2002-02-134011REPS4702002-02-13—————The SPEAKER (Mr Neil Andrew) took the chair at 9.30 a.m., and read prayers.Miscellaneous4710000The ClerkThe Clerk—I present the following copies of petitions filed in the High Court, sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns:Ditchburn and the Australian Electoral Commission disputing the House of Representatives election for the Division of Herbert in the State of Queensland held on 10 November 2001; andGunter and Hollingworth and others filed in the High Court, sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns, disputing the Senate and the House of Representatives election for the State of Queensland held on 10 November 2001.Bills47R144947Bill presented by Mr Abbott, and read a first time.4709:32:0047Abbott, Tony, MPMr ABBOTTEZ5WarringahLPMinister for Employment and Workplace Relations and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service10—I move:That this bill be now read a second time.This bill proposes to amend the Workplace Relations Act 1996 to protect small businesses from the costs and administrative burden of unfair dismissal claims and thereby to increase employment opportunities in the small business sector.This protection will be provided by exempting small businesses from the unfair dismissal provisions in the act and by requiring the Australian Industrial Relations Commission to order that an unfair dismissal application is not valid if it relates to a small business employer.The Workplace Relations Act has made the federal workplace relations system more accessible and responsive to the needs of small business. However, further reform is needed to maximise its benefits. Dismissal laws have an important role in providing a safety net for employees but they need to be made fairer for both employers and employees and should be improved where they still prevent jobs being created.This is certainly the case with the current unfair dismissal provisions which continue to deter many small businesses from employing more staff.The coalition will continue its generation of strong and sustained jobs growth through sound economic policies, sound fiscal management, and workplace relations reforms to help small business. It is vital to maximize the opportunities for growth and innovation for the 1 million private sector, non-agricultural, small businesses in Australia. These businesses account for 96 per cent of all businesses, and our workplace relations system must be more responsive to their needs. This bill is an important step along that path.What is good for Australian small businesses is good for Australian jobs. Small business is the engine room for jobs growth in the Australian economy. And the government believes that it is in the public interest to open the door to the new jobs that can be created by small business by easing the pressure that excessive workplace regulation puts on Australia's hard working small businessmen and women. If one in 20 small business employers in Australia took on an additional employee because of a changed legislative framework for unfair dismissal, then an extra 53,000 jobs would result.Exemption from current unfair dismissal provisionsFor the purposes of the small business exemption, a small business is a business with fewer than 20 employees. The proposal would not affect existing employees and would not exclude new employees from making claims for unlawful dismissal, for example, dismissal for discriminatory reasons. Trainees and apprentices would also be unaffected.The same exemption was contained in a bill which was introduced in 2001 but not considered by parliament before the election. The coalition pledged in its election policies to exempt small businesses from unfair dismissal laws when employing new employees. The relevant section from our small business election policy stated: A re-elected Coalition Government will pursue a full exemption from Unfair Dismissal claims for small business employers. The Coalition has introduced legislation into the Parliament to secure a full exemption for all small businesses with less than 20 employees from unfair dismissal claims when employing new staff. (Getting on with Business, p.21)The government has an undeniable duty to pursue the mandate it received on 10 November 2001, including this explicit commitment in its small business election policy. This commitment directly addresses the views of the many small businesses who, when surveyed, have indicated that they would be more likely to recruit new employees if they were exempted from current unfair dismissal laws.Invalid applications by excluded small business employeesThe bill contains an essential complement to the proposed small business unfair dismissal exclusion in the form of a simple and appropriate means for dealing with invalid applications by excluded small business employees.Under current arrangements, once an unfair dismissal claim is lodged, the commission has no power to reject it without holding at least one hearing which the employer or the employer's representative is required to attend.The bill would require the commission to order that an unfair dismissal application is invalid if it is satisfied that the application is outside its jurisdiction because of the small business exemption.The commission would have the power to make such an order without holding a hearing. If it needed more information to satisfy itself, the commission would be able to seek further particulars from an applicant or a response from the small employer in writing, rather than having the parties appear in person.The objective is to free small business employers from the unnecessary and often costly burden of having to attend or secure representation at commission hearings to defend unfair dismissal applications which can clearly be determined, on the basis of documents provided to the commission, to be outside its jurisdiction because of the small business exemption.ConclusionIn introducing this bill, the government is continuing to demonstrate its commitment to addressing the special needs and circumstances of the small business sector. The bill will assist in creating more small business jobs and in reducing workplace relations red tape for this vital sector of the Australian economy.I commend the bill and present the explanatory memorandum.Debate (on motion by Mr McClelland) adjourned.Bills48R143648Bill presented by Mr Williams, and read a first time.4809:38:0048Williams, Daryl, MPMr WILLIAMS7V5TangneyLPAttorney-General10—I move:That this bill be now read a second time.The number of recent false alarms involving packages or letters containing apparently hazardous material has highlighted the need for tough penalties to deter such malicious and irresponsible actions.The Criminal Code Amendment (Anti-hoax and Other Measures) Bill 2002 will ensure that those who create public fear and alarm by sending hoax material or dangerous substances are properly penalised.The bill gives effect to an undertaking made by the Prime Minister on 16 October last year.The Prime Minister expressed the government's concern about the increasing number of security incidents involving letters and packages and undertook to introduce new laws to target persons who seek to exploit community fears by sending hoax material.Complementing these measures, the bill also contains new offences dealing with the use of postal and similar services to make threats, engage in harassment and send dangerous articles. These new Criminal Code offences are a significant improvement on the existing outdated offences in the Crimes Act 1914, which they are intended to replace.The proposed new offences cover the misuse of any postal, courier or other similar service within Commonwealth constitutional power and not just Australia Post.The proposed offences also increase the penalties for the misuse of those services to more appropriate levels to properly reflect the seriousness of the harm involved.Anti-hoax and other offencesThe bill introduces a new hoax offence directed at those who send an article with the intention of inducing a false belief in the recipient that the article is an explosive or a dangerous or harmful item or that such an article will be left in any place.The new updated offence will extend to all postal and similar services, rather than being limited to Australia Post.The maximum penalty for the offence will be increased from five to 10 years imprisonment.The new offence will apply retrospectively, commencing at 2 p.m. on 16 October 2001.This is the date and time on which the Prime Minister undertook to commence these new measures.Any person who has engaged in sending hoax material since that time can expect to find themselves subject to the full force of the amendments.The new offence will send a strong message to those who may be tempted to make spurious threats that this behaviour is not acceptable.Such actions can have significant consequences, as demonstrated by a number of incidents late last year and early this year in which mail centres and offices had to be decontaminated, security measures enhanced and emergency services diverted from other duties.The cost of this conduct can also be counted in the fear engendered both in the recipients of the hoax material and in the general community.The bill will create two new offences concerning the use of a postal or similar service to make a threat to kill or threat to cause serious harm with the intention of causing the recipient to fear that the threat will be carried out.Under the bill, making a threat to kill attracts a penalty of up to 10 years imprisonment and making a threat to cause serious harm carries a maximum penalty of seven years imprisonment.Threats would be covered by the new offence regardless of whether they are express or implied, conditional or unconditional.The penalty of one year imprisonment that currently applies to the use of the postal service to make threats is clearly inadequate where serious threats are concerned.Intimidating or frightening people into believing that they will be caused serious injury is reprehensible.The proposed new threat offences will ensure that this conduct is subject to substantial penalties.The offence of using a postal or similar service to menace, harass or cause offence is to be extended to all postal and other like services and the penalty increased from one to two years imprisonment.The offence would cover material designed to make a person fearful about his or her safety or wellbeing as well as material containing offensive or abusive language.The bill makes it an offence for a person to use a postal or similar service to send an article in a way that gives rise to a danger of death or serious harm to another person where the first person is reckless as to the danger of death or serious harm.The new offence will carry a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment.The proposed offence is concerned with potential rather than actual harm and will apply regardless of the degree of risk involved.In addition to the general dangerous goods offence, the bill contains a further offence specifically relating to the use of Australia Post. The offence will apply where a person sends an explosive or a prescribed dangerous or harmful substance through Australia Post and attracts a penalty of 10 years imprisonment.Australia Post deals with a high volume of mail in accordance with stringent terms and conditions and therefore requires a more prescriptive offence.ConclusionProtecting the safety, security and integrity of Australia's information infrastructure, including postal and courier services, is a priority for this government.The measures contained in this bill will ensure that these important communication services are not compromised by irresponsible, malicious or destructive behaviour.By introducing tough penalties for such behaviour, the government is making it clear that it views the misuse of the postal system as a serious matter and that offenders will be vigorously prosecuted.I commend the bill to the House and I present the explanatory memorandum to the bill.Debate (on motion by Mr McClelland) adjourned.Bills50R143850Bill presented by Mr Anthony, and read a first time.5009:46:0050Anthony, Larry, MPMr ANTHONYXJ6RichmondNPMinister for Children and Youth Affairs10— On behalf of the Minister for Family and Community Services, I move:That this bill be now read a second time.The purpose of the bill is to give effect to the 2001-02 budget initiative to bring the payment of Australian pensions to people overseas long term in line with international standards. It also equalises the rules under which overpayments are recovered from people receiving foreign pensions.The rate of Australian pensions paid in Australia does not depend on a person's length of Australian residence. However, Australian pensioners residing overseas on a long-term basis are paid a `proportional' rate that reflects their length of Australian residence. Currently, to be paid a full pension after an absence of longer than 26 weeks, pensioners overseas are required to have 25 years of Australian working life residence. Other countries require that people contribute for around 40 years before the full rate of pension can be paid, and often there are further restrictions on the payability of these pensions outside those countries. To bring Australia in line with international standards this bill extends the required residence period to 30 years under the Social Security Act 1991.The bill also further recognises the valuable contribution that senior Australians make to our community. The bill allows people who defer their age pensions and register with the Pension Bonus Scheme to add their bonus periods under the scheme to the Australian working life residence period they accrued before they reached age pension age. As a result they may be paid a higher long-term overseas rate.The amendments made to the Social Security Act 1991 in relation to the Australian working life residence will only apply to anyone who departs Australia after the commencement day of the amendments. A person who is absent from Australia on the commencement day will be subject to these amendments only if they return to Australia and stay for 26 weeks or more.The bill also equalises the treatment of debts incurred by people who receive lump sum payments of foreign pension.Where a person receives lump sum arrears of a comparable foreign payment from a country with which Australia has an international social security agreement, the overpayment of Australian pension for the period covered by lump sum is recovered. In contrast, where the same type of lump sum payment is received from other countries, no debt is currently incurred. The new debt recovery provision in the Social Security Act 1991 ensures that overpayments of Australian social security payments arising from these arrears payments are debts and that they are recoverable. I present the explanatory memorandum to this bill. Debate (on motion by Mr McClelland) adjourned.Bills51R138151Bill presented by Mr Hardgrave, and read a first time.5109:50:0051Hardgrave, Gary, MPMr HARDGRAVECK6MoretonLPMinister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs10—I move:That this bill be now read a second time.Mr Speaker, I would like to add my congratulations to you on your reappointment to the tremendously important office of Speaker and to make the observation that I am obviously delighted as my first duty in this House in the 40th Parliament, as the first ever Commonwealth Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs, to introduce this bill.The creation of this portfolio by the Prime Minister is recognition of the government's commitment to Australian citizenship being the cornerstone of our inclusive and culturally diverse society. Citizenship is the process by which we all come together, no matter which part of the world we have come from and no matter how long we have been in Australia. It is the process of unifying us, and we take very seriously the integrity of Australian citizenship. We place a great deal of importance on promoting the values of citizenship to all Australians, and our aim is to make the status of citizenship even more relevant and meaningful to the realities of modern life.We on this side of the chamber believe strongly in the value of citizens bringing the strengths of their various diverse cultures, experiences and beliefs forward to the great benefit of all Australians. Of course, with some 3.1 million new Australians having become citizens since the passage of the Citizenship Act in 1948, it is also important to know that the most recent Australia Day saw well over 8,000 people making the citizenship pledge. That is the highest number in recent years. This reflects the Centenary of Federation of our great country, and also the result of some deliberate campaigns to encourage people to take out Australian citizenship. In so saying, I would like to acknowledge the personal commitment of the member for Berowra, the senior minister in this portfolio of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, Mr Philip Ruddock.The purpose of this bill is to update a number of aspects of Australian citizenship law.The bill was originally introduced into the parliament in August 2001 by my colleague the Hon. Philip Ruddock and flows from the government response to the report of the Australian Citizenship Council, Australian citizenship for a new century. I commend Philip Ruddock for his significant contribution in ensuring this bill was brought forward early in this parliament.The Australian Citizenship Council reported in February 2000. The government response, Australian citizenship ... a common bond, was released in May 2001.The government response is designed to encourage all Australians to value their citizenship and contains a commitment to update and strengthen aspects of citizenship law.The government agreed with the Australian Citizenship Council that, in its relatively short 53 years of existence, Australian citizenship has been a major success story.Apart from giving a new and unique legal status to those in Australia at the time of its introduction, Australian citizenship law has evolved to be one of the most welcoming and inclusive in the world and has been the basis for over 3 million migrants becoming full participants in our society. The government believes that the overall inclusive and non-discriminatory approach to our migration system and to Australian citizenship, that is premised on welcoming, without undue barriers, migrants and humanitarian entrants who come to Australia as part of the planned migration and humanitarian programs, should continue as the basis for future Australian citizenship law and policy. Accordingly, there will be no change to the basic criteria for grant of Australian citizenship which, in general, are working well.Clearly, some aspects of citizenship legislation need, over time, to evolve to reflect the changing realities of the Australian community.This bill updates aspects of citizenship law, refines and enhances provisions relating to children and young adults, and strengthens existing integrity measures.Turning firstly to the need to update the law on loss of citizenship, this bill will repeal section 17 of the Australian Citizenship Act 1948, so that adult Australian citizens in future do not lose their Australian citizenship if they acquire another citizenship.The government's decision to proceed with this change follows widespread community consultation over the last few years, undertaken initially by the Australian Citizenship Council and, more recently, by the government through the release of a discussion paper.Submissions to the government strongly supported repeal of section 17. Over 800 submissions were received in response to the release of the discussion paper in June 2001; almost all supported repeal of section 17. In fact, since the launch of the government response we have received close to 2,000 representations from people expressing support for the early repeal of section 17, so this move is welcome.This change will allow the growing numbers of internationally mobile Australians to take advantage of opportunities overseas, while maintaining their links with Australia and bringing back to the Australian community their valuable expertise and knowledge.It will also bring Australia into line with the citizenship law of many other comparable countries, including the UK, Canada, New Zealand, USA, France and Italy.The changes will benefit those adult Australian citizens who acquire another citizenship after the new law is passed and comes into effect. This bill also introduces a number of enhancements to citizenship legislation in the interests of young Australians.The bill extends the citizenship by descent provisions to allow children born overseas to an Australian citizen parent to be eligible for registration as an Australian citizen by descent until they turn 25 years of age. Currently the age limit is set at 18 years.Similarly, the bill extends the resumption provisions to allow young persons who renounce their Australian citizenship in order to retain another citizenship to be eligible to resume their Australian citizenship until they turn 25 years of age.Many young people re-examine their identity and future around the ages of 18 to 25. These changes will give young people more opportunities to acquire or resume Australian citizenship.The bill will also provide for children under 16 who acquire Australian citizenship by grant with their parent or, at a later date, to be given their own citizenship certificate.Currently the law requires children under 16 to have their names endorsed on the back of their parent's certificate.Provision of individual citizenship certificates to these children is an appropriate way to recognise their individual citizenship status and will facilitate their having appropriate citizenship documentation upon reaching adulthood.Turning to integrity issues, this bill strengthens the integrity of the citizenship process in a number of ways.Firstly, the bill requires persons aged 18 years and over who seek either to be registered as Australian citizens by descent, or to resume Australian citizenship, to be of good character.It is important that these people of adult age be of good character to access Australian citizenship.Secondly, the bill extends the ban on the grant of Australian citizenship from two years after release from prison, to 10 years, for a person who is a serious repeat offender. The government agrees with the Australian Citizenship Council that a period of 10 years represents a more appropriate length of time for any such applicants for citizenship to demonstrate that they are of good character.Thirdly, the bill introduces powers for the minister to revoke, in certain circumstances, the grant of a certificate of citizenship before actual conferral of citizenship and also to defer conferral of citizenship for a 12-month period in certain circumstances.These changes will ensure that a person does not automatically proceed to become an Australian citizen if, in the period between a decision to grant and actual conferral of citizenship, it becomes evident that the person does not, or may not, meet the requirements for grant of Australian citizenship.Fourthly, the bill provides the minister with a power to revoke the grant of a certificate of Australian citizenship before conferral of citizenship where the person has failed to make the pledge of commitment within 12 months after being notified of the decision to grant citizenship, without an `acceptable reason'. Acceptable reasons will be prescribed in regulations. Currently the citizenship act leaves open indefinitely the time a person, approved for Australian citizenship, has to make the pledge of commitment. I believe that, in their totality, these initiatives will significantly enhance the integrity of our citizenship process. This bill also extends concessions in relation to meeting the residence in Australia requirement for grant of Australian citizenship, which have been available for many years to people who have served in the permanent defence force, to people who have served as full-time members of an Australian reserve force for at least six months.Although Australian citizenship is now a requirement for service in the reserve forces, this has not always been the case. There may, therefore, be some people who have spent substantial periods of time in the reserve forces who have not yet acquired Australian citizenship and such people will benefit from this change.This change recognises the significant contribution of our reserve forces.This bill also inserts a note referring to `people-smuggling' offences in the provision relating to deprivation of Australian citizenship.This amendment will not change the existing policy settings for deprivation of Australian citizenship.Rather, it will highlight that a person who committed a `people-smuggling' offence before a decision to grant a citizenship certificate, and is sentenced to imprisonment for a period of not less than 12 months, after lodging the application for the citizenship certificate, may be deprived of Australian citizenship. The government considers it important to draw attention to the potential for the existing citizenship deprivation provisions to be used in this way as we wish to highlight the seriousness that we attach to people-smuggling crimes.Finally, the bill makes the avenue of review available for decisions on revocation of the grant of a certificate of citizenship before conferral of citizenship; decisions on resumption of Australian citizenship by young people; and decisions on good character in applications for registration of Australian citizenship by descent. In summary, this bill will update and enhance citizenship law to improve its operation in some important areas. This update and enhancement have been long sought and long overdue. It is an important bill and one which will help to create an even more robust Australian citizenship for the 21st century.My colleague the Hon. Philip Ruddock had great pleasure in introducing this bill into the last parliament and I know that he continues to have a close, personal interest in Australian citizenship and in the value these changes will make to a great many Australians. I am pleased he is here to witness the bill's reintroduction in this parliament. I commend the bill to the chamber and table the explanatory memorandum.Debate (on motion by Mr McClelland) adjourned. Miscellaneous5410:03:0054SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER10000PON/A10—There have been some changes implemented to the Notice Paper for this parliament. The Notice Paper for the next sitting day is available in electronic form on the House of Representatives web site within two hours of House rise on the previous sitting day. Members are encouraged to access the Notice Paper on the web site. A hard copy of the Notice Paper will not be delivered to each member's office. A stock of hard copies of the Notice Paper, which will now be produced on A4 paper instead of B5, will be available to members in the chamber and from the Table Office. The Notice Paper issued at the start of a sitting fortnight will list all outstanding questions on notice. Previously, all outstanding questions were listed at the start of each week. Each Notice Paper for the remainder of the sitting fortnight will list only the new questions on notice for that day. Previously, each subsequent day listed all new questions for the week. As a new service, a document with a full listing of all outstanding questions on notice is available on the web site. These changes will result in significant savings to the Department of the House of Representatives.Governor-General's Speech5454Mrs Sussan Ley, for the committee appointed to prepare an address-in-reply to the speech of His Excellency the Governor-General, presented the proposed address, which was read by the Clerk.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Order! Before I call Ms Ley, I remind honourable members that this is her first speech. I therefore ask that the usual courtesies be extended to her.10:05:0054Ley, Sussan, MPMs LEY 00AMNFarrerLP11—Mr Speaker, I move:That the address be agreed to.I am honoured to have been able to move the motion for the address-in-reply to the Governor-General's speech, on behalf of the parliament and of the government. I thank my colleagues who are present in the chamber today. I thank the electors of Farrer for sending me here as their fourth representative in the federal parliament. For me, this is a moment in time to capture and to treasure, and I am conscious of the great responsibility I have to represent here all of the people of Farrer.I carry forward a fine Liberal tradition in this seat. The first member for Farrer, Sir David Fairbairn, was elected in 1949 and served in this chamber until 1975, nine of those years as a minister. Sir David saw active service during World War II and was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross. During the nine days wait for the seat of Farrer to be decided, I was delighted to receive a letter from Sir David's grandson, Daniel Goonan, saying that the family was sure that their forebear was smiling down upon me, looking forward to Farrer returning to Liberal hands. Sir David was a farmer and aviator. He became Minister for Air. I feel a particular affinity with him as I too am a farmer and a pilot. I am told that, shortly after gaining his seat and flying up for the opening of parliament, David decided to dive-bomb Old Parliament House. The Speaker remonstrated with him, and a lively debate broke out as to how far into the airspace above Parliament House the Speaker's jurisdiction actually extended. Mr Speaker, should I decide to fly over the House, I hope you will regard it as an expression of high spirits and a celebration of continuity in Farrer between aviators.I pay sincere tribute to the second member for Farrer, the Hon. Wal Fife, who served his country with distinction both in the New South Wales parliament for 18 years and in the federal parliament as the member for Farrer from 1975 until the seat's redistribution in 1984. Wal Fife too was a minister of the Crown and a fearless protector of his rural constituency.It is important for me to acknowledge the part played in the `new look' Farrer by my immediate predecessor, `the man with the hat', the Hon. Tim Fischer. Mr Fischer served in Vietnam and became the member for Sturt in the New South Wales parliament. He was elected to federal parliament in 1984. He became Leader of the National Party, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade. None can doubt the contribution he made locally and on the world stage. As I travel the dusty back roads of my electorate, especially around Boree Creek, he comes into my mind as the local member who was always on the go. It is imperative for us to continue his commitment to developing markets for Australian producers. That is what will allow rural communities to survive. At the most recent election, the Farrer electorate boundaries were altered again to include the shire of Tumut, which has been so capably represented by my valued colleague Alby Schultz. Our styles may be a little different but I hope I can be as effective an advocate. I warmly welcome each and every person in Tumut, Talbingo, Adelong, Batlow and Brungle into the electorate of Farrer. They bring to the electorate some of the history of the Snowy Mountains scheme, as well as rapidly expanding forest products industries.Before I go on, I note that the Governor-General on behalf of the government acknowledged the 50th jubilee of Her Majesty the Queen. I was born a British citizen and I am now proudly a citizen of Australia, and the Queen is Queen of Australia. The jubilee is a personal celebration which we celebrate because the Queen in her person has led an exemplary life of public duty and is a model for all who seek to serve the public. It is well to congratulate her at a time of discussion about the manner of parliamentary debate and when politicians are asked to consider the duties as well as the rewards of public life. I take this opportunity to add the congratulations of the citizens of Farrer to those of the Governor-General and the government.The area I represent is magnificently diverse. It covers some 96,000 square kilometres and stretches from Tumut to Wentworth, from Mount Kosciuszko to the South Australian border, from snow, tall timbers and orchards to wide western plains. The Murray River is our southern boundary and we include the shires of Albury, Hume, Culcairn, Holbrook, Tumbarumba, Tumut, Lockhart, Urana, Berrigan, Jerilderie, Deniliquin, Murray, Conargo, Wakool, Balranald and Wentworth.I am delighted that friends and supporters from Deniliquin have joined us here today, in the gallery, and I am grateful for the support this town gave me during the campaign. I must also express my heartfelt appreciation to my campaign manager, Angus Macneil, who has worked selflessly for the Liberal Party and who believed in me and without whom I would not be standing here today.One thinks of Farrer, and its residents imagine it, as a rural electorate. Our farms are our living, whether they are apple orchards on the frost covered hillsides of Batlow, or western lands division grazing leases growing wool in the saltbush and mulga country. In between we grow table grapes, wine grapes, blueberries, wheat, barley, canola, olives, wool, dairy, lambs, beef, trout, rice, citrus, almonds, vegetables and timber. In hotels and bed and breakfasts, art galleries and museums, in our historic churches and in our homes, Farrer dwellers welcome tourists from other states, from the cities and from overseas.In this rural electorate lies the important regional city of Albury. When I graduated from the regional La Trobe University with a degree in economics, I went to work in the Taxation Office in Albury. I lived as a farmer well out of town and would drop the children at school on my way to work and study. Working in Albury gave me a chance to experience the daily life of such a city. I had the opportunity to see in practice what my economics training taught me. I saw how all our lives interact through the market, whether it be for wool, food, education or transport, how dependent we are on each other, how a town of a certain size provides employment for all types of people—shop assistants, receptionists, accountants and lawyers. The strategic location of, for example, the University of New South Wales School of Rural Health in Albury shows how such a scheme can boost the economy of a town. Our `capital city' of Albury is strong and vibrant and needs to continue to grow. Too often we see regional centres acting like a sponge, soaking up services, shopping and industry from the towns around them. Albury is in a position to integrate primary production, value adding, research, training and innovation—the full circle of regional development. Mr Speaker, I hope you will indulge a tax person in some statistics that I will put in historical context, and I ask that the parliament and the people of Australia reflect on their human implications. Fifty years ago rural Australia contained 50 per cent of the population, producing enough to feed all Australians. Now, just three per cent of us are farmers, feeding the other 97 per cent as well as exporting 80 per cent of all we produce. These are vivid statistics, but they represent a change in the understanding about the continent which goes unmentioned.When the population was divided more or less equally between city and country, you could be pretty sure that at least half of those in the city were fairly closely related to those on the land. On annual holidays—in those days taken in, rather than away from, Australia—city kids went with mum and dad to relatives in the country and helped with—or hindered—milking and collecting eggs. Without being conscious of it, they learned the implications of, for example, having no shop around the corner. They understood the importance of planning and neighbourly interdependence, and sparse local transport. The reverse learning process took place when the family from the country took the train to the big smoke. The kids saw factories and offices where their uncles worked; they felt the exhilarating pace of city life, the extended choice of movies, transport, food and clothes, and how easy it was to get an icy pole from the local milk bar.Understanding the implications of drought, fire, flood and distance was part of the heritage that Australia celebrated by the early national poets. Then, we all somehow shared in Paterson's `vision splendid' of the bush. Understanding came subliminally because it came as part of growing up, part of experience. Now, the divide is not only in distance but also in experience.I was born in Nigeria. I migrated to Australia, with my British parents, from a childhood in the Middle East. I have come to live in the bush, in an area that has welcomed migrants through the Snowy Mountains scheme and through the Bonegilla camp. My family came to Canberra. After leaving high school I trained as a pilot. In those days there were very few jobs for female commercial pilots, and I worked as an air traffic controller in Sydney. Although I was disappointed at the time not to get a job with a major airline, I can look back now and say how lucky I was. I found work—aerial stock mustering—for a shearing contractor, and it was then that I began to learn about rural Australia.I met my husband John, who was working as a shearer, saving to buy and improve his family farm. John brought me down to earth, literally. To stay with him and get to know country life, I became a shearer's cook. When we took over the farm we milked cows for a time, and as Paul, Georgina and Isabel came along we found ourselves coping with the rural recession. We have been in the wool industry for 15 years and it has not been easy. Times were hard, but we set our goals and we stuck to them.We in the bush have come such a long way. We do what we do better than anyone else in the world. This government has made a commitment to improving further profitability and competition in rural industries. But in our success lies our biggest problem—our lack of critical mass. Some of our best and brightest are leaving. They are moving to the cities as young people, for education, for career, for social reasons, for fun—and, having met friends and partners away from home, they are reluctant to return. As it was put to me recently: `We can't get 18- to 35-year-olds for the cricket team— there just aren't enough around.' We need to—we must find ways to bring people back to the land, to make our communities flourish again.The government will continue to develop strategies that take into account the ageing of the Australian population. Rural communities will be seen to be affected first by this. Many country towns through local fundraising have built retirement villages and hostels and nursing homes to care for the frail and ageing, but these cannot stand alone; they need for everyone's sake to be part of a younger community. All Australians are dealing with change: technological, cultural, social. The bush has taken change on the chin. The produce of the Farrer electorate alone shows ways in which we have diversified to seek new markets. We embraced computer technology. We use computer programs to manage breeding cycles, to check market fluctuations and to communicate with each other and the wider world. This government will maintain initiatives in telecommunications, in improving transport systems and in providing services for regional Australia, and the voters of Farrer will welcome such initiatives. But at times, despite coming to terms with our place in the regional and global economy, despite federal and state initiatives and support, some rural dwellers feel sidelined and overwhelmed.Our country is having a vigorous discussion about water and about the environment: about environmental flows in our river system, about the amount of land to be kept for passive recreation or wilderness, about water entitlements—in a sense about the very right to farm. This argument is taking place in boardrooms, in the halls of the bureaucracies, in scientific conferences, in newspaper columns and on television. Debate in these places raises the awareness of the whole population about the fragility of this land. But I want to see the communities that feel they are poised on a knife edge, farmers losing the security of access to water and townspeople who have lived on the river all their lives take part in the decision making process, because right now they believe it is being taken away from them. The government has promised an investment in the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality, and farmers and local communities in Farrer will be pleased to see how it supports action already being taken by regional communities and local land-holders.There is a growing communication gap between city and country. It cuts both ways. I hope that, as representatives in this parliament of people from all over Australia, we can support an exchange between the two. We rural citizens need to show more of our city fellows what it is like out here. We can explain the critical importance of irrigated agriculture to the nation's economy. On the ground, with time, we can overcome the power of the sound bite and the momentary TV grab. For example, we can demonstrate that an irrigation company allocates its resources not only to distributing water but to satisfying valid environmental safeguards, starting with complex land and water management plans.If they visit to learn, if they can spare a while, non-farming people will leave with a far better understanding of the challenges we face. They will see the difference between environmental sustainability—a goal we all share—and environmental restoration. We understand that, for historic continuity, for research, for the air we breathe, we must try in some areas of the continent an approach that requires that whatever is proposed has nil impact on any component of the environment. But some see this quite simply as removing a farmer's ability to employ his land for the uses that he bought it. This approach will not work unless the farmer is involved in the debate.We as a community are moving towards an increased priority for the environment, but we as a community must pay. At the moment, current generation land-holders and the small towns which depend on them are bearing an unfair cost to achieve a public benefit for the entire community, for present and future generations. At the sharp end, this means your bank manager reviewing your balance sheet and deciding that equity in your business has eroded, risk has increased and so must loan repayments. For a young family starting out with a debt load, the hours are getting longer and the hurdles are getting higher. No wonder the young are choosing a different lifestyle.I want to promote rural and regional Australia as a place to live, work and raise a family, recognising its value to the identity and wellbeing of our nation. Enterprise and ingenuity will always prevail over adversity. Communities have to examine their competitive advantages and look for new ones. Rural centres need to build new relationships between farms, visitors and regional towns. The future is in supporting secondary industry based on the primary products already grown or able to be grown in the area. There is huge value adding potential and no shortage of ideas, but there are failings in the market for venture capital in this country. I have heard of several viable proposals that struggle to get backing. Banks are not interested; investors are not easily found. Communities are not able to raise the funds themselves, and help is needed. We in Farrer note the government's intention to encourage venture capital and overseas development capital into Australia. We are hoping that some initiatives can be taken to encourage this investment to regional Australia, perhaps through the creation of a new regional development bank which will back businesses making real product for local consumption and export.I must conclude with a reflection on my family. As a candidate, I dragged a brashly painted caravan through the length and breadth of the electorate, staying in council caravan parks, learning the needs of the people, doorknocking the shops and talking. During the more solitary moments—and there were a few—I was profoundly glad of one thing, which was that after all the impossible miles and impossible hours there would be a home and a family to return to. My thanks to my husband, John, for always bringing me back to reality, and to my three wonderful children, Paul, Georgina and Isabel, who are the greatest gift of all.00AMMHartsuyker, Luke, MPMr Hartsuyker—I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Order! Before I call the honourable member for Burke, may I remind the House that this is the honourable member's first speech and ask the House to extend to him the usual courtesies. 