth of Australia to Mr Constable, the person found by Justice O'Loughlin to be the sexual molester of Mr Gunner, so as to permit Mr Constable to change his evidence.(9) Did (a) he or (b) the Prime Minister give instructions to counsel for the Commonwealth concerning the conduct of the Stolen Generation Cases.(10) Did the Commonwealth employ private detective agencies in conducting the Stolen Generation Cases; if so, what was the cost of hiring these private detective agencies.(11) Is it standard practice for the Commonwealth to employ private detectives in the conduct of civil litigation.(12) During the conduct of the Stolen Generation Cases, were there members of the Prime Ministers staff present in court at any time.(13) Did members of the staff of the Prime Minister or members of his staff instruct counsel for the Commonwealth as to the nature and scope of cross-examination.(14) What is the total number of applicants bringing Federal or High Court proceedings against the Commonwealth of Australia similar to the cases brought by Mr Gunner and Mrs Cubillo.(15) What is the total number of cases brought against the Commonwealth by persons alleging that they are the children or grandchildren of Aboriginal people removed from their families.(16) Have any attempts been made by the Commonwealth to resolve the claims brought against the Commonwealth in cases similar to that brought by Mr Gunner and Mrs Cubillo; if so, what attempts have been made.(17) Has an estimate been made of the cost of resolving all Stolen Generation litigation brought against the Commonwealth without requiring further litigation; if so, what is that estimated cost. 24437Ruddock, Philip, MPMr Ruddock0J4BerowraLPMinister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and Minister for Reconciliation and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs10—The following information is provided in response to the honourable member's question: (1) At the trial in Darwin, the Commonwealth's legal team for Cubillo v. Commonwealth of Australia and Gunner v. Commonwealth of Australia generally comprised: (a) 3 barristers; (b) 4-5 solicitors; and,(c) 2-5 administrative support staff.(2)(a) The Solicitor-General and two barristers (only one of whom continued in the litigation) were briefed at the commencement of the Cubillo and Gunner cases.(b) and (c)The court sat in Melbourne, Adelaide, Darwin, Perth, Townsville, Alice Springs, Tennant Creek and Canberra. From time to time, other Australian Government Solicitor lawyers and administrative support staff throughout Australia rendered assistance in the conduct of the Cubillo and Gunner cases. It is not possible to accurately ascertain the total number of lawyers and administrative support staff who provided support in each of these places without expending a disproportionate amount of time and resources on the issue.(d) No other people were employed by the Commonwealth in the conduct of the cases, although the Australian Government Solicitor engaged a number of consultants and other service-providers on behalf of the Commonwealth. (3) As at 30 September 2000, the legal fees and disbursements billed by the Australian Government Solicitor to the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet for the conduct of the Commonwealth's defence in the Cubillo and Gunner litigation was $8,401,196.11 (inclusive of GST, where applicable).(4) In accordance with usual practice, fundamental decisions concerning the strategic direction of the Cubillo and Gunner cases were taken at a ministerial level (by the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs) and instructions were provided by the Office of Indigenous Policy in the Department of Prime Minister & Cabinet to counsel through the Australian Government Solicitor. As is normal practice, the content and manner of specific questions during the course of cross-examination was left to counsel to determine.(5) The expectation that the Commonwealth and its agencies will act as a model litigant has been recognised by the Courts. Pursuant to the Legal Services Directions issued by the Attorney-General under section 55ZF of the Judiciary Act 1903, litigation is to be conducted by the Commonwealth and its agencies in accordance with the Directions on the Commonwealth's Obligation to Act as a Model Litigant, which are set out in Appendix B of those Directions.(6) These cases are under consideration by an appellate court and it is not appropriate to discuss the cross-examination of the applicants.(7) These cases are under consideration by an appellate court and it is not appropriate to discuss the Commonwealth's submissions.(8) Counsel advise that they were not involved in passing on evidence given in the case of Gunner v Commonwealth of Australia to Mr Constable so as to permit Mr Constable to change his evidence.(9)(a) In accordance with usual practice, fundamental decisions concerning the strategic direction of the Cubillo and Gunner cases were taken at a ministerial level (by the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs) and instructions were provided by the Office of Indigenous Policy in the Department of Prime Minister & Cabinet to counsel through the Australian Government Solicitor.(b) The Prime Minister did not give instructions to counsel for the Commonwealth concerning the conduct of the Cubillo and Gunner cases.(10) On behalf of the Commonwealth, the Australian Government Solicitor engaged a private investigation firm during the conduct of the Cubillo and Gunner cases to locate and interview witnesses and to locate relevant historical material. The cost of the private investigation firm services was about $770,800 (including search fees, travelling costs and other disbursements).(11) In civil litigation requiring extensive factual investigation it is common practice for the Commonwealth's solicitors to engage private investigators on behalf of the Commonwealth.(12) Members of the Prime Minister's staff were not present in court at any time during the conduct of the Cubillo and Gunner Cases. (13) Members of the Prime Minister's staff and members of the Minister's staff did not instruct counsel for the Commonwealth as to the nature and scope of cross-examination.(14) 736 plaintiffs have brought proceedings in the High Court against the Commonwealth of Australia which are similar to the cases brought by Mr Gunner and Mrs Cubillo. 721 of those writs were filed in the Darwin Registry of the High Court of Australia by plaintiffs claiming to have been removed as children. Of these, nine proceedings (including the Cubillo and Gunner proceedings) were remitted to the Federal Court by consent.15 of those writs were filed in the Darwin Registry of the High Court of Australia by plaintiffs claiming to be the mothers of children who were removed. Of these, two proceedings were remitted to the Federal Court by consent.(15) 6 writs involving a total of 1,368 claims have been filed in the Darwin Registry of the High Court of Australia by plaintiffs claiming to be the children or grandchildren of persons who themselves were removed as children.(16) In 1995 the Commonwealth participated in `without prejudice' discussions seeking to resolve `separated children' claims without recourse to litigation. In accordance with established principles it would be inappropriate to disclose the details of those discussions.(17) No estimate has been made during this Government's term in office of the cost of resolving all `Stolen Generation' litigation brought against the Commonwealth without requiring further litigation.24439(Question No. 1980)198024439Tanner, Lindsay, MPMr TannerYU5MelbourneALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 3 October 2000:(1) What are the estimates for (a) 2000-2001, (b) 2001-2002, (c) 2002-2003 and (d) 2003-2004 for the Regional Solutions Programme (RSP).(2) For each year referred to in part (1), of the totals for each year, what amounts are to come from reductions in funding for the Regional Assistance Programme and what amounts from the sale of an Australian Maritime Safety vessel.(3) Have the amounts for the RSP been incorporated into the forward estimates; if not, when will this occur.24439Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) The estimates for the Regional Solutions Programme (RSP) are:(a) $15.0M in 2000-2001;(b) $25.0M in 2001-2002;(c) $25.0M in 2002-2003; and(d) $25.0M in 2003-2004.The above figures include a Departmental component of $2.4M per year, which is subject to indexation.(2) The RSP is offset by funds from the Regional Assistance Programme (RAP) and the sale of an Australian Maritime Safety Authority vessel as listed below:(a) $5.0M from RAP in 2000-2001; $5.0M from AMSA in 2000-2001;(b) $10.0M from RAP in 2001-2002; $4.0M from AMSA in 2001-2002;(c) $12.0M from RAP in 2002-2003; $0.0M from AMSA in 2002-2003;(d) $0.0M from RAP in 2003-2004; and $0.0M from AMSA in 2003-2004.(3) Funding for the RSP has been incorporated into the Department's forward estimates as part of the Additional Estimates process. Further information about the RSP, including funding, is available in the Transport and Regional Services Portfolio Additional Estimates Statements (PAES), lodged in late November 2000 to support the tabling of the Additional Estimates Appropriation Bills. Funding for the RSP in 2000-01 will be provided in Appropriation Bill No. 3. 24440(Question No. 2017)201724440Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 4 October 2000:(1) Is it the case that some prime contractor transport operators are forcing some sub-contractors to accept commercially unconscionable rate cuts as a means for prime contractors to extract from sub-contractors lower rates in order to pass through savings under the new tax system to customers.(2) Is it the case that reported GST freight rate cuts may be unfairly based as they do not take into account other cost increases such as fuel price rises which have increased by up to 47 per cent since last year.(3) Is it the case that the impact of such unfairly based GST freight rate cuts may result in sub-contractors compromising maintenance and general safety issues due to the requirement to accept commercially unsustainable rates to remain in the road transport industry.(4) Taking into account the application of the chain of responsibility principle to prime contractor transport operators and the capacity, in the case of a fatal accident involving a sub-contractor for example, for a prime contractor transport operator to be prosecuted due to their imposition of commercially unconscionable rates on sub-contractors, does the Government intend to take any action on these commercially unsustainable rates; if not, why not.(5) Is it a fact that police raids on a truck shop at Peak Hill near Parkes, NSW, and various locations in Victoria, Queensland and the ACT on 8 August 2000 led to the arrest of eight people including three truck drivers, allegedly involved in the production and distribution of methyl-amphetamine (speed).(6) Is it the case that freight rates are so low at the moment that employee and owner-drivers may be forced to drive longer and faster and resort to the use of drugs to meet client demands.24440Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) I have received representations to this effect, as has the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC). I understand that the ACCC is currently investigating claims that some transport operators have sought to set freight rates which take into account savings flowing from the New Tax System, but that do not take account of other cost factors.(2) The Goods and Services Tax is not the issue. There have been suggestions that some companies have set rates taking into account the savings flowing from the New Tax System, but without paying adequate regard to increases in cost factors such as fuel. Senator Boswell addressed this in a media release on 17 August 2000. (3) As indicated in the response to (2) above the Goods and Services Tax is not the issue.