10:24:0058O'Connor, Brendan, MPMr BRENDAN O'CONNOR 00AN3BurkeALP01—Thank you, Mr Speaker, and my congratulations on your election to office. May I also extend my congratulations to the members for Page and Scullin for their elections to office. I am deeply honoured to rise as the representative for the electorate of Burke for the first time. I am also grateful to the voters of my constituency for providing me with an opportunity to represent their interests in this nation's foremost parliamentary chamber. I intend to ensure that their confidence in me is not misplaced.Burke was named after the Irish explorer Robert O'Hara Burke, whose attempt to be the first to traverse this continent from south to north has become a romantic, if somewhat tragic, part of our history. It is a diverse electorate consisting of north-western metropolitan areas of Melbourne, such as Deer Park; satellite semirural towns of Melton and Sunbury; and the rural communities of Bacchus Marsh, Gisborne, Woodend, Kyneton, Mount Macedon, Macedon, Romsey, Lancefield and Trentham. It also incorporates the rapidly developing estates of Caroline Springs and Burnside. I reside in Sunbury, which is a fast growing semirural town once renowned for the Australian version of Woodstock—the Sunbury folk festival. Back then, in the early seventies, it was not seen as much more than a paddock by some, although for cricket aficionados—of which, of course, there are a few in this place—it holds almost a sacred interest, as it was in 1882 the birthplace of the Ashes, something its overpossessive caretakers at Lord's in London have seemed to have forgotten.Burke's geographical diversity creates almost a microcosm of the Australian population, providing its federal representative with wide access to people from all walks of life: factory workers, farmers, winemakers, hospitality workers, small traders and meat workers, just to name a few. My predecessor, Mr Neil O'Keefe, was a member since 1984 and knew as well as anyone about the challenge and the advantage of representing both metropolitan and rural constituents. Neil was an outstanding local representative and was respected for his commitment to local matters. I intend to uphold this commitment and when required I will bring important local issues to the attention of this place.Immediately prior to becoming the member for Burke, I was an assistant national secretary of the Australian Services Union. The ASU is a large and diverse union representing employees from the public and private sector and from the so-called older new economies. Although only nine years since its inception, the ASU comprises many former unions that were protecting Australian workers and their families prior to Federation. Although I have worked as a cleaner, a gardener and on a factory assembly line, I consider my role as an advocate for Australian workers for more than 15 years to be my life's work to date—my time as a union official with the Municipal Employees Union and, after amalgamation, with the ASU to be my vocation and my greatest passion. My first challenge when starting employment with the union was to establish a career path for 6,000 Victorian home carers, whose primary role was to provide personal and domestic care for many of our elderly and disabled citizens. The objective of this case was to illustrate the worth of these extraordinary workers. Prior to the case they were paid below cleaners' wages, despite their difficult and demanding responsibilities. The evidence we presented rightfully established the argument for proper salary increments to accord with their skills, duties and responsibilities. The victory, however, was short-lived. In 1994, the Kennett state Liberal government introduced compulsory competitive tendering that forced home carers and other employees to forfeit their employment conditions, otherwise lose their employment.This experience, and many others during my time as a union official, confirmed my strong belief that Labor governments were essential to protect and defend low paid workers in this country. Contrary to the antiunion propaganda, most delegates and workers I have known seek only a fair day's work for a fair day's pay. In response, without provocation, recent Commonwealth laws have set about removing employees' conditions unilaterally, by limiting the lawful scope of awards. Not content with restrictions made to federal awards, those opposite now seek to strike out enterprise clauses, even when they are agreed between the employers and their work forces. Having lectured to employers and employees on the need to diminish third parties to industrial instruments, the government looms as the greatest meddler of all in workplace matters.A lot has been said lately about the relationship between the union movement and the Australian Labor Party and the need to review that relationship. We, on this side of the House, will not be fooled by efforts of some conservative politicians and some in the media who seek to divide us. I welcome such a review if it is to modernise and strengthen this important bond as a united labour movement, engaging with community organisations and the corporate sector. That is an unbeatable combination and those opposite who have any understanding of history are well aware of this fact.Notwithstanding recent setbacks, the union movement is still the largest representative organisation in this nation. I record my indebtedness to those workers and delegates I have had the honour of serving. I believe it is fair to say that my work has provided me with a chance to develop an informed understanding of ordinary people's needs and aspirations. This is the greatest gift I have received and bring to this House. It should also be recorded that my motivation to protect and advance the interests of people less well off in our society was formed well before I commenced employment.I am a migrant and a migrant family's son. My family arrived in Melbourne over 30 years ago. Economically secure but socially turbulent, Australia in the late sixties was providing assistance for people to migrate to this land. Like many immigrants, my parents embarked on a brave journey in the hope of a better life, if not for themselves then for their children. It may have been a less diverse society back then, and not necessarily as tolerant as Australia has become, but it understood the link between immigration intake and national growth. Australia has always appreciated the migrant's desire to make a better life and, in doing so, make a better nation. At a time when our population is ageing this personal experience and recent events have served only to reinforce my view that a long-term plan on population and immigration must be developed.Arriving in Australia as a six-year-old was not the lone reason for my good fortune. I am also blessed with a family that values learning, so I grew up as a beneficiary of Labor's education policies introduced in the early seventies. It was these policies which placed great faith in education being central to national growth and individual development. They also introduced to us the principles of equal opportunity. They enshrined the notion of ability and effort over privilege. Having read in daily newspapers last week that universities are selecting entrants with fewer marks but more dollars, I can understand why so many students and their parents feel that this notion of equal opportunity has been lost. For all the references in this House to the ethos of individual effort by those opposite, there seems to have been scant regard for addressing institutionalised inequalities in society or guaranteeing that people will be rewarded on merit and not on how much money they have. I am aware that too few from my background have been fortunate to gain university degrees. Many of those who provide the labour upon which this nation was built, and continues to be built, have not been provided their fair share. Current policies bestow more to the haves rather than to the have-nots. Recent funding arrangements for category 1 private schools and the introduction of the goods and services tax have redistributed wealth from the poor to the rich. Even the efforts to curb tax evasion appear to focus disproportionately on social security recipients and ignore the tax avoidance of our wealthiest citizens. In the industrial arena, instead of finding solutions to increasingly precarious employment and growing unemployment, efforts are focused on union bashing, opposing safety nets for the lowest paid and systematically weakening the authority of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. A spate of appointments of senior deputy presidents to the commission only last year were drawn from the employer side only, undermining the conventions of appointing a balanced bench.I believe people want governments to focus on the difficulties they confront in their daily lives. A true mark of leadership involves tackling the large structural problems confronting the nation, not pandering to prejudice or diminishing the protection afforded to the weakest in our society.In the last couple of years we have seen reputable companies such as Ansett and HIH come crashing down. The growing anxiety of the Australian work force, compounded by these tragic corporate collapses, requires immediate action. In my electorate alone, and in particular in the airport town in which I live, Sunbury, over 1,000 former Ansett workers and their families have just experienced their worst Christmas ever. Those longer term employees received only a proportion of the redundancy entitlements legally owed to them. Many have had to sell their homes, take casual employment and to attempt to recover from this devastating experience. Many more are still hoping to be employed by Tesna.There are thousands of other Australian workers who have lost their jobs recently in less famous companies, but the effect is the same. The Australian people deserve to know what their national government will do about this growing problem. What protection is to be afforded to creditors who are victims of corporate collapse? Why aren't their directors held to account for their conduct? Why isn't there sufficient transparency of the conduct of directors making corporate decisions?These questions are appropriately being asked in the community, but no response from government has been forthcoming. A frightened and insecure work force might please a few unscrupulous employers but it drains workplaces of confidence and vigour. Australians are increasingly having to opt for part-time and temporary employment, but still have full-time mortgages to pay and families to provide for. Although many of these matters arise from structural changes in the economy, governments should play a role in mitigating the effects, particularly of redressing the ill effects of outsourcing and privatisation.Following the disastrous collapse of Ansett it is time to review whether national competition policy as it currently operates is in the national interest. Given that the so-called `open skies' policy has almost led to a monopoly in the domestic aviation market, I wonder whether anyone's hand is on the wheel. My experience of national competition policy suggests that there are more quantifiable failures than there are successes. And where there is success it seems often to be short term or largely confined to a small part of the community such as some lucky shareholders or people residing in the city rather than the country. Despite the overwhelming evidence of the harmful effects of this unfettered policy, the remaining part of Telstra is still to be flogged off if this government has its way. I call on this parliament to consider a broader public interest test when considering the privatisation or outsourcing of public assets. Not only are Australians seeking political leaders who look after the interests of the many rather than the few; they expect a greater level of integrity and honesty in their dealings. This starts with an honest appraisal of Australia as a country and a society. We cannot change the past but we can learn from it. There should be fewer attempts to revise our history and greater effort to celebrate our triumphs and to acknowledge and wherever possible reconcile wrongdoings. We can look back over 200 years and be proud of many achievements but also saddened by some less than admirable transgressions.Australia has been at the forefront of the introduction of universal adult suffrage and other fundamental democratic developments. We were among the first countries to help create the United Nations, and Australian citizens have relatively as much political freedom and economic security as any other sovereign state. For example, we have also remedied some of our less noble deeds. In 1967 Australians voted to enfranchise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders; we have abandoned the White Australia policy in favour of a less discriminatory immigration policy; we have gone some way towards rectifying sexual discrimination in equal pay cases; and we have extended superannuation, once the preserve of the few, to low wage earners. In 1973 Medibank provided basic universal health services to all and Medicare maintains this important service.In the last hundred years we have moved progressively towards judicial and political independence. These economic, legal and social changes have happened because previous political leaders sought to fulfil the changing needs of our country and rectify the wrongs. In keeping with this trend, I would add my voice to the growing chorus of people who advocate Australia's final cut with British sovereignty to become a republic with an Australian citizen as our head of state. I would also record my support for proper and lasting reconciliation with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders that would involve the Australian government on behalf of the Australian people apologising for the atrocities inflicted upon our original owners and inhabitants. To see one's history, warts and all, is not, as some would have it, to wear a black armband but to be true to oneself. We have more to fear from a blindfold than a black armband, as ignorance will impede our progress to becoming a greater nation and a better society. In accordance with that philosophy, I believe that the last six months will not be looked upon in our history as one of this country's prouder periods. I am compelled to conclude that the atmosphere of fear and loathing has not been as prevalent in Australia for at least 30 years. Many of the electors I met during the election campaign felt neither comfortable nor relaxed. On one hand some people feared that we were being overrun by a multitude of dangerous aliens, given the hysterical portrayal by those who knew better, and, on the other, I confronted the anger of people concerned with our lack of care towards fleeing refugees. We must protect the citizens and sovereignty of this land but also maintain the principles of tolerance and secure our reputation as a humane and just nation. To date we do not have the right balance between these two competing objectives, nor do we have a workable and humanitarian solution to managing this complex problem. I do not want to fight another election where my view on a particular race of people is sought from electors before they cast their vote. Let us all hope that political leaders can rise above this ugly episode and forge a decent and permanent approach to this critical matter. I am proud to get this opportunity to belong to the Labor caucus with Simon Crean at the helm and, although I am disappointed that not enough new Labor colleagues have joined me, I welcome the fact that all other new Labor members are women, ensuring Labor's continued effort to provide a balanced representation in this House. May I also extend my congratulations to all new members who have joined me in this House. I would also like to salute our former leader, the member for Brand, Kim Beazley. Kim is a man of rare intellect and compassion who would no doubt have made a great Prime Minister. Before I conclude, there are several people I must also thank. To the member for Lalor, Julia Gillard, and the member for Batman, Martin Ferguson, I thank you for your support and advice. To Richard Lodders, Linus Power and all of my campaign team, and the many Labor Party members and supporters who worked tirelessly from the moment of my preselection, I thank you and look forward to a long and fruitful partnership. To my union colleagues, particularly Paul Slape, Darrell Cochrane and Brian Parkinson, I thank you for making the last 15 years a fulfilling, inspiring and unforgettable time. I thank all of my friends, but particularly Tallis Richmond, Yorick Piper, Gerry Kitchener, my brothers Michael and Brian, my sister Siobain and my aunty Renee O'Connor, who has come all the way from Tralee, County Kerry, to be here today, and my wonderful parents, Michael and Philomena, who gave me the opportunity to reach places working-class kids rarely get to go.Finally, I would like to thank my partner, Jodi Dack, who has had to put up with me throughout the preselection—and the election, dare I say—and still was able to provide me with tireless support and impeccable judgment. I will do my utmost to reward their unflinching loyalty and warm friendship by enriching this House and serving my constituents to the best of my ability.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Order! Before I call Mr Hartsuyker, I remind honourable members that this is his first speech. I therefore ask that the usual courtesies be extended to him.10:45:0063Hartsuyker, Luke, MPMr HARTSUYKER 00AMMCowperNP11—I am standing in this chamber, by the grace of the electors of Cowper, as I wish to make a contribution to the future of my electorate and our nation. I want to see a continued improvement in the quality of life of all Australians, and I want to help this country reach its full potential as a leading force in Asia and on the world stage. I am privileged to join this parliament as a member of the governing majority and the third term of the Liberal-National coalition, a government that has put this country steadfastly on the right track for economic prosperity, reformed industrial relations, created record export growth, reduced government debt by $55 billion, helped reduce unemployment levels and given everyday Australians a sense of belonging and participation through government policy reflecting their needs and aspirations.To be a part of the governing majority of this parliament under the esteemed leadership of Prime Minister John Howard and my National Party leader and Deputy Prime Minister, John Anderson, is a true honour. Prime Minister, your integrity—the courage to do what is right by this country, not necessarily what is popular—has ensured our country has weathered the world economic downturn, recording economic growth when others falter. My leader, John Anderson, your support has been inspirational, your passion for the needs of coastal and country Australia has been relentless and your support for the institution of family through your own personal actions acts as a beacon in public life.It is a humbling experience to be in this chamber as the National Party representative for the seat of Cowper. It is a reflection of the egalitarian nature of our country and the opportunity available to anyone wishing to participate in our democracy that an ordinary Australian who went to a state primary and high school and a regional university has had the opportunity to come to federal parliament and become a member. This country has been made on the principle of having a fair go, and we as Australians believe that by working hard and making sacrifices you can make a better life for you and your family.The sacrifices of previous generations have made our nation what it is today. I am the son of a Dutch migrant who came to this country alone at the age of 17 in 1951 with £25 in his pocket, an old guitar and all his other possessions in a toolbox. It is a story common to many who have succeeded through self-reliance and hard work. Half a century later, he is sitting with my mother, a fourth-generation Australian, in the gallery as I present this speech to the House. There are few countries around the world that would provide the same types of opportunities. It does concern me that with our improved quality of life perhaps we are becoming more focused on entitlement rather than self-reliance. Perhaps we are developing a soft underbelly. We must never lose a sense of our past and of the sacrifices our parents and grandparents have made to create the nation we enjoy today. The marketing trademark of the Coffs Coast Region, which is within the electorate of Cowper, is `Discover Our Green, Gold and Blue'. It is a statement that is befitting the entire electorate: the green of the lush valleys, magnificent mountain tops and world heritage rain forests, the gold of our expansive, uncrowded beaches—the nation's finest—and the blue of our mighty rivers and pristine ocean waters. The electorate of Cowper typifies all that is great about our country. It is one of the original seats of Federation, and I am the eighth member to represent Cowper, following in the proud tradition of former members such as retired Deputy Speaker Garry Nehl, the Hon. Ian Robinson, and former Country Party leader Sir Earl Page. I would like to take this opportunity to place on record my best wishes to Garry and his delightful wife, Suzanne, and to thank them for the contribution they have made to the people of Cowper and our nation.I could be accused of being parochial in suggesting that I represent the most magnificent region in Australia—but I do not think so. Garry Nehl always said that he was the `Member for Paradise', and I am more than happy to carry that mantle. The electorate of Cowper has enjoyed growth over many years as Australians flock to our subtropical climate, a climate which the CSIRO describes as the most temperate in Australia. Countless Australians have moved to the centres of Yamba, Bellingen, Sawtell, Trial Bay and to numerous coastal villages to discover their own personal sea change. As a result, the electorate has enjoyed an influx of talented Australians from all over the continent. Our wealth of human talent includes residents such as Russell Crowe, Jack Thompson, David Helfgott, George Negus and Kay Cottee, as well as many other everyday Australians all with their own important stories to tell and contributions to make to the electorate and the nation.Paradise is not without its challenges, and as the new member for Cowper my priorities are to encourage strong economic growth through a commitment to regional development and the needs of small business; to maintain delivery of improved infrastructure for our growing region through continued funding of the Pacific Highway and through continued upgrading of telecommunications services—so vital in regional Australia—to continue the development of education facilities as a service to the nation and as an export industry for our region. I commend the government on its policy of offering choice in education to families in Cowper. I will be working to ensure that our older Australians continue to receive the care they rightfully deserve, and I will continue the government's commitment in the area of veterans' affairs, to ensure their contribution is adequately recognised and their needs are met in civilian life. I commend the government on the establishment of the independent committee to review veterans' entitlements, as promised during the election campaign.I will continue to address the needs of rural health, specifically encouraging doctors to practise in our smaller communities. I am a great advocate of decentralisation. We must formulate policy and provide the infrastructure to encourage the private sector and government departments to take advantage of the abundant resources of regional and rural Australia, most notably its people. In regional Australia we do not ask for welfare but we demand equality of opportunity. Technology enables regional Australia to provide a wide range of services. We need to reverse the city mindset so that companies focus on the many positive things there are in regional Australia to help them run their businesses. We could create a healthier, happier and wealthier work force whilst at the same time taking pressure off our capital cities. Through the rapid advances in technology, distance is not the tyranny it once was. Many types of manufacturing, research or development can be performed in regional Australia with sensible economic, logistical and social benefits. We need to facilitate that change of mindset. The government and private sector must understand there are economic and social benefits to moving their work forces to country and regional Australia. The government can play a leading role in relocating government business units to regional areas. Already in Cowper, Centrelink has a 150-person call centre servicing the needs of the nation. We must continue this program which can potentially provide cost savings to government and economic injections to regional areas.In Cowper, we have many exciting firms leading the way in their fields—such as WE Smith Engineering, Lindsay Brothers, Faircloth and Reynolds, Thermal Electrics, Coffs Harbour education campus, Janison Solutions, Express Coaches, Planet Lighting and Blueberry Farms Australia. WE Smith located to Coffs Harbour from Sydney in 1968, bringing 25 families. They have built heat exchanges for power generation facilities, oil refineries and steelworks. This company, now known as WE Smith Hudson, is exporting to the world. Planet Lighting at Bellingen constructed lights for the refurbishment of the Bank of China building in Tiananmen Square, Beijing. Janison Solutions, started by a former technology teacher with the NSW TAFE system, builds software to facilitate learning and teaching, with contracts across Australia and across the world.I will work to ensure that the federal and state governments continue to support the Coffs Harbour Education Campus, which is an Australian leader in delivering higher education covering university, TAFE and senior high school education. It provides tailor-made courses to meet the local job market. The tourism course, for example, is an Australian leader with one of the highest graduate-to-job ratios. Tourism is a vital industry to our electorate. Our tourism product is world class by virtue of the unique qualities of our pristine natural environment and the superb built environment. It is an area in which the electorate enjoys substantial competitive advantage over other regions. The development of the tourism industry in the electorate has provided a diverse range of employment opportunities from fine dining to adventure tourism and provides a wealth of experiences for visitors to our region. The Marine Science Centre, funded through the Centenary of Federation trust and a tribute to the hard work of the former member Garry Nehl, takes its first students this semester.Whilst Cowper is an evolving electorate, farming will always play a significant part in our local economy. There are many exciting ventures afoot including aquaculture, native flower propagation, and evolving horticulture in areas such as macadamia nuts, pecan nuts, olives, and native bush foods. All these industries have enormous export potential which is starting to be realised. Australian farmers are world leaders in efficient production.Small business is the lifeblood of the Australian economy and it is vital to the nation's prosperity. As a small business person, I understand the enormous changes and upheavals which we have endured during our involvement in the tax reform process. Small business is constantly looking to improve productivity and efficiency, not only to improve the bottom line but also just to survive. Countless small business owners now work longer and harder under great stress to provide the services that we as a community expect and demand. Therefore, we as a government must not only help provide a strong economic environment for business to prosper but also be alert to other reforms which would help small business. Areas such as public liability insurance are of great concern to small business operators due to escalating premiums. This burden affects not only small business but also the wider community, with the cancellation of countless community and sporting events. I applaud the attention to this problem by my leader, John Anderson, who recently met with tourism operators in Cowper. I applaud the Minister for Small Business and Tourism, Joe Hockey, and the Minister for Revenue, Helen Coonan, who is convening a round table discussion with state leaders to help find a solution to this growing problem. I also applaud the member for Riverina, Kay Hull, who had the foresight to address this problem very early in the piece. The issue of public liability insurance is not only affecting business but also tearing at the fabric of our society. The Coutts Crossing Sports Day, an event involving people from my electorate, after running for 100 years was forced to cancel because it could not afford the $10,000 public liability insurance premium. Last year the same sports day raised $6,000 for the local rescue helicopter service. Many of the legislative changes required for reform are the domain of the state government, but the Commonwealth government can lead the way for reform through consultation with the states.As I have stated, the natural environment is growing and will continue to grow as a drawcard for tourists in my electorate. Yet, we must be careful to ensure our timber and our fishing industries are supported into the future. Their survival is becoming more and more marginal, due in part to continued pressure from extreme lobby groups. We must continue to strive to find a balance between economic growth and environmental sustainability. Decisions on land use and approvals must be scientifically based and not decided by the loudest, most aggressive arguments. Our local landcare groups, through funding through the Natural Heritage Trust, are making real improvements. Yet there is much to be done, for example in the Bellinger Valley controlling the proliferation of camphor laurel trees.Our road system is our lifeblood, and the Howard-Anderson government's commitment to improving our road network is commendable. In particular, funding to build local roads was well received by our local councils and communities. I consider this a vital initiative as every item exported from regional Australia commences its journey on a local or a regional road. In many cases the government has brought forward work that was unable to be budgeted for for at least another 10 years. In the past decade improvements to the Pacific Highway have been enormous, thanks in no small part to the effort by my predecessor, Mr Pacific Highway, the former member for Cowper, Mr Garry Nehl, and the state member for Coffs Harbour, Andrew Fraser. Yet, there is much more to be done and I will work to see urgent priorities, such as the Macksville bypass and the continued duplication of the Pacific Highway, proceed as a matter of urgency. I will work in cooperation with my state colleagues Mr Andrew Stoner and Mr Andrew Fraser to see continued funding at state and federal levels.Since coming to government the coalition has improved opportunities for older Australians to either stay in their own homes or go into care. There are now more than 300 community aged care packages in Cowper; before the coalition came to government in 1996 there were none. Societies are judged by the manner in which they care for their aged, and I am committed to ensuring that our senior Australians continue to receive the care they rightfully deserve. Whilst the coalition has done much to improve the number of doctors in regional and rural areas, there is more to be done. As has been reported nationally, our community of Dorrigo is currently without a full-time GP. During the election campaign I was able to announce funding for accommodation in the Bellinger Valley for doctors wanting to train outside the cities. Bonded medical places across Australia's universities is another positive way to overcome the shortage of doctors outside our cities. These are commonsense solutions that will have an eventual impact on our local communities and the number of doctors practising in rural and regional areas. It is an urgent problem. For example, in the Coffs Harbour community many doctors have closed their books, full to capacity with their current number of patients.The issue of quality of life of our indigenous population is of great concern to the National Party, as we represent areas with a large percentage of the Aboriginal population. We need to work cooperatively with our Aboriginal people to further improve their quality of life, health and employment opportunities. I commend the government on its pursuit of practical reconciliation matters. I will work with my local Aboriginal peoples to continue to improve the situation in our electorate. As a government, we need to focus on the needs of the community and not just the economy. I believe that the people of regional and rural Australia share a stronger sense of community than those of metropolitan Australia—I have lived in both. Many of the symbols and traditions for which our country is famous have their genesis in regional and rural Australia. Much of that for which this nation is famous has been developed from our periods of isolation and the dependency in times of trouble on your neighbours and your mates. The SES and the rural fire service that perform so well in times of need, as we have seen most recently, epitomise this spirit in regional areas. We need to help invigorate that sense of community, especially with our younger members. Service clubs and community groups are finding it harder and harder to attract members. We need to have a focus not only on efficiency but on preserving communities and their way of life.I joined the National Party some seven years ago, because I felt, as a grassroots organisation, it could help make a difference to those Australians living in rural and regional Australia. Too many of our fellow citizens feel disillusioned and powerless with what is happening around them. I implore them to get involved, to understand what is happening and to articulate their view if they are not getting a fair go.I am under no illusion that, if it were not for the support of my party, the National Party, I would not be standing here as the representative for Cowper in this House. I have much to thank the party for at all levels. We have the most democratic principles of all the political parties and our grassroots membership are our strength, rock and pillar. To all our members and supporters in Cowper who manned polling booths and worked in the campaign office, your efforts and contributions were magnificent. To those that worked tirelessly on the campaign over many months, including my campaign manager, Glynn Tosh, who has worked for many years for the National Party, and the member for Coffs Harbour, Mr Andrew Fraser, and his wife, Kerrie Fraser, whose support was above and beyond the call of duty, my greatest thanks. Michelle and Barry Greenwood, John Sercombe, Peter and Christine Lubans, Harry Green, Anne Garrett, Tony Walsh— this is quite a long list—Stuart and Joy Hull-Moody, Ian Hodges, Brian Doak, Phil and KC Tinkler, the financial genius Tony Stenhouse and Liz Stenhouse, Rob and Aileen Mutton, Alan Martin, Yolanda and Lionel Herring, Scott Mitchell, Warren and Melinda Pavey, I thank you all.To Michael Priebe at the National Party head office and Julie Dale and Gaye White at the federal secretariat, your support was vital. My parliamentary colleagues—my leader and member for Gwydir, John Anderson; the Deputy Leader of the National Party and member for Lyne, Mark Vaile; the member for Page, and we are delighted he is now also the Deputy Speaker, Ian Causley; the member for Richmond, Larry Anthony; the member for Riverina, Kay Hull; the member for Wide Bay, Warren Truss; the member for Maranoa, Bruce Scott; and many more— thank you for your help and guidance. The list is endless. Let me again mention the retired member for Cowper and former Deputy Speaker of the House, Garry Nehl—a booming voice all too familiar to longstanding members of this House. His assistance and experience was invaluable.And of course my family: to my wife, Irene, and sons, Ben and Paul; my parents, Tom and Rita, who are here today; my brother, John, and his wife, Sally, if it were not for your strength and support it would not be possible. I think all members of this House all too well realise that family are an important aspect of success in this House. I am passionate about representing the needs of my electors in Cowper. As a small businessman, as a family man, as an ordinary everyday Australian, I believe I can make a valuable contribution on behalf of the people of Cowper in the federal parliament.10000Causley, Ian (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Hon. IR Causley)—Order! Before I call Ms Grierson, I remind honourable members that this is her first speech. I therefore ask that the usual courtesies be extended to her. 11:05:0067Grierson, Sharon, MPMs GRIERSON 00AMPNewcastleALP01—On the occasion of my first speech in this place, I acknowledge the Ngunnawal people as the traditional owners of the Canberra region and I register my respect for the indigenous carers of this great land. I warmly congratulate my fellow new members and thank the staff of this House for the courteous and considerate assistance they have given to us in our new roles.Today I address the chamber for the first time as the member for Newcastle—Australia's second oldest city, Australia's largest regional city and originally the place of the Awabakal people. For a Novocastrian there can be no greater honour and no greater responsibility than to represent `our town'. I thank the people of Newcastle for the confidence and trust they have extended to me. Being only the fifth person elected to this position in 100 years and the first woman ever to hold this office makes that trust a significant tribute, deserving in return my devotion, dedication and unswerving commitment to prospering the community of Newcastle. I pledge that here today. To achieve this task, I draw comfort and strength from the people and experiences that have shaped my journey here—a journey that in many ways reflects Newcastle's progress and development.Firstly, I am a proud daughter of the noble working class of Newcastle. Our city, founded by convict labour, was built from the honest sweat and toil of the working people: miners and steel makers, shipbuilders and stevedores, transport workers and tradesmen, shop workers and public servants—men and women who collectively created a great city and a wonderful community.My family fostered in me a respect for the dignity of work and an appreciation for the struggle of the union movement to gain safe and fair labour conditions. My grandfather was part of that struggle at the Rothbury riots, a shameful event in our industrial history when shots were fired on miners of the Hunter Valley as they protested for a fairer deal in a dangerous industry. In more recent times, Australians also registered their abhorrence and outrage when force and intimidation were once more used against workers. The shameful events on our waterfront will remain forever as a reminder that government's purpose is to promote successful enterprise based on positive and harmonious industrial relations.There is no greater asset to any organisation's balance sheet than a skilled, committed and loyal work force who are valued and rewarded in return for their contribution and experience. Legislation that compromises this important relationship must fail. Any industrial relations legislation presented to this parliament must be tested against the principles of fairness and decency, not just against the platitudes of fairness and decency that some here may espouse.Like many of my generation in Newcastle I gained the support of my family to complete a higher level of education than they had enjoyed themselves. I thank my mother for her personal sacrifice and encouragement, which gave me the privilege to serve as a teacher and principal in the public schools of Newcastle for almost three decades. I, therefore, come to this parliament enriched by the youth of Newcastle—guided by their excitement for learning and technology, inspired by their talents and creativity, and strengthened by the courage they constantly display to conquer disability and to triumph over disadvantage and adversity.But in representing them in this parliament I am mindful, too, of the high expectations our young people hold for government. I also know the disappointment they express when we, the decision makers of this country, perform below the ideals and values that they are taught to aspire to each and every day. Undoing the cynicism they quickly develop when we fall short of their expectations will not be an easy task. If government is to be relevant to the youth of Australia, we must hear their voices and heed their hearts.I pay the highest tribute to all my colleagues in education. My new colleague and former Leader of the Opposition, the Hon. Kim Beazley, was correct when he said that teachers are our most important resource. We entrust to them our nation's greatest asset, the children of Australia. The future prosperity of this nation resides today in our schools, colleges and universities. The solutions to the world's greatest problems will be discovered by some of these young learners. Yet what have we invested in their future? Since 1996 our investment in education has failed to increase, in spite of the changing demands of modern learning. Although 70 per cent of our students attend public schools, they receive an ever decreasing share of federal education spending. Today, many parents look over the elegant fences of private schools wondering how our public schools can continue to deliver excellence in student outcomes with comparatively so few resources. In our universities the present government over its term of office has reduced funding by more than $700 for every planned student place. Government now contributes less than 50 per cent of the funding for universities, leaving students to contribute almost 40 per cent themselves. No nation that aspires to play a major role on the global stage can afford to neglect its knowledge base. Australia can never hope to become a knowledge nation unless it nourishes the skills and talents of all its people.From Newcastle I also bring to this new office experience gained in urban renewal and regional development as a former director of the Honeysuckle Development Corporation. This corporation, originally set up by a federal Labor government under the Building Better Cities program, has undertaken the task of breathing new life into an industrial city experiencing urban decline. I pay particular tribute to the then Labor Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Brian Howe, who led this initiative and to my predecessor, Mr Allan Morris, who was determined and tenacious in his pursuit of this program and other programs for Newcastle.The Honeysuckle Development Corporation has led the creation of a new and vibrant image for Newcastle, transforming disused railway yards, abandoned workshops, rotting wharves and surplus industrial sites into vibrant places for people and communities. The greatest benefit from this exemplary joint federal-state program has been the boost to regional economies through the creation of almost 1,500 jobs. Although some in the Newcastle media would seek to attribute the present change in progress in our inner city to one of its politically preferred heroes, it has been a Labor initiative that has provided the catalyst for change.Whilst it has been a personal pleasure to work with people dedicated to aligning government, commercial and social goals to deliver community benefits to the people of Newcastle, I regret that the Honeysuckle Development Corporation has been constrained in achieving optimum integration of affordable housing into new prime residential developments. Newcastle has always enjoyed a unique community character and an egalitarian spirit where pretentiousness and conspicuous wealth have not been admired. To strengthen social harmony in our communities the federal government must make a stronger commitment to the provision of affordable housing. I note that in his maiden speech of 1953 the Hon. Gough Whitlam highlighted the decline then in the provision of housing for the people of Australia. It is time to revisit some of these basic government responsibilities.Newcastle, like many electorates, has a significant proportion of aged citizens. As a former director of the Tinonee Gardens Multicultural Village for Aged Care, I bring to this place some understanding of the needs of our older citizens. It has become increasingly evident that a bottom line approach to aged care that pays too little regard to the principles of compassion and equal opportunity will always fall short in meeting our obligations to older Australians. My personal experiences suggest that reform to aged care policy is urgently needed by this parliament.In expressing my gratitude to the people of Newcastle for the diverse and rewarding opportunities extended to me I must register my special appreciation of the local membership of the Australian Labor Party. Without their example, commitment and tireless work I would not have been elected to this parliament. Newcastle ALP membership includes three former members of this House, both a former and current state member of the New South Wales parliament and Australia's first female lord mayor. I thank them for the rich Labor tradition that they have established and for their personal support and encouragement. Newcastle ALP membership also includes a diverse group of Novocastrians who work tirelessly to advance their collective belief in the Labor values of social justice and equity. I am grateful for their influence, humbled by their selfless concern for their fellow man and quite embarrassed at times by their generous efforts on my behalf during the election campaign. To my dedicated campaign team, my loving family, my beautiful daughters and my most wonderful and dear friends: thank you. You provide me with constant inspiration, immense pleasure and pride, and the courage to attempt to make a difference in this place so that Novocastrians and, indeed, all Australians can enjoy a quality of life unsurpassed by any other nation in the world. That so many of you could be here in the gallery today warms my heart.But now the real journey begins, and I direct the attention of this House to Newcastle—its past, its present and its future. The people of Australia will know some things about our city and our people. They will, no doubt, remember the determination and courage Novocastrians displayed to rebuild and repair the physical and emotional damage wreaked on Newcastle by the earthquake of December 1989. They may also remember that in Newcastle, when faced with the closure of the BHP steelworks, we celebrated together the skill and contribution of Newcastle men and women to 80 years of steel making. In the final hours of the BHP plant the mateship of the workplace and the pride of a city in its steel-making heritage shone through the tears and regrets—regrets for an industry that could so easily have been transformed and modernised had the corporate will been there and tears for the hardship we knew many would experience through retrenchment and redundancy.Australians may have also wondered at a Newcastle football team's inspiring ability to snatch victory from the jaws of certain defeat at two National Rugby League premierships in the past five years. The parochial pride we display in our courageous Knights demonstrates a community spirit and passion that is the envy of many a city and town. Newcastle is as united as its emerging national soccer team in its desire for a suitable football stadium to showcase and nurture its sporting talents.But many Australians will not know much about the clever industry of the Newcastle of today—industry that will take us into the future. The work of the Hunter Medical Research Institute, supported by our university, our regional health body and community sponsorship, has established a national and international reputation for excellence. Our local telecommunications industry provides ABC services to the Asia-Pacific region and is currently being considered as a suitable foundation for major international investment into the provision of regional telecommunications, broadband and fibre-optic services. We continue to maintain our reputation as outstanding shipbuilders with the successful completion of the Huon class minehunter series, a project that began nine years ago under a Labor government and ends this year on time and on budget. We are also the new home for the CSIRO National Energy Technology Headquarters, a centre that has the potential to put Newcastle at the heart of new energy research and industry development. Our modern port, the most efficient exporter of coal in the world, is also taking on the challenges of the future, with plans for a multipurpose freight terminal to diversify port capacity and function. To sustain each one of these endeavours will take some degree of federal government commitment to regional development.The recent report prepared by Tasman Economics for the Australian Industry Group on the ADI minehunter project clearly identifies the benefits that flow to regional Australia and to the Australian economy in general when governments invest in regions. The report states that the ADI defence project directly and indirectly generated or sustained an average of more than 1,800 full-time equivalent jobs in Newcastle for each year of the nine-year project. In addition, the project contributed up to $887 million to gross domestic product and up to $492 million to consumption. Governments' faith in Newcastle shipbuilding was richly rewarded and a track record for excellence undeniably reinforced. The report's findings add weight to the call for a sound and sustainable manufacturing policy for Australia, one that insists on a significant level of local manufacturing content in all projects government helps to finance. So the Newcastle of today has an exciting future. But the Newcastle of today currently has the second highest unemployment rate in the state of New South Wales. Unfortunately, clever jobs are not always within the reach of our unskilled and untrained youth or our mature-age job seekers. Employment and training initiatives in areas of high unemployment such as Newcastle need new approaches with a local focus. Government must take on the challenge of job creation and employment training if we are to avoid a welfare crisis that undermines our social cohesion and further divides our community by wealth and opportunity.In my concluding remarks to this House I wish to focus further on the role of government in supporting the community prosperity and pride of this great nation. Recent global events have seen Australians divided in their confidence in this nation's ability to deal with new threats. The insecurity many Australians feel about their own future has made them harden their hearts to the human suffering of others seeking asylum on our shores. This is not the Australian way.On 25 April each year, Australians commemorate what we consider our nation's finest hour. We remember a defeat in battle on the shores of a foreign and unfamiliar land. We remember young men who went with honour to certain death because of their belief that human rights were worth defending, even for allies we then knew little of. Every year we see more young people attend our ANZAC marches and dawn services to show their respect for the courage of those who thought standing up for what is right was the most noble cause of all. It is these principles of courage and compassion for our fellow man and a commitment to our global responsibilities that the government of this day needs to apply to the present situation with refugees fleeing oppression, extremism and terror. In everything we do here, it is the responsibility of members of this parliament to exemplify the highest of human ideals and virtues and to provide moral leadership that strengthens the finest traditions of this nation. The people of Newcastle would expect no less from us. I am proud to represent them here. Thank you.10000Causley, Ian (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Hon. IR Causley)—Before I call the member for Solomon, I remind the House that this is the honourable member's first speech and I ask the House to extend to him the usual courtesies.11:19:0071Tollner, David, MPMr TOLLNER00AN4SolomonLP11— Mr Deputy Speaker, congratulations on your election to the deputy speakership. I acknowledge the presence of my wife, parents and friends in the gallery. It is a tremendous honour to be speaking to the address-in-reply to the Governor-General's speech for the first time in this place as the inaugural member for the new Northern Territory seat of Solomon.This year is, among other things, the Year of the Outback. For many Australians the outback is a somewhat forbidding place, but I take up the comments of Dr Tim Flannery in this year's Australia Day address, in which he spoke of his perceptions of a primary producing nation learning to live and survive in Australia's unique conditions. He said:Leading the way are people like the Bell family, who run cattle sustainably in the ultra-dry Lake Eyre Basin, or the many involved in the development of sustainable aquaculture. These people are my national heroes. They mean far more than Ned Kelly or the Man from