(4) The Government is working co-operatively with the States and Territories through the National Road Transport Commission to progress the development and implementation of `chain of responsibility' provisions into road transport law. Implementation of such provisions will rest largely with the States and Territories. However, relevant provisions will be enacted by the Commonwealth for vehicles registered under the Federal Interstate Registration Scheme (FIRS). (FIRS is an optional alternative to State or Territory registration for vehicles engaged solely in the interstate transport of goods or passengers.) The issue of freight rates is not a matter being considered for inclusion in road transport law nor is it to be captured under `chain of responsibility' provisions, as freight rates are essentially a commercial matter which would be included in a negotiated contract. However, as `chain of responsibility' provisions become increasingly operative, behaviour by all those in the transport chain, which could lead to drivers or others breaching the law, will be targeted. In certain specific circumstances, there may also be recourse to remedies, under State fair trading legislation and at common law, for unfair or harsh contracts or unconscionable conduct. There is also access in Commonwealth legislation to similar remedies. These are set out in Section 51AC of the Trade Practices Act 1974, which contains provisions dealing with unconscionable conduct in business transactions. The Government is supporting the development of a voluntary Code of Conduct by the road transport industry for the road transport industry, which is intended to establish a framework for fair and reasonable business dealings. 5) I am aware of the media reports on this matter and I am advised that the matter is currently before the courts. However, the precise details of the matter have not been able to be confirmed with the NSW Police Service who I understand co-ordinated the operation.(6) There are suggestions from parts of the trucking industry that this is the case. The Government's position is that breaches of the law cannot be condoned whatever the circumstances. While drivers may be pressured they are not forced to break the law. They can always say no. If employee drivers are then sacked they can take action for wrongful dismissal and/or report the matter to the appropriate State or Territory road transport authority. Owner-drivers who lose contracts because they refuse to break the law should also refer the matter to the relevant road transport authority. 24441(Question No. 2018)201824441Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 4 October 2000:(1) Given the Government's support for the chain of responsibility principle in road transport, what is the Government doing to make the chain of responsibility a feature of commercial transport dealings and thereby stopping trucking companies from taking short cuts with safety, putting lives at risk and undercutting operators who work by the rules.(2) Is it the case that until the chain of responsibility concept becomes a feature of commercial dealings, transport prime contractors will continue to pressure sub-contractors to conform to schedules which cannot be met without breaking laws such as driving hours legislation, occupational health and safety legislation and industrial relations legislation.24441Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) The Government is working co-operatively with the States and Territories through the National Road Transport Commission (NRTC) to progress the development and implementation of `chain of responsibility' provisions into road transport law. Implementation of such provisions will rest largely with the States and Territories. However, relevant provisions will be enacted by the Commonwealth for vehicles registered under the Federal Interstate Registration Scheme (FIRS). (FIRS is an optional alternative to State or Territory registration for vehicles engaged solely in the interstate transport of goods or passengers.) `Chain of responsibility' provisions are already in place under dangerous goods legislation with sanctions which can include exclusion from the industry for a specified period and fines which can be as high as $500,000 for a company. `Chain of responsibility' provisions have also been included, to some extent, in driving hours legislation and the `three strikes and you're out' policy to combat speeding heavy vehicles. With respect to driving hours there are currently fines of up to $1,500 for an individual and $7,500 for businesses who set schedules that cannot be met without a driver breaking driving or speeding laws. Under the speeding heavy vehicles policy, sanctions can be applied to the owner or operator of the vehicle through the suspension of the vehicles' registration for a specified period, in addition to any sanction applied to the driver of the vehicle.The NRTC has also developed a Compliance and Enforcement: Mass Dimension and Load Restraint policy. The policy establishes a “best practice” compliance and enforcement regime and a consistent sanctions model including the introduction of “chain of responsibility” by extending the liability for offences to consignors, packers, loaders, carriers and `receivers' (consignees). Proposed sanctions range from fines, supervisory intervention orders up to exclusion from the industry. If endorsed by Transport Ministers the policy will be given effect by a mix of legislative provisions and administrative guidelines and will be developed during 2001 in tandem with compliance and enforcement provisions for other road transport law. (2) As I have indicated, `chain of responsibility' is already operating to some extent. When fully introduced it will undoubtedly have a strong deterrent effect particularly if sanctions such as exclusion from the industry are enforced. 24442(Question No. 2019)201924442Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 4 October 2000:What action does the Government intend to take in relation to (a) the failure by Western Australia to introduce the uniform national licensing and registration reform and (b) the proposal by the Northern Territory Government to introduce a licence demerit points scheme that excludes intrastate drivers who commit road safety offences.24442Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:The road transport reform process is progressed by the States and Territories and the Commonwealth through the National Road Transport Commission (NRTC) and overseen by the Australian Transport Council (ATC). In this forum the Commonwealth has no unilateral powers in relation to progress, or lack thereof, in jurisdictions implementing road transport reforms.The April 1995 competition policy agreements do, however, link National Competition Policy payments to, among other conditions, the implementation of agreed road transport reforms. The second tranche assessment framework of agreed transport reforms included the uniform national licensing and registration reforms and the National Competition Council has therefore assessed jurisdictions' progress in implementing the reforms and has made recommendations to the Commonwealth Treasurer as to whether jurisdictions have met the agreed conditions for payments. The Treasury has advised that the following actions/decisions have been taken.(a) The National Competition Council's 30 June 2000 assessment of Western Australia's progress in implementing its CoAG road transport reform commitments in relation to national licensing and heavy vehicle registration schemes considered the matters should be re-examined in the context of the June 2001 third tranche assessment for competition payments.(b) Consistent with the National Competition Council's 30 June 2000 assessment of the Northern Territory's progress in implementing its agreed CoAG road transport reform commitments, the Commonwealth has suspended 5% of the Northern Territory's 2000-01 competition payments pending a further assessment to determine whether (i) a driver demerit points scheme consistent with the CoAG framework has been introduced or (ii) the Northern Territory has been exempted from the commitment by the ATC and CoAG.24442(Question No. 2039)203924442Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 10 October 2000:(1) What are the details of the framework implemented to give effect to the Prime Minister's commitment to maintain government service levels right across the Commonwealth referred to in his letter to participants in the Regional Summit, including (a) when and (b) how the public was informed of it.(2) What mechanisms and processes for complaints of diminished services are included in that framework.24442Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) A framework was put in place by the Government to give effect to the Prime Minister's commitment to regional and rural Australia. - During his visit to rural and regional Australia in January and February 2000, the Prime Minister said on 31 January 2000, that “in any future government decisions...in effect a red light flashes if that government decision involves a reduction in the delivery of an existing Commonwealth service”. He also stated on 31 January 2000 that this “doesn't mean to say you can't find different ways of delivering the same service level”.- The Prime Minister then wrote to all Portfolio Ministers on 10 February 2000 stressing that a fundamental responsibility of the Government is to ensure the maintenance of key services and the overall level of Commonwealth services provided to regional and rural Australia. The letter outlined arrangements to be implemented. There were subsequent discussions between the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet and relevant agencies. - The Prime Minister's statement, as above, was made publicly on 31 January 2000, at a community luncheon in Nyngan. The statement was prominently reported in the media.(2) Issues can be brought to the attention of Ministers, and other members of Parliament through letters, direct representations, and contact with Ministers' departments.24443(Question No. 2044)204424443O'Byrne, Michelle, MPMs O'Byrne84SBassALP00 asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 11 October 2000:(1) During the period 1 January 1997 to date, what is the average number of days that a Judge of the Family Court of Australia sat in Court for proceedings other than giving judgments.(2) During the period 1 January 1997 to date, how many days has the Hobart based Family Law Court Judge sat in Court for proceedings other than giving judgments.(3) How many reserved judgments of the Hobart based Family Law Court Judge are outstanding(4) In respect of the Hobart based Family Court Judge what was the date of the last day of hearing of those matters where judgment remains outstanding.24443Williams, Daryl, MPMr Williams7V5TangneyLPAttorney-General10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) I am advised by the Family Court that it is in the process of reforming the collection and reporting of its management information. According to the Court, its information on sitting days prior to July 1999 is unreliable or misleading for the purposes of this question. However, for the periods 1 July 1999 to 30 June 2000 and 1 July 2000 to 30 September 2000, it has advised that the national average number of days that Judges sat in Court for proceedings other than giving judgments, that is, for defended and interim hearings, is 137 and 34, respectively. (2) Subject to the same qualifications and during the same periods, the number of days on which the Hobart based Family Court Judge sat in Court for proceedings other than giving judgments is 158 and 25, respectively. (3) As at 21 November 2000, there were six matters with outstanding reserved judgments where orders have not been made.