Snowy River, because they're ... inventing their own, distinctively Australian futures in a bid to create sustainability in this land.To the Bell family I could add many Territory pioneers: pastoralist families like the Hayes of Central Australia; the Underwoods and Beebes of the north; the Flying Doctor, Clyde Fenton; outback priest and eye specialist, Father Frank Flynn; Nat Buchanan, who opened the stock routes out to the west; and the miner-prospector, Joe Fisher, and many, many more. This year we pay tribute to those Australians who blazed the trails, developed the pastoral industry and opened up this great country. The man who has provided his name to the seat of Solomon was the Territory's first federal member. He was a pioneer in his own right, and an extraordinarily energetic man who was the Territory's sole founding father of the Australian Federation and a constant advocate of the Territory's cause. Solomon was born in Adelaide, and was just 19 years old when he arrived in Darwin in search of gold in 1873. He started an importing, shipping, mining and insurance agency in early Darwin. He was an instigator of the Northern Territory Reform Association, arguing for radical change to South Australia's early administration of the Territory. Solomon was a delegate to the constitutional conventions at the end of the 19th century and helped to draft the federal Constitution. He was actively involved in local government as a member of the Palmerston District Council from 1874, and was also twice elected to the Territory seat in the South Australian House of Assembly. In 1901 he was elected to the first House of Representatives for the South Australian seat that included the Northern Territory.The outstanding lesson of Solomon's life is how little some conditions have changed. The concerns of the Territory's first federal member and the first federal member for Solomon are little changed, despite the 100-year interval. Remote administration, self-determination, constitutional, economic and resource development, the railway, Darwin's defence significance are all key issues—then and now. Former Northern Territory Senator Bob Collins has described the Northern Territory as a rootin', tootin', shootin' sort of place. Others from this place, perhaps overly comfortable in their leafy inner-city suburbs, have said it is a tin-pot place. Even less sympathetic commentators have said that Territorians are parasites on the federal system. In fact, Territorians contribute better than three times the national average to export earnings per capita, despite many years of seeing the Territory treated as a quarry, a paddock and a playground for social reformers intent on righting the wrongs of our colonial history. We do not object to that. Territorians want new mines, live cattle exports and to see wrongs righted. But they also want a full stake in their own future—a sense that when politicians, the judiciary, big business or big bureaucracy are making decisions that will affect them they will get a say in the outcome.When Territorians voted in the statehood referendum in 1998 it was widely believed that the result would be a resounding yes. In the event many, including myself, who were and still are strongly supportive of statehood for the Territory, voted no. We did so because we did not like the process that led to the vote. We did not like the apparent disregard for community involvement. We did not like the sense that our vote was being taken for granted. But let there be no doubt: Territorians do want full membership of the Federation and they do want their full entitlement to representation in the Commonwealth parliament—in this place and in the other place.A citizens' committee has been formed in the Territory to again pursue statehood. It has my full support, but, at this time, politicians are not invited to participate. That is an understandable decision after the disappointing debate and result of 1998. There is, of course, an absolutely crucial role for politicians to play in creating the seventh state of the Australian Federation, a role anticipated in section 121 of the Australian Constitution. It says:The Parliament may admit to the Commonwealth or establish new States, and may upon such admission or establishment make or impose such terms and conditions, including the extent of representation in either House of the Parliament, as it thinks fit.As the member for Solomon, I urge members of this House to take up the challenge of section 121 and end the constitutional anomaly which leaves Australia today with one-sixth of the country and a little more than one per cent of its citizens outside the Federation. More than that, I am certain that it is the clear duty of this House to complete the task of the federation of all the states and people of Australia. It is not a Territory issue, it is a national issue, and one that is now more than a century overdue. There is no doubt that the constitutional status of the Territory has been a disadvantage to its development. Until self-government, the Territory was placed on a care and maintenance basis by Canberra based administrators. What has been described as generous Commonwealth funding in the early years of self-government was no more than an attempt to make up for past neglect and, unlike the financial arrangements that established the Australian Capital Territory's self-government, it was a requirement that Territorians take over the debt bequeathed to the Northern Territory by the Commonwealth. From 1988 onwards the Territory has been treated financially as any other state. It is both unjust and unfair to continue to report the myth of favoured financial treatment of the Territory.However, it is not the financial specifics that have most disadvantaged the Territory over the years. Rather it has been a perspective, adopted by some federal bureaucrats and even some politicians, that the Territory is not quite a part of Australia in the full sense. Essential and fundamental infrastructure was not built because the Territory was not seen as being within the national framework. It took World War II to build the Stuart Highway into something better than a bush track. It took a private consortium years of negotiation and a Prime Minister with genuine national vision to get a transnational railway under way—an undertaking that was promised by the Commonwealth in 1911. I pay tribute to the member for Bennelong for his national perspective and leadership. There is, however, evidence in Hansard and elsewhere that not every member and senator shares this perspective. It seems that there are still those who believe that Territory projects are less deserving of support than those interstate. I hope I am wrong, and not just for the sake of the Territory because, if that view prevails, it will disadvantage all Australia.Members will be aware that the Timor Sea has emerged as one of the world's great gas provinces with known reserves that could provide this nation with cheap and clean energy for at least half a century. Indeed, 88 per cent of the nation's gas reserves are located off the coast of the Northern Territory and northern Western Australia. The Timor Sea reserves are sufficient to provide the nation with 400 petajoules of gas energy every year for 50 years—almost 50 per cent of all Australia's current gas consumption and 10 per cent of this nation's total current energy use from all sources.The Timor Sea gas reserves have been known about for nearly 30 years and yet to date no gas development has occurred. There have been and are difficulties that have slowed development—the fluctuating world market, international negotiations, East Timor independence, corporate rivalry and up-front costs, just to name a few. Already in the Territory we have seen one major customer—Methanex—go interstate, and offshore technology has developed to a point at which it is now preferred by some of the big companies above onshore production of LNG. This will cost the Territory jobs, investment and opportunity for downstream industries.Let me put that aside and consider the national interest. Gas is a global business and the window of opportunity for the Timor Sea is now. While international agreements are in place—and I acknowledge the work of federal ministers in resolving those difficult issues—there are serious federal issues still outstanding, not the least of these being taxation matters. Bearing in mind the lead times for land negotiation and pipeline construction, plus the continuing uncertainty over regulatory and competition policy, decisions must be taken now to meet deadlines set by future national needs. This is because, within the decade, gas reserves from other sources will be insufficient to meet national demand. I believe the provision of gas-fired energy is a fundamental building block of Australia's future industrial and economic growth.The known rival sources of gas for the national market are a long pipeline from Papua New Guinea, a reinvigorated Cooper Basin and comparatively small and scattered fields offshore Victoria. The Victorian and Cooper Basin alternatives are at best short-term and comparatively marginal in terms of size, economics and reliability. The Papua New Guinea option carries with it sovereign risk. We could burn more coal to provide for our energy needs, but we live at a time when the Kyoto protocol is argued both at international conferences and across the family dinner table of Australian homes. I welcome the announcement of the committee to devise a national energy policy but I fear that by the time it has completed its deliberations the window of opportunity for Timor Sea gas will have already closed. On hold at present is a decision on accelerated depreciation following the Ralph review. The review's recommendations on depreciation impact most on capital intensive projects such as long gas pipelines. I have no doubt that the Timor Sea is the nation's best option for future production. If we let this opportunity slip then it will not just be Territorians left without jobs and opportunities, it will be people in Sydney and Melbourne who will want to know why the lights do not come on one evening, why Australians pay such high prices for power and why our international rating on carbon credits is so low.In the past few weeks economic forecasters Access Economics and BIS Shrapnel have predicted that Northern Territory growth will outstrip national growth by several points. In the first years of the 21st century the Territory will see economic diversification as a result of a billion dollar plus railway project, and anticipated investment in oil and gas projects worth something like 10 times the railway in investment terms. I hope the forecasters are right, but I fear the combination of a do-nothing Labor government in the Territory and a lack of resolution of the issues I have raised will make such predictions overoptimistic.While time prevents me from expanding too much on any single subject, there are two other matters that I must raise. The loss of air services is both anticompetitive and inconvenient for all Australians, but the effect is much more keenly felt in remote Australia where alternatives are minimal and distances are greater. The loss of Ansett is followed by the end of services to Darwin by Malaysia Airlines and Singapore Airlines as a result of the world downturn in airline travel. Adding to these difficulties, the Territory is now being overlooked by Qantas, which is establishing international services from Townsville direct to Singapore. In the early days of Territory self-government, ministers doorknocked Royal Brunei and Malaysia Airlines and persuaded them to operate new services into Darwin. That sort of proactive government has now gone by the wayside with the election of Labor in the Territory. I only ask that, as far as possible, federal ministers bear in mind the need to fill this void in any future negotiations with the airlines.The need for continued tertiary education services, particularly through the Northern Territory University, is a priority of mine. The university was established in the 1980s through the vision, determination and funding of the Northern Territory government against the resistance of the federal Labor government and the scepticism of higher education establishments of the day. Today it is the largest provider of higher education, training and further education in the Territory with two major campuses within the electorate of Solomon. It also has colleges in Katherine and Alice Springs focused on the regional industries, primary production and tourism, and strong links with international educational research institutions and organisations, particularly in South-East Asia.The university cannot hope to meet all of the needs and demands for education and training in the Territory, but it carries a social responsibility as a regional university in an area of comparatively small and considerably scattered population. The university has made a strong and positive contribution to the development of the Territory, not only in economic and intellectual terms but also from a social and cultural perspective. As the most distant and isolated university in Australia its specialist opportunities such as desert knowledge and tropical environment studies, its proximity to South-East Asia and the Pacific, plus its special role in retaining and training as a regional institution, should receive special recognition. I am encouraged by the public comments of the new minister and I know that the minister understands the vital role this university has to play in both regional and national terms. It is a particular and, in this place, unique privilege to be a member of the Country Liberal Party—a pro-development party that governed wisely in the Northern Territory from the first Legislative Assembly elections in October 1974 until the disappointing election result in August 2001. This long record of CLP government has brought vast improvements to the lifestyle, character and general wellbeing of Territorians. I am not alone in fearing that much of that good work may now be undone by the apparent inactivity and procrastination of Territory Labor since it came to office.Territorians ask for no more and expect no less than the opportunities and advantages enjoyed by all Australians. The Territory's Aboriginal people, the great land-holders of this region, will be the beneficiaries of future growth as major stakeholders in our future. The potential for development partnerships on Aboriginal land is unlimited, and the social benefit to flow from such investment is also unlimited.While I have expressed some fears that opportunities may be lost and services are in decline, I am at heart an optimist. I believe the Territory has a great future as a trading and transport hub, as a centre of gas production, as a tourism icon, as a mineral and live cattle exporter and as a centre of excellence in learning and services.The man who gave the electorate his name, Vaiben Louis Solomon, said much the same thing more than a century ago. He did not live to see his optimism realised. I hope that today's enlightened Commonwealth and the proven determination of Territorians will combine at the beginning of the 21st century to see the promise fulfilled.For my part, I will do my best to see those irresistible forces combine for the good of the Territory and the good of Australia. I come to this place as a Territorian, as a representative of the constituents of Solomon, and I mean to do my best for them. But, as I have said, the major issues for my constituency have both length and breadth—that is, they have been constant for many years, and they are as one with the national interest.10000Causley, Ian (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Hon. IR Causley)—Order! Before I call Ms King, I remind honourable members that this is her first speech. I therefore ask that the usual courtesies be extended to her.11:39:0075King, Catherine, MPMs KING00AMRBallaratALP01—Mr Deputy Speaker, may I congratulate you and the member for Scullin on your election to this chamber. It is with honour and humility that I rise to make my first speech in this place as the representative of the people of Ballarat. I want to thank the people of my electorate for the faith they have placed in me, and promise to do all I can to give them the voice they deserve in this parliament. The seat of Ballarat is as old as the Commonwealth itself, and was first represented in this place by Alfred Deakin. The electorate is home to John Curtin's birthplace, Robert Menzies' primary school, and James Scullin's first tilt at federal parliament.In the past 100 years, both Labor and non-Labor parties have held the seat. Over the past two decades, two respected members— John Mildren from this side of the House and Michael Ronaldson from the other—have worked hard to represent the people of Ballarat, and I plan to uphold and enhance their standard of representation. Keen observers of politics will be aware that both John Mildren and Michael Ronaldson spent their first terms in opposition, only to find themselves on the government benches soon thereafter. It is another Ballarat tradition I plan to uphold.The Ballarat district and, in turn, the seat, gains its name from the description `a good resting place', given to the area by the Wathuarung—its original inhabitants. Though still a good place for members to enjoy a short break, Ballarat's history has been less than restful. The Ballarat gold rush of the mid-19th century changed the Western District of Victoria and, indeed, the colony forever. The discovery of gold brought tens of thousands of diggers to Ballarat from 16 different nations. Their work with pick, pan and spade brought unprecedented wealth and, for a time, prosperity to our part of the continent.The failure of the colonial government to heed the diggers' desire for a say in their governance and the imposition of an inequitable licence fee led to the Eureka rebellion of 1854. It was a rebellion that helped crystallise the very meaning of our democracy— the right of every citizen to representation. Ballarat's Eureka spirit is not just a matter of 19th century history. The people of Ballarat were keen supporters of Federation and also played a significant role in the labour movement's fight for an eight-hour day. In recent years, the City of Ballarat has proudly raised the Aboriginal flag over its town hall in recognition and celebration of the indigenous peoples' prior occupation of our land and their continuing contribution to our nation. As honourable members will observe, not least from the recent election result, Ballarat has never been frightened of going against the tide.I joined the Australian Labor Party for one reason and one reason alone—only Labor is committed to a fair go for all Australians. The current government has had little regard for the need to create opportunities for all our citizens. It has been content to see people at the margins—the unemployed, the young and the poor—drift further from the focus of mainstream policy making. The policies pursued by this government have seen growing numbers of people from the aged to the very young feel that they are being punished for the circumstances in which they find themselves; for instance, the 62-year-old plumber who, finding himself unemployed for the first time in his life, rang my office last week, humiliated because he has been told that he now has to attend a three-week course on resume writing—a course that he does not believe will assist him in getting another plumbing contract.This election was a bitter one. The Prime Minister has been exhorting us, since his headland speeches of 1996: `I want to focus on those things that unite us not divide us.' Yet, his every action points to the opposite. It is well past time that we accept this statement from the mouth of the Prime Minister. He has divided us on education policy, taxation policy, employment policy, immigration policy and on how the unemployed are to be treated. He has pitted regions against each other, and his continued attacks on the thousands of men and women such as the workers at Bendix Mintex in my electorate, who choose to be members of the trade union movement, should be rejected for the old ideology that it is.In the context of this government's policies, many people in my electorate are rightly concerned about their chances in life. That concern is sometimes translated into a belief that we should concentrate on looking after our own citizens first before we assist those seeking asylum in this country. I believe that in this country we have the capacity to do both and that as a nation we will be richer for it. I am proud to be part of a Labor caucus, led by Simon Crean, that is determined to show compassion to asylum seekers. Long may the aftertaste of this election stick in the throats of those on the other side of this House as they attempt to extricate themselves from the mess they have made of our immigration program.This government has vacated its responsibility to create an inclusive, cohesive society. It has withdrawn from service delivery in key policy areas. In many cases, the government has vacated the field of service provision with the vain hope that the private and community sectors will fill the void. An important policy area for women and families in my electorate is that of child care. There is a drastic shortage of child-care places in most cities and towns in the electorate of Ballarat, and the government has failed to address the emerging crisis. Almost every day since the federal election, a woman has telephoned or visited my office to advise that she is unable to return to work or to take up study because she is unable to obtain affordable child care. In Ballarat there is a lengthy waiting list for family day care, occasional care and full-time child care. In Ballan there is simply no child care suitable for working families. Choice in child care can operate only when there are actually places to choose from. Private and community providers are simply not filling the void left by government. It is time for government to recognise that child care is not a lifestyle choice for women; its provision is a fundamental component of ensuring that all Australian families have decent employment, education and economic opportunities. The provision of child-care services, particularly in regional Australia, is a significant challenge for this government and one I will pursue on behalf of my constituents. Let us hope that the debacle this government has made of the family tax benefits system, which has left many families in my electorate with a debt, is not replicated with the introduction of the fairly limited `baby bonus'. As the representative of a regional electorate, I will give particular attention to those issues that impact on Australians living outside the metropolitan cities. I am passionate about good regional policy and will not join city based journalists and academics in a damaging discussion about rural and regional decline. Regional communities do face significant challenges; population change, withdrawal of government services, and the provision of employment and education opportunities are matters to which regional community leaders and policy makers must turn their minds. But the real story in regional Australia is how small communities are facing up to these challenges and not just surviving but thriving.One of the most vibrant communities in my electorate is the town of Avoca. When the big banks threatened to pack up their money bags and leave town, the people of Avoca created their own community bank. The bank is a success and is serving as an inspiration to other towns in the electorate of Ballarat and surrounding regional electorates. Recognising that Avoca needs to adjust to the changing economy, community leaders developed a plan for a new convention centre at the local turf club. Then, at the last election, they extracted sizeable promises of funding from both sides of this House to ensure that their project would be realised.Communities in other parts of my electorate are similarly resolved to tackle current challenges and to work to make our towns and cities even better places to live. What the people of my electorate need is a fair go from government: decent services, decent infrastructure and a place at the table when national policy is formed.With glorious, historical Ballarat at its centre with a population of 83,000, my electorate also encompasses Halls Gap, Stawell, Creswick, Avoca, Daylesford, Hepburn, Clunes, Talbot and Ballan and a multitude of other smaller centres. Its industries include mining, agriculture, manufacturing, tourism and a growing service sector in health and education. It is home to some of the world's best wineries, it hosts magnificent country race meetings, it produces a large proportion of the nation's confectionary and it boasts two universities: the University of Ballarat and the Australian Catholic University. Since the 1850s Ballarat has benefited from a vibrant multicultural community drawn from every corner of the world. The quality of life enjoyed by the residents of Ballarat continues to attract people from all over.I draw to the attention of the House the recent decision of the Victorian government to relocate some functions of the State Revenue Office to my electorate, and I commend the benefits of decentralisation to the government. I similarly note with approval the Victorian government's support for faster rail links to Ballarat and the unprecedented investment in rail infrastructure. My town and many other Victorian towns will benefit from this development.As the member for Ballarat, I will work with all sectors of the Ballarat community to grow our region. I will work with local government, small business, medium and large industries, unions, community organisations and the growing health, tourism and education sectors to make Ballarat a stronger, more prosperous and fairer place for the future. Employment growth must be a local and national economic priority, and I pledge to do all I can to grow employment opportunities for the people of Ballarat. The provision of better infrastructure, including communications, is a major issue in my electorate. The government is kidding itself, and fooling no-one, when it says that the full sale of Telstra will mean better services in rural and regional Australia. On behalf of the people of Ballarat, I pledge my firm opposition to the further privatisation of our national telecommunications carrier.In the north of my electorate, the Wimmera-Mallee pipeline is an excellent example of what can happen when good environmental, economic and agricultural policies coalesce. I urge the government to fulfil its election commitment of $4 million for the next stage of the pipeline, and I also urge it to commit funds for the remaining stages of the project. On behalf of the people of Ballarat, I will hold the government to its commitment to the Deer Park bypass as a high priority.I am proud to be the first woman to hold the seat of Ballarat. I am also proud to be supported by Emily's List and to be one of the growing number of women who are in our parliaments today. When I was preselected as the Labor candidate for Ballarat, some people told me that Ballarat would never elect a woman. Of all the things I was concerned about in the election campaign, this was never one of them.Eight years ago I sat in this House and listened to the first speech of the member for Fremantle. In that speech, she implored other women not to wait to be pressured into political life. She said:... put up your hand and demand that you participate.Back then, I did not imagine I would have the courage to follow her advice. Well, I did and today I stand here as an observer no more. I want to do everything I can to help other women realise their potential and to encourage them to take their place in this parliament and others around the country.In every step I have taken I have stood on the shoulders of women like my mother, who is here in the gallery today. I thank her sincerely. I also want to thank my father, who taught me from an early age that it is important to keep your promises. His personal battle out of poverty has provided each of his children with a reason to try harder in everything that they do.I want to thank my campaign team, who worked tirelessly to win this seat for the Australian Labor Party. In particular, I want to thank Joe Helper, Chris Reilly, Mathew Jose, Kirsty Jennings, Peter Hanley, Jeff Rootes, Darren Cheeseman and Danny Michell. I recognise the work of hundreds of ALP members and supporters in Ballarat, Daylesford, Clunes, Creswick, Avoca and Stawell who fought this campaign for well over 12 months. It is your hard work promoting our message of a fairer, better Australia that ensured Labor's election win in Ballarat.Thank you to Robyn and Sharon, who established the Friends of Catherine King, for their constant support. Thank you also to the Ballarat labour movement, in particular the members of the Ballarat Regional Trades and Labour Council and its secretary, Graeme Shearer. I also want to thank my partner, Mark Karlovic, whose patience, humour and intellect challenge me every day.To the member for Brand: you are a man of great honour, dignity and intellect. I am sorry that this country has lost the chance of having you as someone I believe we would have been proud to have as leader.Honourable members—Hear, hear!00AMRKing, Catherine, MPMs KING—Finally and most importantly, I want to thank the people of Ballarat. I recognise the important task you have given me as your representative. My pledge is that I will represent you with energy, passion, decency and honesty. I stood for parliament because I want to make our region and our country a better place—now and in the future. It is a task to which I now turn my undivided attention.Honourable members—Hear, hear!10000Causley, Ian (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Hon. IR Causley)—Order! Before I call the honourable member for Dickson, I remind the House that this is the honourable member's first speech. I ask the House to extend to him the usual courtesies.11:55:0078Dutton, Peter, MPMr DUTTON 00AKIDicksonLP11— On 30 January last year I attended a Liberal Party preselection at the Samford CWA hall, at which I was selected as the Liberal candidate for the federal seat of Dickson. That night was obviously significant to me in many ways. On one hand, it brought to a climax a lifetime of hard work and a focus on achieving the goal of standing proudly in this place today; on the other, it was a night which signalled a lifetime change and the beginning of an opportunity to work with people for whom I have great respect and friendship. Dickson is my home; it is where I work and live. It is of course a great honour to represent those people in this great place. The federal seat of Dickson is an exciting and diverse community, very much representing middle-class Australia. Our community is diverse and rich in goodwill. We are an area often neglected because we are neither metropolitan nor rural, but we are an area rich with natural water resources, picturesque rural settings, industrial and commercial precincts, and fast-developing residential areas.Dickson is well served by service groups, community groups and a true Australian spirit. That spirit sees many volunteers do so much for so many. Dickson is a community where good people are raising young families, where farmers and small business people—the backbone of the Australian economy—are enjoying the benefits of a strong local economy. It is also a place where people are working towards a better life not only for themselves but for their families. It is these people that I have to thank most today. They have bestowed upon me what I consider to be one of the most significant honours in life—that is to serve in what is the greatest democracy and nation in the world.Only a few short kilometres from where I live in Dickson, my great-grandparents started their new life as dairy farmers in the electorate in the 1860s. My grandmother, who worked hard on the farm all her life, joins me today in the gallery. It makes me very pleased to see her well and enjoying this very proud moment for all of us. My parents, who have been my lifelong inspiration, are also with me today, as are my brother, sisters, family and close friends— the people who have stood with me through the ups and the downs, the highs and lows that life has to offer, and of course the pinnacle today, the opportunity to represent the great seat of Dickson as part of a decisive and well-managed government in the strongest economy in the world.My parents have been an inspiration to me for many years. Their outstanding quality is their tenacity. My family is a typical, small business, middle-class family. When we were children, mum and dad struggled to send us to good schools, and worked and saved hard to provide for their sole focus: their family. Let me take this opportunity to pay a special tribute to my parents for making this special moment possible.As the members of this place would be aware, the election campaign in Dickson last year was a robust campaign. It is probably appropriate that at this time I also take the opportunity to make mention of my predecessor. I would like to thank the former member for her efforts in the seat during the last term.Honourable members who had an interest in the Dickson campaign would know also that I was a police officer for nine years. I often say to people that, as a police officer, I have seen the best and the worst that society has to offer. I have seen the wonderful, kind nature of people willing to offer any assistance to those in their worst hour, and I have seen the sickening behaviour displayed by people who, frankly, barely justify their existence in our sometimes overtolerant society.I am proud of the fact that I had a distinguished career in the police service and that that service saw me perform duties all over the great state of Queensland. It provided me with the opportunity to work with many dedicated, hardworking and, best of all, loyal colleagues to whom I pay special tribute. Many of those people I still call close friends today. Some of those people are no longer with us.I would also like to take this opportunity to reflect on the tragic events of September 11 last year, and to hope and pray that those that were lost, including the Australians and those emergency service workers who gave their lives, are never forgotten. I visited the site of that tragic event earlier this year, and the experience was indeed sombre and humbling, but it was both moving and a chilling reminder of the reality of our short existence.I first started work in our family business when I started high school and, when I left the Queensland Police Service in 1999 to work full-time with my father, it made me very proud to see what we had achieved. The business now employs close to 40 Australians, both young and mature age workers. I thank them for working with a boss who perhaps has not always been as tolerant as he could have been, but certainly who always demanded the best for our valued clients. In particular, I would like to make special mention of and thank Jodie Grant. Jodie, who is suffering personally at the moment with the illness of her mother, is a very good friend and our business manager. She has been a dedicated member of our business family for many years, and I thank her for her loyalty, tolerance, honesty and friendship. I first joined the Liberal Party when I was about 18 years of age, and for me it was a party of natural choice. I had always had an interest in politics, and to me the Liberal Party was a party founded in many ways on the principles of individualism and reward for achievement. It goes without saying, of course, that these are principles from which I have benefited and always defended with great conviction. What makes the Liberal Party even more significant today is the stark contrast in which it stands when compared to the other party structures in Australia's society. Where we are guided by principles and objectives, the others in Australia have adopted this third way of operation, in which the end result is that they now stand for nothing. They have lost all credibility. Because they stand for everything they stand for nothing.The Liberal Party has provided me with many longlasting friends. I would like to take the opportunity to thank my friends and supporters, particularly in the Queensland division, including other honourable members of this House and of the other place, for their belief and loyalty. In particular, I would like to thank the members of the Dickson FEC for their incredible support through a very hectic year. I take the opportunity to thank all those who worked hard on my campaign team, but in particular those who worked seven days a week with me during the campaign period, including Penny Edwards, Craig Ansford, John King, Brenda Martin and Jan Orme.My aim for this term as the member for Dickson is to continue working hard to make Dickson an even better place. That means fighting for adequate medical services within our community, supporting the business community and fighting for a road system adequate to facilitate a fast developing region. When we consider the challenges of our modern society, our aim to make our community an even better place is not an easy task. In society today we are experiencing unacceptable crime rates, causing older Australians to barricade themselves in their homes, all in the name of safety. We are seeing an alarming number of households where up to three generations—in many cases by choice—have never worked in their lives, and a society where in many cases rights are demanded but no responsibility taken.The fight for a better place in which to live is today made even more difficult for many reasons, not least of which is the fact that the boisterous minority and the politically correct seem to have a disproportionate say in public debate today. The silent majority, the forgotten people—or the aspirational voters of our generation, as some like to term them—are fed up with bodies like the Civil Liberties Council and the Refugee Action Collective, and certainly the dictatorship of the trade union movement. Australians are fed up with the Civil Liberties Council— otherwise known as the criminal lawyers media operative—who appear obsessed with the rights of criminals yet do not utter a word of understanding or compassion for the victims of crime. Their motives are questionable and their hypocrisy breathtaking.That is not to say that right of speech should not be observed at every turn—quite the opposite. What it does mean is that there is a right for all people to be heard. The mood of the silent majority is fast rising to one of anger, because at present there is a basic right that is being impinged upon. It is incumbent upon us to represent the views of the majority and not to be held captive by groups who grab headlines in tabloids on the basis of anything but substance. As leaders and representatives of this country, we must facilitate and inform debate, and not be deterred by those who would seek to drive their own hidden agendas. It is my aim to use my experience both in small business and in law enforcement to provide perhaps a more practical view on some of the issues and problems experienced in these areas. It also makes me proud to be part of a government so determined to ensure a balanced workplace, not only for employees but also for employers. This program is significant to small business and indeed essential if small business is to continue as the engine house of the Australian economy. I spoke before of my commitment to small business and the incredible role that small business plays in our community. The process of reform in the area of industrial relations must continue to be rolled out, and an employee's right to choose whether he or she should join a union is an essential in any modern democracy.Perhaps the most significant challenge our society faces today is the way in which we deal with the issue of national security, and indeed our continued and ongoing response to the terrorist and criminal attacks generally. The fact is that we live in a complex world. The terrorist attacks and the attacks on our day-to-day lives by criminals who have complete disregard for common decency must be dealt with in a measured way. At this point in time it is stating the obvious that in my opinion the courts are not representing the views in the large of the broader community. Time after time we see grossly inadequate sentences being delivered to criminals whose civil rights have far exceeded those of the victim and others in our society. This imbalance must be addressed, and for the sake of living standards and reasonable expectations for all Australians must be addressed as a matter of urgency.I am a strong advocate of the rights of the individual and I am certainly an advocate of minimalist intervention by government in our lives. However, as part of this process we must set ourselves on a course of information sharing between law-enforcement agencies and other government departments, with this end in mind: when does the right of privacy for the individual start to impinge on the common good of society? We must face the reality that criminals in today's society are well resourced, professionally operated and structured and administered, and must be combated to ensure the fabric of our society remains intact. It is counterproductive in our society when, for example, police are searching for a murder or rape suspect, they know who the offender is, but they are prevented from obtaining any details from government departments, including federal and state departments.I take this opportunity to thank both my staff and the people of Dickson, as I mentioned before, for providing me with the opportunity to be a part of such an exciting democracy and to be part of a government that has served the Australian economy and the Australian community very well since 1996. I thank honourable members for their hospitality in hearing me today and wish them all the best for their term of office.Honourable members—Hear, hear!10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Order! Before I call Ms Vamvakinou, I remind honourable members that this is her first speech. I therefore ask that the usual courtesies be extended to her.12:09:0081Vamvakinou, Maria, MPMs VAMVAKINOU 00AMTCalwellALP01—Mr Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you and the other office-bearers in this House on your election. I also thank you personally for the warm welcome you extended to me and my new colleagues at the recent seminar for new parliamentarians.The electorate I am so proud to serve and represent here in the House is named after Arthur Calwell, a member of the House of Representatives from 1940 to 1972, a senior minister throughout the 1940s and Labor's leader in the 1960s. It was Arthur Calwell who introduced the Displaced Persons Scheme in 1947. That scheme enabled around 170,000 refugees from the wreckage of war torn Europe to make their homes in Australia under the auspices of the International Refugee Organisation. It marked a first tentative departure from the White Australia policy and it paved the way for multiculturalism. Arthur Calwell is to be commended for having the courage to make a bold and far-reaching decision without fear of public opinion. He did what was in the long-term interests of this country without being dissuaded or frightened off by the so-called majority view. Calwell's motto `Be just and fear not' is good advice for politicians in any age. Multiculturalism is one of the modern foundations of our nation. It is one of our proudest achievements. Nowhere is this more evident than in the electorate of Calwell where two-thirds of residents are either first or second generation Australians. I am pleased to say that most Australians celebrate multiculturalism. In the last five years, however, we have seen others challenge multiculturalism because they cannot accept the true nature of the contemporary Australian identity. It was horrifying to see xenophobia and race used by some as a campaign weapon in the last election. Pandering to the darkest elements of the Australian political psyche, particularly at a time of intense economic insecurity, may well offer short-term political advantages, however, it will do enormous damage to Australia both internationally and domestically in the long term.What both Calwell the man and Calwell the electorate named after him teach us is that cultural diversity is not a mere slogan; it is an inevitable and, 55 years on from the Displaced Persons Scheme, an integral part of Australian life. The electorate of Calwell has benefited from the many significant milestones of our immigration history. It is very much a microcosm of Australian society. It has been the place where many postwar migrants joined a community of Anglo-Celtic Australians and together set about making a go of it on what was then Melbourne's urban frontier. The electorate of Calwell is the home of the original inhabitants of the Wurundjeri and Marin-Balluk clans of the Woi Wurrung tribe.At this point I want to acknowledge our indigenous people as the original owners of this great continent. Our Calwell community has always been at the forefront of settling displaced persons. Beginning with Scottish and Irish pioneers, to the first wave of postwar migrants from Europe, to the more recently arrived new settlers from the Middle East and the Horn of Africa, we continue to embrace and encourage their contribution because we recognise that their presence enriches Calwell's cultural fabric.Our diversity of cultures and backgrounds also means a diversity of faiths and religions. The electorate of Calwell has one of Australia's largest concentrations of residents who observe the Islamic faith—in excess of 15 per cent, I believe. The electorate of Calwell also has one of the largest concentrations of Turkish born and Turkish identifying Australians who started arriving here in large numbers after the White Australia policy was officially axed in 1967.In recent times members of my electorate have come under a great deal of pressure and have been subjected to considerable prejudice and harassment. Despite this, however, they have conducted themselves in a dignified and exemplary manner, seeking to reassure the broader community that, as Muslims, they are devotees of peace and humanitarianism. Part of my community work in Calwell has involved chairing a religious leaders forum. The forum represents a diversity of religious faiths, with Christians, Muslims, Buddhists and Sikhs all participating. Following recent international events, the religious leaders forum has been active in the community, encouraging tolerance and urging restraint. I would like to acknowledge the important role played by Father Malcolm Holmes from the Uniting Church in Broadmeadows, Imam Younis Jan from the Broadmeadows Turkish mosque and Sheik Famini Imam, leader of the Arabic-Muslim community in Victoria, who have all shown that they not only talk of religious tolerance, but also practise it. I would like to also single out Mr Yasser Solomon, president of the Islamic Council of Victoria, who is also a local resident. Yasser's tireless work—especially in the wake of September 11—to convey the true meaning and practices of Islam has been commendable.Australians of Islamic background have been unfairly demonised and, although many of us can understand that this is the result of ignorance, it must also be said that much of the hostility they have been subjected to is deliberate and wilful. I look forward to a time when these excuses will wear thin and the generally receptive and tolerant nature of this society will be allowed to flourish once again. The fabric of multicultural Australia is woven from our shared experience. Its strength lies in our ability to value our collective humanity over our differences. This is essentially one reason why the different cultural and religious communities of Calwell work well together. They have learned how important cooperation is to achieving shared goals. Calwell is predominantly a blue-collar constituency that continues to receive an unfair distribution of wealth and does not fully share in Australia's economic prosperity. A great part of the electorate has experienced poverty and deprivation and continues to bear the brunt of economic restructuring and the loss of local jobs, particularly in the manufacturing sector. Recent job losses at Vodafone and South Pacific Tyres and the collapse of Ansett have all hit this region hard. We live in a society in which there are winners and losers and where not all citizens are necessarily treated equally. We need social reform to remedy these injustices and only the Australian Labor Party has the will and capacity to achieve this.People voted for me because they wanted a Labor MP in a Labor government. I feel sad because a lot of the people in the electorate of Calwell were depending on a Labor victory. Surely they would have been the beneficiaries of a Labor government. I believe that effective representation involves empowering the community you serve so that it can help itself. It will be my job and proud duty to share in this work. As former Victorian Premier Joan Kirner would say, `Power comes from other people.' Many times in Calwell we have seen the surge of hope that a united community brings to a struggle. Activists like Sonya and John Rutherford of the Broadmeadows Progress Association are examples of what can be achieved by commitment to and participation in our local community. Instead of treating people with hostility because they look different, follow different customs or speak different languages, we should be encouraging them to actively participate. This is especially important for recently arrived migrants and in particular migrant women who tend to bear the brunt of racist attacks, partly because their traditional dress makes them highly visible and partly because most racists are cowards who prefer soft targets. There are a lot of misconceptions about what migrant women can and cannot do. We can only shatter those misconceptions by getting out and demonstrating our abilities, our ambitions and our leadership skills, just as I hope to do here in this House.The next challenge, of course, will be to get women from more recently established migrant communities to take up leadership roles where they can make a real impact on decision-making for the benefit of our community—Muslim women, for example, who are often unfairly stereotyped. Through my association with Muslim women in my electorate and those I have met through the Islamic Women's Welfare Council of Victoria, I have found that many are highly educated—the teachers, the doctors and the social workers of their communities. We need their intelligence and experience in all aspects of Australian life.Migrants and working people in general have always been aspirational, wanting better education and jobs for their children. Like most other people, the residents of Calwell hope that their children will have a better life than they have. That is their central aspiration. That was, indeed, the case with my parents. A substantial portion of my electorate of Calwell is made of young families who are the children and grandchildren of first generation migrants—people who have come here or who were born here and who have managed to get an education, learn a trade or profession or maybe start their own business. They represent the migrant success story. Our Calwell families, particularly in the north of the electorate, however, continue to battle hard. The battlers and the upwardly mobile all come from the same beginnings and they recognise that they are part of a single community. That is why improving the quality of local life becomes another important goal.Calwell's success stories have learned to negotiate the system and their increasing influence has empowered them to tackle it head-on. They are using their social and economic resources to improve the communities they live in, not to flee them. The aspirations they feel for their children and their neighbourhoods have not made them insensitive to others' needs. The people of Calwell are motivated by a strong sense of fairness. I believe that when they look around Australia today they see deepening inequality and growing injustice. Whether they be battlers in commission homes in Coolaroo, wealthier couples in Greenvale mansions or young first home buyers in the housing estates of Hillside, they know that this is wrong and they know that it can be addressed through social action. They know and I know that Calwell has a lot to offer and is a great place to work, study and live. One of my jobs as the member for Calwell will be to make sure that the rest of Australia knows it too. One of our many hidden treasures is the Kangan Batman Institute of TAFE whose aviation, automotive and other training programs attract students from throughout the Asia-Pacific and from as far afield as Turkey. It was pleasing to see the institute named Training Provider of the Year for 2001 in the recent Victorian training awards. The presence in the electorate of a major educational institution like the Kangan Batman TAFE is important because education is so central to the aspirations of Calwell residents. It was the same when I was growing up. My parents, and in particular my late mother, were very determined that my sister Helen and I had an education that would give us the skills we needed to achieve our goals in life. We got that education at public schools in Carlton, where we lived, and in nearby Brunswick. My formative years in the seventies were spent at Princes Hill high school which at the time was at the cutting edge of public education. It was known as a multicultural village with students present from over 40 different ethnic backgrounds and with a tradition of very progressive teaching and learning attitudes. At that time the funding of public schools was a priority and tertiary education was free. The system was good enough to get me into the University of Melbourne and increased my choices in life.Things have changed a lot since then. We are now expected to believe that governments are not responsible for educating the nation's children and we all face many challenges to ensure that the next generation of schoolkids achieve their best. There are parts of my electorate where few adults have formal qualifications. No more than one in eight has a trade and only one in 10 has been to university. Around two-thirds have no qualifications at all.I am committed to improving education outcomes for local kids. They are entitled to excellence in public education with the highest possible standards and learning opportunities. As a product of the state school system myself—and as a teacher in that system—I know its capacity to transform people's lives. Unfortunately, many young Australians are now being denied these advantages. It is critical that we reverse the creeping marginalisation of public education and strengthen our state schools while still supporting real choice between public and private sectors.Equal access to a quality education is the right of every Australian child, not just the privileged. And the only certain and equitable way to ensure that every child has access to quality education is through public provision. My highest priority in this House will be to advocate improvements to public education that will benefit the people I represent. That means creating lifelong learning opportunities for Calwell's adults, especially through the TAFE system. It means increasing the educational resources available to Calwell's children through state primary and secondary schools. It means recognising the absolutely central importance of public education not only in equipping Australia for success in the knowledge economy but in enriching the lives and expanding the horizons of individual Australians.Nowhere is this more obvious than in large parts of Calwell. The electorate has a large manufacturing sector and high youth unemployment. Kids who feel there is no place for them at school leave early, have trouble finding work and in many cases are at risk of living their lives in poverty. The answer is to equip these kids with skills they consider meaningful and which are in demand among local and international employers. The abolition of the technical education stream in Victoria closed off a lot of opportunities for Calwell kids, especially for boys. We can make good that loss—and keep kids at school longer—by increasing the capacity of secondary schools to deliver vocational training. That does not just mean recognising VET programs as part of the school syllabus. It means equipping schools with modern workshops and staffing them with the specialist teachers required to make those programs work. I have had the migrant's advantage of being bilingual. I am fluent in both Greek and English. In fact, I have taught Modern Greek in secondary schools. My experience is hardly unique. Calwell is a multilingual community, like so many others around Australia. The nation as a whole, however, is not taking advantage of this or building on the opportunities our migrant communities have given us. Through a lack of foresight, policy makers may have missed the opportunity to create a genuinely multilingual education system and society in Australia.Economic development agencies boast that Australia is multilingual, and they reel off statistics about how many languages are spoken here. They recognise the dollar value of language skills. What they do not acknowledge is that Australia's language skills are being eroded due to neglect and the misapplication or resources. Since the 1996 federal election, 16 languages have been eliminated from the curriculum of Australia's universities. We must make an extra effort to ensure our children have the opportunity to learn languages other than English. This will not only improve Australia's access to external markets and expand our economic opportunities but also broaden our intellectual horizons and improve our understanding of people different from us. Greece is my birthplace. I was born on an island in the Ionian Sea called Lefkada. I was four when my family came to Australia in 1963. I did not have much say in the matter—but I am glad we did. After a long period of adjustment, my parents are glad they did, too. They came here seeking a better life—for their children as much as for themselves—and they found it. Like so many migrants, the price they paid was a sense of dislocation and loss. My parents have been a part of the Australian story for 40 years. They have built a life here and have raised a family, and they have come to feel that Australia's story is also their story. In fact, on election night my father said that my win in Calwell vindicated his decision to bring us halfway around the world four decades ago. He had plans! While I do not think my father needs me to justify anything he has done in his proud life, that one word made me aware of just how big a gamble my parents felt they were taking by coming here and of just how hard it is to leave one's homeland. No-one sails away lightly from everything they know and love.There is no question that for my family the gamble has paid off. Australia has given me opportunities I may never have enjoyed in Greece. It has given my parents opportunities they may never have enjoyed either, especially the opportunity to open up new horizons for their children. Should we as migrants and refugees then be ashamed of wanting these opportunities? Should Australia, our new home, be ashamed of unlocking them for us?Giving hope and comfort to people less fortunate than us is the mark of a civilised society. Our nation is not and probably never will be a great military or economic power. However, we can be a great moral power. We can lead the world in doing the right thing, and we can teach the world the meaning of a fair go. We did it in the forties when Arthur Calwell launched his postwar migration program, which not only offered a new start to the refugees and other migrants who came here but also saved Australia from being narrow-minded and inward-looking. We did it again in the seventies, when the Fraser government opened Australia's doors to refugees fleeing from Vietnam and Cambodia. We can do it again in the new millennium by showing a modicum of humanity to those who arrive on our shores fleeing terror.And finally our next great challenge as a nation is to create an Australian republic with an Australian head of state. Our present Constitution chains us to our colonial past. It is silent on reconciliation with the indigenous Australians robbed of their land, their dignity and even their children. It is silent on the recognition of Australia's ethnic diversity and the development of multiculturalism. It is an obstacle to Australia assuming its rightful place among the truly sovereign nations of the world. There are three things an Australian republic must address. It will say sorry to indigenous Australians and acknowledge that mistakes have been made in the past, and it will promise that the Australian people are ready to start putting those mistakes right. To the many Australians who come here from places other than the British Isles and to the many Australian-born who feel no connection with Britain it will be an assurance that this is their home too and an invitation to share fully in shaping its future. It will be a declaration of Australian independence and a demonstration that we are ready to stand on our own two feet. My presence here is not just a measure of one migrant's progress. It is a measure of Australia's progress towards building an open-minded, open-hearted and egalitarian society. The people of Calwell have put me here to help defend that society and I will not let them down.Finally, whatever one achieves in life is usually done with the assistance and support of other people, and in my case there are many people who have played a significant role in my overall journey. I will never be able to mention everyone, because time does not permit that. However, I want to acknowledge the profound influence my late mother Stella had on my overall development, in particular her generosity to others and her love of poetry, my father Peter, who has a strong sense of justice and has worked hard for most of his life to ensure that we never went without, and my sister Helen, whose incredible strength of character and sheer will is a source of great inspiration.My sincere thanks go to my many friends and comrades in the ALP who have supported me and believed in me, in particular members of my campaign committee—Joanne and Victor Dougall, Kosmos Felekos and my campaign director Jason Murray— and to everybody else whom I could not possibly name. I look forward to working with you all to continue our struggle to make a difference. My thanks also go to my good friend Christos Tsirkas, who for the last two decades has encouraged and supported my political involvement, to my former employer and now colleague, Senator Kim Carr, whose incredible energy and unyielding dedication to the socialist objective has had a profound influence on the consolidation of my own political ideals, and to my husband Michalis, whose presence in my life has made a significant impact. Quite simply, without his support I would not be here. Finally, my thanks go to my two children, Stavros and Stella, who have opened up a whole new world to me—the exciting and fulfilling and often trying world of motherhood. I have finally understood my own mother's anxieties and sacrifices, and because of that I am surely a better person.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Order! Before I call the honourable member for Ryan, I remind the House that this is the honourable member's first speech. I therefore ask the House to extend to him the usual courtesies.12:31:0086Johnson, Michael, MPMr JOHNSON 00AMXRyanLP11—I sit in this House as the elected representative of all the people of Ryan. I am the fourth member to represent Ryan in its 52-year history. I thank the people of Ryan for giving me the tremendous opportunity of representing them in our nation's parliament. As one of only 997 members who have sat in this chamber, I consider my election to the Commonwealth parliament a very deep privilege. Indeed, that someone like me—who claims no fancy background, no establishment patronage and who possesses no material advantage—can be elected to the parliament of Australia says much about the strength of our contemporary civil society. My fellow Australians, the majesty of our democracy is alive and well.For over 20 years Australia has been my country and Ryan my electorate. For over 20 years the western suburbs of Brisbane have been my home and the centre of my educational and social life. Like several others in this parliament, I am from a migrant family that has made Australia home. My father is of British heritage and my mother from the southern Chinese province of Guangzhou (formerly Canton province). Therefore, being the first member of the House to have a part Chinese heritage is clearly a source of emotional pride. That said, however, like all Liberals in this House, I am first and foremost a proud and loyal Australian. My younger brother, Dr David Johnson, rates as one of the most gifted young neurosurgeons in Australia. My younger sister, Catherine, is about to commence her second year of a science degree at the University of Queensland. The close-knit Johnson family—migrants, small business operators, civic minded, law-abiding and very aspirational—are contributors to the Australian story. Our story is one small part of the rich tapestry of the Australian nation.There are many big picture policy issues exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth that require attention and debate in this chamber. Whether and how these issues are addressed will unmistakably have an impact upon the lives of all Australians. I would like to raise two issues. The first public policy issue I wish it to be known I have a genuine interest in tackling concerns the ageing of our population. This issue is indisputably one of the most critical public policy issues facing our nation at the beginning of the 21st century. As Australia is not alone in this challenge—with most of the industrialised countries of Europe, as well as Japan in our region, confronting this issue— we must seize every advantage that goes with being the first to address the challenge.The two main reasons for Australia's ageing population essentially lie in the consistent decline in our fertility rates, combined with the increasing life expectancy of the baby boomer generation. When today's baby boomers were children, they outnumbered the generation of people over 65 years by four to one. In the next two decades, for the first time, older Australians will outnumber the children of Australia. The first of the baby boomers reached 55 in 2001. It is calculated that by 2030, people over 50 will comprise 40 per cent of our population. Moreover, a quarter of the Australian population will be 65 years of age or over. By comparison, today the number of Australians aged 65 years or over is some 12 per cent of the population.With forward projections showing that there will be more Australians over the age of 65 than at any time previously, the challenges confronting our country in a range of policy areas will be unprecedented. The greatest pressures will be placed on community services, the aged and health care budgets. Significant shifting trends within the labour market—including decreases in the participation rate of men, a trend from full-time jobs to part-time jobs, and longer periods spent in education by the young—add to the complexity facing policy makers. Therefore, it cannot be stressed enough that how the parliament tackles this issue of profound national significance will make a real difference to Australia's future economic growth.His Excellency the Governor-General indicated in his speech at the opening of the parliament that the Howard government stands ready to lay the foundations for our future well beyond the life of the 40th Parliament. The government's evidence of genuine leadership in this policy field can already be seen with its excellent initiative in establishing the Department of Health and Ageing. I congratulate the new minister on his appointment to the portfolio.A natural extension of the ageing population question is the desirable level of Australia's population. It is very much in the national interest that Australians begin to engage in a national debate about the level of population we should be looking to set. I commend the organisers of the population summit planned for 25 February in Melbourne and lend my voice of support. All debates on population should be deep and broad, encompassing every informed perspective in Australian society. The wonderful success and vibrancy of contemporary Australia is founded on an immigration program that includes and embraces people from 185 countries—virtually every corner of the globe. Today, almost one in four Australians was born overseas—a ratio far higher than any other comparable country. In the United States the ratio of people born overseas is about one in 10. Unlike the laws and cultures of many other countries which prevent foreigners from taking out their citizenship, our laws say that anyone can become an Australian. We are a generous and tolerant people, and I have every faith that we will always be so. But in opening up their country, Australians are right to ensure that there are proper channels through which people from around the world can make Australia their new home. This is absolutely fundamental to the acceptance, integrity and stability of our immigration program. The queue into Australia, therefore, must not be jumped or permitted to be seen to be jumped. Perhaps, however, there is some scope for that queue to be lengthened and processed more efficiently and more speedily, but never to compromise the broad domestic security of the Australian nation.Any lengthening of the queue into Australia could also be part of an expansion of Australia's immigration intake. Our focus should continue to be skills orientated and youth based. It should continue to be heavily entrepreneurial and encompass businessmen and women well placed to value add to the economic wealth of this country. Perhaps a larger composition of new Australians could prove to be a workable part solution to the challenges facing the people and towns of regional and rural Australia. Whilst for many Australians there is apprehension about increasing our population, I say to these Australians that we must have faith that an expansion of our current levels of immigration will make our country stronger. In short, our economic prosperity will be enhanced, our strategic security will be strengthened and our political and diplomatic voice, both regionally and internationally, will attract greater weight.In today's globalised world, more than at any time since the peace of Westphalia in 1648 when the construct of formal statehood was born, there can be no place for policies tending towards national isolation or insularity. The political, economic and social mores of the 21st century are such that nations simply cannot prosper or flourish of their own accord. No nation can choose to lock itself out of technological and information superhighways or transactions that steer funds, ideas or skills across borders. If this is what represents so-called globalisation, then it is here to stay. Our mighty challenge is to make globalisation our friend, not our enemy.Australia is well placed in this context. Through hard work and constructive engagement, we maintain healthy relations with most countries of the world. We are also fortunate to preserve even stronger ties with the major industrial and financial powers. I commend the government for its full appreciation of the significance of our historic ties with Great Britain and our crucial security links with the United States. Both are firm friends and loyal allies with which the Australian people have much in common. As someone who has spent three years in the United Kingdom, including as a graduate student at the University of Cambridge, and who keeps strong personal links with the United States, I look forward to playing a new member's role in strengthening our ties with these two countries.But, of course, it is indisputably within the Asia-Pacific region that our own country physically exists. Our geographic location in the Asia-Pacific region represents both a tremendous opportunity and a bold challenge. We sit on the edge of a geographic region as diverse and historic as it is challenging in policy and frustrating to us in temperament—a geographic region teeming with the humanity of some 1.3 billion. But there are many friendships to be won and even more business to be transacted in the region. China, Japan and Indonesia are clearly three major nations with which it is in our compelling national interest to have positive relations. These countries, on any index, have the capacity through unilateral action to impact upon our broadly defined economic and security contours. Our dialogue with each of them, and collectively, must be within the framework of appreciating their own uniqueness, history and overwhelming policy challenges. As a member with a deep and abiding connection to the Asia-Pacific region through my birth in Hong Kong, my childhood years in Papua New Guinea and my time spent as a Chinese language student in Beijing and Shanghai, I look forward to supporting any dialogue that strengthens Australia's friendships in the region. We have much to address in our country and much to redress. In terms of strengthening our democracy, there are two issues in particular with which I firmly associate my name. The most compelling of these, for my mind, concerns a constitutional amendment to allow for the House of Representative's three-year term to be increased to a four-year term. A study of this topic by the Interparliamentary Union in 1993 revealed that the overwhelming number of lower houses have four- or five-year terms. Only 13 out of 148 have three-year terms. A second matter that I would encourage this 40th Parliament to consider is an amendment to our electoral laws that would effectively discourage the vexatious resignation of members from this chamber. Members elected to this House surely have one of the greatest privileges on offer to an Australian. The mandate of the people should not, therefore, be abused arrogantly by an ill-timed departure. But for all our imperfections and shortcomings, Australia remains the greatest country in the world. We are free. We are democratic. We are stable. We are prosperous. We are innovative. We are generous. And we are especially well governed federally. To paraphrase the words of Edmund Barton, our country's first Prime Minister: `We alone enjoy a nation for a continent and a continent for a nation.'Australia must always be a land of vast abundance—one that is rich in opportunities for our people to pursue their hopes and dreams. `Equal opportunity, not equal outcomes' is a description that sits at the heart of my Liberal political views. It is in this context that my philosophical view of the role of government takes shape. It must be the role of government to do all in its capacity to ensure that its citizens have the greatest opportunity of pursuing their life's dreams. There must never be powerful state hindrance or cruel institutional barriers to individuals wanting to fulfil personal or professional goals. That is why schools of special learning, such as the Glenleighden School at Fig Tree Pocket in my electorate, must be better resourced. These schools, few in number, provide Australian children with learning difficulties that crucial tailored opportunity to acquire skills and confidence that ensures they too can become full participants in the fabric of our community. The alternative is a cost too heavy for a future generation to bear. A nation where each one of us, irrespective of gender, ethnicity, financial station or religious affiliation can pursue childhood dreams or adolescent aspirations—`our own little rainbows'. That is my kind of Australia. That is my kind of liberalism. That is why I joined the Liberal Party.So let us find it within each of us to honour the nation builders of 20th century Australia by making the 21st century the Australian century. Let us rise to the challenge of working hard, of working smart and of working together to leave our mark on the 21st century. Let the next 100 years be a story about Australia and her people's determination to be the very best they can be: to do the things that are hard, to foster a culture of enterprise and innovation, to praise success and embrace the withdrawn, to do the things that are right and just, to do all the things that have never been tried and to be limited in our conduct and policies only by the boundaries of our collective imagination. Our challenge is not to do this just for our times and for our generation; our challenge is to blaze new frontiers and explore new possibilities that will lay the foundations of a stronger and more secure Australia two, five and 10 decades hence.As the federal member for Ryan, I am alert to the fact that with my election come tremendous responsibilities. The people of Ryan can rest assured that I will perform my duties with enthusiasm, energy, integrity and diligence. They can rest assured that, consistent with my affections for Ryan over 20 years, I will continue my support of community activities, worthy charities and local businesses. I will also be a member for all the people of Ryan and commit to maintaining the high profile Ryan deserves from its federal member of parliament.I take a moment in the presence of this distinguished audience to express my deep love for my parents. I am grateful for all the sacrifices they have endured to give me every opportunity to make the most of my life. I am overjoyed that my parents and sister are in the Speaker's Gallery to witness this occasion. I thank the Prime Minister for his warm welcome to my family yesterday. I also thank the special lady in my life, Ms Huyen Giang. My only regret is that she cannot be here today. Her patience, love and understanding have enabled me to remain dedicated to my passion of representing the people of Ryan. I also thank all the dedicated and loyal Liberal Party members in the Ryan federal electorate council who helped in the campaign. Your enthusiasm and skills helped to create a little bit of Australian political history on election day, 10 November 2001. Once again, to the people of Ryan, you have bestowed upon me the greatest honour any Australian could ever imagine being conferred upon them—a seat in the parliament of Australia. Thank you and God bless.10000Jenkins, Harry (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Jenkins)—Order! Before I call Ms Jackson, I remind honourable members that this is her first speech. I therefore ask that the usual courtesies be extended to her.12:48:0090Jackson, Sharryn, MPMs JACKSON 00AN2HasluckALP01— Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and congratulations on your election. It is with an immense sense of pride that I stand here today as a Labor representative to this House.I commence my first speech by acknowledging two important groups of people. Firstly, the Ngunnawal people, the traditional owners of the land upon which our magnificent Parliament House is built. As set out in Labor's value statement:Genuine reconciliation with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people is crucial to our capacity to face the world as a united, peaceful and just nation.During my time in parliament I hope to participate in and be witness to real and meaningful reconciliation with indigenous Australians.Secondly, I would like to acknowledge the people of the electoral division of Hasluck and the honour that they have afforded me. Being elected as the first member to represent the constituents of Hasluck, I fully recognise the opportunity that I have been given and the task that they have entrusted to me. As such, I intend to apply my commitment, energy and skills to the challenge. Hopefully, as I am judged for my work and actions, I will earn the respect of my constituents as their representative in this parliament.Since nominating to contest the seat of Hasluck the most frequent question I have been asked is why I wanted to stand for federal parliament. The first time I was asked this I was a bit lost for words. Those who know me well, particularly my family—who are present in the gallery today—may be a little bit surprised by that or find it a little hard to believe. But the reasons I stood for federal parliament are simple.Firstly, I believe Labor, because of our values, can and will make a difference to the quality of life of all Australians. Secondly, I believe that I am able to represent the electorate of Hasluck as part of the Labor team.The people of Hasluck are entitled to a member who genuinely represents their interests in parliament and who understands the role that politicians must play in influencing opinions for the betterment of our community and not dividing it. This is what I hope to achieve.Leadership is not about poll driven policy making. It is about shaping opinions, guiding positive change and bringing the community with you.As with all people, my beliefs and values have developed as a result of my life experiences. These have strengthened my determination to fight against the privatisation of our national assets and to oppose attacks on hardworking Australian families. I will endeavour to use my time in parliament to further progress the role of women in our society and to push for improved standards in, and access to, health care and education.Much of my childhood was spent in the bush—lots of different places in the bush. Dad was a bank officer and we were transferred around the state of Western Australia every three years or so. York, Mukinbudin, Wagin, Ballidu, Kojonup, Dampier—you name it and we probably lived there at some time.Anyone who has spent time in rural or isolated areas knows and understands the importance of government infrastructure and services. They also understand what community is. A strong and vital public sector is essential to foster a fair and just society. The public provision of services such as schools, hospitals, telecommunications, transport and utilities was and still is the building block of our tradition of a fair go for all. They are paid for by our taxes and are essential to our prosperity as a nation. There is little or no proof of sustained community benefit that supports the privatisation of government enterprises and services. Indeed, increasingly the evidence suggests that privatisation and deregulation lead to a decline in the standard of living for the majority through higher charges for essential services and less access by those on lower incomes to those same services. That is why I am opposed to the further sale of Telstra and the privatisation of institutions such as Australia Post. These are valuable community assets—if it is public, it is ours; if it is private, it is theirs. The people of Hasluck can be assured that I will continue to fight against the sale of these assets.I am also committed to equity for women. As one of four girls in a close family, I was acutely aware of the double standards that applied to girls and boys. My mother, the dux of her junior year at Girdlestone High, was not allowed to continue her schooling because you did not waste money educating girls. Consequently, she was determined that her girls would be fully educated. My parents struggled financially to send my sisters and me to Swanleigh for our secondary schooling. Swanleigh, a boarding hostel in the Midland area on the northern boundary of Hasluck, is for country students who stay there to attend a state school. I attended Lockridge Senior High School.At Lockridge I was exposed to a diverse and multicultural population where the majority of kids came from low-income and/or single-parent families. Only a handful of us completed high school and even fewer went on to tertiary education. Like the member for Burke, this was possible for me only because of the education policies of Labor in the seventies.Not long after completing my university studies, I commenced work for the union movement. My first paid job in the union movement was as the Women's Officer at the Trades and Labor Council of Western Australia. This reflects what continues to be a lifetime commitment to women and to addressing their issues. I am very proud to join the increasing number of women who have been elected to this parliament, particularly Labor women. As my dear friend and colleague the Hon. Sue Ellery said in her first speech to the Legislative Council in Western Australia, `It is no longer the case that the sisterhood is watching you, but that the sisterhood is among you.'Despite the growing number of women parliamentarians, there is still not enough. As a founding member of Emily's List, I consider it my duty to ensure that the number of women in this House continues to increase until this parliament and others can say it is truly representative of the whole community.I think it is appropriate at this time to acknowledge Jenny Macklin, who has been recently elected as the first female deputy leader of a parliamentary party in this House. It is quite a tribute to her and to her talents, and it is a wonderful acknowledgment of the progress that women in the Labor Party have made.For the last 15 years—10 as part of the leadership team—I have been with the Miscellaneous Workers Union. I want to thank the union, its members and elected representatives, especially Helen Creed, Rory Neal and Jeff Lawrence, for the opportunities I have had as a consequence of working for a vibrant and progressive organisation. It has been and is a great privilege to be a representative of, and advocate for, working people.The members this union represents are ordinary working people who often struggle financially to make ends meet. They are sometimes described as `the invisible work force'; like cleaners, hospital workers, laundry workers, security guards, carers and home carers, they are more often noticed when they are absent than valued for the work they perform. Their courage and preparedness to fight for improvements in their wages and working conditions has always filled me with great pride and even greater determination to see them recognised. That is why it is with a growing sense of anger and despair that I have observed first-hand the impact of the coalition's policies, particularly the deregulation of our industrial system.Unionists in Australia have had a proud legacy; always leaving behind them advances in living standards for the next generation of workers. The legislative regimes of this Howard government are already destroying that legacy. It is appalling that one in every four Australian workers is now employed in casual or temporary employment, with all the uncertainty that brings. We continue to witness reductions in real wages, working conditions and benefits at the same time as observing increases in hours of work, workplace injuries, executive bonuses and company profits.Recent reports have highlighted the fact that the ranks of the working poor are growing. Poverty and inequality in Australia are increasing. The divide between the haves and the have-nots is widening. People without employment are being punished by one-sided mutual obligation policies. Families are being overwhelmed by flawed support systems such as the family payment debts.It is little wonder that politicians attract the wrath of ordinary Australians when the benefits and privileges that they enjoy as parliamentarians and ex-parliamentarians so grossly outweigh those applicable to the rest of the community. I believe that only Labor is committed to restoring the balance.It is not surprising that among the significant issues for electors in the lead-up to the federal election were health, education and employment. We must urgently address the needs of the aged care and disability services sector, our public hospitals and our schools—to name a few—by reprioritising government expenditure. Joan Kirner, an inspiration and role model, often makes the point that we live in a community and not an economy. I agree. A nation's success should be judged on how it supports and cares for its people.In the early 1980s my youngest sister, Tania, died from cancer. My family and I struggled with the grief that such a tragedy brings. However, that experience taught me the importance of living life to the fullest and grasping opportunities as if there is no tomorrow. Hasluck, for me, is one of those opportunities.The new electorate of Hasluck is in the outer eastern metropolitan area of Perth. It comprises communities from the hubs of Midland and Guildford in the north to the City of Gosnells in the south, and the hills and foothills in between. It contains a diverse range of industries—retail, transport and services as well as market gardens and vineyards. I am pleased to say that over half of the wines produced in Western Australia are produced in the electorate of Hasluck. It also boasts some significant conservation areas— national parks, nature reserves and some of Perth's most significant wetlands and catchment areas. There are many local conservation and land care groups active in preserving these areas. The Hasluck community is a true microcosm of Australia. Dedicated groups and organisations like Midland Women's Health Care Place and CASA work tirelessly to improve the community in which we live. We also have inclusive diverse ethnic groups that make it a shining example of multiculturalism.Hasluck also represents Australia's future, with new housing developments in areas such as South Guildford, High Wycombe, Wattle Grove and others, which have seen many young families build their first homes. We have the revitalisation of regional urban heartlands such as Midland, around the historic railway workshops, and the Gosnells town centre, which shows a local community determined to regenerate business and jobs in those areas.Hasluck is named in recognition of the contribution made to the Australian community by Sir Paul Hasluck and his wife, Dame Alexandra Hasluck. As a woman, I am proud that the seat is named for both of them and not for Sir Paul alone. While neither of them were members of the Labor Party, their service to the community and to the parliament was substantial. It is an honour to represent an electorate bearing the name of two great Western Australians. I would not be here to serve in this parliament without the hard work and support of many people. I cannot begin to list them all, and I probably should not as I am bound to leave some out. I have been fortunate to have been part of a wonderful team. My campaign director, Sue Ellery, and manager, Fiona Henderson, have my heartfelt thanks and respect for their tireless efforts. To Steed Farrell, Judy Webber, Andrew Lee, Rick Barrett, Lisa Jooste and Simon Mead, all I can say is: we did it! I had a fundraising dynamo, Shelley Archer, who was ably assisted by Melanie, her daughter. I will never forget the night of a women's dinner that I held in June 2001 when new grandchild, Taylor Archer, decided her mum and grandma were having such a good time she was going to be born early and join us. So to the three generations of `Archer girls', my thanks.Peter Collins and former Senator Pat Giles spent many days, weeks and months in all kinds of weather keeping my spirits up as we pounded the pavements knocking on doors throughout the electorate.I thank my Emily's List mentor, the Hon. Cheryl Davenport, for her support and encouragement, not only through a long campaign but through the last 20 years. Women like Cheryl have forged the way for the rest of us to succeed. The Labor branch members in Hasluck, the true believers—people like Margaret Holland, Jack DeGroot, Julee Brouwer and Eve Omacini—were the backbone of our election campaign team. We were fortunate to have had over 400 volunteers and helpers join us to help Labor win the new seat of Hasluck. I wish there was time to name them all.Last, but by no means least, to my family, Fred and Val Jackson, my sisters Julie and Karina, their husbands and my tribes of nieces and nephews, and especially my partner, John Walker, my love and thanks. I am grateful that you are here with me today.I hope in some small way in this first speech I have managed to convey to you a little bit about me and the values that I stand for. My former colleagues in the union movement will acknowledge the passion and the commitment that I have brought to industrial relations and to union struggles. I relish the chance to bring the same passion and commitment to the broader issues confronting the Australian community.