(4) The last day of hearing in respect of those six matters was: 7 September 1999; 23 November 1999; 4 February 2000; 22 August 2000; 24 August 2000 and 2 October 2000.24443(Question No. 2067)206724443Latham, Mark, MPMr LathamK26WerriwaALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Family and Community Services, upon notice, on 12 October 2000: (1) For each of the past 10 years how many people have been classified by DSS/Centrelink as incapacitated unemployed within the (a) Job Search Allowance (b) Newstart Allowance and (c) Youth Allowance (other) programs.(2) For each of the past 10 years how many people have been classified by DSS/Centrelink as eligible for Sickness Allowance.24443Anthony, Larry, MPMr AnthonyXJ6RichmondNPMinister for Community Services10—The Minister for Family and Community Services has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1)(a) Job Search Allowance was paid (separately from Newstart Allowance) from 1 July 1991 until 20 September 1996. Although Job Search Allowance and Newstart Allowance were separate payments, the incapacitated customer numbers were recorded as one figure for both payments, provided at (b). (b) The numbers of people classified as incapacitated for Job Search Allowance and Newstart Allowance for the past 10 years are as follows:· 1991 - 5,223 · 1992 - 8,679· 1993 - 9,830· 1994 - 15,510· 1995 - 13,118· 1996 - 37,225· 1997 - 63,574 (Newstart Allowance only)· 1998 - 48,792 (Newstart Allowance only)· 1999 - 59,670 (Newstart Allowance only)· 2000 - 66,521 (Newstart Allowance only)These figures reflect the population at August in 1991, June for 1992 - 1997 and May for 1998 - 2000.Until 20 March 1994 people with an incapacity of more than 6 weeks duration were transferred to Sickness Benefit/Allowance. After 20 March 1994 this was extended to 13 weeks duration, in line with Newstart Allowance. From 20 March 1996 all unemployed customers who were ill or injured remained on Job Search Allowance or Newstart Allowance, irrespective of the duration of their incapacity.(c) Youth Allowance was implemented on 1 July 1998 replacing the Youth Training Allowance (payable to people under 18), which was introduced on 1 January 1995. Prior to 1 January 1995 young people who were unemployed were paid either Unemployment Benefit/Job Search Allowance or Sickness Benefit/Allowance. Provisions for young people receiving Youth Training Allowance, and later Youth Allowance, who became ill or injured were the same as those applied under Job Search Allowance and Newstart Allowance. The numbers of people classified as incapacitated for Youth Allowance (other) or Youth Training Allowance since 1995 are as follows:· 1995 - 200· 1996 - 892· 1997 - 1,125· 1998 - 685· 1999 - 3,929· 2000 - 5,720These figures reflect the population at June for 1995 - 1997 and May for 1998 - 2000.(2) Until 1 July 1991 people who were suffering a temporary illness or injury were paid Sickness Benefit. From 1 July 1991 until 20 March 1996 people receiving Job Search Allowance, Newstart Allowance and Youth Training Allowance were only transferred to Sickness Allowance (previously Sickness Benefit) if the incapacity was expected to have a significant duration. Since 20 March 1996 to be eligible for Sickness Allowance, people with a temporary incapacity must also have employment or study to which they will be returning on their recovery. The numbers of people classified as eligible for Sickness Benefit/Allowance for the past 10 years are as follows:· 1991 - 71,400· 1992 - 44,259· 1993 - 46,552· 1994 - 47,067· 1995 - 46,794· 1996 - 34,500· 1997 - 15,600· 1998 - 16,285· 1999 - 11,724 · 2000 - 14,076These figures reflect the population at June for 1991 - 2000.24445(Question No. 2076)207624445Rudd, Kevin, MPMr Rudd83TGriffithALP00 asked the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 12 October 2000:(1) When did the Indonesian Government notify the UN in East Timor of their request for assistance in evacuating UN staff from Atambua in West Timor in early September.(2) What was the precise content of this request.(3) Once this request was received by the UN in Dili, to which (a) elements of the UN Peace Keeping Forces and (b) individuals was it passed.(4) Was this request passed to the Australian Government; if so, (a)when was this done, (b) to whom was it passed in the first instance, (c) who considered this request and decided on the response, (d) when was it replied to, (e) what was the content of the reply, (f) to whom in East Timor was the reply delivered and (g) (i) when and by what chain of command was this reply conveyed to Australian field units in East Timor and (ii) what did those units then do in response.(5) What role did (a) Australian units and (b) New Zealand units play in the evacuation of UN staff.(6) What policy and procedures govern Australian military responses to situations such as that which arose from the request for the evacuation of UN staff from Atambua; were those policies and procedures followed in that instance and have they subsequently been changed; if so, in what respect.(7) Apart from a request from the Indonesian Government was there also a request for assistance from the UNHCR itself on the day of the Atambua murders; if so, what was the request, (b) when was that request made, (c) by whom was it made, (d) to whom in the UNTAET was it delivered, (e) when was it conveyed to the UNPKF, (f) when was it conveyed to (i) Australian military units in East Timor and (ii) to the Australian Government, and (g) what was the Australian response.24445Reith, Peter, MPMr ReithWI4FlindersLPMinister for Defence10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:All timings are local East Timor time (that is Dili is two hours behind Canberra).(1) It is not known if a formal request from the Indonesian Government was received by the United Nations (UN) in East Timor. However, MAJGEN Kikki Syahnakri (COMD KODAM IX) requested UNTAET assistance in dealing with the situation in Atambua on 6 September 2000. (2) The specific detail of any such requests made to the UN on 6 and 7 September 2000 is unknown.(3) Once a request was received by the UN in Dili:(a) it was passed to the FC PKF, who tasked Commander Sector West (COMSECWEST) to plan for an extraction of UNHCR personnel in Atambua.(b) On 6 September 2000 initial HQ PKF communication with Sector West was between FC PKF and Commander Sector West and their staff.On 7 September 2000 the FC again tasked COMSECWEST with planning to evacuate the remaining personnel in Atambua.(4) Information passed to the Australian Government is as follows:(a) Information was passed on 6 September 2000 to and 7 September 2000:· At 4pm 6 September 2000 the Commander of the Australian Contingent (COMASC) contacted Commander Australian Theatre (COMAST) and requested 1 Light Observation Helicopter (Kiowa) be approved to assist the Sector West extraction operation. This deployment of Australian personnel into West Timor was not approved by COMAST.· At 4.05 pm 6 September 2000 COMASC contacted COMAST and requested an Australian linguist be approved to assist the Sector West extraction operation. This deployment of an Australian person into West Timor was not approved by COMAST.· At 5.40 pm 6 September 2000 COMASC contacted COMAST with Commander Sector West request for 2 AUSBATT Platoons, ASLAV Troop and APC elements to be as a contingency in the event any NZAVN elements crashed in East Timor. This request was subsequently cancelled. · At 10.15 am 7 September 2000 COMASC submitted formal written request to COMAST for Australian assistance to Sector West planning for evacuation of remaining personnel in Atambua noting a H-Hour of not before 2 pm on 7 September 2000.(b) Commander Sector West passed these requests to COMASC, who passed them on to COMAST.(c) 7 September 2000 request was passed COMASC/COMAST/HSC to the Minister. A/CDF, who was in Adelaide, was briefed on the contents of the request.(d) Responses were made on 6 and 7 September 2000 to the two separate requests:· At 4.20 pm on 6 September 2000 COMAST informed COMASC that the LOH support was not approved. Commander Sector West was immediately informed.· At 4.28 pm on 6 September 2000 COMAST informed COMASC that the Australian Linguist support was not approved. COMMANDER SECTOR WEST was immediately informed.· At 1.35 pm on 7 September 2000 COMAST informed COMASC that the LOH, 3 Blackhawks, 10 security personnel and 1 linguist were approved to support the Sector West plan for evacuation. By 1.45 pm on 7 September 2000 FC PKF, Commander Sector West and CO AUSBATT had been informed of the approval. (e) As in part (d) above.(f) The reply was delivered as follows:· 6 September 2000. COMASC who then contacted Commander Sector West.· 7 September 2000. COMASC who then contacted FC PKF, Commander Sector West and CO AUSBATT.(g)(i) Replies were conveyed to the Australian field units in East Timor. 6 Sep 00: LOH: Timings as above and from ASNCE to Headquarters Sector West to 161 Recce Sqn Det. Australian Linguist: Timings as above and from ASNCE to Sector West direct to linguist (Sector West staff officer). 7 September 2000: Timings as above direct from Australian National Command Element East Timor to HQ PKF, Sector West and AUSBATT. (ii) 6 September 2000: Acknowledged that approval was not given. The Linguist was removed from the NZAVN aircraft and the LOH was tasked with providing support from within East Timor air space. 7 September 2000: Acknowledged that approval was given for the air assets and continued planning for the evacuation operation.(5)(a) Australian unit roles in the evacuation of UN staff were:· 6 September 2000. An LOH provided limited air command and control from within East Timor air space for CO NZBATT. AUSBATT provided reception, security, clothing, processing and medical attention between 5.45 pm and 9.00 pm on 6 September 2000 at Balibo. Non-Australian UN air assets transported 36 evacuees from Balibo to Dili.· 7 September 2000. At 3.45 pm on 7 September 2000 a TNI led and escorted road convoy arrived at JP-A (Batugade). AUSBATT soldiers provided reception, security, clothing, processing and medical attention between 3.45 pm and 6.00 pm on 7 September 2000 at JP-A until the 69 persons and 3 mortal remains were taken to Dili by Non-Australian UN air assets.(b) Three New Zealand helicopters (UH1H aircraft) and a detachment of 10 security personnel deployed to Atambua, leaving Suai at 5.00 pm on 6 September 2000. First lift arrived in Balibo at 5.47 pm on 6 September 2000 and the second and final lift arrived in Balibo at 5.56 pm on 6 September 2000. The aircraft then returned to Suai.(6) Australian Government policy requires that Australian forces are not to be employed outside of the agreed Areas of Operations. Australian forces are not to be used for purposes other than as agreed between the Australian Government and the UN, without prior approval from the Australian Government. The Area of Operations is defined in the CDF's Executive Orders and Rules of Engagement. Missions, limitations, policy and procedures for Australian military responses are included in CDF's and COMAST's Instructions and Directives to the National Commander of the Australian Contingent. Policies and procedures were followed when the request for the evacuation of UN staff from Atambua was received. Planning proceeded as indicated but no action was taken prior to approval. There has been no subsequent change to these policies or procedures. (7) Currently unaware of any such request being made. Any request is likely to have been to UNTAET, not the Australian Government. Such a request did not come through ASNCE or Headquarters Australian Theatre.24447(Question No. 2101)210124447Albanese, Anthony, MPMr AlbaneseR36GrayndlerALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 1 November 2000:(1) How many resolutions have been carried by the Sydney Airport Community Forum since its formation in 1996.(2) How many resolutions have been supported by the Government with action.