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Order! Before I call Mr Anthony Smith, I remind honourable members that this is his first speech. I therefore ask that the usual courtesies be extended to him.13:05:0093Smith, Anthony, MPMr ANTHONY SMITH 00APGCaseyLP11—At the beginning of my first speech, I would like to record my thanks to the electors of Casey for their faith and confidence in electing me to this House as the seventh member for Casey and as part of the third Howard government. It is an honour and a privilege to be a member in both. I would like to record my sincere thanks to three former Liberal members for the electorate of Casey: my immediate predecessor, the former health minister, Dr Michael Wooldridge; the former Speaker and current Ambassador to Ireland and Ambassador to the Holy See, Bob Halverson—who served between 1984 and 1996; and Mr Peter Falconer, who held the seat between 1975 and 1983. In their own ways and at different times, each has provided invaluable help, advice and assistance to me. Each represented the people of Casey with honour, distinction and vigour, and following in their footsteps will indeed be a great challenge. I also thank the Liberal Party membership in Casey and my many friends who worked so hard on my behalf during the election campaign. As well, I thank the current Treasurer and member for Higgins for his friendship and for the opportunity to work with and learn so much from him over many enjoyable, humorous and eye-opening years. I also thank my former colleagues and friends in his office. Of course, most of all I thank my family. I thank my parents, Alan and Noel—who are here today—for the support they have always given me and, most importantly of all, I thank my wife and best friend, Pam, for her unstinting support and encouragement, without which I would not be speaking here today. My only regret is that none of my grandparents are alive to be here. All four had a major impact on my life and all lived long enough to see my developing interest in parliamentary and political affairs. If they were alive, they would very proudly be here and it would be a truly special day for them. The electorate of Casey bears the name of a distinguished Australian: Richard Casey, a servant and builder of our great nation all his adult life. Born in 1890, at the very time the founding fathers were striving to create a new nation, Casey lived a life that literally saw him at the scene of every key defining moment and event that shaped the Australia that we now know and live in. As a soldier, he fought in the great battles of the Great War—at Gallipoli and on the Western Front—torturous battles that maimed yet also strengthened our nation. As a diplomat, he served in London in the critical period between the wars and, with the outbreak of World War II, served as our first representative in the United States, helping to give birth to a new relationship and alliance with that great democracy. After a short time he was then appointed by British Prime Minister Winston Churchill to the British war cabinet, as the United Kingdom's Minister of State in Cairo.In between diplomatic duties, Casey had a distinguished political and parliamentary career, first entering this House as the member for Corio in the 13th Parliament in February 1932 and later representing the electorate of La Trobe between 1949 and 1960. He held a variety of ministerial posts, including Treasurer in the Lyons government and Minister for External Affairs in the Menzies government. Following his retirement from this House, he of course served as our Governor-General.In each of Casey's ministerial posts, he showed himself to be ahead of his time. As external affairs minister, he advocated a closer relationship with Asia to complement our long relationship with Britain and our then new relationship with the United States. As Treasurer, he was a sceptic on the value of high tariff protection, arguing the cost and harm to consumers at a time when the prevailing view favoured an ever increasing escalation of tariffs. The argument over tariffs is as old as our Federation itself but, for my part as a new member of this House, I am glad that the argument is now no longer about how high tariffs should be, but rather how soon they can be phased out. It is often said that there is no higher service than public service. Irrespective of our differing philosophies, beliefs and backgrounds, the one thing that ought to unite all members of parliament is that we have come to this place with a burning desire to work on behalf of the people of Australia for their best interests and to help to continue to build the best Australia possible. Richard Casey was the epitome of this—working for a better Australia at every opportunity and every level. Many members of this House have a variety of backgrounds, and it is this variety that makes for such a rich and vibrant people's chamber. In my case, I come to this House not totally unfamiliar with its workings and functions. For the last decade I have worked as a member's and, more recently, minister's adviser. I consciously chose to follow that path because I wanted to make a contribution to public policy and give a professional commitment to the things which I believed might make Australia an even better place. I am proud to have had the opportunity to work with the Prime Minister and the Treasurer in a government that, over the last six years, has done so much to improve the lives of Australians and that has been prepared to take difficult political decisions in order to bring about far-reaching reforms in the national interest. Many people have the opportunity to work in senior roles for ministers and governments both here in Canberra and in the states, but few have the opportunity to do so for a reforming government that has the courage of its convictions and the determination to do what is right rather than what is easy or popular but ultimately irresponsible. Governments like these do not come along very often; they are rare, and the Howard government is one of them. I am glad and grateful to have had that experience which I believe will be of great assistance to me in my endeavours to be a forceful representative for the people of Casey. I stand here today on this side of the House not because I was born into my political party. I was not introduced to the Liberal Party through family or friends, and when I did join I was the first member of my immediate or extended family to ever join a political party. It was only after reflection and thought that I believe that the philosophies, beliefs and approaches on this side of the House provided the best ingredients for progress in Australia. I stand here because a long time ago I decided that only this side of the House best represented the views and aspirations of the vast silent majority of Australians which were so often not heard over the clatter and rattle of loud minority groups. I stand here because I saw how the extreme Left happily and without hesitation trashed the rights of individuals. While working my way through university I saw this every day on campus and then I saw it every night at my place of work. I stand on this side of the House because this side of the House believes every Australian has a fundamental right to choose whether or not they wish to belong to a union. I stand here because I believe that no Australian should be forced to forfeit that right and be conscripted into a union just so they can get a job to support themselves and their family.The electorate of Casey comprises 411 square kilometres of fast developing outer eastern suburbs and Yarra Valley heartland which are bound together by an uplifting community spirit. The rural areas from Seville, to Silvan, to Monbulk and to Coldstream are at the forefront of agribusiness in the country, producing some of the best flowers, juices, fruit and wine for domestic consumption but, importantly and increasingly, also for export. These businesses, many of them family businesses which settled in the area generations ago, have worked through the good times and the bad without asking for or receiving government assistance other than the expectation that the government of the day worked to create the best economic conditions possible for them to compete, create jobs and make a living.The urban areas contain rapidly growing and expanding new suburbs where young families have come to build their dreams and their future. These new houses, and indeed new suburbs, sit alongside older houses and more established suburban areas built by the postwar generation, who made the same trek for the same reason: to build a better life and provide better prospects for their children in their future. It is a living example of a coming together of the Menzies and Howard home building sprawls. I mention this because there has been a tendency by many political and social commentators to label those pursuing the recent suburban dream as `aspirational voters' as if either they are some new phenomenon in political life or no previous generation ever aspired to a better life. In my view, the fact that some commentators view aspirational voters as a confounding new phenomenon is a worrying sign in itself. Far from being new, these Australians are proudly marching in the footsteps of their parents, who went to new frontier suburbs in the 1950s and 1960s to build a better future.Such has been the growth of outer suburbs that the 1949 boundaries of Casey's electorate of La Trobe then stretched from Wattle Park in the now electorate of Chisholm right through today's electorates of Deakin, Casey and La Trobe, as well as parts of Menzies and McEwen. The so-called new phenomenon is in fact a historic phenomenon which has run through the veins of our nation since the days of the free settlers. Menzies simply called them the forgotten people. Far from having new demands, their concerns and expectations of government are the same as those of all who passed before them. They want reward for effort and initiative, as well as a fair go for those in genuine need. They want stable and sensible economic management by the government of the day and recognise that that is the guardian of continuing low home mortgage interest rates and growing job opportunities. They want to know that we have a strong defence force to protect our democratic freedoms and those of like-minded nations. They support Australia's strong and successful immigration program, which in many cases has included them, their parents or their grandparents, and they just as strongly believe that the future integrity of immigration relies on strong and adequate border protection. At a local level, they want to see government provide the best services possible in areas of community need, while maintaining low income taxes. They care about their local environment. They live in Casey because they like the natural beauty of the area as well as the pleasant and safe surroundings for them and their children. They want choice in education: the choice of quality government schools as well as the chance— and the right—to send their children to a private school if they see fit. They want a strong health system, and they believe that this strength comes from having government support for both Medicare and private health insurance, not one or the other. The more than 6,000 small businesses, many of them family businesses, want the right to go about their daily work without interference and intimidation from militant unions. Importantly, they want to control the destiny of their own lives with government assistance—but not an overbearing government interference that limits their choices. As their representative, I will do all in my power to represent their views and give voice to their goals. Because Casey straddles both urban and rural Victoria, it also has some unique needs. As in the electorates of La Trobe and McEwen, the speed of suburban development has run far ahead of the provision of services and infrastructure by all levels of government. This is to be expected, but it is also expected that it will be rectified. The encroachment of new suburbs into rural areas has meant that, in many cases, because of their new found proximity to urban Australia these rural areas do not qualify for the same rural assistance as other areas. For its part, this government has taken steps to correct the situation and, with the help of representatives like me and the members for La Trobe and McEwen, I am confident it will continue along this path. The state Labor government in Victoria needs to meet its end of the bargain.While unemployment levels are the lowest they have been for a long period of time, there remain difficulties with middle-age male unemployment. Many in this situation have years of experience and understanding but have fallen out of work because of the last recession or because their skills are no longer in demand in the industries in which they once worked. In my view, employers need to reassess their attitude to the middle-age unemployed. Rather than seeing them as too old or incapable of adapting to modern systems, employers need to realise that these people have years of practical experience of interacting with other businesses and customers, and have a valuable contribution to make not just to their businesses but to the wider community.In the remaining time available, I would like to address my remarks to an area that is often overlooked in contemporary debate, and that area is the role of government and the limitations of that role. Too often there is pressure for government to have a role in areas where it cannot provide the solution and all too often this pressure is put on government itself, thinking with good intentions that somehow, by the mere bureaucratic process of devoting funds to an issue or a problem, it will automatically have the intended positive effect. The easiest thing for governments to do is to think and promise that they can solve every problem, but when government succumbs to the temptation to try and solve problems it cannot solve, fix things it cannot fix or do things that are better done by other organisations, far from serving the nation, government harms the nation, desponds the electorate and deludes itself.To me, the first principle of government should be a recognition and essential honesty about its true capacity and its limitations. This does not mean that governments do not always have a role; sometimes it is just important to recognise that government does not always possess the only solution to every problem. Governments can provide assistance and support to families and communities—and they should—but this does not mean that governments hold the solution to their every problem or difficulty. Families and local communities will always have a greater capacity to affect their own future than any government alone. Governments can provide assistance to business, but they cannot help business managers show commonsense or good judgment, or make good decisions for them; nor should they attempt to do so. Recognising this requires a fundamental understanding that, while governments have roles and responsibilities, so too do citizens, families, businesses and communities. After all, it is easily forgotten that Australians created their governments to help them live their lives, not so that they could abdicate their lives to them or have governments live their lives for them. As we meet here in the 40th Parliament, Australians can be proud of the country we and our forebears have created since the first House met in Melbourne 101 years ago. We have so much to be proud of and so much to look forward to. We face challenges, but we always will. Whereas previous generations defended our free and democratic way of life in wars and battles between nations, today we must continue the defence of our democratic ideals against international terrorists who are joined and bonded not by national borders but by fanatical beliefs. We will always face domestic challenges because we will always be striving to do better. We will always be seeking to provide better opportunities, better standards of living and increasing opportunities for all Australians to reach their full potential and live the life they want to lead, no matter what their circumstances are.We will have differences about the best means to tackle the inevitable problems which all parliaments confront, but we should have no difference at all on the proposition that, in our short history, Australians have created a truly special nation that is the envy of the world. It is an honour and a privilege for me to represent the people of Casey in this representative House of theirs. Thank you very much.13:24:0097Edwards, Graham, MPMr EDWARDS83RCowanALP00—It is indeed a privilege to return to this 40th Parliament and to be able to take part in this debate on the address-in-reply. From the outset, I want to thank the electors of Cowan for their continuing faith in me. I was returned to this place with a healthy increase in my vote in an election which did no favours to the ALP. I want to thank those who contributed to the campaign, particularly the ALP members who, as has well been identified, are indeed the true believers. I want to thank the many volunteers—the workers—who manned pre-polling booths, delivered pamphlets and letters, and staffed booths so well on the day. I particularly want to thank my office staff—Maurene, Tim and Simon—for their dedication to the responsibilities of my office over the past three years and for the very professional and committed way in which they have dealt with our constituents in the electorate. It is very pleasing to me to go out to various places in the electorate and talk to various people and to be constantly receiving compliments about the way in which my office is run and the way in which my office staff deal with constituents. I also want to thank my wife, Noelene, and my daughters, Kerryn and Jaynie, for their love and support—qualities without which this job would be untenable.Over many years I have been a strong supporter of Kim Beazley. If there is a tragedy resulting from this election, it is that Kim Beazley will not be the Prime Minister. Kim Beazley is a man of courage, character and intellect and his qualities of leadership, vision, compassion and a sense of Australiana are qualities which are sorely needed at this time in our nation's history, yet qualities which are sadly missing from our nation's top office.I want to congratulate Simon Crean and his frontbench team. They are a good team and I am pleased, indeed thrilled, to see some of the younger members—that is, the class of `98—get their chance in this parliament to move to the frontbench and tackle many of the challenging issues confronting this nation and I know that they will do well. I am particularly pleased to have been appointed parliamentary secretary to the shadow minister for defence and parliamentary secretary to the shadow minister for veterans' affairs. Senator Mark Bishop is a talented and hard-working member and I know that in the short time he has been in the portfolio area he has covered much ground and received many briefings on the issues confronting veterans. I look forward to working with him in these areas. I also have a high regard for Senator Chris Evans and I look forward to working with him in the years ahead. Chris Evans has a big task in front of him and the shadow responsibilities of defence could not have been put in better hands on this side. I congratulate Mr Speaker on his well-deserved re-election to the highest office in this parliament and I wish him well in his duties, as I do to the deputies: the members for Page and Scullin. I know that Mr Deputy Speaker Jenkins will not mind me saying that he is held in high regard in this parliament, not just by members on this side of the House. One of the requests I do want to make to Mr Speaker is for him to revisit the issue of dress standards in this place. Some members will recall that in the previous parliament I raised this issue and I had listed a motion which suggested that collar and tie without coat should be considered a suitable dress for this chamber. This European dress standard is a nonsense in Australia. To have to come into this chamber in the middle of summer with a collar, tie and coat is a nonsense and it does absolutely nothing to reflect the Australian way of life. It is time we had a bit of reform in this area, and I know that there are people on both sides of the chamber who actually support that.Speaking to the address-in-reply gives members the opportunity to focus on issues which they believe are important to their individual constituencies. There are many issues important to the electors of Cowan: the issues that we campaigned on—health, education, aged care and so on. But there are also many local issues such as the current fights to preserve existing planning structures in some of the suburbs like Greenwood, Kingsley and Woodvale—all central residences and neighbourhoods in the electorate of Cowan. I want to congratulate those members of the public who have recently taken up the fight against the City of Joondalup who put forward a concept to change the nature of these suburbs. There have been two requisition meetings held in the last week. At the first one there were almost 3,000 electors. At the second one, which was held on Monday night—unfortunately, I was not able to attend—there were in excess of 2,000 people. Such is the depth of feeling that ratepayers and residents have about their areas. It would pay the City of Joondalup well—their councillors and their staff—to heed the very strong messages that they have received from ratepayers at these requisition meetings.Other planning issues such as those in precinct 64 in the suburb of Landsdale—an area just to the east of my electorate office— continue to drag on. One such issue involves a Telstra site, and hopefully it will be resolved to some degree in the not too distant future. I raised the issue of Telstra when I was first elected, and I am pleased that things have moved on and there have been some changes. However, the whole site has undergone another change since I last spoke on the issue, and that change relates to two satellite ground stations which will be installed by Telstra in an area which is about to become more urbanised. I want to quote from a media release from the Minister for Foreign Affairs of 16 October 2001, headed `Satellite ground stations: Australia-Japan joint venture'. It reads:I am pleased to announce that two satellite ground stations will be built at Telstra's Perth International Telecommunications Centre under a contract between the National Space Development Agency (NASDA) of Japan and a Telstra joint venture company `Xantic'. The ground stations will communicate with six Japanese satellites, two of which will have a scientific, research, and commercial function, while the other four are information gathering satellites.The first ground station will support the two scientific, research and commercial satellites. The second ground station will only perform a safety function at the time of the launch and positioning into orbit of the information gathering satellites. Once these satellites are safely in orbit, the latter ground station will be dismantled. The permanent ground station will not perform any function in relation to the information gathering satellites.The Australian Government has agreed to this arrangement as a practical contribution to our relationship with Japan. Our hosting of the ground stations will further strengthen the economic, political and security aspects of our relationship.I have some concerns about the nature of the scientific research and commercial function, and I wonder if at all that will impact on Australia in those areas. We are all aware of Japan's scientific research into whaling, which has done it no good anywhere. I am concerned about the information gathering aspects of this station, and I refer to an article in the West Australian on Wednesday, 17 October 2001, headed `Japan plans WA spy base: green light for Landsdale station to monitor six satellites'. It reads: The Japanese Government is set to build a station in Perth to monitor the launch of four spy satellites.The Federal Government said yesterday that Japan's National Space Development Agency had been given the green light to begin construction of the station at Telstra's international telecommunications centre in Landsdale.Japan plans to launch four spy satellites to gather information on regional activities and two commercial satellites over a nine-month period beginning in February 2003.The tracking station will be operated remotely from Japan and feature two giant radar dishes. One of the dishes will be dismantled once the spy satellites are in orbit. The other will monitor the commercial satellites.A spokesman for Foreign Affairs Minister Alexander Downer said the deal would strengthen Australia's economic, political and security relationships with Japan. He would not comment on whether information obtained by the spy satellites would be shared with Australia.The spokesman also denied that the satellites would be used to spy on Australia.“The Japanese Government has said that the satellites are for gathering information for their own security and we accept that,” he said. “We have a close and friendly relationship with Japan and we share a national interest in maintaining regional stability.”Defence analyst Professor Des Ball, from the Australian National University's strategic and defence studies centre, said the satellites would be capable of capturing digital images from every corner of the globe, including Australia.But he said it was likely they would be used to monitor only countries nearer Japan's borders, such as North Korea, China and the former Soviet Union. China had similar satellites in orbit.“All countries in this region are rapidly building up their intelligence collection capabilities, including Australia,” Professor Ball said. “We've got our own (spy satellite) that has been designed and will be ready for construction soon.“This is the end of the Cold War—it's everyone for themselves.”I guess I was not too concerned at that stage about these things, although I did have a briefing at this site and I must say the issue of information gathering capacity was not provided at that briefing by Telstra. But it is interesting to move from there, post September 11, into this current environment and read an article in the Australian today under the heading `Spy claims shake ministry'. I will quote part of the story:The Howard Government was in disarray last night, over allegations it used phone intercepts provided by a spy agency to defend its controversial asylum seekers policy. Defence Minister Robert Hill was forced to issue a statement denying that the Defence Signals Directorate had been used to spy on communications between the Maritime Union of Australia, the International Transport Federation and the MV Tampa. But Senator Hill's statement was further at odds with earlier statements from Foreign Minister Alexander Downer and Workplace Relations Minister Tony Abbott.An editorial in the same newspaper under the heading `Canberra must answer spy allegations' says:`I don't think any government could get away with that.' At least Alexander Downer admitted the Howard Government will be in dangerous territory if it is proven it spied on Australians during the Tampa affair. For who can trust a government that authorises a spy agency to listen in on the private conversations of its own citizens, and then uses the intelligence for political purposes in the heat of an election campaign?In another article in the same paper today under the heading `Indefensible breach of privacy' there is a subheading of `Australian citizens were spied on in a saga that constitutes one of the most absurd overreactions in our maritime history, argues Scott Burchill'. I will quote part of the article:The revelation that the Howard Government deployed the resources of the Defence Signals Directorate during the Tampa crisis last year to confer upon itself a political advantage constitutes much more than a breach of public trust. The first effect will be to undermine the integrity of the DSD, which is only supposed to pass on the details of the signals intercepts of Australians (including phone calls faxes and email) in cases of a serious criminal offence, a threat to the life and safety of Australian citizens, or if there is a suspicion that an Australian is acting as an agent of a foreign power. Federal minister Tony Abbott's claim yesterday that the DSD would only have been acting `in the national interest' is a pathetic and inadequate defence of what appears to be a clear breach of the law.These things not only undermine the credibility of the DSD but also further undermine the credibility of the government. Where I might have been able to some time ago take their word for things, I am no longer prepared to do that. I want some answers, and so do my constituents, about the full nature of the equipment which is being installed at Landsdale. I want to know what the nature of these four information gathering satellites is. Will Australia share in that information? Is there a military aspect to this information? If so, does this have anything to do with the war against terrorism? Does it have anything to do with President Bush's axis of evil? We have already heard the suggestion from the WestAustralian and from defence experts that these satellites will be able to spy on North Korea, which is one of the countries named by President Bush as being part of this axis of evil.Why is this facility being installed so close to residential areas which are about to become further urbanised? Is the Australian government being totally honest with the Australian people and has the full nature of these satellites been disclosed? Why was this announcement made by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and not by the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts in the first place? As I said, I want some answers to these questions and I want to be able to ensure that my constituents who live adjacent to this Telstra site are fully informed of the nature of the site and the job that it is doing.I do not want to be alarmist about these things but, as I have said, since that release of the minister's, things have changed. I do not trust the Australian government and I am sure that there are many Australians out there who, following the most recent revelations of how they were spied on, also will not trust the Australian government. In short: is the Landsdale site being used by the Australian government to spy on other Australians? I want a clear answer from this government on that question, as will my constituents and many other Australians.I have spoken to the shadow minister for foreign affairs, Kevin Rudd, who I might say has taken like a duck to water to that job. He is a very active, committed and professional member of parliament, and a very professional shadow minister. I know that he will want some answers, and I am sure that he will want a briefing from the Minister for Foreign Affairs so that we can confirm what it is that the Landsdale site is now involved in.I do not have much more time, but there are some issues which I want to visit briefly. I said earlier that the debate on the address-in-reply gives a member the opportunity to forecast some of the things that he or she will be interested in pursuing over the next three years. I am particularly interested in my electorate in the issue of aged care. Like many other members on this side of the House, I celebrate the fact that we now have a new minister for aged care. I celebrate the fact that the former minister, Bronwyn Bishop, has moved on. I have had a bit to do with the new Minister for Ageing, Mr Andrews. I believe him to be a man of character and a man of good qualities. I hope that he will do everything he can to restore some credibility, some compassion and some integrity to the whole area of aged care, because it needs it. The people who work in the area need some support and they need some leadership. But, above all, the people in our community who rely on aged care, particularly the frail aged, must be given some guarantee that there is a change in the attitude of the Howard government. They must be given some reassurance that they will not continue to be treated in the very shabby way that they have been treated in the past. I say to the new minister that he has a big job here, he has a big task, but I am sure that if he goes about it in an energetic, honest and straightforward way he will have support from members on this side of the House in addressing those issues. I also want to quickly touch on veterans' affairs. I want to congratulate the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, Danna Vale, on her appointment to this very important portfolio. I have not yet had the opportunity to talk to her. I know she is in Singapore, and I think it is very appropriate that she is there commemorating the Australians who lost their lives in Singapore. There is a lot of work to be done in veterans' affairs. There is also a lot of work to be done to restore the integrity of that portfolio, following the demise of the minister who recently lost that portfolio. I know that there are many people in the rank and file of the veteran community who celebrate that as well. I wish the new Minister for Veterans' Affairs all the very best. I am only too happy to work with her on a bipartisan basis on issues which impact on the veteran community. I compliment the government on putting forward the review of certain aspects of the Veterans Entitlement Act. It is a catch-all review. I hope the government are fair dinkum about it, and I look forward to having some input, as I know many veterans do. Once again, Mr Deputy Speaker, I take the opportunity to wish you all the best in your new job. (Time expired)13:44:00101Randall, Don, MPMr RANDALLPK6CanningLP10— Mr Deputy Speaker Jenkins, initially I would like to congratulate you on your re-election to the elevated position that you hold in this chamber. I would like to say that I am deeply honoured to be again standing in this great place, the House of Representatives of the Australian parliament. It is a privilege to have been elected on behalf of the people of the electorate of Canning in Western Australia. I have a sense of both achievement and satisfaction in winning Canning in the November 2001 federal election. It has been described by some as a win against the electoral tide at this time. As many would know, I was the federal member for the seat of Swan in the 38th Parliament. I became the member for Swan in March 1996, largely as a result of the tide receding from the Australian Labor Party in the anti-Keating swing of 1996.An interesting statistic is that, since the first federal parliament some 100 years ago, there have been 997 members of this House of Representatives. Of that number, 78 have been returned to parliament after losing their seats. I am in an even smaller group of 25 members who have been returned to a seat other than the one they previously held. Winning Canning at this election was an extremely challenging task because each vote had to be prised away from the Labor Party incumbent. Many have observed that this election was a holding election, where incumbency was a very real advantage. Winning the seats of Dobell and Canning, therefore, were unique in these circumstances.The seat of Canning takes its name from Alfred Canning, after whom the famous Canning Stock Route was named. It had been concluded in 1897 that it was absolutely impracticable to bring live cattle from the Kimberley districts to feed those people living in the goldfields. Alfred Canning, a surveyor with the Western Australian lands department, left Day Dawn Station in March 1906 in a quest to find water sufficient for the stock every 24 kilometres of the 1,490-kilometre route. He reached Halls Creek in January 1907, with the task successfully completed. Alfred Canning was also responsible for surveying the rabbit-proof fence that divided Western Australia from the eastern states. At its completion, it stretched from Starvation Harbour on the south coast to Cape Keraudren, east of Port Hedland, in the north—1,890 kilometres in total. It was the longest single survey in the world at that time.Alfred Canning showed, through his tenacity, spirit of adventure and sheer determination, that the almost impossible could be done, and it was with this sort of spirit that I took up the challenge to return the seat of Canning to the Howard government. Standing here today, I feel a great affinity with the man who has given his name to this seat. I am proud to be the ninth member for the seat of Canning since its formation in 1949. My electorate is located south-east of Perth. It begins as an outer metropolitan location that includes the Armadale-Kelmscott localities and the newer locality of Canning Vale. It extends to the semirural areas of Serpentine-Jarrahdale and into agricultural localities such as Pinjarra and Waroona. It also encompasses the beachside localities of Falcon, Dawesville and Halls Head, to name just a few of the 108 localities in this electorate. This diverse electorate has an area of approximately 4,174 square kilometres, and includes all or part of eight to 10 local government regions. Winning Canning on behalf of the Liberal Party was a campaign focused largely on local issues impacting on the lives and wellbeing of the people and families in the electorate. My campaign team and I were determined to be at the forefront of issues and to endeavour to make the quality of life for people and their families somewhat better. These issues included environmental ones such as the operation and existence of the Brookvale waste treatment plant. This plant has been treating toxic and hazardous waste in close proximity to the backyards and schools of local residents. I am pleased to have been an outspoken voice against this plant and its operations. I also possess a good deal of satisfaction in the outcome gained, which will see this plant close in the very near future. There are other environmental hot spots in Canning, such as the Pinjarra and Wagerup alumina refinery problems. To secure positive outcomes, I have offered my support and services where appropriate in these matters. With issues such as these, it is important to achieve a balance between the environmental and economic viability of issues important to this area.Health was certainly a campaign issue. I was pleased to have been responsible for alerting the people of the region about the state Labor health minister's intentions in relation to the cost-cutting measurers for the Armadale-Kelmscott hospital, in particular his statements about the emergency facility at that hospital. It is ironic that my Labor Party predecessor in this seat, in her maiden speech in 1998, made reference to the need to maintain a first-class publicly owned hospital in the Armadale-Kelmscott region, yet one of the first actions of the state Labor government was to attempt to diminish this part of the hospital's vital services. It is no coincidence that my exposure of Mr Kucera's intentions has quarantined this hospital from these predatory actions for the time being.Migration was another hot topic in the Canning campaign. It was very noticeable from my doorknocking that people had changed their minds and their votes overnight when John Howard took a firm stand on the issue of illegal immigrants. The people in the suburbs were relieved to see the Prime Minister showing decisive leadership on this issue. In today's technologically astute society our constituents are more knowledgeable and better informed than ever before. As a consequence, they were able to contrast the Prime Minister's position with the vacillation and division emanating from the Australian Labor Party on this issue.Thankfully, but stupidly, for the third time the Australian Labor Party tried a scare campaign using the GST. Again, on economic issues the electorate is better educated and informed than people give it credit for. It saw through this tired scare campaign and Beazley's bogus roll-back proposal. Except for the true believers and the disgruntled, the voters have become sick and tired of the GST scare. Time does not permit me to list the many other issues and subissues of the campaign.In the next three years my time will be devoted to representing the aspirations, ideas and issues paramount to the lives of the people in Canning. Already there are many issues to be addressed—for example, people are nervous and frightened about the rise of trade union domination and thuggery in the workplace and on work sites since the election of the Gallop Labor government in Western Australia. The public is well aware of the threats, the bashings, the intimidations, the late-night phone calls and even the death threats that have escalated since 10 February 2001, when Labor came to government in Western Australia at the state election. I am not anti-union—in fact, in my former teaching days I was a union representative. Collective bargaining can be a successful approach to workplace bargaining. However, unions need to be attractive to employees. In our great democracy the right to choose is of paramount importance. Labor's support of compulsory unionism is totally out of step with the majority of thinking people in modern Australia. The people are astute to the point where they know that inflexible work practices inherent in archaic labour practices lead to lower productivity and increased costs. In the same vein, the popular myth that the Labor Party stands for the working man needs to be exposed. The best thing that can be done for the worker is to give him a job. We saw that support for the inflexible workplace and poor economic management by the last Labor government to occupy the treasury bench in this place delivered over 11 per cent unemployment to the Australian work force and home loan interest rates of up to 18 per cent. That is what the last federal Labor government did for workers in this country. Contrast this with last December's seasonally adjusted unemployment rate of 6.7 per cent and the current average home loan interest rate of 6.05 per cent and you will see a difference. This has really delivered for young families in Canning. They can now have a better chance of a job and a real opportunity to fulfil their dream and own their family home.Health has always been an issue to be addressed. There is still much to do, particularly in the areas of hospital emergency departments and waiting lists for surgery. However, it must be noted in this country that if you are very sick you will receive hospital attention with almost immediate effect. Australia has a world-class health system. This does not suggest that it cannot be improved so as to better provide for specific community requirements. It is my belief that the serious health challenge in this country is in the area of aged care. The challenge to government and industry is to successfully meet the needs of the group called the post World War II baby boomers, who will require an elevated amount of accommodation and health care as they age.The Canning electorate has within its boundaries most of Perth's water storage dams. I intend to be an active supporter of the Ernie Bridge vision—the piping of water from the north of Western Australia in order to give a long-term solution to Perth's water needs and environmental future. Overflowing storage dams such as the Serpentine and Canning Dams would see the flushing of rivers like the Serpentine, the Murray and the Canning. If gas can be brought from the Pilbara then so can water. If CY O'Connor could do it for Kalgoorlie all of those years ago then planners of vision can do it for Perth today.I wish to be one who works with government and its agencies to think outside the square and to work towards this long-term strategy for generations of Western Australians to come. This is the sort of challenge that Alfred Canning would be eager to take on if he were alive today. I intend to rise to that challenge. I am eager to be the voice of those who want to be safe in their homes and secure in their communities and workplaces. Consequently, I oppose the Gallop Labor government's move to community work orders for crimes such as car theft, burglary and assault. It does send a soft message to petty criminals, who may later graduate to major crime. Let us not forget the victims of crime. People are uneasy about this approach. I intend to reflect the opinion of the electors on this issue and work for a return to strong action and sanctions for those who wreck the security and safety of citizens in my electorate.During the campaign, I made a statement on taxation. I said that people have a clear choice between a government that collects their money and spends it the way it thinks it should be spent and a government that leaves the money with them so they can determine how it should be spent. Thankfully, the latter prevailed. There are many challenges to be confronted in relation to taxation and the taxation industry. I believe that the Australian Taxation Office has demonstrated a lack of fairness and duplicity in its disregard for those caught in difficult circumstances. This was never more evident than for those poor citizens caught up in the so-called tax effective schemes. It will be no surprise then that I welcome the establishment of the Office of the Inspector-General of Taxation to address these concerns about the administration and the conduct of taxation in this country. I wish the Treasurer and Senator Coonan well in this regard. The educational opportunities of our children and tertiary students are a priority if we are to become a clever country. The ability of the individual, and this country in general, depends on these opportunities. The vast majority of students in Canning are in the state government education system. With increased funding from the goods and services tax, as a growth tax, we all need to be vigilant to see that the state government ensures that this education sector gets its fair share from the growth revenue.The final issue that will occupy much of my focus and energy will be the subject of the working poor, particularly on behalf of the families in my electorate of Canning. Nothing upsets me more than to see good, decent breadwinners working long and extensive hours to provide a better quality of life and opportunities for their children and to sadly observe that they are making little headway. For those who genuinely want to work to improve their lot, I support measures that will ensure that they get to keep more of the money that they earn. These measures include incentives of government to further reduce taxation so that low income earners may retain more of their earnings and have the ability to use those savings for their families. This measure will also provide greater incentive for lower income earners to work and to distance themselves from the welfare system. It maximises the potential for individuals or couples to improve their lot and to address the problem of the working poor in our community.In conclusion, I would like to thank the Liberal Party for its magnificent support in winning the seat of Canning at this election. To the Prime Minister, Peter Costello and a raft of ministers and members and senators, I owe much of my success to you. I would like to make particular mention of Senator Ian Campbell for his support in the tough times and for his intelligent support during the campaign. In the same manner, the Liberal Party's federal secretariat has my thanks for its invaluable support. Similarly, I would like to thank Peter Wells and the Liberal Party of Western Australia. I need to make mention of David Johnston and my campaign soul mates Bob Cronin and Bethwyn Chan. The caucusing at the half-price pizza place obviously was most valuable. Special thanks must be made to my mate Dino. Without his support and that of his friends who supported me financially, I would not be standing here today. Likewise, the material support of people like Fred, Michael and Kari made this day possible. Thanks also to my old mate Mal for watching over me. The support of many of the people from the Canning division of the Liberal Party—led by Mal Bungey, a former member for Canning—helped cement a successful campaign. This thanks naturally includes those myriad of polling day workers: I salute you.Finally, I wish to thank my family for their enduring support in so many ways. Thank you for standing by me in pursuit of this challenge once again. Thank you for having the tenacity to ride out the rough with the smooth. Without my wife, Julie, and children, Tess and Elliott, today would not be the same. I thank you and I love you all.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Order! It being 2 p.m., the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 101A. The debate may be resumed at a later hour.Ministerial Arrangements10514:00:00105Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—I inform the House that the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, Mrs Danna Vale, will be absent from question time today and for the remainder of the week. The minister is leading the commemorative mission of veterans and war widows to Singapore and Malaysia to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the fall of Singapore. The Minister for Foreign Affairs will answer questions on her behalf during her absence.Questions Without Notice10510514:00:00105Crean, Simon, MPMr CREANDT4HothamALPLeader of the Opposition00—My question is to the Minister for Foreign Affairs representing the Minister for Defence in this place. Can the foreign affairs minister confirm that the Defence Signals Directorate intercepted and reported on communications by Australians, including by journalists or members of parliament, to or from the MV Tampa during August and September 2001? 105Downer, Alexander, MPMr DOWNER4G4MayoLPMinister for Foreign Affairs10—I thank the honourable member for his question. As the honourable member knows, Senator Hill, the Minister for Defence, issued a statement last night, and in that statement and in comments I and others have made we have pointed out that it is a longstanding practice, not just of this government but of successive Australian governments, not to comment on matters of intelligence and security.Opposition members—Oh!4G4Mr DOWNER—As I said, it is a longstanding practice, and when the Leader of the Opposition was a minister it was a practice that was observed by his government as well. However, Senator Hill did point out that in this particular case it was important to reassure the Australian public that the allegations in the media, the allegations made by the Leader of the Opposition, lack substance. In particular, neither the communications of the MUA, nor of the ITF, were the subject of DSD targeting or reporting. Much has been made of the fact, and the minister in his statement too has made it clear, that the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, Mr Blick, produces an annual report every year and constantly monitors DSD's operations to ensure that they comply with the appropriate guidelines on the privacy of Australians and, if there is any breach of that privacy, that breach is referred to in the report to the parliament of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security. Senator Hill made it clear yesterday that around the period being referred to in the Daily Telegraph article there was an inadvertent error made—Opposition members—Oh!4G4Mr DOWNER—There was indeed an inadvertent error made by DSD, and this had been referred back to the Inspector-General by Senator Hill, and the Inspector-General has had another look at this matter. These intelligence matters are matters that obviously need to be protected in the national interest but, because of the Leader of the Opposition's interest in this issue, the government would be happy, privately, to brief the Leader of the Opposition about that inadvertent error. I think when the Leader of the Opposition finds out what the inadvertent error is he will realise that this is an insubstantial error and he will realise that the kind of fear campaign that he has been developing about DSD and its role, based on rather a long period in opposition and out of government, I suspect, is little short of irresponsible. Trying to whip up feeling like that, if I may say so, against the fundamental intelligence agency of this country is irresponsible. It served Labor governments as an organisation extremely well, as the former Leader of the Opposition knows only too well. It served your governments extremely well, and it serves us well. It is not an organisation which is a tool of politics or political power.DT4Crean, Simon, MPMr Crean—If I could take a point of order that goes to relevance—10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. There is nothing that is not relevant to the question in the minister's current response. DT4Crean, Simon, MPMr Crean—The minister is not responding—10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. I will act if the minister sways from the question.4G4Mr DOWNER—Mr Speaker, I have answered the question. I have said that you can have a private briefing on an inadvertent error, and you will find out from that private briefing that you are embarrassing yourself going down this path. 10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The minister will address his remarks through the chair.4G4Mr DOWNER—In conclusion, let me say that this is a government that does use its intelligence agencies to support our national interests and protect our borders, and on that point we make no apology. We are a government which will not wind back the operation of our intelligence agencies in so far as they support our national interests in protecting our borders and our security, and it will not be missed by many Australians that the Labor Party wishes to undermine the credibility of the DSD.10614:06:00106Dutton, Peter, MPMr DUTTON00AKIDicksonLP10—My question is addressed to the Prime Minister. Has the Prime Minister received the report he commissioned last year on matters relating to the interception and boarding of a suspected illegal entry vessel by HMAS Adelaide in the period in and around 6 to 8 October 2001? What information can the Prime Minister provide to the House? 106Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—I thank the honourable member for Dickson for his maiden question. I think he will have many more opportunities to ask questions in this House. With your indulgence, Mr Speaker, can I congratulate the honourable member for Dickson and other honourable members on both sides of the House for the very good maiden speeches that they have made.May I remind the House that on 9 November, which was the day before the election, I indicated that I would commission a report on the sequence of events involving the advice given to ministers on or about 7 October that some children had been thrown overboard the vessel known in the defence report as SIEV4. After the election, on 13 November, I formally requested the preparation of that report, which I am going to table, from the secretary of my department.It is clear from the report, which I will table during question time, that the original statements made by ministers regarding children being thrown overboard were based on reports and advice received. They were provided in good faith to ministers by serving officers of the defence forces and were used in good faith by ministers. It is also clear from the report that subsequently doubts about the veracity of the original advice to ministers arose within the defence establishment, but the report contains differing recollections regarding the communication of those doubts to the former defence minister.The report clearly states that neither me nor the minister for immigration were informed by our departments or other officials that the original advice may have been inaccurate. I table the report prepared by Jennifer Bryant, Assistant Secretary, Education and Immigration Branch of the Social Policy Division, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, dated 21 January 2001. There was a companion report prepared by Defence under the inquiry procedures of the Defence Act. It contains a number of coloured pages which are not as easy to reproduce as this document and it may be an hour or two before that document is available because of the need to reproduce the coloured pages. As soon as it is, it will be tabled and also made available.10714:10:00107Crean, Simon, MPMr CREANDT4HothamALP00—My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer him to the communication intercepts referred to in my previous question. Can the Prime Minister advise whether the former Minister for Defence, Mr Reith, or the government requested DSD to conduct such intercepts of communications by Australian citizens? If so, what were the terms of any such request?107Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—I have no knowledge or recollection of any such request having been made. I have not specifically spoken to the former defence minister about it. Can I simply say again that at all stages it is my advice that the law was adhered to and that there was nothing done in relation to Australian citizens that was not properly within the law and properly within the usages and customs of the intelligence service. There has been some reference made—the Leader of the Opposition has dwelt upon this in comment outside this place—to an inadvertent intercept. Could I say to the Leader of the Opposition that if he cared to have a look at the web site of the Defence Signals Directorate and at the annual reports of that particular organisation going back, for example, to 1993-94, he will find that, given the amount of work involved for DSD, from time to time there are breaches, inadvertent intercepts.To suggest that it is some kind of security outrage that there was one inadvertent breach in relation to this material, can I remind him, for example, that in 1993-94 the annual report of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security discloses that during the previous year there were 28 breaches. I offer no criticism of that. There were 28 breaches in the previous year and they all occurred when the Defence Signals Directorate was under the surveillance of and answerable to the former government. It stands to reason, if you just pause for a moment, given the nature of intelligence activities, that from time to time there will be inadvertent breaches. I would counsel the Leader of the Opposition to take advantage of the offer made—which I endorse—by the Minister for Foreign Affairs that the Leader of the Opposition be confidentially briefed about the nature of that. Any suggestion that at a political level the government sought to use the intelligence organisation to further its political agenda in relation to matters, I completely deny. Let me make it very plain to the House that the issues at stake in relation to the action the government took regarding MV Tampa were very clear. We did not need the counsel and advice of the intelligence services to indicate what was in the Australian national interest in relation to that issue. We knew what the national interest of Australia required. The national interest of Australia required that the government take the action it did.The operation of the intelligence services were, on my advice, wholly consonant with the law, save and except the inadvertent breach to which Senator Hill has referred. There was no targeting of the unions, and any attempt to whip up some argument about us targeting the unions is rejected. I simply say to the Leader of the Opposition: if you continue to make reference to inadvertent breaches, I ask you to remember the contents of all these annual reports and the number of breaches previously reported. The Australian intelligence services deserve support, understanding and a defence by this government. They serve the national interest, and it is in the interests of all of us that their strengths be supported and maintained.I want to also make it plain that the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, Mr Blick, who indicated yesterday that he was reviewing all of the material in relation to this matter, indicated to the defence minister this morning that he will carry out an inquiry. I welcome that. This government has nothing whatever to hide in relation to this issue. There may be a little bit of first day excitement on the other side about it. I can assure those who sit opposite and, more importantly, the Australian public that we have not used the intelligence services of this country for political purposes. We use the intelligence services to defend the national interest. We make no apology for that. We will do it in the future. That is our duty and that is our obligation.10814:16:00108Ticehurst, Kenneth, MPMr TICEHURST00ANFDobellLP10—My question is addressed to the Treasurer. Would the Treasurer advise the House of the government's commitment to provide adequate resources to protect Australia's borders?108Costello, Peter, MPMr COSTELLOCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—I thank the honourable member for Dobell for his maiden question—perhaps the most penetrating question from a member for Dobell in over a decade. It is a fine contribution to this House, and something which I am sure will continue. In relation to unauthorised boat arrivals, last year's budget allowed $250 million for unauthorised boat arrivals, $190 million of which was for the department of immigration. At the time of the mid-year review and in the pre-election statement, another $147 million for this financial year was allowed—capital and operating costs of $130 million to the department of immigration and the remainder principally in relation to costs involving Nauru. The additional estimates, which will be presented tomorrow, will include another $85 million which will cover approximately $18½ million in relation to Manus Island and the remainder will be in relation to capital and operational costs to the department of immigration. It is quite possible that there will be savings made on those costs in this financial year if the number of unauthorised arrivals remains, as it currently does, at very low levels. In August of last year, the number of unauthorised arrivals who came to Australia in that month alone was 1,200. If that rate, or anything like that rate, had continued, the costs of managing those unauthorised boat arrivals would have blown out to something like $400 million for immigration alone. This government has put in place a number of measures to protect Australia's borders and there is evidence that they are being successful. There have been no unauthorised boat arrivals in the last two months.Opposition members interjecting—CT4Mr COSTELLO—The meteorologists on the other side claim it is all an act of God. As previous years show, there have been arrivals in December and January in previous years. Let me figure it out—maybe monsoons only started this Christmas, did they? Maybe this was some kind of new development. One does not want to prejudge what the smugglers might do, because the smugglers obviously are looking for new ways of smuggling people into Australia and, this being the profitable trade that it is, one cannot say that success has been gained. I can say that the fact that the government put in place these measures has dramatically reduced the number of arrivals. We believe that there could be savings if that continues. We also note that the Labor Party, or at least a proportion of it, supports our proposals and our policies—which proportion of it, we cannot tell, but there is a proportion of it that supports them. Opposition members interjecting—CT4Mr COSTELLO—Whilst many are interjecting, there are others who are saying publicly that they actually support our measures. I make this point: the government has determined that it will be putting in place those measures which will protect Australia's borders. There is evidence that that has been successful and that the costs have been contained against what they would have been otherwise. I make this point in conclusion: notwithstanding costs, we on this side of the House believe it is a government's duty to protect the country's borders, and we will be putting in place the measures which are required to do that. We believe it is one of the prime responsibilities for any government to protect its borders and to look after the national security. If the Labor Party can support us in doing that, so much the better, but this government will lead on this issue and it will deliver.10914:21:00109McClelland, Robert, MPMr McCLELLANDJK6BartonALP00—My question is addressed to the Attorney-General. Attorney, I refer to the story that appeared on the front page of yesterday's Daily Telegraph titled `Spy games'. Given reports that the information in that story came from `a senior Government source close to Cabinet', what guarantees can you give that the government's proposed security legislation will not prevent public interest stories like this one from coming to light? What specific measures in the legislation will protect the freedom of the press and the right of every Australian to know? 109Williams, Daryl, MPMr WILLIAMS7V5TangneyLPAttorney-General10—I am pleased to be given the opportunity to set the record straight. What was just said was a misleading piece of information. The government is seeking to establish a regime to protect the national security across the board. It is very important that we see this as being a matter in the public interest, and I hope it will receive bipartisan support.The article to which the member for Barton refers relates to the espionage bill that is contemplated for introduction. The espionage bill is a piece of legislation that was developed in the last parliament and introduced. It was designed to bring the espionage offence up to date to take account of recent events and, in particular, to deal with a situation that arose in 1999 in relation to Jean-Philippe Wispelaere which demonstrated that there was a need to modernise the offence.Included in that bill was a provision designed to restate a provision in the Crimes Act relating to official information and to transfer it, in more modern and appropriate language, to the Criminal Code. Media reports have suggested that the purpose of this aspect of the legislation is to plug leaks, to stop whistleblowers and to curb the freedom of the press. Nothing could be further from the truth. That provision in that bill did not seek to change the law in any way; it simply sought to change the form in which it was expressed. I am encouraged by a recent article in the Canberra Times that correctly reports that the bill will not create any new official secrets offences.As I said when I first introduced the bill in September last year, the bill is primarily designed to strengthen Australia's espionage laws. The espionage offences will be significantly different but the provisions relating to official information will not be. I look forward to the Labor Party supporting the bill when it is reintroduced. 10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I inform the House and the questioner that, while I allowed the question to stand and the answer to be given, the answer was close to anticipating debate, which falls outside the standing orders. I realise it was not a matter for controversy across the House but I was conscious of it.10914:25:00109Cadman, Alan, MPMr CADMANSD4MitchellLP10—My question is addressed to the Treasurer. Would the Treasurer update the House on recent measures of business and consumer sentiment? How does Australia's economic performance compare with that of other economies?109Costello, Peter, MPMr COSTELLOCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—I thank the honourable member for Mitchell for his question. I can inform him that today's Westpac-Melbourne Institute index showed that consumer sentiment rose for the fourth consecutive month and is now about 13 per cent above its long-term average and is certainly above its pre September 11 levels. It is great news to see that consumers have recovered confidence, which fell in the wake of the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Centre. Yesterday's National Australia Bank business survey showed that business confidence was rising. It, too, had recovered and was now higher than at any time since the September 11 terrorist attacks.Rising consumer confidence and rising business confidence are good in a very uncertain world. We know that the United States economy was in recession at the end of last year. Japan is in its third recession in a decade. Singapore is in a deep recession. Taiwan is in a deep recession. Growth in Europe is sluggish. Yet the Australian economy throughout the course of 2001 probably grew not only more than any of the other developed countries but substantially more. No other country in the developed world has a growth rate anywhere near three per cent or above, and the highest outside Australia was around two per cent. Australia grew at about double the rate of the next highest growth in the developed world, and at about five times the average rate of the G7.I am sure all Australians will be pleased to welcome the news that the Australian economy continued to grow through the course of 2001. It was of course partly a response to many of the reforms which the government put in place over recent years. It would not have happened if we had not taken taxes off our exports—wasn't that a great reform, which was put in place on behalf of Australia's exporters. Australia's farmers got reductions in diesel costs and in the taxes on exports and were able to hold up Australia's exports while the world went into recession. Wasn't it good to have income tax cuts coming on-stream during the course of 2001, because that also kept up spending. The interest rate reductions throughout the course of 2001 were also supportive, as was the First Home Owners Scheme. I know that many in the coalition party supported the First Home Owners Scheme to help young Australian couples to get homes. It has been good for young Australians.We notice that the Australian Labor Party is now discovering the `aspirational voter', something that was discovered by Robert Menzies nearly 50 years ago. He called them the `forgotten people', people who were not part of big business or big unions but wanted to have a home and a family and wanted to better themselves in life, as was pointed out in a maiden speech prior to question time. We welcome the interest of the parliament, on both sides now, in the `forgotten people', those people who really want to save and get a home—and the First Home Owners Scheme was very much a part of that.The state of the international economy remains very severe. Nobody should kid themselves that we are going to go back, in international terms, to anything like the conditions that were experienced during the 1990s, but this government remains focused on keeping the Australian economy growing, to look after as best it can—by promoting further labour market reforms and economic reforms—those people who are very much the focus of government policy, those people who are very much on the minds, and retain the continuing interest, of the coalition government.11014:29:00110Rudd, Kevin, MPMr RUDD83TGriffithALP00—My question is directed to the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Minister representing the Minister for Defence. Minister, can you advise the House what specific rules document the Defence Signals Directorate was subject to in the conduct of its operations during the period August-September 2001? Can the minister confirm that this rules document specifically prohibited the deliberate interception of communications between Australians in Australia, the dissemination of information relating to Australian persons gained accidentally through the course of routine collection of foreign communications, or the reporting or recording of the names of Australian persons mentioned in foreign communications?111Downer, Alexander, MPMr DOWNER4G4MayoLPMinister for Foreign Affairs10—Mr Speaker, I do not have the exact words with me, but my recollection from looking at the document over the last couple of days is that the general tenor of the comments the honourable member made in his question is right, and this of course is the whole point. There were guidelines—they have been updated since the Intelligence Services Bill went through the parliament into the Intelligence Services Act, a piece of legislation introduced by this government to give the public still greater confidence in our intelligence agencies and, what is more, to set up a parliamentary committee with the role—albeit a limited role—of oversight over DSD as well as ASIS. It is very important that there is public confidence in these agencies and that there is transparency.There are privacy provisions—there are now and there were back then, last year in the period the honourable member refers to, and of course way before that, back into the period of the Labor government. Off the top of my head—I could be wrong—I do not think those privacy provisions were changed by this government after 1996. I think the same or very nearly the same privacy provisions applied under the previous government. Absolutely, it is not the role of DSD to collect conversations between Australians, except in circumstances of dire national emergency or where there is a very direct threat to national security. We have made the point here, and it is an important point, that the DSD say that in this particular instance— and by `this particular instance' I mean during the period of time which the Daily Telegraph article referred to—there was an inadvertent error.One does not want to just leave the point of the inadvertent error hanging there so people run away and think that this is a conversation between Paul Kelly of the Australian and the captain of the Tampa or something like that, or between a Labor member such as the member for Fremantle or whoever it may have been and the captain of the Tampa. By the way, whether she rang the captain of the Tampa or not, I do not know; I would not be surprised if she had, though.The point of the inadvertent error, though, is that that is an error in relation to the guidelines the honourable member referred to. That is the point of `inadvertent error'. We will brief the Leader of the Opposition on what the inadvertent error is, so you can see that all this wild talk of spying on Australian politicians, on Australians and so on is, believe me, way over the top.11114:33:00111Pyne, Chris, MPMr PYNE9V5SturtLP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. How can the government do more to assist small business to remain profitable, create jobs and generate growth in the Australian economy? Will reform that assists small business rank highly in the priorities of this government in its third term?JK6McClelland, Robert, MPMr McClelland—Mr Speaker, I rise on a similar point to that you made earlier. I trust the same principles will apply in respect of not anticipating debate on a bill that is before the House today.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I reassure the member for Barton that I noted the question as it was asked, and it referred principally to small business and its capacity to remain profitable. I am aware of the legislation introduced today and I will be listening to the minister's reply.111Abbott, Tony, MPMr ABBOTTEZ5WarringahLPMinister for Employment and Workplace Relations and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service10—I thank the member for Sturt for his question. I wish to assure him that the government's third term agenda certainly does include boosting small business and helping small business to create more jobs. Let me say that the best thing that this government, this parliament and this polity can do to help create more jobs in Australia is to take the unfair dismissal burden off small business. After economic conditions generally and some tax matters, small business consistently says that the biggest single obstacle to hiring more staff is the unfair dismissal burden. Do not just believe me on this, Mr Speaker; let me quote the member for Hunter, the shadow minister for resources, who said: Well my wife consistently tells me she could afford to put on one person or would like to put on one more person, but is fearful of unfair dismissals, she is fearful of going through the barrier to another level of red tape and regulation. All those perceptions are out there, all of them are well founded ...The member for Hunter is absolutely right. It is about time the unfair dismissal burden was taken off the back of small business. If just one in 20 small businesses were to put on an extra staff member as a result of changes the government might make, there would be more than 50,000 new jobs in Australia— 50,000 more jobs that Australian workers and would-be workers need.On this issue we can focus on one or two hard cases, and on that basis we can build a whole regulatory burden that impacts on hundreds of thousands of good businesses like the business of the member for Hunter's wife as well as a few bad businesses or we can restate our faith in the decency of Australian small business and the commonsense of Australian workers to sort these things out for themselves. This government will never make quasi-Marxist assumptions that all employers are exploiters and that all workers are victims. This government will always try to promote a greater spirit of partnership in the Australian workplace.The Leader of the Opposition in a different context said yesterday that he had turned over a new leaf. I invite the Leader of the Opposition to turn over a new leaf in another context—a context vital to the welfare of Australian small business and to the creation of jobs in this country. I invite him to rise above his past as a union official to prove that the Labor Party really can change and to support the government's fair dismissal bill.11214:37:00112King, Catherine, MPMs KING00AMRBallaratALP00—My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, do you recall promising on 14 September last year:... statutory entitlements of employees in a liquidation of a company that employed them will rank ahead of the entitlement of its secured creditors.Isn't it the case that the Governor-General yesterday in his address to the parliament stated that the government would merely consider such legislation? Prime Minister, when will you be bringing forward legislation to honour this promise concerning employees' entitlements?112Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—I say to the honourable member for Ballarat that I do remember making a statement substantially to that effect, and it remains the intention of the government to legislate in this area. The reference in the Governor-General's speech was a reference to the consultation that we are undertaking with the business community, particularly with small business, so that when the legislation is brought in proper regard is paid to the impact of those changes on small business. I am quite resolved, and the government is quite resolved, that we will make this change. Without checking my files, but from recollection, if this measure had applied over the last period of years, something like 87 to 90 per cent of entitlements would have been paid to people who lost their entitlements as a result of companies going bankrupt or going into liquidation or receivership in circumstances where they could not meet their full workers' entitlements.This is an important and serious issue. It has been underlined by a number of company failures in recent years. I remind the honourable member that for a couple of years we operated a safety net scheme, to which no state government opted to contribute other than the South Australian government. We have now indicated that as a result of the failure of state governments to come to the party we are prepared to go further in order to cover these entitlements. I can assure the honourable member that we will be legislating. We are consulting—as the Governor-General's speech alluded to—with small business to ensure there are no deleterious impacts, but it is our intention to legislate. 11314:40:00113Hartsuyker, Luke, MPMr HARTSUYKER00AMMCowperNP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for Education, Science and Training. Would the minister outline for the House the measures the government is taking to ensure that taxpayers get the very best return for public investment in research? Is the minister aware of any other policies in this area?113Nelson, Dr Brendan, MPDr NELSONRW5BradfieldLPMinister for Education, Science and Training10—Thank you, Mr Speaker. Congratulations, firstly, on your re-election to the esteemed position of Speaker. Congratulations also to the member for Cowper on not only his election to the parliament to follow in the fine footsteps of his predecessor but also a great maiden speech this morning. The Howard government is completely committed to seeing that the 21st century for Australia is built very much on a research and information culture. To that end last year the government committed $2.9 billion to the Backing Australia's Ability program, which comprises a series of measures which support research, research infrastructure, incentives for industry in business and the commercialisation of ideas. Included in that is a doubling of the budget for the Australian Research Council over the next five years, a further $736 million.Two weeks ago I announced that one-third of that ARC budget—as I said, which will be doubled over the next five years—will be committed fully to four research priorities. They will be nano- and biomaterials, genome and phenome research, complex and intelligent systems and photon science and technology. The priority research areas have been adopted by the government after an exhaustive process, which involved 60 eminent scientists, the Chief Scientist and the board of the Australian Research Council—a process which lasted some four to six months. Finally, the expert committee recommended to the government that four research priorities be funded.Some of the criticism that has come to the government from members of the opposition suggested that in some way this was inappropriate. In fact, the recently retired Vice-Chancellor of the University of Canberra said in the Australian newspaper on 6 February this year:It is quite sensible to propose that at a given moment some areas of research, all things considered, are more important and more deserving of money than others.He went on further to say:... not to engage in this kind of priority setting seems silly in a country of fewer than 20 million people.The member for Cowper asks me about other policies. There are other policies, and in one sense there are not other policies. The Labor spokespeople have started the year where we left them. I think the Treasurer would remember this: the member for Dawson very kindly pointed out to us last year that the Labor Party are like a cattle dog in the back of a truck. They run from one side of the truck to the other, depending on the slightest attraction which seems to take their attention. Labor's shadow spokesperson has criticised me on behalf of the government for picking priorities. The shadow spokesperson for Labor has said:The Government's `picking winners' approach to research contradicts the stated objectives of the Australian Research Council.That is from a media release on 29 January. Firstly, one of the ARC's priorities—in fact, one of its charter objectives—is to:· contribute to the development of a coordinated approach to setting priorities in research ...It makes you wonder how the Labor Party can attack the government for setting research priorities, when there is only one policy document on their web site when you visit it, and it is Knowledge Nation. If you go to page 37 of the hard copy, Knowledge Nation says:Government should be in the business of determining priority industries ...Wait for this—it says:... fear of `picking winners' should not be allowed to constrain Australia from developing a national investment strategy. On this side we have no trouble picking winners: we seem to have chosen one in our Prime Minister. But the Labor Party obviously has problems with these four priorities. I challenge the Australian Labor Party to nominate which of those four priorities it would not fund, particularly when you consider that Knowledge Nation said the following ought to be priorities:· the development of industries in emerging fields such as biotechnology, nanotechnology, information and communications technology, and environmental management—Apart from anything else, environmental issues and dryland salinity and a whole range of other things important to the member for Cowper and many people on this side will be funded under the research that will be covered in these four priorities.11414:46:00114Macklin, Jenny, MPMs MACKLINPG6JagajagaALP00—My question is addressed to the Minister for Education, Science and Training. Are you aware that last year 44,000 Australians missed out on a university place and that this year even more Australians are being turned away? Isn't it the case that more than two-thirds of these people—over 30,000 people, in fact—would have gained a place at university if your government had maintained public contributions per student at 1996 levels? Minister, given that the Commonwealth is now contributing $780 less per student than when your government came to office, and thousands of eager young Australians and older Australians are missing out on a university education, why have you ruled out increasing higher education funding in the May budget?114Nelson, Dr Brendan, MPDr NELSONRW5BradfieldLPMinister for Education, Science and Training10—I take the opportunity to congratulate the member for Jagajaga on her elevation to deputy leadership of the opposition. A point that needs to be made first in relation to higher education—and I am very pleased that I have been asked a question about unmet demand and the number of places in Australian universities—is that there are a number of issues that need to be pointed out. The first is that there are now 55,000 more equivalent full-time student unit places in higher education than there were when this government came to office in 1996. Some 25,000 of those are fully funded undergraduate places. The sector this year will have $10.4 billion dollars available to it in terms of revenue; $6.15 billion of that will come from the Commonwealth government, $1.98 billion more than it had when your government left office. And, most importantly in terms of unmet demand, in 1992 when there were 1.1 million Australians in this country without work, do you know how many people could not get a place in university? Twice as many as there are today. One hundred thousand people could not get a place in higher education in this country.The other thing that needs to be made clear is that the opposition has a choice. The Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition have a choice. You can spend this year doing what you have done for the past six years. You can oppose every single measure that is brought into the parliament by this government to increase wealth creation and you can do everything you can to oppose every measure that is proposed by this government, or you can support me and support this government in addressing the real issues that face Australian higher education. I have foreshadowed that much of this year will be spent in the process of policy review in relation to higher education and universities. We have to make sure that regional universities are on a sound footing. We have to have a system which means that work practices in universities are not much different from the rest of working Australia. We also have to ensure that the universities in large cities are able to see that they can compete with the rest of the world. What that means is reviewing all of the issues that affect universities, including governance and administration. If you want to come in here every day for the next year and criticise anything and everything that we do, then you consign yourselves to another term in opposition. I would also say to the newly elected member for Burke—and I listened with interest to his first speech—that in 1995, 15 per cent of students in Australian universities came from the bottom 25 per cent of income earning families. Three years after the election of this government it had increased to 19 per cent. There are 10,700 more students in universities today from low socioeconomic backgrounds than there were when we came to office. This government is about ensuring that higher education and information, research and innovation are the foundation for the future of this country, and you ought to help us put together meaningful policies to expand them further. 10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—This is the first opportunity the parliament has had for a question time. I did not, for that reason, interrupt the minister for education but, in fact, of course, the reference to `you' makes the chair feel decidedly uncomfortable and places the answer somewhat outside the standing orders.11514:51:00115Barresi, Phillip, MPMr BARRESIZJ6DeakinLP10—My question is to the Minister for Employment Services. I refer to calls this morning by the Australian Council of Social Services for more to be done for the unemployed. Can the minister please inform the House what is currently being done by this government for the unemployed and what additional initiatives are planned?115Brough, Mal, MPMr BROUGH2K6LongmanLPMinister for Employment Services10—I thank the member for Deakin for his question. We welcome the comments by ACOSS and their interest in the unemployed of this country. It is timely at this, the start of 2002, to outline not only what the government has achieved since the introduction of the Job Network and its expansion into regional and rural Australia from 300 old CESs to some 2000 outlets which are connecting Australians with people who are out there to try to get them work, but also some of the important initiatives that we are about to undertake and that are going to impact on the lives of both employers and employees.Last year the government announced as part of its Australians Working Together initiative that we would be committing $1.7 billion over the next four years to further improve the opportunities available for Australia's unemployed. To that end, we have $324 million being provided for 30,000 places in extra Job Search Training, with intensive assistance being given to people on how to get a job; we have 16,500 places in the Work for the Dole program, which is proving very successful right around Australia; we have $251 million being provided to help parents who want to re-enter the work force after they have been carers; we also have 3,600 new extra literacy and numeracy training places at a cost of $9 million.Today, unemployed people looking for an opportunity that perhaps is eluding them know that they can commence a Work for the Dole program with real work opportunities and that this government is going to reward them by ensuring that they receive a training credit of up to $800 towards real training at the end of that time. Once they have built their own commitment, their own self-esteem, and are back in the community getting work experience we can give them the extra assistance that they may need, with the $800 training credit to get them back in the real work force. So when ACOSS calls for additional funding in the area of employment services, I am pleased to say that this government is delivering now and will be delivering into the future.In the important area of indigenous employment we are taking an extra step from the old CDEP program and involving indigenous employment centres. Aboriginals, who are the most disadvantaged in our community, are working in their own communities and being fully engaged in employment again and being productive members of our society. We hope to be in a position this month to announce the first of those pilot programs. These sorts of practical measures are ensuring that, whilst the world economy is turning down, the Job Network and the government's employment services continue to provide for Australia's unemployed. There is much more to be done and we will continue to work with organisations like ACOSS and the myriad of other fine organisations providing Job Network services around Australia to deliver to both Australia's business community and the unemployed.11614:55:00116Crean, Simon, MPMr CREANDT4HothamALP00—Mr Speaker, my question is to the Prime Minister. It relates to the report that he tabled at the beginning of question time. Prime Minister, can you confirm that the report that you tabled today on the `children overboard' incident formally finds that the Minister for Defence and a number of his senior advisers knew as early as 11 October that `the photographs released the previous day did not depict children in the water after having been thrown overboard ...' and yet the then minister took no steps to correct the public record? Prime Minister, I ask you: can you assure the House that neither you nor any member of your staff or department, nor any other minister, their staffs or members of their departments were advised of this fact prior to the election? 116Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—Mr Speaker, the report does contain a reference, from recollection— I would have to read it again; it is a couple of weeks since I have read the report—substantially to the effect of the first part of the Leader of the Opposition's question. It also contains—this was not acknowledged in the Leader of the Opposition's question—reference to a number of statements attributed to the former defence minister's then staff putting a slightly different version and that is why in the comment I made when I tabled the document I said that there were conflicting reports regarding the communication to the minister. The report has been tabled and I would invite all honourable members and the media to read it. In relation to the last part of the question asked by the Leader of the Opposition, I can certainly indicate to him that, as the reports will indicate, steps were taken at my insistence to make the video available. As far as I am concerned there was no attempt on my part or, to my knowledge, by anybody else to suppress any information.11614:58:00116Billson, Bruce, MPMr BILLSON1K6DunkleyLP10—Congratulations to you, Mr Speaker. My question is addressed to the Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs. Would the minister inform the House what the government is doing to further its ongoing commitment to community harmony since the 11 September terrorist attacks in New York and Washington?116Hardgrave, Gary, MPMr HARDGRAVECK6MoretonLPMinister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs10—I am really pleased to have the member for Dunkley ask my maiden question in this place. I am especially pleased to be part of a government that has appointed the first ever Commonwealth minister for citizenship in 101 years. The member for Dunkley has shown, as all members on this side demonstrate in their conduct in public life, a commitment to the strengths that individuals from a variety of cultures bring to the equation for building a better and stronger community here in Australia. This government has put in place measures to ensure that Australia remains a tolerant, harmonious community and one that respects difference and encourages individuals from a diverse background to contribute to our nation.It is important to know that there are those in our community who, sadly, want to promote the negatives and to cause difficulties; they see one problem and try to say that that is the whole. On this side, we believe strongly that the positives our diverse community have brought to this nation need to be promoted, and we will deal with the problems one at a time. It is stunning to know that those opposite went into the last election without one mention of citizenship and multiculturalism. There was no guarantee of funding to the various government initiatives that we have put in place—the Living in Harmony grants, Citizenship Day. Those matters did not rate a mention in Labor Party policy prior to the last election. Multicultural Australia certainly did see through the Australian Labor Party on 10 November last year. The steps that the member for Dunkley seeks that will help the Australian community maintain its harmony following September last year include the wise appointment of a Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs by our Prime Minister and also the provision of new Living in Harmony grants and a partnership program, which are providing funding to address issues arising out of 11 September last year, using schools especially. After all, when younger Australians from diverse backgrounds get together in schools, it is important that they understand a respecting of the differences and have an energy to learn from those differences and to apply that in a positive way. So antiracism initiatives in schools are maintained, and settlement programs, something the Labor Party also did not commit themselves to prior to last year's election, are also continuing. I believe there is tremendous harmony in Australia's community despite all of the pressures that some opposite and some of their fellow travellers around Australia continue to try to put onto the Australian community. There is tremendous harmony in Australia. Last year—Opposition members interjecting—CK6Mr HARDGRAVE—and those opposite would be wise to just settle down because it is important to note this—10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The minister has the call. I will determine whether or not people need to be settled down.CK6Mr HARDGRAVE—when the mosque in Kuraby in my electorate was firebombed a few days after September 11, the local community got together and went and expressed support—and, in fact, a great strength of feeling—to the people who attended that mosque. I have found that the imam at that mosque, Yusuf Peer, offered, in fact, great support to his community and rightly said it was just one individual within the community that did something wrong, not the Australian community as a whole.So it is obvious that, under the leadership of this Prime Minister and this government, the appointment of a minister to look particularly after citizenship issues highlights the fact that the diverse communities that we have and the strength that we have through that diversity are, of course, brought together by citizenship, a common bond. It is important for all members in this House to talk it up, not to talk it down, and I have distributed to all members some information about Harmony Day on 21 March, one of the commitments that we have but Labor did not have prior to the last election. I would urge all members to use their office to promote good harmony in our community, because it is good for all Australians, particularly those more recently arrived migrants.11715:02:00117Crean, Simon, MPMr CREANDT4HothamALP00—My question is to the Prime Minister, and it follows from the answer that he gave to the immediate question on the children overboard. You said in that answer, Prime Minister, that there was no attempt by you to suppress the information—which implies that you knew prior to the election. Prime Minister, why didn't you take active steps to correct the public record when you became aware?118Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—Can I say in reply to the Leader of the Opposition that the assumption on which his question is based is wrong. It is plainly wrong, and I stand by the previous answer. The report indicates very clearly that the claims made by me and by the minister for immigration and the Minister for Defence on or about 7 and 8 October were based on clear advice communicated to us from Defence. Not only was there a reference made in an ONA report but there was in fact a written—83LGillard, Julia, MP10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The Prime Minister has the call. Member for Lalor!ZD4Mr HOWARD—In addition there was a written communication in a task force report which was conveyed to me, and that was the basis. And the information that was provided to the minister for immigration was, I understand, provided to him by the secretary of his department, Mr Farmer, who was a member of the task force.83LGillard, Julia, MP10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Member for Lalor! I would point out to the House that I have already tolerated a question from the Leader of the Opposition which went very close to falling outside the standing orders—under standing order 144—in terms of imputation. I think the Prime Minister is entitled to be heard in silence as he replies.ZD4Mr HOWARD—The point I am making to the Leader of the Opposition is that the report makes it clear that at no stage were the minister—that is, the minister for immigration—or I told by our departments or by other officials— 83LGillard, Julia, MPMs Gillard—That's not true.ZD4Mr HOWARD—Oh, it's not true?10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The Prime Minister has the call.Honourable members interjecting—10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—When the House has come to order! Has the Prime Minister concluded his answer?ZD4Mr HOWARD—No. The Leader of the Opposition asked me when did I know. The answer is that my belief was based upon the original advice that I received and that other ministers received on or about 7 October. That remained my belief until I received this report in relation to the children overboard.11815:06:00118Forrest, John, MPMr FORRESTNV5MalleeNP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for Regional Services, Territories and Local Government. Could the minister advise the House concerning his campaign to reduce the retail price differential in fuel products between city and country localities and whether progress is being achieved in this regard?118Tuckey, Wilson, MPMr TUCKEYSJ4O'ConnorLPMinister for Regional Services, Territories and Local Government10—Thank you, Mr Speaker, and may I extend my congratulations to you on your appointment.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I thank the minister.SJ4Mr TUCKEY—Immediately upon my appointment as minister for regional services, I made public announcements attacking the scandalous differential that exists between city and country retail fuel prices. I also proposed a solution which was to achieve by negotiation or legislation an open, consistent and transparent terminal gate price system, so as to allow resellers, larger country consumers such as farmers, and motorists either direct access to the best wholesale price or the knowledge of the profit margin charged by local outlets.I have also made it clear that a typical road freight tanker freight rate for fuel is ½c per litre per 100 kilometres, meaning that for the majority of country resellers their freight cost is only equal to the Howard government one to three cent per litre country reseller subsidy. My office has already had discussions with major fuel companies and I am delighted to advise the House that the Shell company has announced today that it is to implement the process I have recommended in all states bar Western Australia where it is prevented from so doing by WA Labor government legislation. Shell has already announced a range of prices, which it will adjust twice weekly.The member for Lingiari has constantly regaled this House with the cost of fuel at Yuendumu, approximately 1,200 kilometres south-west of Darwin. Under these new arrangements, and after allowing a fair margin, the price of unleaded fuel at that locality can drop from its present $1.40 per litre to $1 per litre. Prices in Bourke, Gympie and Mildura could fall approximately 5c per litre after allowing a 7c per litre retail margin, which compares favourably with the 2c per litre typical for larger outlets. These savings can only be delivered if retailers take advantage of the direct access I have negotiated. I trust local members will involve themselves in ensuring that their constituents receive the benefits of this government initiative and the responsiveness of the Shell company, whom I congratulate.11915:09:00119Gillard, Julia, MPMs GILLARD83LLalorALP00—My question is to the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. Given that the report tabled today finds that Minister Reith knew on 11 October that the photographs did not depict children being thrown overboard, precisely when did you or any member of your staff first know that the claims you made in relation to this matter on 7 October were not correct?119Ruddock, Philip, MPMr RUDDOCK0J4BerowraLPMinister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Reconciliation10—I thank the honourable member for Lalor for her first question. In this parliament I may get more questions than I have had in the past. Early in October a suspected illegal entry vessel with 229 people on board was intercepted off Christmas Island. On 7 October at 9.45 a.m. I was explaining the implications of the border protection legislation bills that this House has passed and I had a call from the secretary to my department, Mr Farmer, who was taking part in a meeting of the high level interdepartmental working group considering this issue. Mr Farmer advised me that the working group had received advice from a representative of the Department of Defence that all passengers on the vessel were wearing life jackets, that some were jumping into the water— 83ZIrwin, Julia, MPMrs Irwin—Because it was sinking.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The minister has the call! I remind those on my left that he is entitled to be heard in silence.0J4Mr RUDDOCK—and that some were throwing their children overboard. My recollection is that the vessel sank several days later. I did advise the media attending the press conference of the information I had received. I later became aware of some reports from Christmas Island that were carried in newspapers. I know of those reports only what was contained in them. I do not know whether they had any veracity associated with them or not. The fact is that at no time have I been advised that the initial advice that was given to me was—5I4McMullan, Bob, MPMr McMullan—Did you ask?0J4Mr RUDDOCK—I simply say: at no time was I advised that the information that was given to me was otherwise than correct. The fact is that that was the case. I have not seen the report, which you are all reading, that has been tabled today.Opposition members interjecting—0J4Mr RUDDOCK—That is the case. The Prime Minister has tabled the report today. I will read it and come to a view as to whether or not I should form a different view as to what may or may not have happened at that time.12015:13:00120Baird, Bruce, MPMr BAIRDMP6CookLP10—My question is to the Minister for Trade. Can the minister inform the House of the government's efforts to seek continued access for Australian steel to the US market?120Vaile, Mark, MPMr VAILESU5LyneNPMinister for Trade10—Mr Speaker, I initially congratulate you on your election to the high office of Speaker of the House of Representatives again.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I thank the minister.SU5Mr VAILE—I thank the member for Cook for his question. Australia exports about $1 billion worth of steel products and some $450 million worth of that goes predominantly into the west coast mills of the United States. Members would be aware that the US government has conducted an inquiry, subject to a safeguards action, on the imports generically of steel into the United States and our exports to the United States have formed part of that inquiry. The administration is currently reviewing the recommendations of the ITC on that, which recommended tariffs of 20 to 40 per cent. I had the opportunity during a recent visit to Detroit, Washington and New York to press the case of the Australian steel industry in terms of the competitive nature of the product that we export and sell to the United States.A number of members in the House who represent electorates that produce and export steel—the member for Throsby, the member for Cunningham, the collective members who represent the Hunter Valley and Newcastle area—would also be aware of the sometimes painful but nevertheless important reform process that Australia's steel industry has undertaken in recent years. So the case that we are pressing with the United States is that what we export to the United States is not subsidised, is efficiently produced and is produced far more efficiently than other steel mills do in other parts of the world, particularly in the United States.We got a very good hearing from senior members of the administration, and BHP and other Australian steel exporters have made some suggestions as to how the Australian product may be dealt with in the administration's response to this. We certainly got a very good hearing, and they are seriously considering the suggestions that we made and that BHP made when they visited the United States the week before I was there. The important point to make—and it is one that often causes some concern in the Australian community—is that, when Australian industries are going through a reform process, whether they be manufacturing industries or agricultural industries, we are now in a position where we are driving the economy along and we are more efficient and more competitive in most sectors on the international scene and we do not deserve to be prejudiced in such a way that we get lumped in with the other steel producing countries of the world in an action like this. We will continue to argue the case on behalf of Australia's steel exporters in this particular circumstance and in others if they arise. We believe that we had a good hearing. Our suggestions are being seriously considered. We look forward to the response of the administration, which we understand is due in the first fortnight of March—that is the time frame that has been allowed. Our officials in Washington continue to work actively with our like-minded counterparts, particularly the US steel industry from the West Coast and some of the unions, I might add, that work in that steel industry that use the Australian feed stock that goes into supporting those jobs there.A final point that is very important is that we actually deliver steel to the steel mills on the west coast of the US at $US40 a tonne cheaper than it can be delivered from the east coast mills. We made that very salient point. I know the Prime Minister made that point as well in his meetings when he was visiting the United States. We should give credit to the Australian steel industry and to those who work in it that we can be so efficient and so competitive. That point should not be lost in this case and we have made it very strongly.12115:17:00121Crean, Simon, MPMr CREANDT4HothamALP00—My question is addressed to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, how can you expect the House and the public to believe that Minister Reith knew on 11 October—one month before the election—that he had misled the Australian public on the children overboard incident, yet had not subsequently informed you or your office of that fact prior to the election on 10 November?121Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—I assume that the Leader of the Opposition's question refers to the issue of the photographs?DT4Crean, Simon, MPMr Crean—Yes.ZD4Mr HOWARD—That being the case, I point out to the Leader of the Opposition that the report, on which his question and the question of the member for La Trobe was based, after having quoted the finding that Mr Reith and a number of his senior advisers had been informed that the photographs released the previous day did not depict children in the water after having been thrown overboard on 7 October, then goes on to say that evidence from Mr Reith and his staff indicates that they did not consider that they had received clear advice that the photographs had been misrepresented.Opposition members interjecting—ZD4Mr HOWARD—It is typical: one part of the report is read out but the other part—DT4Crean, Simon, MPZD4Mr HOWARD—If the Minister for Defence did not believe prior to the date mentioned by the Leader of the Opposition that he had received clear advice that the photographs had been misrepresented, it stands to reason that he would not have communicated to me or to anybody else a clear view that they had been misrepresented. The House will know that there was media debate about the photographs before the election. In fact, the day before the election on 9 November I and a number of other people were questioned about it. It arose out of the statements that were made by Vice Admiral Shackleton regarding what the video represented, and he made the statement that the video did not depict children being thrown overboard. That bore upon what the video depicted; it did not bear upon the veracity of the advice that was given to us about children having been thrown overboard. Nothing can alter the fact that we were informed that children had been thrown overboard. It was on the basis of that that the statements were made. There was subsequently doubt formed within the Defence hierarchy.DT4Crean, Simon, MPZD4Mr HOWARD—There has been conflicting evidence given to the inquiry about the communication of those doubts. I invite members to read not only the report that I tabled—DT4Crean, Simon, MPZD4Mr HOWARD—but also the other report carried out by Major General Powell, dated 14 December 2001, that I referred to and which I now table. DT4Crean, Simon, MPXH4McGauran, Peter, MPMr McGauran—He hasn't changed!10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Neither it would seem has the Minister for Science!ZD4Mr HOWARD—The government has commissioned these two inquiries. They show very clearly that the original statements made by me, by the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and by the Minister for Defence were based on advice given in good faith and that advice was used in good faith. Nothing that the Leader of the Opposition can say can alter that situation. Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.Questions to the Speaker12212215:22:00122Murphy, John, MPMr MURPHY83DLoweALP00—Seeing as this is the first time I have risen to my feet in this parliament, Mr Speaker, I take the opportunity to congratulate you on your high office and I know you will continue the good job that you did in the last parliament.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I thank the member for Lowe.83DMr MURPHY—I raise with you the fact that the Table Office no longer distributes the Notice Paper to members on each sitting day. I am wondering whether a compromise could be reached. Whilst I can understand that we are in an age where we have information overload and there is pressure on our trees to produce so much paper, I think this is a very important document in terms of making members aware of the business of the day. Whilst one can access it on the web site and get a copy of it when it is required—I am aware of that—I think that the Notice Paper could be distributed by the Table Office on the first sitting day of each sitting week to make members aware—because they might not otherwise be aware, if they have not got a copy printed off from the web site—of the business of the government, particularly with regard to questions on notice, which are a vital source for representing one's electorate. Could you look into that for me?122SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER10000PON/A10—I am well aware of the tangible evidence that the Notice Paper gives to the member for Lowe's interest in questions on notice. I draw the member for Lowe's attention to a statement I made in the House this morning when he may not have been present. If the statement has not answered his question, I am happy to take up the matter with him again. I did make a statement to the House indicating the availability of the Notice Paper in hard copy form both in the parliament and in the Table Office, from recollection. I invite the member for Lowe to come back to my statement. He is then welcome, as he knows, to raise it with me again if I have not fully answered his inquiry.12215:24:00122Danby, Michael, MPMr DANBYWF6Melbourne PortsALP00—Mr Speaker, can you please confirm that the Minister for Foreign Affairs approached your office or that of the President of the Senate requesting that his Holiness the Dalai Lama be excluded from speaking in the Great Hall of Parliament House? Can you confirm that the Dalai Lama has been excluded from the Great Hall? If the Tibetan leader has indeed been excluded, on what basis was this decision made without the consent of parliament? Are you aware that on 18 April 1991 the Dalai Lama was able to address members of the US Congress in the Capitol Hill rotunda? Are the presiding officers intending to review this exclusion of the Dalai Lama?122SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER10000PON/A10—I will deal with the question as best I can and come back to the member if there are details I am overlooking. From my memory, this is not a case of the Minister for Foreign Affairs imposing anything on the Presiding Officers but of the Presiding Officers approaching the ministry for foreign affairs for information at a time when, I think, the parliament was in recess. It was recognised that the Dalai Lama is a respected major spiritual leader, that he has been welcome in this parliament before and that he continues to be welcome in this parliament. It was also recognised that he is the head of the Tibetan government in exile, which Australia does not recognise. It was, therefore, deemed not appropriate for him to address a public and televised meeting in the Great Hall, but that did not mean that he was excluded from Parliament House. If there are other details that I ought to be making available to the member, I will do so. Miscellaneous12315:27:00123Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—I move:That this House:(1) extends its sympathies to those Australians who suffered personal losses during the Christmas 2001 bushfires that raged across New South Wales;(2) acknowledges the tireless commitment of the thousands of individuals from rural and metropolitan fire brigades, emergency and rescue services, ambulance services, the defence force, police, welfare groups, government agencies, councils and businesses from across the country who were involved in fighting these fires;(3) expresses its enduring gratitude and admiration to these Australians, many of whom were volunteers, for their efforts and sacrifices and in particular acknowledges the bravery of those who risked their lives in fighting the fires; and(4) recognises that the way that the community heroically pulled together in a time of crisis truly demonstrates the strength of the Australian spirit.Australians will be aware that the Christmas bushfires in New South Wales were amongst the most severe and the longest in the history of Australia. The emergency lasted for 24 days from Christmas Eve until 16 January and burnt more than 730,000 hectares across a 3,500-kilometre front. More than 26,000 people—and, according to some estimates, up to 70,000 from across the country and New Zealand—were involved in fighting the fires and providing valuable support. Of these, a great number were volunteers. Thousands of firefighters and support workers came from rural and metropolitan fire brigades; emergency and rescue services; ambulance services; defence forces; police, welfare and charitable organisations; government agencies; councils and businesses. The tireless effort and dedication of these individuals resulted in the fires being conquered and no lives being lost. They made a significant impact in reducing the extent to which devastation occurred. The full extent of the damage caused by the fires will not be known for some time. One hundred and seventy homes and other buildings were destroyed but, by battling more than 100 fires during the declared emergency period, firefighters saved approximately 10,000 homes. The Commonwealth contributed $1 million to the Christmas 2001 Bushfire Relief Appeal established by New South Wales and $800,000 to cover the cost of transporting the firefighting helitankers Georgia Peach and The Incredible Hulk to Australia at short notice. On 8 February the Acting Prime Minister announced an initiative to compensate volunteer firefighters who suffered loss of income. This initiative made available ex gratia payments of $160 for each day of lost income. Although numerous organisations were involved in the emergency, the Commonwealth payment is only being offered to volunteer firefighters, as was a similar payment made for the 1993-94 bushfires.It was pleasing that on 8 February an estimated 60,000 people lined the streets of Sydney to pay their respects to the 8,000 firefighters and emergency volunteers. Tragically, many of the recent fires were deliberately lit, just as about 70 per cent had been lit in the case of the 1994 bushfires. The majority of those charged in relation to the recent fires are, sadly again, juveniles. This does demonstrate the need for tough treatment of juvenile arsonists and the strongest efforts to encourage greater personal responsibility amongst young people and their parents and guardians. It has been said by the New South Wales Rural Fire Service that the response to the New South Wales bushfires was the biggest operation of its kind in the history of New South Wales and possibly Australia. At the peak of the operation, 75 aircraft were involved and there were 10,000 firefighters on duty at any one time, which meant the commitment of 20,000 people over a 24-hour period.Prince Andrew, who was visiting Australia at the time, visited residents of Cross Street at Warrimoo in the Blue Mountains in early January in the company of the New South Wales Premier. I had the opportunity on two occasions to visit areas that had been affected by the bushfires. On Boxing Day, I visited the Rural Fire Service headquarters at Rosehill in Western Sydney and subsequently visited one of the burnt out areas of Warragamba. I was accompanied on that occasion by officers of the Rural Fire Service of New South Wales. The most heart-warming thing to me in relation to that was that, when I arrived at 11 o'clock on the morning of Boxing Day at the Rosehill headquarters of the Rural Fire Service, the first group of people I met were some 30 or 40 volunteer firefighters from Victoria, many from rural areas of Victoria, who had plainly travelled overnight on Christmas night in order to supplement the volunteer firefighting effort. I thought to myself and I remarked to one or two of the people who had come from Victoria that there did not seem to me to be anything much wrong with a country that could produce that kind of volunteer response at that time of the year. Honourable members—Hear, hear!ZD4Howard, John, MPMr HOWARD—One of most remarkable things about this whole episode, as is so often the case, is that Australia is nowhere and at no time more magnificent than at a time of common challenge, because all of the best things about us come out to the full: our ready willingness to volunteer and our easy cooperation. Because we are a classless society, we do not get hung up about chains of command or who goes first—we simply cooperate to make certain that the job is done.I had the opportunity to then go by helicopter to an area in Warragamba and to spend about an hour with the people whose homes, in many cases, had been devastated. The most lasting memory of that visit was of a very sad lady who had not only lost her home but, to a day the year earlier, had lost her 29-year-old son in a road accident and who pointed to the cross that she had erected in his memory in the front of what then was a burnt out dwelling. I walked along that street and talked to the people, very few of whom had a lot of money. The word `battlers' is sometimes used I think improperly in a political environment, but it is the expression that really applies to the people in this street. The expression, as it applies to people struggling and battling with life, certainly applied to these people. They had tremendous spirit: they were out in the front of their homes, they were talking to each other and they were encouraging each other. I met the local Catholic priest who had been there for 29 years. His church had been saved but his presbytery with a lot of precious items that he had brought and that his family had sent out from Ireland had been burned.I went about a week later with the Premier of New South Wales and the New South Wales opposition spokesman on police matters, Mr Andrew Tink, the state member for Epping, which is part of my electorate. We visited an area which had been touched by the bushfires that had emanated from Pennant Hills Park and had burnt through towards the Lane Cove National Park, affecting a part of the electorate that we represent in common. The amazing thing to me on that occasion was the awe in which people spoke of Elvis, that extraordinary helitanker with the capacity to draw 9,000 litres of water from reservoirs. It was, according to residents, in the space of six minutes carrying the water from a reservoir behind Macquarie University and dumping it on the edge of the park. It quickly dampened the fire. Every resident without exception said to me, `You'd better get your shekels together and get another Elvis—get a few more Elvises!' And of course we did. I indicated then that we would cooperate with the New South Wales government. They brought two more and we paid the $800,000 transportation costs. They were brought out in one of those large Russian transport planes. I still intend, after discussion with relevant officials, to see if we cannot have a more permanent arrangement for the hiring of these helitankers during the bad season. We probably need to have arrangement with Western Australia to have one there, because they are pretty hard to get from one side of Australia to the other in a hurry. We perhaps should have one in Victoria and one stationed either in Sydney or in Brisbane.The great thing that has to be said is that this could have been a major tragedy had it not been for the skill and the effort and the energy of not only the volunteers but also the full-time fire services of New South Wales, with the magnificent cooperation of their fellow firefighters from other parts of the country. I want to pay tribute to Phil Koperberg, who is a remarkable person, as head of the New South Wales Rural Fire Service. They learned a lot from 1994. The important thing is to learn something from the past. If you learn something from the past, you can save loss of life and loss of property. I am also pleased to report that there was total, very smooth cooperation between the New South Wales and Commonwealth governments. I was in regular touch with the Premier of New South Wales about things that we might do together to see that this common threat was faced. This is a country that has always been defined by fire and flood. It is part of our history, it is part of our being, and there is something ironically very Australian about a Boxing Day where the skies of Sydney are filled with smoke and haze. I have to say that Christmas night had the smokiest sky I have ever seen in Sydney in my 62 years. It was quite an extraordinary sight. The coloration of the sun in the morning was an amazing sight, and it gripped the whole city. The important thing is that the city, the people of Sydney and the people of Australia, responded in that great Australian volunteer cooperative tradition. Some dare to call it mateship.Government members—Hear, hear!ZD4Howard, John, MPMr HOWARD—I think it perfectly depicts what this country is all about. All credit to those wonderful men and women who saved lives and saved property and did this nation very great credit.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Before I recognise the Leader of the Opposition, I should indicate that the debate has been brought on and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition has indicated leave will be granted, so there is no need to proceed to request leave as would be the normal course. I thank the opposition.15:39:00125Crean, Simon, MPMr CREANDT4HothamALPLeader of the Opposition00—It gives me great pleasure to second this motion. The fact is that no-one likes getting phone calls at meal times, particularly on Christmas Day, but on Christmas Day this year 1,000 calls went out across New South Wales and the ACT, because it too was threatened. People were called out, away from their loved ones, their Christmas meals together, to go and fight for the protection and survival of the property of others. None of those calls was welcomed, but all of them were responded to. They were the volunteer firefighters of New South Wales and it was their call to duty.For most of us the news did not filter through until later in the day that New South Wales was going through the beginning of an experience which would see them, for the next 24 days, under one of the most severe bushfire threats in that state's history. I remember speaking to Andrew Refshauge, the Acting Premier, the following day, Boxing Day, to ascertain the extent of the problem. The Prime Minister has mentioned this, too. Despite the gravity of the situation, the irony was not lost on either of us. In Melbourne the cricket test could not proceed because it was raining, yet in Sydney they were sweltering and they were burning.I flew to Sydney. I went up the next day, but nothing that I had seen on television prior to going prepared me for the magnitude of the problem. Flying up from Melbourne to Sydney you could see, from the Southern Highlands west to the Blue Mountains and north as far as you could see, that the whole of the basin was covered in smoke. The pilot warned us that as we flew in and descended we would smell the smoke in the cabin, and we did, so intense was it. On the ground the feeling was eerie: the pall of smoke was hanging everywhere. The Prime Minister described it as he saw it on the evening before. I happened to be there the very next morning.To see the impact on the ground was staggering. That day I visited Helensburgh and Heathcote. Despite the widespread and unforgiving nature of these fires, what strikes you is that bushfires are also terribly discriminating. I remember standing with a group of firefighters who were showing us where, on either side of a garage, two houses had been burned out. In front of one of those burned-out houses a house still stood, but on the other side of the road the house had gone. When I was talking to the firefighters—and they were exhausted then so you can imagine what they would have been like at the end of 24 days—I found them to be people who did not complain: they were people who knew they had a task to do, and they had set about doing it. I also visited the Rosehill command centre, which was an operation I will never forget. I would also like to pass on my congratulations to Phil Koperberg and in particular to his team, who gave us a briefing. Phil was on edge that day, as well he might have been, because the reports coming in about the weather were terrible. They were facing a circumstance where, on the next weekend—bearing in mind that this is the day after Boxing Day—the forecasts were for 40-degree temperatures and the wind building up. When you looked at the ring of fires around Sydney, you could see that there was no direction that the wind was coming from that could not inflame the situation somewhere, such was the nature of the surrounding areas that these fires were covering in Sydney. So these people knew they needed more support, more effort. I think it was on that day that the Prime Minister announced government support. That was very welcome indeed. That was appreciated not just by the firefighters themselves but by the New South Wales government as well. But that was the beginning of it. At its height, there were 100 bushfires raging around New South Wales and the ACT. There were 170 homes destroyed, most of them in the early days, but, incredibly, more than 10,000 homes were saved. As I said, undamaged houses stood beside damaged ones, but it was the effort of the firefighters post the 170 homes that went up that was miraculous in itself.Services were cut. People were evacuated. The logistics were incredible. I got stuck in the traffic going down to Heathcote on that morning. The traffic was not moving because the police had to screen those going in. They had to let some people back in because the power poles, which were timber, went up in flames, the power went off and so, in the homes that had been saved, the refrigeration was off and food was rotting. You can understand the dimension of the logistics. This is not just about trying to seal off an area; it is about trying to protect and preserve it in a healthy state.I think the most incredible thing out of this exercise was the fact that not one life was lost. I do not know of anything that approaches this event in magnitude in which lives have not been lost. That is not just a tribute to the firefighters themselves; it demonstrates the lessons that have been learnt from these earlier tragedies. We are better prepared as a consequence.The situation deteriorated after the first couple of days—that weekend that I talked about. I talked about the calls that took place on Christmas Day, but there were calls that went beyond that subsequently: they went to Queensland, they went to Victoria, they went to South Australia, they went to Western Australia and they went to New Zealand. The calls went out and they were all responded to. Every state in the country contributed to this effort. This was mobilisation on a national scale. Convoys of fire trucks and buses stretched out along Highway No. 1 in this country. Airlines put on special flights; state governments sent their helicopters.The real work, however, was not done by the machines. The Prime Minister mentioned Elvis. I think we all remember Elvis and, in a funny sort of way, we probably remember it because it was the only name that was given to something helping to save the situation. There were many others, all of them with names, who participated in and contributed to the effort. There were 10,000 volunteers in the field at any one time—70,000 of them in total. About two-thirds of that figure were active in firefighting and the other third were supporting agencies, such as the police, ambulance officers and volunteers from the state emergency services, the Volunteer Rescue Association and St Johns Ambulance.The new member for Ballarat told me of the 50 volunteer brigades, together with local professional officers and a large contingent of Department of Natural Resources and Environment and Parks Victoria staff from her electorate, who joined the fight. My deputy, who will speak later in this debate, met an amazing family from Cessnock, the Roberts. She will talk about them later. Every member of that family served in the crisis and the family ensured that not all members went out together on the same job in recognition of the danger and the risk that they were being exposed to. Over the next 24 days, the nation stood in awe of these people. They were ordinary Australians—men and women—but heroes all. They were farmers, construction workers, housewives, plumbers, electricians, forklift drivers, shop owners, office workers, public servants, unionists, the unemployed, the self-employed—a cross-section of the Australian community. If they were not mates at the beginning, they were at the end. These are the people who are nation builders. In this case, they were saving the nation. They are people that we praise, and deservedly so, but I think it is important to put in context the circumstances in which they performed because they seldom receive accolades or thanks. And, in many cases, when you talk to them they say that they do not expect to. They appreciate your presence, they take it in good spirit, but they know what their task is.How do we recognise their efforts? Our lasting monument to the men and women who battle bushfires should be a redoubling of our efforts to recognise the importance of that great Australian virtue—volunteerism. The solution should not be a bureaucratic one. The firefighters demonstrated that we need to help strengthen the capacity of communities to shift for themselves, but we can help. The first thing we should do is to keep recognising their efforts. The public parades for the firefighters have been marvellous events. I had the opportunity to attend the one in Sydney last week. Phil Koperberg told me that he was even more nervous about attending to receive the award of gratitude from the city than he was at any stage during the firefighting effort. It was a privilege to be a part of that event in Sydney. It was fantastic to see the firefighters, the volunteers and all the support people parade, proudly bearing a banner that defined their region, their community and their district. It was like the Olympic Games ceremony in a funny sort of way, with everyone coming in proudly holding up victory signs behind the placard that defined their region and their contribution—and all of them would turn out and do it again.In addition, we should support extra funding for research into bushfires, Prime Minister. Len Foster from the Victorian Country Fire Authority and his colleagues from the fire authority's council are seeking federal funding for a national centre for bushfire research, and examination of their proposals should be given proper consideration. We need to understand better why some houses survived while others burned to the ground. We should continue to make ex gratia payments to the volunteers who lost pay as a result of their service, and we should examine ways of encouraging employers to give time off to firefighters. We should ensure that there are tough penalties for those people who deliberately light the fires. As the Prime Minister indicated, something like 70 per cent of the fires were thought to have been deliberately lit. Bushfires have ravaged the continent since the birth of time. One of the first things that early European explorers recorded about Australia was the smoke and raging fires that they could see from their ships as they arrived. We will not ever end the threat of bushfires. Their explosive potential lurks in the fibre of our continent, but we can be better prepared. Supporting our professional and volunteer firefighters is the best preparation we can make. We should congratulate them today, but we should continue to support them in the future because they will be supporting us. 15:53:00128Anderson, John, MPMr ANDERSON4K4GwydirNPDeputy Prime Minister10—I am delighted to have this opportunity to speak to the motion, in support of the Prime Minister, and to acknowledge both his and the Leader of the Opposition's remarks. The Leader of the Opposition was with me when I had the privilege of representing the Prime Minister at the ticker tape parade in Sydney last week. As has been said, tens of thousands of people from across the country were involved in this massive exercise of more than 100 fires. They provided support during a very real emergency. It is indeed remarkable and a great tribute to those who volunteered and who played so many diverse and important roles in tackling this emergency that no lives were lost. It is also cause for relief that none of the volunteers themselves gave way to the pressure of the moment. The physical pressure and exhaustion of fighting fires under those circumstances is something that can scarcely be imagined. I do not claim to have been involved in the sorts of exercises that were seen in Shoalhaven and in many other places, but I have been involved in a few firefighting exercises and I know that, particularly when the weather is hot, there is nothing more debilitating. Not only was it a great sacrifice and a mighty physical effort; we can all be very thankful that, as can sometimes happen under these circumstances, no-one expired from a heart attack or from the sheer physical exhaustion. Those firefighters certainly have our gratitude and respect. Their dedication is a sterling example of the Australian spirit.I was able to join the member for Gilmore, Joanna Gash, and meet with some of the people in her area who had had narrow escapes, amongst other things. Among those people were Thomas McManus, his wife, Cath, and their dog, Jedda. Their home was utterly destroyed, and yet the houses surrounding it were fully intact. I was struck by his very strong views, which were based on a lot of experience, on the management of the fuel load around that particular part of the south coast. He put those views to the Premier of New South Wales, and I understand that the Premier had responded positively. I made some quite strong comments about the need to ensure in relation to the management of national parks in particular— there has been a very large increase in the area of national parks in New South Wales in recent times—that the local knowledge, commonsense and understanding of the people who have lived in the area for a long time and who are sometimes preceeded by generations of their own families ought not to be discarded. That local knowledge ought to be respected and listened to. I am not here in any way to be political. I just note in passing that there was a very savage reaction at that time from a New South Wales minister, but later that afternoon it was announced that sweeping new powers would be given to Phil Koperberg to make certain that he could insist on appropriate hazard reduction and so forth where those responsible were not meeting what might be called their `reasonable responsibilities'. I hope that those powers are delivered.I join others in again paying tribute to Phil Koperberg. What was evident at the ticker tape parade in Sydney was the enormous esteem and regard that he is held in by his troops. Every time he got up to speak or to receive another award, the spontaneous cheering from the volunteers was something to behold. I think that really says it all. In relation to the management of hazard reduction and so forth, I encourage the states, territories and local authorities to use the Work for the Dole scheme as a way of reducing fire hazards during the cooler months. Participants could make a real contribution to the safety and wellbeing of their community. That is something that those who are responsible for those hazard reduction programs could think through and take advantage of. I was delighted to represent the Prime Minister at the ticker tape parade last Friday. More than 60,000 people turned out to show their support for the firefighters and emergency services personnel who put in such a sterling effort. They came from all over Australia, including many groups from my own electorate. Of course, generous tribute was paid to those New Zealanders who came in the spirit of Anzac across the Tasman to also make a contribution. It was a privilege, too, to announce at the parade that the federal government would provide some compensation as a way of showing our appreciation and our thanks as a nation to volunteer firefighters who suffered loss of income, and to pay tribute to the men and women who were involved in fighting the fires and to those who backed them up in so many ways. Indeed, one volunteer was none other than the member for Gilmore. She went out there as a volunteer in a back-up role. AK6Gash, Joanna, MPMrs Gash—Tony Abbott also volunteered.4K4Anderson, John, MPMr ANDERSON—The minister behind me also volunteered. There were volunteers everywhere, many who are unsung and unrecognised but who reflected that spirit of generosity, of courage, and of a sacrificial willingness to make a contribution to their communities that we all value as Australians. We record our respect for them all here in this House today. 15:59:00129Macklin, Jenny, MPMs MACKLINPG6JagajagaALP00—I too am very pleased to be able to join with the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition in adding my appreciation and respect to the firefighters who battled such terrible events over Christmas and New Year. The devastation of the fires through New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory brought that home to me on the number of visits that I made to the fire damaged areas during the peak of the crisis. In early January I went with the member for Cunningham to Helensburg and Stanwell Park, and a few days later with the Premier of New South Wales and the member for Hunter up to Cessnock. We went up in a helicopter over Cessnock and just stared down at the huge areas burnt and full of an eerie, empty blackness. The Leader of the Opposition raised the example of the family that we met at Cessnock, the Roberts family—mum, dad and the four children—all of them out at different times fighting fires in this area. The mum did admit to me that she was a little nervous about the 14-year-old being allowed to go out and fight the fires, but I thought this really epitomised the huge contribution that was made by so many people over this horrific period.During the visits we saw the huge strength of spirit and self-sacrifice that was everywhere. People did turn to each other and certainly when I was there with Steve Martin at Helensburg I saw how much it was affecting people after the event and how difficult it was. But the way in which people were helping each other out—whether it was caring for each other's children, comforting each other or making sandwiches; all of these basic things—really showed just how much people were prepared to come together and support each other through these terrible events.Along with the other speakers, I particularly want to commend and acknowledge the huge contribution made by those who battled all of these fires, particularly the volunteer firefighters, some of whom I am very proud to say came from my electorate of Jagajaga. Their self-sacrifice, courage and commitment certainly showed the whole world what it is like here in Australia in these difficult circumstances. They have been called heroes by many people; other people have called them angels. Having witnessed all of that first-hand, it certainly is the case that those descriptions are pretty true.As the Prime Minister said, many Victorian firefighters put their hands up to go and help out. One of the best expressions of thanks that I have heard was actually read to the Victorian firefighters at a wonderful event we had in Melbourne, with Elvis flying overhead and all of the firefighters in their trucks from all around the state coming up Burke Street. There was a message from the Premier of New South Wales on behalf of the people of New South Wales to all of those firefighters. He said:When New South Wales burned over Christmas-New Year, the Victorians were there to help, no questions asked ... You displayed the grace under fire—in this case, real scorching fire—which is the very definition of courage.Grace under fire—the very definition of courage. I do want to extend the thanks and gratitude of everybody here today to not only the firefighters but also their families—we know that so many families were left behind over the Christmas period—and their employers, who did stand behind the firefighters and allow them to go off as volunteers, because without that support they would not have been able to make that contribution. As I mentioned to you, Mr Speaker, I would like to have included in Hansard the names of the firefighters, particularly those from the three brigades in my area that went up and fought these fires. If that were agreed to, I would appreciate that very much. I seek leave to incorporate these names in Hansard.Leave granted.The list read as follows—From Eltham:Mark Jopling, Clement Egan, Mathew O'Brien, Paul Hoyle, Russell Purser, Shaun Pearsell, Adrian Birth, John James, John Prenc, James Armstrong, Evan Thomas, Shayne Egan, Darren Trelor. From Research: Steffan Bock, Chris Davis, Chris Gore, Chas Pagon, Michael Brinkkotter, Neville Stewart, Adrian Redfern, Anna Richtarik, Andrew Oldroyd, Stephen Hewitt, Alan Salter.And from North Warrandyte: William Hodgson, Paul Buck, Michael Keating, Rowan Thorton, Anthony Brown, Sandy Millar, Graham Lawrence, Nicholas Porter.There are many of them, but there is just one that I want that I want to mention because I think this typifies the sort of impact that it had on families: Anthony Brown, from the North Warrandyte Brigade. He missed the first birthday of his twin babies on 1 January, while he was off fighting the fires in New South Wales. I have no doubt that, one day, Anthony's children will be proudly telling their friends the story of why their dad missed their first birthday. This does show that so many people missed out on many special events, Christmas celebrations and the rest, but they did so willingly, in the interests of helping others. On behalf of everybody, and particularly on behalf of those in my own area, I want to thank so many people for their selflessness, courage and dedication and for showing that grace under fire.Honourable members—Hear, hear!Mr ABBOTT (Warringah—Leader of the House) (4.00 p.m.)—I move:That the debate be adjourned.I point out for the benefit of members that the government intends to make more time available in the Main Committee next week for this matter to be further discussed.Question agreed to.Documents13016:05:00130Abbott, Tony, MPMr ABBOTTEZ5WarringahLPLeader of the House10—Papers are tabled as listed in the schedule circulated to honourable members. Details of the papers will be recorded in the Votes and Proceedings and I move:That the House take note of the following papers:DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND AGED CARE—The Aged Care Standards and Accreditation Agency Annual Report 2000-01—section 9 of the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997.(26 September 2001/27 September 2001) (Presented out of session on 4 October 2001)DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND AGED CARE—Report on the Operation of the Aged Care Act 1997—1 July 2000 to 30 June 2001— section 63-2 of the Aged Care Act 1997. (4 October 2001/4 October 2001) (Presented out of session on 4 October 2001)DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND AGED CARE—Commissioner for Complaints—Annual Report 1 July 2000 to 30 June 2001—section 10.34A of the Committee Principles 1997 of the Aged Care Act 1997. (Presented out of session on 8 October 2001)PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE ADMINISTRA-TION COUNCIL—Private Health Insurance Administration Council—Annual Report 2000-01—section 9 of the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997. (11 October 2001/11 October 2001) (Presented out of session on 17 October 2001)AUSTRALIAN TRADE COMMISSION— Australian Trade Commission—Annual Report 2000-01—section 89 of the Australian Trade Commission Act 1985. (28 September 2001/5 October 2001) (Presented out of session on 22 October 2001)DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY, SCIENCE AND RESOURCES—Australian Tourist Commission—Annual Report 2000/01—section 9 of the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997. (21 September 2001/ 21 September 2001) (Presented out of session on 23 October 2001)AUSTRALIAN INSTITUTE OF HEALTH AND WELFARE—Australian Institute of Health and Welfare—Annual Report 2000-01—section 9 of the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997. (18 October 2001/ 25 October 2001) (Presented out of session on 29 October 2001)HEALTH INSURANCE COMMISSION— Health Insurance Commission—Equity and Diversity—Annual Report 2000/2001—section 9(1)(b) of the Equal Employment Opportunity (Commonwealth Authorities) Act 1987. (28 September 2001/28 September 2001) (Presented out of session on 29 October 2001)HEALTH SERVICES AUSTRALIA—Health Services Australia—Annual Report 2000-01— section 63 of the Public Service Act 1999. (26 October 2001/26 October 2001) (Presented out of session on 29 October 2001)HEALTH INSURANCE COMMISSION— Health Insurance Commission—Annual Report 2000-01—section 9 of the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997. (5 October 2001/5 October 2001) (Presented out of session on 29 October 2001)REPATRIATION MEDICAL AUTHORITY— Repatriation Medical Authority—Seventh Annual Report 2000/2001 (27 August 2001/27 August 2001) (Presented out of session on 31 October 2001)AUSTRALIAN HEARING SERVICES— Australian Hearing Services—Annual Report 2001—section 9 of the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997. (15 October 2001/31 October 2001) (Presented out of session on 1 November 2001)DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND AGED CARE—Department of Health and Aged Care— Annual Report 2000-2001: Volumes 1 and 2— section 63(1) of the Public Service Act 1999. (5 October 2001/5 October 2001) (Presented out of session on 1 November 2001)MEDIBANK PRIVATE—Medibank Private— Annual Report 2000-2001 (19 September 2001/20 September 2001) (Presented out of session on 22 November 2001)MEDIBANK PRIVATE—Medibank Private— Statement of corporate intent 2001-04 (19 September 2001/ 20 September 2001) (Presented out of session on 22 November 2001)PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE OMBUDSMAN—Private Health Insurance Ombudsman—Annual Report 2001—section 9 of the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997. (29 September 2001/11 October 2001) (Presented out of session on 20 December 2001)PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE ADMINISTRA-TION COUNCIL—Operations Of The Registered Health Benefits Organisations— Annual Report 2000-01—section 82PA(1) of the National Health Act 1953. (20 December 2001/20 December 2001) (Presented out of session on 2 January 2002)PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE ADMINISTRA-TION COUNCIL—Operations Of The Registered Health Benefits Organisations— Errata to Annual Report 2000-01 (7 January 2002/7 January 2002) (Presented out of session on 22 January 2002)DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND AGEING—Medical Training Review Panel— Fifth Report—section 3GC(4) of the Health Insurance Act 1973. (11 December 2001/ 16 December 2001) (Presented out of session on 29 January 2002)Debate (on motion by Dr Martin) adjourned.Miscellaneous13113110000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I present the annual report of the Parliamentary Service Commissioner for 2001-02.Documents13113110000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I present the Auditor-General's audit reports Nos 14 to 31 of 2001-02, entitled Audit Report No. 14—Performance audit—Client service initiatives follow-up audit—Australian Trade Commission (Austrade); No. 15—Performance audit— Agencies' oversight of Works Australia client advances; No. 16—Performance audit— Defence Reform Program management and outcomes—Department of Defence; No. 17— Performance audit—Administration of petroleum excise collections—Australian Taxation Office; No. 18—Performance audit— Performance information in Portfolio Budget Statements; No. 19—Assurance and control assessment audit—Payroll management; No. 20—Performance audit—Fraud control arrangements in the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry—Australia (AFFA); No. 21—Performance audit—Developing policy advice—Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs; Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business; Department of Family and Community Services; No. 22—Protective security audit—Personnel security— Management of security clearances; No. 23—Performance audit—Broadcasting planning and licensing—The Australian Broadcasting Authority; No. 24—Performance audit—Status reporting of major Defence acquisition projects—Department of Defence; No. 25—Assurance and control assessment audit—Accounts receivable; No. 26—Performance audit—Management of fraud and incorrect payment in Centrelink; No. 27—Assurance and control assessment audit—Agency management of software licensing; No. 28—Information support services—An analysis of the Chief Financial Officer function in Commonwealth organisations—Benchmarking study; No. 29—Financial statement audit—Audits of the financial statements of Commonwealth entities for the period ended 30 June 2001—Summary of results andNo. 