(3) What were the resolutions referred to in part (2).24447Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's three questions is as follows: (1), (2) and (3)I am advised that eighty-three resolutions had been carried by the SACF up to (and including) the twenty-seventh meeting held on 15 November 2000.Of these resolutions, some sought more than one action outcome, some sought similar outcomes to those sought in earlier resolutions, some expressed a general viewpoint (without an explicit action proposal), some were procedural in nature and some involved a combination of the above.Of the discrete action outcomes specifically sought by the resolutions, close to half have been implemented or have been accepted for implementation. Examples of significant actions which the Government has taken in response to, or with the support of, SACF include:· introduction of the noise sharing arrangements established under the Sydney Airport Long Term Operating Plan (LTOP)· inclusion in the LTOP of provision for use of Simultaneous Opposite Direction Parallel Runway Operations· introduction of ICAO `A' departure procedures for Runways 34 Left and Right· introduction of the legislated movement cap· no amendments to the movement cap or the curfew during the Olympics· Commonwealth funding for Sydenham open space and community facility development· introduction of the `out to sea' SID [Standard Instrument Departure] to the south of the Airport· enhanced reporting and provision of information on the Airport's runway and flight path movements· the location of a permanent noise monitoring terminal in Croydon· the purchase of additional mobile noise monitoring terminals for use in Sydney· regulations imposing penalties for fuel venting from aircraft· exclusion of older aircraft accessing the Airport during the curfew· ensuring Sydney Airport air traffic takes priority over Bankstown traffic· requirement for regular SACL reporting to SACF· deferral of implementation of the Precision Runway Monitor on Runways 16 prior to a full environmental assessment being conducted.24447(Question No. 2103)210324447O'Byrne, Michelle, MPMs O'Byrne84SBassALP00 asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 11 October 2000: (1) Does the web site of the Federal Magistrates Service advertise the existence of a Magistrate based in Launceston. (2) Is it normal practice for Federal Courts to publicise the existence of a judge or magistrate when the official is yet to be appointed. (3) Will he ensure that the web site of the Federal Magistrates Service accurately reflects the Government's progress in appointing a Magistrate to Launceston.24448Williams, Daryl, MPMr Williams7V5TangneyLPAttorney-General10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) On 16 November I announced the appointment of Mr Stuart Roberts as the first federal magistrate for Launceston. At that time, I indicated that Mr Roberts would take up his position on 4 December 2000. As at 4 December 2000, the web site of the Federal Magistrates Service indicated that Mr Roberts commenced his appointment on 4 December. Before that time the web site noted that family law matters for the Federal Magistrates Service could be filed in the Launceston registry of the Family Court.(2) On 31 of January 2000, I announced the proposed locations of the federal magistrates. That announcement included the fact that the Government intended to locate a federal magistrate in Launceston. In these circumstances, it was entirely appropriate for the Federal Magistrates Service to indicate that a federal magistrate would be appointed who would be resident in Launceston.(3) See question 1. The web site of the Federal Magistrates Service now indicates that Mr Roberts took up his position on 4 December. It also includes my press release of 11 December noting that Mr Roberts would start hearing cases from 11 December. The web site has accurately reflected the position regarding the appointment of a federal magistrate at all times.24448(Question No. 2109)210924448Ferguson, Laurie, MPMr Laurie Ferguson8T4ReidALP00 asked the Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 1 November 2000:(1) For the latest year for which data is available, how many recruits to the Army Reserve completed Common Induction Training.(2) Of those referred to in part (1), how many were (a) full time students, (b) unemployed, (c) self employed, (d) employed in the private sector, (e) employed by State or local government and (f) employed by the Federal Government.24448Scott, Bruce, MPMr Bruce ScottYT4MaranoaNPMinister for Veterans' Affairs and Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) 1300 Part Time soldiers were trained in Training Year 99/00 of which 1167 have successfully completed the requirements of the 45 day Army Recruit Course. 23 Part Time soldiers have been inducted in Training Year 00/01 and are at various points along the training continuum. This result is equivalent to that for the same point in Training Years 98/99 and 99/00.(2) A detailed breakdown by pre-induction employment is not possible from the database maintained by the Army Recruit Training Centre. A significant research task would be necessary to extract the necessary information.No one group dominates the intake population, however, students are a significant component of the Part Time recruit population in the period December to February.24448(Question No. 2117)211724448Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Financial Services and Regulation, upon notice, on 2 November 2000:(1) Was he, his staff or his Department consulted by the Chairman of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) concerning the Chairman's decision to write for the Business Review Weekly every four weeks.(2) What is the nature of the ACCC Chairman's appointment and what are the details of the Chairman's remuneration package.(3) Will the Chairman of the ACCC write for the journal every four weeks, covering any subject he chooses, as reported in the BRW on 20 October. (4) Has the Government developed guidelines or held discussions with Professor Fels about his position and the type of subjects on which he chooses to write.(5) Will Professor Fels be required to declare publicly any financial benefit he receives for writing for the BRW.(6) Given Professor Fels' heavy workload as reflected in the ACCC annual report 1999-2000, will his remuneration package be discounted for any earnings he receives from the BRW.24449Hockey, Joe, MPMr HockeyDK6North SydneyLPMinister for Financial Services and Regulation10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) No.(2) Professor Fels was appointed from 6 November 2000 until 30 June 2004 on the same terms and conditions as applied to his initial term as ACCC Chairman, until the Remuneration Tribunal determines otherwise. His remuneration package totals $250,000. This includes a base salary of $179,500 and an office holder supplement of $11,500 as determined by the Remuneration Tribunal. He has access to the usual superannuation and leave arrangements for the holder of a statutory office at his salary level, a private plated vehicle, home telephone reimbursement and spouse travel.(3) Professor Fels will write for the BRW every four weeks. He intends to write mainly about trade practices and competition issues.(4) There have been no discussions with Professor Fels about him writing for the BRW.The ACCC is required under the Trade Practices Act 1974 to disseminate information with respect to the carrying out of the functions, or the exercise of the powers, of the ACCC under the Act. Therefore, it is not uncommon for Professor Fels and other ACCC members to write articles for a variety of publications from time to time.(5) Professor Fels will not receive any financial benefit for writing for BRW. He did not seek any financial benefit, nor was he offered any financial benefit.(6) Not applicable.24449(Question No. 2125)212524449Ferguson, Laurie, MPMr Laurie Ferguson8T4ReidALP00 asked the Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 2 November 2000:(1) Has the Government yet finalised its response to the August 1997 Abadee report into the judicial independence of military trials; if not, what is the reason for the delay.(2) Which of Brigadier Abadee's 48 recommendations have been (a) accepted in full by the Government, (b) rejected in part and (c) rejected in full.(3) Did the 1999 annual report of the Judge Advocate General indicate that proposed legislation responding to the Abadee Report had been forwarded to Service Chiefs for comment; if so, what is the current status of this proposed legislation.24449Scott, Bruce, MPMr Bruce ScottYT4MaranoaNPMinister for Veterans' Affairs and Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Some of the recommendations require implementation by administrative action only. Such action will be finalised by the issue of the next amendment to the Discipline Law Manuals. Drafting instructions are being prepared with regard to those recommendations that require amendment of the Defence Force Discipline Act 1982, its regulations or rules.(2)(a) The Department of Defence has accepted, or agreed in principle to, 38 recommendations; as follows:RECOMMENDATIONS AGREED OR AGREED IN PRINCIPLE BY DEFENCE RECOMMENDATIONSPARTICULARS1.26.1 Standard of Military Justice should not vary between war and peace.1.26.2Multiple roles of Convening Authorities (CA) should be eliminated1.26.3Court martial (CM) / Defence Force magistrate(DFM) prosecutions decisions: prosecution policy similar to those in operation in various States or the Commonwealth (with suitable modifications) should be introduced1.26.6Retain the present system of the Judge Advocate General (JAG) nominating officers to the Judge Advocate's (JA's) panel, appointing DFMs and recommending the appointment of DFDA s154(1)(a) reporting officers to provide legal reports in respect of DFM/CM convictions.1.26.7No command or control (other than administrative) should be exercised over JAs, DFMs and DFDA s154(1)(a) reporting officers in respect of their judicial duties 1.26.8 & 1.26.12JAA should be under command of JAG.1.26.9No reporting on JAs, DFMs and DFDA s154(1)(a) reporting officers in respect of their judicial duties 1.26.10Separate administrative authority in respect of the non-judicial duties of JAs, DFMs and DFDA s154(1)(a) reporting officers1.26.11Duties of a judicial nature, including the appointment of a JA, DFM for a particular trial, or the nomination of a 154(1)(a) reporting officer, be allocated by JAA 1.26.13Convening orders issued by CAs should include a request for the JAG to appoint a JA or DFM, or alternatively, a statement that a particular JA/DFM has been appointed by the JAG.1.26.14Fixed term tenure for JAs/DFMs and DFDA s154(1)(a) reporting officers 1.26.15JA's DFMs and DFDA s154(1)(a) reporting officers should be permitted to perform non-judicial duties1.26.16Consideration should be given to the establishment of a Courts Administration Unit, independent of the CA (outside the chain of command and reporting chains)1.26.17A CA should wherever possible appoint persons from outside his command, outside his reporting chain and outside his unit with selection perhaps being from a large, tri-Service, pool of suitable officers.1.26.18Reviews of CM proceedings and DFM trials should be conducted by an authority other than the CA.1.26.19Prohibit reference to officer's performance as member of CM when determining pay, appointment or efficiency reporting1.26.20 Consideration should be given to the question of whether a JA should be involved in sentencing. 1.26.21Further consideration should be given to whether JA should give reasons for punishment. 1.26.23No right of appeal by prosecutors in respect of sentence1.26.24Consideration should be given to the inclusion of a `no conviction' option in respect of an offence charged under the Act1.26.27No action should be taken to provide appeal rights in respect of CO/SUBSA convictions1.26.29The present review system is efficacious and provides appropriate protections.1.26.30Disadvantages of appeals from decisions of summary authorities outweighs advantages1.26.31Redress inexperience of some DFDA s154(1)(b) legal officers addressed by training, secondment to DPP, and use of Reserves. 1.26.34 & 1.26.37Re elective punishments, provision should be made for the election to be in writing and for the summary authority to furnish to the accused certain explanations about the election when giving him the opportunity to elect trial by DFM or CM. 1.26.33,1.26.38-1.26.45Training of summary authorities, prosecuting and defending officers including publication of sentencing statistics and guidelines and legal principles contained in legal reports by JAG/DJAG and DFDA s154(1)(a) officers.1.26.46No change recommended in respect of the present system of reporting on COs in relation to their performance of duties in maintaining and enforcing discipline1.26.47No reporting in respect of performance of duties by CO as a service tribunal in a particular case(b) The Department of Defence has partially agreed to one recommendation, as follows:RECOMMENDATIONS PARTIALLY ACCEPTED BY DEFENCE RECOMMENDATIONPARTICULARSRESPONSE1.26.48 Extension of discipline officer system to include officers of up to and including the rank of MAJ(E)Extension of discipline officer system to include officers of up to and including the rank of CAPT(E) under training(c) The Department of Defence has disagreed with nine recommendations; as follows:RECOMMENDATIONS REJECTED BY DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATIONSPARTICULARS1.26.4 Appointment of an independent Director of Military Prosecutions on a tri-Service basis1.26.5Appointment of an independent Director of Military Prosecutions on a tri-Service basis1.26.22Confer rights of appeal in relation to sentences imposed by CM/DFM. 1.26.25 WOFFs as CM members1.26.26WOFFs as CM members1.26.28Give further consideration to conferring rights of appeal against decisions of COs especially when elective punishments are involved1.26.32DFDA s154(1)(b) legal officers should be independent of the prosecution process and of the reviewing authority.[Initial agreement withdrawn because of practical implementation problems]1.26.35Remove reduction in rank as an elective punishment1.26.36Review elective punishments (3) The annual report to Parliament for the period 1 January to 31 December 1999 submitted by the Judge Advocate General stated that `...the proposal for a Miscellaneous Defence Legislation Amendment Bill incorporating the Abadee recommendations has been forwarded to the Service chiefs for comment.' Drafting instructions are being prepared to enable the amendment of the Defence Force Discipline Act 1982, its regulations or rules.24451(Question No. 2127)212724451Ferguson, Laurie, MPMr Laurie Ferguson8T4ReidALP00 asked the Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 2 November 2000:(1) When did work commence on the development of an Australian Defence Force Prosecution Policy.(2) Is a key requirement of the policy the need to ensure that military commanders exercise their discretion to prosecute fairly, appropriately and consistently. (3) Has the proposed policy been finalised and promulgated: if so, on what date did this occur; if not, what is the reason for the delay.(4) What reporting to Parliament is envisaged concerning actual compliance with the provisions of the policy. 24452Scott, Bruce, MPMr Bruce ScottYT4MaranoaNPMinister for Veterans' Affairs and Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Work commenced on the development of an ADF Prosecution Policy in July 1998.(2) The policy guides commanding officers in the exercise of their discretion by setting out applicable principles and a non-exhaustive list of factors to be considered. One of these factors states that “As a general rule, the discretion to prosecute should be exercised consistently and fairly with similar cases being dealt with in a similar way. However, it must always be recognised that no two cases are identical and there is always a requirement to consider the unique circumstances and facts of each case before deciding whether to prosecute.” (3) The policy instruction Defence Instruction (General) Personnel 45-4 Australian Defence Force Prosecution Policy was issued on 29 August 2000. (4) The policy instruction does not require the formulation of compliance reports and, consequently, does not require any such reports to be submitted to Parliament. 24452(Question No. 2138)213824452Crosio, Janice, MPMrs Crosio7T4ProspectALP00 asked the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, upon notice, on 7 November 2000:(1) Has his attention been drawn to a recommendation from Major General Mohr in an independent report stating that Australian civilian surgical and medical teams operating in Vietnam during the Vietnam War be deemed as performing qualifying service for repatriation benefits.(2) How many Australian civilian surgical and medical teams who served in Vietnam were awarded the Australian Active Service Medal (AASM).(3) Were Australian civilian surgical and medical officers who served in Vietnam awarded an AASM on the basis that they were integrated with the Australian Defence Force (ADF) and performed like functions with their ADF counterparts.(4) Will he amend the Veterans' Affairs Legislation Amendment (Budget Measures) Bill 2000 to allow Australian civilian surgical and medical teams access to repatriation benefits; if not, why not. 24452Scott, Bruce, MPMr Bruce ScottYT4MaranoaNPMinister for Veterans' Affairs and Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Yes.(2) 279.(3) No. The Australian civilian surgical and medical officers were awarded the AASM on the basis that they were an important part of the Australian aid effort in South Vietnam. They were not bound by military discipline or orders and therefore not under military command.(4) No. The members of civilian surgical and medical teams who worked in Vietnam were employed by the then Department of External Affairs under a South East Asia Treaty Organisation (SEATO) aid program.Their contract of employment specified that they were covered for compensation purposes under Commonwealth employees' compensation legislation, now the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988.Therefore the Government takes the view that compensation coverage is available for the nurses and that if there are issues to be resolved about that cover they should be resolved within the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 and not by recourse to the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986.24453(Question No. 2139)213924453Bevis, Arch, MPMr BevisET4BrisbaneALP00 asked the Minister for Community Services, upon notice, on 8 November 2000: (1) Is it a fact that the 1995-1996 Labor Government Budget allocated funds to the Commonwealth Financial Counselling Program in Queensland of $477 429, and in the 1996-1997 Coalition Budget this was cut to $416 840.(2) Is it a fact that the Coalition Budgets of 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 allocated to the Commonwealth Financial Counselling Program in Queensland $414 800, $415 590, $416 190 and $459 640, respectively.(3) While there was an increase in the allocation to Queensland from 1999-2000 to 2000-2001, is the current budget allocation still below that of 1995-1996 in dollar terms and real dollar terms.(4) Did Network Australia undertake a cost benefit analysis of the Program in 1998 which showed that the Program's measurable benefits exceed its costs.(5) Did Network Australia also indicate that it would be next to impossible for a commercial provider to provide the same level and quality of service as the existing non-profit agencies.(6) What steps are being taken to ensure that agencies are adequately funded and viable.(7) What administrative support is the Government giving to agencies.(8) Is the Government using the information obtained by the agencies to inform public policy on issues such as bankruptcy and related consumer credit issues, if so, how.(9) Is the Government working cooperatively with the agencies to assist them to develop viable funding models.24453Anthony, Larry, MPMr AnthonyXJ6RichmondNPMinister for Community Services10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) In 1995-96, a total of $497,429 was paid to 6 financial counselling services in Queensland under the Commonwealth Financial Counselling Program. About $45,000 out of this total were one-off payments for start-up costs of two new services. In 1996-97, total funding was $416,840 [without any start-up costs or one-off payments].(2) Funding for the 6 financial counselling services in Queensland under the Commonwealth Financial Counselling Program for the period 1997-98 to 2000-2001 was:[1997-98 $414,800] [1998-99 $415,590] [1999-2000 $416,190] [2000-2001 $459,640] (3) The current year's [2000-2001] total allocation for the Commonwealth Financial Counselling Program is $2.21 million while the total allocation in 1995-96 was $2.19 million.(4) Network Australia Organisational Consulting Group in Brisbane conducted a cost-benefit analysis of the Program in 1998 at the request of the then Department of Industry, Science and Tourism which was the Program administrator at the time. The analysis concluded that the Program's measurable benefits exceed its costs.(5) Network Australia's cost-benefit analysis also concluded that the estimated cost for a commercial provider to run the same level of service would be $3.25 million compared with the actual cost of about $2.20 million under the Program.(6) The Program administrator has always maintained close communication with the funded agencies and the national Senior Casework Officer/Facilitator on funding matters.(7) Since 1996, the Program has been funding a Senior Casework Officer/Facilitator to assist the financial counsellors in their casework and to facilitate the resolution of any issues that may arise between the financial counsellors and the agency management. From time to time the Government, as Program administrator, also assists in the implementation of new initiatives for the Program, e.g. in 1998 the Government assisted the agencies in implementing their client service charter.(8) Each agency is required to provide quarterly statistics on service provision. The information collected includes problems confronting clients, sources of income/income level, sources of referral, gender, family composition and others. In addition, agencies also provide annual appraisal reports on their operations. This information has been provided from time to time to other Government agencies, including Insolvency and Trustee Service Australia, to assist in policy formulation relating to bankruptcy and consumer credit issues. (9) The Government, as Program administrator, has always worked cooperatively with the agencies on funding issues affecting their services.24454(Question No. 2141)214124454Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Financial Services and Regulation, upon notice, on 8 November 2000:(1) In accordance with the terms of the Airports Act, when will the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) commence its five year Regulatory Review of the airport privatisation process.(2) Has his attention been drawn to the concern from airport owners that the ACCC does not have the depth or intricate knowledge of the day to day dynamics of running an airport, nor the ability to foresee the impact of operational and technological advances in the industry; if so, is it appropriate that the ACCC review its own continuing role in regulating the industry.(3) Does the Government accept that there is a fundamental contradictory flaw in having a regulator such as the ACCC conduct a review of its own continuing role in regulating the industry, rather than an alternative body such as the Productivity Commission.(4) Will the airport owners be consulted about the Regulatory Review and the terms of reference of the review.(5) Will the Civil Aviation Safety Authority or the Australian Transport Safety Bureau play any role in the Regulatory Review.(6) Will the terms of reference be publicly available.(7) Will any party be open to make submissions to the review.24454Hockey, Joe, MPMr HockeyDK6North SydneyLPMinister for Financial Services and Regulation10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) to (7) The Government has decided that the Productivity Commission will undertake the review of prices oversight arrangements at airports. There are strong synergies between this review and the Productivity Commission's current review of the Prices Surveillance Act 1983, which provides the framework within which airport prices are regulated. There are also synergies with its current reviews of telecommunications specific competition regulation and access arrangements under Part IIIA of the Trade Practices Act 1974.The Government sent terms of reference to the Productivity Commission on 21 December 2000. The Commission will shortly release an issues paper and invite expressions of interest from anyone wanting to participate in the review. The terms of reference are publicly available.24454(Question No. 2145)214524454Murphy, John, MPMr Murphy83DLoweALP00 asked the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 8 November 2000:(1) Further to the answer to question No. 1925 (Hansard, 2 November 2000, page 19584), were the last medical reports provided to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) about the state of health of former Senator Malcolm Arthur Colston provided on 7 April 1999; if not, (a) how many medical reports have been submitted to the DPP since 7 April 1999 and (b) what are the dates of these medical reports.(2) Since the Media Statement titled “Prosecution of Malcolm Colston”, dated 5 July 1999 which declared that there is no prospect that former Senator Colston will be fit to stand trial in the future, has the DPP's attention been drawn to reports that former Senator Colston has been observed (a) sitting in the audience of the television show “The New Price is Right”, (b) dining out in Brisbane restaurants, (c) shopping in Brisbane, (d) travelling within and outside Queensland, (e) providing an interview to the media and (f) engaging in correspondence with the print media.(3) In light of the above reports on the activities of former Senator Colston since 5 July 1999 and further to the answer to question No. 1925 that, if there was evidence contrary to the earlier advice that former Senator Colston was not fit to stand trial and there was no prospect that he would be fit to stand trial in the future, will the DPP obtain fresh medical opinions on the current state of health of Mr Colston. (4) Are the current DPP Prosecution Policies based on the UK Royal Commission on Criminal Procedure, chaired by Sir Cyril Philips, dated January 1981.(5) Does he accept the view put forward in paragraph 6.10 at page 128 of the report referred to in part (4) that it is a material consideration of a criminal justice system that the proper objective of a fair prosecution system is not simply to prosecute the guilty and avoid prosecuting the innocent but rather to ensure that prosecutions are initiated only in those cases in which there is adequate evidence and where prosecution is justified in the public interest.(6) Does the report further note at paragraph 6.11 at page 129 that the ability of any prosecution system to take account of these considerations of humanity (viz. age, sex, physical and mental condition (of the defendant)) and of other elements of public interest is a hallmark of fairness, provided that such criteria are applied consistently.(7) Does the application of the Information Privacy Principles in the way they have been applied to this matter and in the matter of Christopher Skase in the prosecution of justice, combine to produce inconsistency in procedural decision making.(8) Is leaving sole responsibility in the hands of the DPP in deciding whether to continue or discontinue proceedings precisely the kind of “lacking effective machinery for achieving conformity in prosecution policies” referred to a paragraph 6.46 on page 138 in the UK report.(9) Are the standards applied in weighing these considerations inconsistent with weigh to such factors given by the DPP's pursuit of the prosecution of Mr Christopher Skase.(10) Further to the answers to parts (4) and (10) of question No. 1925, are both the policy considerations of adequacy of evidence and justification in the public interest satisfied.(11) Is the last available medical evidence now some nineteen months old; if so, does the weight of policy considerations in obtaining further evidence in determining whether to direct the DPP to resume prosecution now outweigh policy considerations that medically preclude former Senator Colston from standing trial.(12) Have the compassionate grounds upon which this prosecution was terminated now been exhausted and should fresh evidence be called.24455Williams, Daryl, MPMr Williams7V5TangneyLPAttorney-General10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) No. (a) and (b) Apart from reports which the DPP has obtained from medical experts consulted by the DPP, the DPP has been provided with one medical report by Dr Colston's solicitors dated 23 November 2000. (2)(a) to ( e) Yes. (3) Yes. The prosecution was discontinued because Dr Colston was not fit to stand trial and there was no prospect that he would be fit to stand trial in the future. The DPP is in the process of reviewing this position. (4) No, although the report of this Royal Commission was part of the material considered in preparing the Prosecution Policy of the Commonwealth.(5) Yes (Note: this is at paragraph 6.9 of the Report) (6) Yes. (7) No. (8) No. (9) No. (10) See 3.(11) No. See 3.(12) See 3.24456(Question No. 2154)215424456Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 27 November 2000:(1) Has the Government's attention been drawn to a low-noise approach technique proposed by Ansett involving aircraft on descent into Sydney using minimum power, thereby potentially making less noise until aircraft reach an altitude of 1000 feet; if so, will this proposal be considered as part of the current trial of the new Precision Runway Monitoring System and will that testing include consideration of whether the proposal helps minimise greenhouse emissions.(2) Has Airservices Australia or the Civil Aviation Safety Authority conducted any separate analysis or safety assessment of the technique referred to in part (1) or any similar system; if not, why not.24456Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) I am aware of the Ansett proposal to trial “power-off” approaches using a Standard Terminal Arrival Route (STAR) at Sydney Airport. Following receipt of advice from the Sydney Airport Community Forum, I have advised the Forum of my view that an evaluation of the STAR approach should be deferred until after Environment Australia has completed the current trial of the Precision Runway Monitor System.(2) I am advised that Airservices Australia has developed a procedure to be used in trialing “power-off” STAR approaches for northerly arrivals at Sydney Airport. This was drawn up in accordance with Airservices Australia's standard practices for developing new operating procedures.24456(Question No. 2155)215524456Thomson, Kelvin, MPMr Kelvin ThomsonUK6WillsALP00 asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 27 November 2000:(1) Has the ATO been tracking sales and volume moved in the legal tobacco movement in relation to its enforcement of the excise laws.(2) Will he provide a copy of that tracking information.(3) Excluding any increase in the rate of excise, has revenue from tobacco excise increased since the implementation of the Excise Amendment (Compliance Improvement) Act.(4) Is the ATO monitoring the sales of empty cigarette tubes; if so, what are the results of the monitoring.(5) Should controls be introduced on the supply of empty cigarette tubes.(6) How many empty cigarette tubes were (a) imported and (b) sold in (a) 1996, (b) 1997, (c) 1998 and (d) 1999.24456Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The Assistant Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) Yes. (2) No, such information is subject to legislative and or commercial confidentiality.(3) Yes.(4) It is not possible to determine the number of imported empty cigarette tubes because cigarette tubes and cigarette papers are classified to the same import tariff item. However, part of the strategy to combat the illicit tobacco trade includes trying to obtain indicative data on the volume of cigarette tube sales. (5) The placing of controls on pre-rolled empty cigarette tubes was discussed by the Senate Economics Legislation Committee at a public hearing on the Excise Amendment (Compliance Improvement) Bill 2000 in Melbourne on 4 August 2000. The committee expressed the view that “a tax on tubes may compound the chop chop problem by encouraging smokers to switch to cheaper substitute material to produce cigarettes.' Should the Government decide to introduce controls on the supply of empty cigarette tubes, an announcement would be made at that time.(6) This information is not available; see (4) above. 24457(Question No. 2162)216224457Danby, Michael, MPMr DanbyWF6Melbourne PortsALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 27 November 2000:(1) Further to the answer to question No 1797 (Hansard, 6 November 2000, page 19674) in which he quotes Mr Corrigan as saying that since the Government's most recent waterfront reform, stevedoring charges have declined, has the increase in productivity due to higher crane lift rates and the reduction in the workforce led to the declining charges.(2) Are importers and exporters paying the same stevedoring rates, and in some cases higher rates, as they were paying prior to the waterfront reform; if so, why.24457Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's questions is as follows:(1) The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission's (ACCC) October 2000 Container Stevedore Monitoring report concluded that stevedoring charges were $173 per teu for the January to June 2000 period. This compares with $181 per teu for the period February to June 1999 and $203 per teu in 1995. Therefore, between 1995 and 2000 there has been a 15 per cent reduction in the aggregate stevedoring charge.The ACCC report also states that during the period July 1999 to June 2000 the stevedoring industry was going through a period of transition with revenue per teu falling but marked increases in productivity. The improvement in productivity was reflected in the December 2000 issue of Waterline which reported record waterfront performance for the September quarter 2000 with a five-port average crane rate of 24.9 containers per hour, the highest level achieved since the series commenced. This compares with the pre-Patrick dispute five-port average crane rate of 18.7 containers per hour.The five-port average ship rate was also an all time record at 38 containers per hour for the September quarter 2000, well above the pre-Patrick dispute figure of 24.3 containers per hour. (2) Refer to answer in question (1) above.24457(Question No. 2171)217124457Latham, Mark, MPMr LathamK26WerriwaALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Industry, Science and Resources, upon notice, on 23 November 2000:(1) What consultations and negotiations did the Government conduct with Mitsubishi prior to its decision in 1997 to freeze car tariffs?(2) As part of the process referred to in part (1), did Mitsubishi give certain undertakings regarding the future of its car production operations in Australia: if so, what are the details?(3) How many people are employed in the Australian car manufacturing industry?(3) What sums are provided in (a) direct subsidies and support, (b) import protection and (c) other indirect assistance to the car manufacturing industry by (i) the Commonwealth Government and (ii) State Governments?24457Reith, Peter, MPMr REITHWI4FlindersLPMinister for Defence10—The Minister for Industry, Science and Resources has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) The Government consulted closely with each of the Australian car manufacturers, including Mitsubishi Motors Australia Limited (MMAL), prior to its decision in 1997 to freeze car tariffs at 15 per cent between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2004.(2) No specific undertakings were given by MMAL or other car makers to the Government as a result of the 1997 decision to freeze car tariffs.(3) Data held by the Department of Industry, Science and Resources indicates that in December 1999 there were 21,394 people employed in the Australian car manufacturing industry. The most recent data published by the ABS indicates there were a further 30,077 people employed in the automotive components industry in 1999. (4)(a) Under the Duty Free Allowance (DFA) arrangements, vehicle producers were entitled to import 15 per cent of their value of production duty free. Duty forgone in 1999 under the DFA was $192.6 million. The Export Facilitation Scheme (EFS) allowed participants to earn export credits in return for automotive exports and to use these credits to offset the duty on their imports. Duty forgone in 1999 under the EFS was $262.3 million. The DFA and EFS arrangements ended on 31 December 2000.The Automotive Competitiveness and Investment Scheme (ACIS), which commenced on 1 January 2001, is encouraging the development of internationally competitive firms in the automotive industry through the provision of import duty credits to reward eligible production, strategic investment and research and development. The full value of ACIS, including the former DFA, will be over $2 billion over its five year term.(b) A 15 per cent tariff applies to imports of passenger motor vehicles and components. The rate will fall to 10 per cent on 1 January 2005.(c) The Automotive Market Access and Development Strategy provides support to the industry through the services of a market access facilitator in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and the placement of industry specialists in the Detroit, Frankfurt, Tokyo and Bangkok offices of Austrade. Firms in the automotive industry may also benefit from a range of non-industry specific assistance measures, such as the research and development tax concession, R&D Start, the Greenhouse Gas Abatement Program, the National Office of Information Economy's Information Technology On Line program and others.The Commonwealth has no record of the amount of assistance provided by state governments to automotive firms.24458(Question No. 2173)217324458McClelland, Robert, MPMr McClellandJK6BartonALP00 asked the Minister for Community Services, upon notice, on 28 November 2000: (1) Has Centrelink recently written to tax practitioners seeking their assistance in arranging for their clients to provide information to Centrelink regarding their involvement in private trusts and private companies.(2) Did Centrelink obtain client identification numbers from another Department or Departments for the purpose of that mail out; if so, (a) which Department or Departments provided that client identification number to Centrelink and (b) were the principles contained in the Privacy Act complied with in respect to the provision of that information.24458Anthony, Larry, MPMr AnthonyXJ6RichmondNPMinister for Community Services10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Centrelink wrote to tax agents on 18 October 2000. The letter was provided to the Australian Taxation Office which sent the letter on behalf of Centrelink using their current tax agent mailing list. The purpose of the letter was: · To advise tax agents it was proposed that the rules in relation to the assessment of private trusts and companies were changing from 1 January 2002.· To advise that Centrelink customers would be asked to provide detailed information about their trust or company in February 2001 and that, because of the complexity of the information required, their clients may seek help from their tax agent or accountant to provide the information.· To tell them where to obtain more information and that Centrelink would, from mid January 2001, have a telephone hotline service for the exclusive use of professionals.(2) Centrelink did not obtain any client identification details for the purpose of the mailout.24459(Question No. 2187)218724459Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 29 November 2000:(1) Has he received a copy of the report from the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority assessing the respective Murrumbateman by-pass options, including costings; if so (a) when did he receive the report and (b) will he release a copy of the report to the local community of Murrumbateman for its consideration.(2) When will he announce a decision on the by-pass.24459Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows.(1) and (2) No. However, the Department of Transport and Regional Services received a copy of a draft for comment on 3 November 2000. The Department has identified a number of weaknesses in the draft report and has asked the RTA to address them. The Department has also asked the RTA to exhibit the report, as amended, for public comment, and to prepare a report on the public comment received, before submitting it for my consideration.24459(Question No. 2214)221424459Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 5 December 2000:(1) With respect to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau's (ATSB) Media Alert regarding Australia's record in 1997 as the sixth worst rank amongst OECD nations for annual motorcyclist fatalities, how many road fatalities of motorcycle riders have occurred in (a) 1997, (b) 1998, (c) 1999 and (d) to date in 2000.(2) What action has the Government taken to improve safety awareness for motorcyclists, motorists and the general public about motorcycle safety.(3) What amount of the ATSB's budget is allocated to promoting and improving motorcycle safety and how is that budget spent.(4) How many motorcycle accidents have been investigated by the ATSB in 2000 and have any safety recommendations for improvements resulted from those investigations; if so, have they been implemented.(5) Are there any national standards, programs or campaigns being pursued by the National Road Transport Commission or the Australian Transport Council that relate to strategies to reduce the number of motorcyclist fatalities; if so, what are they.(6) Are there any Australian Design Standards for road construction or maintenance that enhance the safety of motorcyclists.(7) Which Department, agency or authority is responsible to ensure that National Highways meet design standards and how is that responsibility fulfilled. 24459Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's questions is as follows:(1) The number of motorcyclist fatalities from road crashes in Australia (including pillion passengers) in 1997 was 177; in 1998 was 181; in 1999 was 176; and in 2000 was 191.(2) The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) chairs a Motorcycle Safety Consultative Committee, which provides a forum for constructive consultation between the Federal Government and key stakeholder groups on national motorcycle safety issues. The committee normally meets twice a year in Canberra.In 1998-99 the ATSB, in consultation with the Motorcycle Safety Consultative Committee, developed a new safety education video for novice motorcycle riders. A booklet was also produced to complement the video. The video was duplicated and its availability was advertised during 1999-2000. Requests for the video have come from all parts of Australia and over 15 000 copies have been distributed.The ATSB has provided a free copy of the video to all public libraries with video lending facilities across Australia. All motorcycle clubs and associations have had advertising brochures direct mailed to them. The ATSB offered the video at cost price to all motorcycle trainers. Other safety materials developed by the ATSB and its predecessor, the Federal Office of Road Safety (FORS), in consultation with the Motorcycle Safety Consultative Committee include a poster, brochure and card. The major message of the material is that safety on the roads for motorcyclists is the joint responsibility of all road users. The ATSB direct mailed multiple copies of the materials to all motorcycle clubs and associations around Australia. This year, the ATSB provided 60 000 copies of the brochures to the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority for direct mail out with renewing registrations during Motorcycle Awareness Week. In 1996, FORS conducted a national outdoor advertising campaign aimed at raising motorcycle safety awareness among both riders and drivers. The campaign featured billboard advertisements with informative messages tailored to each group of road users. A total of 493 billboards, positioned at service stations and major intersections around Australia, were used to display four separate messages addressing different aspects of rider and driver behaviour. A subsequent evaluation of the campaign found that the strategy was successful in communicating with both road user groups, achieving a national awareness rate of 32% (considered very high for this advertising medium).Annual statistical reports and monthly statistical bulletins produced by the ATSB and by FORS give explicit treatment to motorcyclist casualty data.These regular outputs are augmented by statistical monographs dealing with topical road safety issues. The following monographs have been dedicated to motorcyclist road safety issues:· Road risk for sober licensed motorcyclists (FORS Monograph 27, 1999).· Australia's international motorcycle safety performance 1987-1997 (ATSB Monograph 4, 2000).· Types of fatal injuries sustained by motorcyclists (ATSB Monograph 6, to be released in early 2001).Between 1997 and 2000, ATSB and FORS released an additional five monographs dealing with the issues of vehicle use by intoxicated or unlicensed motorists. Each of these monographs included specific information about intoxicated or unlicensed motorcyclists.Another monograph released during this period, Vehicle type and the risk of travelling on the road (FORS Monograph 17, 1997) compared the risk of road casualty between vehicle types, including motorcycles. It included the finding that motorcyclists are 20 times more likely to be killed or admitted to hospital than the drivers of other types of vehicles. During 1996 and 1997 FORS and Vicroads jointly funded a comprehensive investigation of motorcycle crashes. The aim of the study was to identify risk factors associated with serious injury and fatal motorcycle crashes, in order to contribute to the development of effective countermeasures. Public release of the findings attracted media attention and helped to promote awareness of the safety needs of motorcyclists.(3) In the 2000-2001 financial year, the ATSB has allocated an estimated $77,500 to promoting and improving motorcycle safety:· $15,000 - for the administration of the Motorcycle Safety Consultative Committee;· $15,000 - a grant to the NSW Motorcycle Council for television airtime and advertising to promote Motorcycle Awareness Week;· $24,000 - for staffing and postage costs of distributing motorcycle safety materials and for advertising the availability of the materials;· $16,000 - for the production of two ATSB monographs dedicated to motorcyclist road safety issues;· - In addition, ATSB's budget for 2000-2001 included $976,457 for statistical activities covering all road user groups. These activities include the maintenance of databases of road crash data pertaining to all types of road users, the preparation of annual and quarterly statistical reports and the analysis and reporting of data in response to requests for information. These statistical resources are relevant to motorcycle safety, but it is not possible to attribute a specific fraction to motorcycle safety. · $7,500 - for a study to assess the feasibility and cost of a research program to investigate the interactions between motorcycles and road safety barriers, and to recommend a suitable method. The total cost of this project was $25,000, of which $17,500 was expended before 30 June 2000. (4) The ATSB is not resourced to undertake investigations of individual road crashes; this is done by state and territory police.(5) The National Road Transport Commission (NRTC) is not currently pursuing any national standards, programs or campaigns that relate specifically to strategies to reduce the number of motorcyclist fatalities. A significant part of the NRTC work program is focused on nationally uniform or consistent regulation of issues concerning heavy vehicles; in addition to the Australian Road Rules and the National Driver Licensing Scheme, which apply to all drivers/riders. The Australian Transport Council has adopted the National Road Safety Strategy 2001-2010, which aims to dramatically reduce death and injury on Australian roads. The associated National Road Safety Action Plan 2001 and 2002 identifies a menu of Action Areas and measures that are available for implementation. Motorcyclists are identified as one of a number of groups of vulnerable road users, and measures offered in the Action Plan aimed explicitly at improving motorcycle safety include the need to: · Evaluate and, if appropriate, improve motorcycle rider training and licensing schemes.· Promote improved interaction between motorcyclists and other road users through targeted public education campaigns.· Ensure that road safety audits take into account motorcycle-specific safety issues.Several other Action Areas in the Strategy and Action Plan will also have benefits for motorcycle safety, in particular those relating to compliance with speed limits, deterrence of unlicensed driving and motorcycling, and improving the safety of existing and new roads.(6) As part of its `Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice' series, Austroads has published Part 15: Motorcycle Safety, which is intended to provide traffic engineering practitioners with a better understanding of motorcyclists' safety needs.A revised version of Austroads' Road Safety Audit Guide is to be released soon. The Guide provides practitioners and decision makers in State highway authorities, local government authorities and consulting practices with ways of formally addressing road safety issues during design, before accidents occur. One of the specific aims of conducting road safety audits is more explicit consideration of the safety needs of vulnerable road users, and the guide also provides instructions and checklists for specialist audits for specific road user groups such as motorcyclists. Auditors are encouraged to use the mode of travel in question and consider the safety issues from the user's point of view.The Australian Standard for Road safety barrier systems (AS/NZS 3845:1999) acknowledges that special measures, such as removing gaps, and/or cushioning or softening parts of barriers, may be necessary where the risk of impact by motorcyclists is unacceptably high. There are many other standards, design guides and guidelines relating to road design, maintenance and construction, that include safety as a consideration, and these are intended to enhance the safety of all road users including motorcyclists. (7) The Department of Transport and Regional Services is responsible for ensuring that National Highways meet design standards. In any submission for National Highway funding, State/Territory road authorities are required to provide details of the proposed construction or maintenance to the Department. The submissions are examined for compliance with the National Highway Design Standards as promulgated by the Minister. The Department also conducts field inspections to confirm that the standards have been met.24461(Question No. 2240)224024461Fitzgibbon, Joel, MPMr Fitzgibbon8K6HunterALP00 asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 7 December 2000:Further to the answer to question No. 1893 (Hansard, 28 November 2000, page 20150), what is the aggregate amount of funding provided to Australia's major oil companies under the Government's Fuel Grant Scheme in the first three months from July 2000.24462Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: The Government does not publish quarterly figures for the Fuel Sales Grants Scheme.24462(Question No. 2246)224624462Theophanous, Dr Andrew, MPDr TheophanousQJ4CalwellALP00 asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, upon notice, on 7 December 2000:(1) How many hunger strikes and other acts of rebellion by detainees have occurred in immigration detention centres since Australasian Correctional Management (ACM) took control of these centres.(2) How do the acts referred to in part (1) compare with the period before ACM took over as the private contractor running these facilities.(3) Is he satisfied that the attitudes of ACM, including its recruitment and personnel strategies, are completely legal and appropriate and have not provoked or exacerbated tensions in the centres.(4) Is he satisfied that no wrongful actions on the part of ACM or its staff have been responsible for provoking protests by detainees at Woomera Detention Centre.24462Ruddock, Philip, MPMr Ruddock0J4BerowraLPMinister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and Minister for Reconciliation and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) “Acts of rebellion” is difficult to define. Detainees express their opposition to detention in a variety of ways, ranging from non-compliance with a request to more serious incidents such as assaults, wilful damage and mass breakouts. The question has therefore been defined within these parameters in order to provide a meaningful response. The data below records incidents rather than the number of individuals participating in an incident. Records kept by ACM for the period from commencement of the contract in December 1997 to the 31 December 1998 would require manual retrieval from files of more than 1100 incident reports for analysis. In the time available, and given the resource intensity of such a task, data for this period has not been included. Since 1 January 1999, records have been stored electronically. For the period 1 January 1999 to 19 December 2000, more than 2215 records have been examined to provide the following information.ACM Incident Reports 1 January 1999 - 19 December 2000 CentreAssault on StaffWilful Damage to C'wealth PropertyHunger StrikeFailure to comply with lawful directionsEscapesMassBreakouts19992000Maribyrnong1332Perth212633Villawood11229-1Port Hedland25163731Curtin2111651Woomera1162--1Total311782419143(2) Comparing incident reports kept by APS since the establishment of immigration detention centres until the engagement of ACM in December 1997 with that of ACM, would require manual retrieval from files of more than 4000 incident reports for analysis. As indicated in the response to the first question, due to time and resource constraints, such a task cannot be undertaken at this time. However, using the same parameters adopted in the response to the first question, the following information is provided on the basis of APS incident reports for the period 2 January 1996 - 3 December 1997.APS Incident Reports: 2 January 1996 - 3 December 1997 CentreAssault on StaffWilful Damage to C'wealth PropertyHunger StrikeFailure to comply with lawful directionsEscapesMassBreakouts19961997Maribyrnong 143121-Perth 44111--Villawood631346--Port Hedland 83111421Total191418171331Comparison of these figures shows the following trend under ACM vis-à-vis APS: Assault on StaffWilful Damage to C'wealth PropertyHunger StrikeFailure to comply with lawful directionsEscapesMass Breakouts84%21.4%33.3%41%106.3%200%While “assault on staff” and “wilful damage to Commonwealth Property” have decreased under ACM, other “acts of rebellion”, including “hunger strike” and “escapes” have increased significantly. This trend is a reflection of increasing non-compliant behaviour by immigration detainees. These “acts of rebellion” also need to be viewed within the context of the number of persons held in detention over the period under review.The environment within which APS operated and the environment within which ACM operates, are very different. Under APS, there were 4 detention facilities. We now have 6 detention facilities. The population in detention centres under APS was significantly less than current levels. There were more detainee days in 1999 - 2000 than in the three preceding years combined.The following table shows the number of detainee days for the period 1996 - 2001 (a detainee day refers to a day each immigration detainee spends in detention). Period No of detainee days00 - 01 (Year to date Jul - 26 Jan)453, 34599 - 00928,93198 - 99201, 20597 - 98152, 06196 - 97173, 798(3) ACM recruitment and personnel strategies are conducted in accordance with the principles of equal opportunity, merit and natural justice. ACM run competency based training courses that include modules to assist their staff to promote the health, welfare and safety of detainees. Refresher courses are run regularly.(4) There is no evidence to suggest that the major incidents at the Woomera IRPC in 2000 (June breakouts and August riot) were precipitated by the actions of ACM staff.24463(Question No. 2256)225624463Murphy, John, MPMr Murphy83DLoweALP00 asked the Minister for Financial Services and Regulation, upon notice, on 7 December 2000:(1) Is he able to say what efforts are being made by the four major banks in respect to assisting those affected by floods.(2) Is he able to say how many more bank branches are to close in Australia in 2001.24463Hockey, Joe, MPMr HockeyDK6North SydneyLPMinister for Financial Services and Regulation10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Each bank provides a range of assistance for customers who are experiencing difficulties because of the flooding. All of the four majors have decided to freeze interest rate margins on farm loans and not to impose establishment fees on loan restructuring for existing business loans for customers who receive government support. Australia & New Zealand Bank The ANZ has made a donation of $100,000 to enhance community resources available to help those facing hardship following the flood. ANZ has also announced that:· customers eligible for government assistance can defer principal and interest calls on term loans for 12 months;· repayments on all loans will be suspended for 3 months;· withdrawal costs for term deposits and fees associated with restructuring business loans will not be imposed; and· temporary adjustments to customer lending limits will be considered.Commonwealth Bank of Australia· Commonwealth and Colonial Bank branches are accepting community donations for the Wesley Mission Flood Victim appeal. The Bank is collecting packaged and tinned food and is shipping this to flood affected areas. Teams of Commonwealth Bank staff have also been provided to help clean up affected areas on a fully paid basis. The CBA has also announced that:· there will be opportunities for flood affected customers to change their repayment arrangements on home loans or they can apply for additional loans;· the possible postponement of credit card instalments for customers of good standing;· consideration will be given to possible emergency credit limit increases; and· no prepayment charges will be imposed on early access to term deposits for one month.Westpac· Westpac has announced that:· affected home loan customers may apply to suspend repayments for three months;· credit card customers may ask to defer their next credit card payment and request an emergency credit limit increase;· no early withdrawal penalties will be imposed for customers wishing to withdraw term and farm management deposits;· principal and interest repayments on term loans will be deferred for 12 months; and· carry on finance will be made available to viable farms.National · NAB has announced that:· flexibility will be applied in restructuring loan arrangements to absorb interest charges and provide carry on finance;· existing business loan customers can apply for loan repayments to be deferred and their facilities restructured; and· farmers who receive Government support will not be charged for application fees on restructured facilities.(2) No.