30—Performance audit—Test and evaluation of major Defence equipment acquisitions—Department of Defence. Ordered that the reports be printed.Miscellaneous13213210000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I present the report of the Independent Auditor on a performance audit of the audit management processes of the Australian National Audit Office.Ordered that the report be printed.Business132Mr ABBOTT (Warringah—Leader of the House) (4.07 p.m.)—I move:That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the routine of business for Monday, 18 February 2002 being as follows, unless otherwise ordered:(1) Notices and orders of the day (excluding Grievance debate), government business (to be interrupted at 1.45 p.m. in order that Members' statements can be called on):Provided that:(a) if a division is in progress at the time fixed for interruption, the division shall be completed and the result announced; and(b) the Speaker shall fix the time for the resumption of debate on any business under discussion and not disposed of at the time of interruption.(2) Members' statements (at 1.45 p.m.).(3) Questions without notice (at 2 p.m.).(4) Presentation of petitions.(5) Grievance debate (to continue for 1 hour and 20 minutes).(6) Notices and orders of the day, government business.Question agreed to. Matters of Public Importance13213210000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I have received a letter from the honourable member for Hotham proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:The failure of the Government to develop a constructive third-term agenda for the benefit of Australians and its continuing efforts to set Australian against Australian.I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—16:08:00133Crean, Simon, MPMr CREANDT4HothamALPLeader of the Opposition00—This is a government that is prepared to do anything to save its hide but nothing to help ordinary Australian families. If anyone had any doubts about the lack of a third term agenda, exhibit 1 was presented yesterday: the speech by the Governor-General, written by the Prime Minister's office, that contained only one initiative that will be introduced by this government over the course of its term. This is a parliament that has now been in recess almost five months. It is a government that was returned on 10 November and, three months later, that is the best it can come up with. On the very first day that the parliament came back, we saw again the circumstances in which this government is prepared to do and say anything to save its hide and to protect itself. We have seen claims that the government used intercepted signals from DSD to help it win a close election. I appreciate the fact that this report has now convinced the government to offer me a briefing on this matter. I accept the offer, and I will look forward to that briefing to establish whether there is any further basis for pursuing this. But it is completely unAustralian and outrageous when a government uses information obtained from citizens secretly to advance its own political agenda. Nothing we have heard from the government today satisfies us that it has answered all of the questions. It is true that a statement was put out yesterday by the minister but that statement raised more questions than it answered. We still have not got the answers today. But it was not just that incident. Don't anyone believe that this is a problem associated only with the circumstances surrounding Tampa. Our concern is that if the government used information obtained during those circumstances to help it get re-elected, when will it stop using that information in the future at any stage? We also know that there is legislation being brought forward by this government, the so-called whistleblowers legislation. We still have not seen it. But there is concern that this is legislation that is going to stop genuine information coming out to hold the government accountable. That very report that was in yesterday's paper could have been suppressed if the concerns we have about where the government is intending to go on this issue were realised. It is not just that incident because today we saw another circumstance where the Prime Minister tabled a report into the `children overboard' incident, which I understand—and I might be corrected on this—he has had since 21 January. This report clearly shows that then Minister Reith knew on 11 October—that is one month before the election—that the claim that he had been making that the children had been thrown overboard was incorrect. He had been making that claim as recently as the day before. On 10 October he repeated the claim. The Prime Minister and the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs made the claim on 7 and 8 October. But then Minister Reith repeated it again on 10 October, yet was told—this report tells us today—on 11 October that what he was saying was incorrect. Yet he did not seek to correct the public record. What we ask the Prime Minister today is when he knew. We ask the minister for immigration when he knew. It beggars belief that the former Minister for Defence would learn that what he was saying was incorrect and not inform the Prime Minister or their staff, or the minister for immigration or their staff. We know that the former Minister for Defence was loose with the truth. He was loose with it on the waterfront dispute. We know he has been loose with it on this issue. But it beggars belief that he would not have told the Prime Minister. We know that he would not have told the Australian public, because he did not. But the Prime Minister expects us to believe that he had no knowledge of it before the election. This government won the last election— we grant that. But people should not forget the basis upon which it won it. We should not have any rewriting of history in this place as to what the real issues were upon which this government won the election; it was a dirty victory. What we are seeing, with this report tabled today, is that dirt being revealed. What we want to know—and what the Prime Minister has avoided answering today—is when he knew, and we want to know when Minister Ruddock knew, because this has been information withheld from the Australian public. They want their political leaders to be honest with them, not deceive them. This looks very much like they were totally deceived on this dramatic issue which was used to stereotype the people they say they were trying to keep out of this country—putting everyone in the category of people who would do anything, including throwing their children overboard, when there was no evidence whatsoever for that claim. We know how dramatic was the claim, we know how people would react to it, and that is why the government was prepared to make it. But the government had an obligation to correct the record when it knew it had deceived the Australian public.That is not the only area for deceit. There is the repayment of the family tax benefit and the child-care benefit. What we now know is that letters have been sneaked out in recent weeks demanding repayment of the family tax benefit and the child-care benefit—letters that the government held back until after the election. On the question of public liability insurance, the government has disagreed over desperately needed reforms to public liability insurance that are causing deep distress in the community, yet it has known about this for more than a year. Everywhere we have visited around the country, local governments and not-for-profit organisations have been telling us about the difficulties that they confront. The government does not lift a finger. It said that it was prepared to look at it, but then when it was re-elected it cannot even agree on how it is going to proceed. I do not believe the government has any intention of proceeding down this path. We have got the circumstance of the 44,000 university places. We saw the minister's performance today, saying that the universities have never been better off. How is it that we still have 44,000 unmet places? This is what the minister will not answer, and he wants to get out there and put his spin on things about how it has never been any better in the universities. But he will not explain to us why we have 44,000 kids missing out. And there is private health insurance and the great debut by the new Minister for Health and Ageing. I think she was more surprised than anyone when she got that portfolio, announced on the day. But there was the government before the election, promising people that the policies they put in place—the private health rebate that would get more and more people into private insurance—would force downward pressure on private health insurance premiums. Now they have leaked a report to say they are going up by 13 per cent, no doubt to cushion the impact when they only go up by six or seven per cent. But they said before the election they would go down, not up. What we need is accountability from the minister as to why it is they went to the election on private health insurance saying it would come down, and now they have every intention of whacking it up. There is the unfair employment bill—and it is very interesting to see the minister at the table today, because he tried his best in question time to get his dorothy dix bill up. This is George Orwell at his best, personified in Tony Abbott. He calls it the `fair employment bill'. I ask the people in the gallery: how fair is it when an employer can dismiss someone and that person cannot have a remedy if that dismissal is harsh? This is defining fair as unfair. That is what your bill is about. People who have actually recovered damages through the commission, people who have worked in local newsagencies, people who have been able to get recovery because they had been unfairly dismissed, under this bill no longer will. What is fair about that, Minister? Your problem is that you think there are two sides to this debate and you have to barrack for one. Well, I am sorry; you have to barrack for both. You have to create an environment in which it is easier for small businesses to employ. I tell you how you can start making it easier: you can support Labor's proposition that we took to the past election.10000Causley, Ian (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Hon. IR Causley)—The Leader of the Opposition has already heard the Speaker on the word `you'. DT4Crean, Simon, MPMr CREAN—The minister can support Labor's proposition that it took to the last election to simplify the GST collection. That will lift a mountain of red tape from small businesses and enable them to get on with doing what they are good at—running their businesses. If you want to do something constructive for small business, get behind our constructive proposal. We are prepared to talk to you about procedures that small businesses go through in terms of their relationship with their employees, but we will not support making it easier to unfairly sack people. Your bill does that. As usual, you have gone over the top again. The minister's problem is that he has no measure.10000DEPUTY SPEAKER, TheThe DEPUTY SPEAKER—The Leader of the Opposition will please not use the word `you'. Will you please address the member properly?DT4Crean, Simon, MPMr CREAN—I did. I corrected myself. He has no measure. He thinks that his task is to create a division in the community—setting one against the other. Good industrial relations is where you get partnerships in the workplace, where you get people cooperating. That is what I stand for, and I have all of my life. For all of the argument that you run about my association with the trade union movement, when I was leading the trade union movement I always advanced the agenda of partnership and cooperation in the workplace. I was the one that led the introduction of enterprise bargaining. I was the one that argued for better workplace relations. I was the one that took the trade union movement away from their `them and us' mentality to one of cooperation. It was called the Accord. Do you remember it? That was one of the best periods for continuous industrial relations outcomes in this country, measured by industrial disputes. It was also the period that saw the biggest improvement in productivity in this country, and productivity is the ball this government has dropped now. We will not get our unemployment down unless we get productivity up. It is all very well for this government and this smirky Treasurer today to come in and tell us that three per cent is good because it is better than the rest of the world. Three per cent is not sufficient to get unemployment down. The only way you will get unemployment down is to try and grow faster, and you will not do that unless the efforts are being put in to lift productivity, and you will not get that unless you get cooperation in the workplace. We never got it from division in the past and we will not get it in the future.My message to this government today is this: we know that you have no agenda, except to divide the community. Labor have an agenda: to develop a partnership with the community. We will be bringing forward constructive proposals over the course of our term in opposition. We will not be defined by what we oppose; we will be defined by the constructive proposals that we put forward. We want cooperation and partnership in this community. We want a strong economy and a just society, and only we are committed to the mix of policies that will achieve it. We have the agenda; you lack it. You have fallen back in because of your deceit. You will not be allowed to forget about it, but we will be the ones setting the agenda in this country over the next three years. (Time expired)16:23:00135Abbott, Tony, MPMr ABBOTTEZ5WarringahLPMinister for Employment and Workplace Relations and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service10—No less an authority than the Prime Minister has said on a number of occasions that the hardest job in Australia is being Leader of the Opposition, and the Leader of the Opposition has just demonstrated why it is such a difficult job. We have seen from the Leader of the Opposition a tone of whining self-justification and wheedling ingratiation basically designed to try to tell the Australian people that they got it wrong on 10 November. The fact is that members opposite cannot accept that this government won and they lost. They cannot accept that this government had a policy of border protection—a legitimate policy of border protection—even though they supported it at the time. The interesting thing about the government's policy of border protection is that, far from setting Australian against Australian, it has united the Australian community in a way that it has rarely been united before. While the Leader of the Opposition is alleging that this government has set Australian against Australian, the real issue here in this debate today is the way the Leader of the Opposition's failure to lead has set Labor member against Labor member. That is what we have seen since 10 November and the government's election victory. This government, since 10 November, has gone on with the ordinary tasks of government. For the benefit of members opposite let me say that the task of government is, first, to manage the affairs of the nation in response to the exigencies of the day; and, second, to try to move our society and move our polity in the directions set by the fundamental principles and ideals of that government. This government stands up for Australia. This government does not apologise for our country. It does not apologise for its past, its history or its institutions. This is a government which is proud of the Australian people—proud of our record, proud of what we have done and confident about our future. This government indicated yesterday, through the Governor-General's—Opposition members interjecting—10000Causley, Ian (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Hon. IR Causley)—I ask members to please give the Leader of the House a chance to address the House.EZ5Abbott, Tony, MPMr ABBOTT—The Leader of the Opposition has made great play of wanting to raise parliamentary standards. What we have seen over the last three minutes is a constant caterwauling of unnecessary and mindless interjections from the people who claim to support higher parliamentary standards. The fact is that the Leader of the Opposition was heard in silence. He was given the respectful hearing that the Leader of the Opposition deserves, even by people who do not agree with him, and now we have this kind of nonsense from members opposite. Opposition members interjecting—10000DEPUTY SPEAKER, TheThe DEPUTY SPEAKER—I remind opposition members that I will invoke standing order 304A if they do not maintain silence in the House and allow the Leader of the House to address the House.EZ5Abbott, Tony, MPMr ABBOTT—This government clearly set out in the Governor-General's speech yesterday its agenda for a new term. It will dedicate itself to the fundamental task of any government, which is to protect the sovereignty and security of the nation which it is charged to govern. We indicated yesterday through the Governor-General's speech that we will be protecting our borders, we will be boosting our defences and we will be carrying our international obligations in respect of the campaign against terrorism. We also indicated that we would do our best, even in these difficult economic times, to continue the good economic management which has meant that since March 1996 we have had more jobs, higher pay and fewer strikes. That is exactly what the Australian people, particularly the workers of Australia, want. We recommitted ourselves to welfare reform which is designed to ensure that every Australian has an opportunity to participate in the life of the wider community, preferably through paid employment, but, if not, through programs such as Work for the Dole which this government has put in place. We committed ourselves to an education and training agenda that involves, amongst other things, the spending of $3 billion on better science and research. We recommitted ourselves to spending $1.5 billion on environmental protection, particularly the reduction of salinity in the Murray-Darling Basin. We will give Australian families a better deal, particularly one-income families and families where one partner wants to stay at home to look after the children, who are the future human capital of our country. We also committed ourselves to a better industrial relations system, and we have already commenced that by introducing legislation into this parliament.The big question which was begged by the Leader of the Opposition's speech is: where does the opposition stand on anything? Is there any subject of great moment before the Australian people today on which the opposition speaks with one voice? Of course there is not. The caucus met on Monday. The caucus rededicated itself to the policy of mandatory detention, a policy that was first introduced by the former Labor government. The caucus recommitted itself; the leadership recommitted itself. Just 24 hours later we had 10 members of the opposition, led by the member for Fremantle, a senior shadow minister, standing up to undermine in public the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition and undermine in public the position that the Leader of the Opposition had just recommitted himself to.On the one hand we have the member for Fremantle saying that the policy which the opposition supports is immoral and makes her feel ashamed and, on the other hand, we have people like the member for Werriwa saying, in a letter to the New South Wales Labour Council:Groups like Labor for Refugees look at atrocities such as the Woomera riots or the payment of money to people smugglers and declare the people who did this need help.I congratulate the member for Werriwa on standing up—in this instance at least—for the good, decent working people of Western Sydney. We have people like the member for Grayndler joining the member for Fremantle to say how appalling the policy of the Leader of the Opposition is—the policy that the opposition took to the last election, the policy that the Leader of the Opposition has just recommitted himself to. Then we have people like the member for Batman—again, good on the member for Batman for having the guts to stand up for the working class of this country, the traditional, solid, decent, patriotic working class of this country. He says:I note since the election some Labor Party people have had a lot to say about rights in terms of immigration and refugees.This is where he goes on:The Labor Party has also got to appreciate that a lot of our traditional voters have got rights: rights to a job, rights to a decent education, rights to decent health care. And so on. That is the real division in Australia today: not Australian against Australian but Labor against Labor. That is the real division which the Leader of the Opposition needs to tackle. It is all very well for the Leader of the Opposition to lecture the government about those things which the Leader of the Opposition has no power to control, but why doesn't he tackle the things which he does have some power to control—that is, what goes on inside his own party? A party which is not allowed to govern itself should never be allowed to govern a country.This leads me to the second great issue on which Labor is against Labor. Since the election, modern Labor thinkers have repeatedly come out with the determination, the imperative, that the Labor Party should break the 60/40 rule which means, in the words of Carmen Lawrence, the member for Fremantle, that it is `not a truly democratic party'. A veritable rollcall of the best and the brightest in the Labor Party from today and yesterday has stood up to talk about the damage that the 60/40 rule and the fact that the Labor Party is a wholly owned subsidiary of the ACTU are doing to that party.Opposition members interjecting—EZ5Abbott, Tony, MPMr ABBOTT—As the member opposite said, `If we do not change and we lose again, the Australian Labor Party will begin to rival British Labour of old in the international losers league.' We had that mighty icon of Labor, none other than the former Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam who said, and I cannot imitate his accent:As people always say, there are four former presidents of the ACTU in the federal parliamentary Labor Party, but only one of them was ever a unionist, one of the Fergusons—good on the member for Batman—The other three—lawyers, and they were union bureaucrats.He was damning none other than the current Leader of the Opposition when he made that very point. We have had sensible, decent, committed Labor person after Labor person stand up to point out the absurdity of the 60/40 rule. We had Senator Chris Schacht talking about how the 60/40 rule enables, in his own state:The secretaries of the Shop Assistants' union and the Liquor and Miscellaneous Union between them can dominate all party decisions.And he says:A system that informally allows two people, no matter how clever or well-intentioned, to dominate every decision, cannot claim to reflect the views of the party membership, let alone those of the general community. The former state member for Gladesville in the New South Wales parliament, Rodney Cavalier, talking about the organisation of the Labor Party, says:Members of unions affiliated to the ALP now constitute fewer than 10 per cent of the Australian electorate: that is, nine out of 10 Australians are excluded from the governance of Australian Labor.He goes on to say:This is the way of madness. It is also the route to oblivion. This is what the Leader of the Opposition needs to tackle, but what has the Leader of the Opposition said to us since the election? Thanks to Stephen Long's story in the Financial Review just before Christmas, we know that, having talked about changing the 60/40 rule, the Leader of the Opposition then went—cap in hand, contrite, penitent—to the ACTU executive and said:I'm not Tony Blair...You can say that again. Tony Blair is a leader, but the Leader of the Opposition, sadly, thus far at least, has not shown any of the sparks of leadership which are necessary if he is to prove to be anything other than a stopgap, interim leader while someone opposite gets ready for the inevitable coup. Let us consider the Leader of the Opposition's self-image, self-statement. On 14 November he said to Neil Mitchell:I'm a conviction politician.Then, a few moments later, he said to Neil Mitchell:I'll be a consensus leader.He said to John Laws:I don't intend to distance myself from the ACTU.He said: When I was ACTU president I was not part of a faction.Then he said to John Laws just a few minutes later:Yes, I am part of a faction.The Leader of the Opposition says that he wants a policy on border protection. He says he wants a policy which is firm but compassionate. The Leader of the Opposition might as well say that he wants to be blonde and brunette. He might as well say that he wants to be short and tall, hot and cold. The Leader of the Opposition does not know what he wants. All he wants is power. That is the problem that the Leader of the Opposition has.For Australia's sake, for the sake of a great political party now fallen on hard times—the Australian Labor Party—I hope that the Leader of the Opposition is capable of discovering a principle, because all the Leader of the Opposition has ever been interested in until now is power and advancement. He has been genetically programmed to become leader of the Labor Party. He needs to discover some fundamental principles, some sure ideals and some basic foundations on which he can build some leadership. The Leader of the Opposition's own colleagues were quoted in the weekend's Sydney Morning Herald. `There's a lot of scepticism about the Leader of the Opposition', said one insider, `Right now the ABC candidate probably starts with around 40 per cent of the caucus' support.' You do not need to be a military code breaker to work out that ABC refers to anyone but Crean. After today, I reckon that 50 per cent will be in the ABC faction. (Time expired)16:38:00139Plibersek, Tanya, MPMs PLIBERSEK83MSydneyALP00—I was interested to hear the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations say that the real division in Australian society is Labor versus Labor. I don't think so. From what I read in the Canberra Times, the real division in Australian society is Liberal versus Liberal; it is Abbott versus Costello; it is wets versus dries; it is small `l' liberals versus big `L' Liberals. The real divisions in Australian society are being played out every day on the government benches as we sit and wait for the Prime Minister to drop off the perch—so to speak—and we will watch with delight while the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations and the Treasurer go head to head to see who is going to replace the Prime Minister. That is certainly going to be very entertaining.The Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations had 20 minutes to tell us about the government's third term agenda. With this matter of public importance, we were expecting the government to come in here and say, `Well, of course we have a third term agenda. We've got issues such as'—I do not know; I have not heard of any. We certainly did not hear of any in the election campaign. However, I thought that perhaps they would get together before today and come in here with a few issues they could tell us about. I thought they could tell us about their third term agenda—if they have one, but nothing. We had 20 minutes of criticism of the Labor Party and not a single statement about the government's third term agenda. Not one single idea was advanced— not one single thing that they could tell us about their third term agenda. That is symptomatic of the fact that we have hit the nail on the head: the government have no third term agenda. It is just more of the same. It is more of turning Australian against Australian, more attacks on the weakest members of society and more blaming the victim.The government have had no solutions for the problems that have beset us as Australians. They have nothing to offer the electors of Sydney who come to my office every day. Instead, in the last election campaign, they used a campaign of fear and propaganda to divert attention from the real issues, from their failures from their previous terms and from the fact that they have no third term agenda. This Prime Minister is a victim of nostalgia not just for his previous terms but for the middle of the last century. He has no third term agenda because his heart is in yesterday not tomorrow. He longs for a time when Australia was a monoculture with a narrow immigration program and he longs for a time when mothers had no choice about whether to stay home and care for their children or to enter the work force. His only solution to the challenges of balancing work and family is to offer women a few dollars to bribe them out of the work force. The Prime Minister has no vision for the future. All he had to offer the Australian people at the last election was a sideshow campaign based on fear and loathing. It is said that the victors write history, but we will not allow the Prime Minister to get away with rewriting history or telling the Australian people that this election was not about generating fear of refugees. In the campaign in Richmond, the former Minister for Community Services—the member for Richmond—put out a pamphlet which said:Will your vote bring illegal immigrants to the Tweed? Keep Australia in safe hands. Only the Liberals and Nationals are serious about illegal immigration. The pamphlet said that the Labor Party has a secret plan to end mandatory detention and that means that `illegal immigrants would be moved into low-cost accommodation like Tweed units and caravan parks'. That is absolutely outrageous. In Dobell, 1,000 posters went up a couple of nights before the election which showed the Prime Minister holding a lectern saying:We decide who comes here and under what circumstances.00ANFTicehurst, Kenneth, MP83MPlibersek, Tanya, MPMs PLIBERSEK—The member for Dobell is laughing. He thinks that it is hilarious to use a scare campaign to win a seat. We'll see how long you hang on, sport! There was a letter and a postcard from the Prime Minister. They had a postcard from Bill Heffernan warning of illegal immigrants about to flood the seat of Dobell. What an absurdity! In Queensland, we heard of Liberal campaign workers using the slogan, `Vote Labor, get a Taliban for your neighbour.' That is the sort of election campaign they ran. For the Prime Minister to try to rewrite history and to pretend that people voted for them on the basis of their policies is an obscenity.This government has done nothing for the most vulnerable people in our community, including job seekers. We know that some of the job agencies do their best to help job seekers, but the whole system is flawed because job agencies are pitted against one another to try and make profits out of job seekers. There is no cooperation; there is only competition. This government has done nothing for the unemployed, but it will continue to punish them and accuse them and imply that they are unworthy of help. The lack of help for job seekers means that a lot of job seekers are forced to approach charities and not-for-profit organisations. The underrated and undervalued workers in these organisations have been granted a pay increase in the industrial commission. The state governments have said that they will pay their share; what about the federal government? Not a cent. This government forces people to use charities, but it will not help their workers. It is basically saying that they should cut their services to clients or cut staff numbers. This government has made any number of promises over the last few years and it has kept none of them. It has not come up with an appropriate solution to the issue of workers who lose their entitlements in company collapses, despite any number of promises to do so. There is still only the `Stan plan'. Unfortunately, Mr Stan Howard can only serve on one company board at a time, although he should be put on every board and perhaps workers would get their entitlements. The government promised to introduce legislation to make directors of failed companies repay their bonuses so that that money might be used to fund worker entitlements. Not only have we seen no legislation from the government on that but the government voted against the proposal put up by the Democrats and Labor to do just that.This government stood by while Ansett collapsed, while One.Tel collapsed and while HIH collapsed. We have got a crisis of insurance in this country because the government has had no response for what to do with public liability insurance. The government could have prevented the collapse of Ansett and it chose not to. This government has been missing in action for the last few years, and the future is no brighter. The government has managed to turn around a projected budget surplus of over $20 billion. That is no mean feat, but it is a monumental feat of fiscal mismanagement. And, you know what? The most vulnerable Australians will be paying for that for years to come because they will be asking the government why they cannot find the money for public hospitals— 5K6Ellis, Annette, MPMs Ellis—It's all gone to the Pacific solution.83MPlibersek, Tanya, MPMs PLIBERSEK—they will be asking why the government cannot find the money for public schools and they will be asking why the government cannot find the money for the 44,000 students that cannot find a place in a university. As the honourable member says, it has all gone to the Pacific solution. It is not just the estimated $1.8 billion that we will end up paying for the Pacific solution. It is the $20 million a month that the government was spending on government advertising before the election. It is the $500 million—the half a billion dollars— that they spent on consultants. It is the $1 billion that was wasted on IT outsourcing. It is the $33.7 million that CHOGM will cost. It is the $1.9 million that the Queen's visit will cost. It is the $983 million sale of 53 government properties that was bungled.This waste and mismanagement is shocking when listed in this way. What is even more shocking is the administrative mismanagement—the 900,000 families who received incorrect assessment for family tax benefit and child-care benefits. They will be paying these bills back now—not before the election, mind you, when the letters were first ready to go out. You would not want to send these letters out before the election, would you? Yet, the government is still able to find $57 million for the 61 wealthiest schools. It is able to spend $2 billion a year propping up the private health insurers. That is why it cannot do anything for Australia's most vulnerable.This government deliberately created a crisis around the Tampa issue. We have heard today what we all suspected: that Minister Reith knew a month before the election that no children were deliberately thrown into the water. This crisis was created to divert attention from the fact that this government has no third-term agenda. Labor do have an agenda. In contrast to the government, we have an agenda, which we will continue to develop over the next few years because our policies are always responsive and they always reflect the needs of the people that we represent. We have something positive to offer our people for the future. We do not just have the negative, carping criticism that the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations was able to offer today. We will do our best to drag the government kicking and screaming into the 21st century.Yesterday was our first day back. We were already talking about parliamentary reform. We are already holding this government to account for spying on Australian citizens, and we will continue to do that as an energetic, positive, optimistic, hardworking and disciplined opposition. We have had a peaceful transition from the excellent leadership of the member for Brand, and I look forward to our energetic and intelligent new leader leading us into government. (Time expired)16:48:00141Bartlett, Kerry, MPMr BARTLETT0K6MacquarieLP10—It is hard to believe that the opposition leader is serious in raising an MPI about a positive, constructive agenda. This is an opposition that spent six years over there making a hallmark of negativity—of opposing for opposition's sake and of offering nothing at all constructive. With every difficult issue over the last six years, we saw the opposition trying to walk both sides of the street, and they still do—unwilling to take a stand, unwilling to take on the hard issues and unwilling to make a simple decision— yet they try to talk about a constructive agenda. This government, by contrast, in its six years demonstrated very clearly that it was willing to undertake critical areas of reform, willing to attack the tough issues, willing to make the hard decisions and willing to govern in the interests of Australia.This government does have a very constructive third-term agenda. Let me outline some of the issues. The first is a determination to continue to provide strong economic management—as the Governor-General said yesterday to `vigorously pursue' policies that will continue to strengthen the economy and to provide a strong economy where initiative is rewarded, where businesses thrive and where people have the opportunity to work and to prosper. We are already delivering in this regard and have been for the last six years. Our current rate of economic growth of 2½ per cent is the highest of the G-7 countries. Many of the leading economies in the world are in recession. Australia has a positive growth rate of 2½ per cent. This calendar year, it is forecast by most economists to be probably 3.3 per cent—the highest in the industrialised world. We heard the opposition leader over here say, `That is not good enough'—that is not good enough coming from the recession kings over there, from their high debt, high interest rate policies. If we had Labor in government now, we would be drifting along there at the bottom of the industrialised world in recession with many of the others. This government has been delivering and continues to deliver sound, strong economic management— BV5Adams, Dick, MP10000Causley, Ian (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Hon. IR Causley)—I remind the member for Lyons, who has been called to order on several occasions, that the next time he will get called out.0K6Bartlett, Kerry, MPMr BARTLETT—for the benefit of all Australians. Look at the figures. We heard the previous two speakers from the other side talking about unemployment. What did Labor give us? When Labor left office we had unemployment of 8.6 per cent. For 13 years of Labor, unemployment averaged 8.7 per cent. It is now down to 6.7 per cent under this government. What would we have with interest rates under the policies of the former government? When Labor left office, home loan interest rates were 10.5 per cent. For 13 years of Labor, home loan interest rates over that time averaged over 12 per cent. They are now 6.03 per cent. Who is the winner out of that? Battling Australians, people trying to pay off their homes and businesses wanting to take out loans for their businesses.Over the last six years, this government has repaid $55 billion of Labor's debt. In their last five years—with their profligate, irresponsible spending—they ran up $70 billion; $70,000 million of government debt in five years of extravagant spending. This government, in six years, has repaid $55 billion of that. The current account deficit frequently under Labor exceeded six per cent of GDP; it is now down to about half of that. We have been delivering and are determined to continue to deliver responsible economic management. We have made a commitment to making Australia more competitive through a range of further measures on business tax reform, measures to attract productive overseas investments and measures to make our workplaces more productive and more efficient.On the issue of workplace relations, we have a very clear, constructive agenda to assist small businesses and to allow unions— yes—the rightful place to stand up for workers' interests, but not to allow them to get in the way of businesses wanting to get on with their business and not to allow them to hinder flexible, positive workplace relations. This government has allowed business managers the rightful role to manage their businesses the way they see fit. Already this morning—on the first day of business in the 40th Parliament—we have seen the introduction of the Workplace Relations Amendment (Fair Dismissal) Bill 2002, a piece of legislation determined to give small businesses a go. How many members in this chamber have had small businesses come to them and say, `If we could get rid of the unfair dismissal laws, we would put people on—we would give an apprentice a go, we would take on a trainee, we would give them a chance—but we're not going to do that so long as Labor's immoral, job destroying unfair dismissal laws remain, because we are afraid of being taken to the cleaners as so many of our business colleagues have'? This government is determined to reform the dismissal legislation to give small businesses a chance to manage their businesses and to take on new employees.Further plans to be introduced in this autumn sitting of parliament—in this week— include legislation to ban compulsory union fees, legislation to require secret ballots before industrial action and legislation to prevent the one-size-fits-all pattern bargaining that Labor would want to see introduced. Our constructive agenda is for more flexible workplaces, for more harmonious workplaces and for more productive businesses for the benefit of employers and employees. If Labor are serious about a constructive agenda, I challenge them to support us on this legislation. Do not stand in the way; get behind this positive agenda. It will be good for small businesses and it will be good to create jobs in Australia. I remind those members opposite and those people in the gallery that under this government we have had the lowest level of industrial unrest, the lowest level of man days lost, in the 80 years that records have been kept. Not only that; we have had rising wages. Over Labor's 13 years, average real wages rose by a miserable 0.4 per cent. Under the six years of coalition government they have risen by 12 per cent, and that is not only average real wages but also minimum real wages. Minimum real wages under Labor—the so-called protectors of the battlers, of the working class—after allowing for inflation fell by five per cent over their 13 years; in our six years they have risen by 9.5 per cent. It is this government, this side of the chamber, that is determined to protect working Australians.The second key issue in terms of our constructive agenda is our determination to enhance Australia's national security, to build our defence capacity and to strengthen our security procedures. We had already shown a commitment to this prior to the tragic events of September 11, but it is obviously even more urgent now. In response to the 2000 Defence white paper we increased our defence spending by over $500 million in last year's budget. We made a commitment to increase defence spending in real terms by three per cent a year for each of the next 10 years. That will mean an increase in defence spending of around $30 billion over the next 10 years. This government is committed to ensuring Australia's security is protected.In terms of antiterrorist measures in response to the events of September 11, we have already seen a number of measures introduced. We saw last week what Michelle Gratton in the Sydney Morning Herald called `landmark talks' between the President of Indonesia and the Australian Prime Minister about strong measures to counter terrorism. Already on the agenda for this autumn sitting we have five bills listed before the House regarding antiterrorism measures. We are committed to enhancing Australia's security.There are many other key areas. In terms of the environment there is a commitment to enhancing environmental protection with the National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Control, ongoing funding for greenhouse gas abatement and the National Heritage Trust et cetera. In terms of education, there is a commitment to increasing funding from early intervention to tackle literacy and numeracy problems right through to research, expenditure, innovation and commercialisation. There are a range of policies for our families, from the first child tax refund right through to substantial increases in aged care spending which were announced prior to the election. There are many measures determined to provide a constructive agenda for the welfare of all citizens of this country.This government is determined to continue to provide strong, responsible government, to build a robust, vigorous economy with maximum opportunity for all, to enhance the productivity and fairness of our workplaces, to continue to look after those most in need, to continue to look after, improve and restore Australia's environment and to continue to enhance Australia's national security. This government is determined to make the hard decisions in Australia's interests. The contrast with Labor could not be clearer.10000Causley, Ian (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Hon. IR Causley)—Order! The discussion is now concluded.Governor-General's Speech143143Debate resumed.10000Causley, Ian (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Hon. IR Causley)—Order! Before I call the honourable member for Throsby, I remind the House that this is the honourable member's first speech and I ask the House to extend to her the usual courtesies.16:59:00143George, Jennie, MPMs GEORGEJH5ThrosbyALP01— Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker Causley, and congratulations on your recent election. I am very honoured to enter this chamber as the representative of the Australian Labor Party for the electorate of Throsby. I succeed Colin Hollis, who represented the electorate from the time the seat was created back in 1984 until his retirement. I want to place on record the collective appreciation of the electors and all the local ALP members for his work and efforts on their behalf. I take this opportunity also to thank the many ALP members who worked in a voluntary capacity to ensure my election. Thanks also to the electors of Throsby for their support and their acceptance of me, coming as I did initially from outside the electorate when I stood down as President of the ACTU. I am committed to giving them effective representation.I know it is popular for those on the other side of this chamber to decry the achievements of the union movement and on occasion to vilify trade unionists and their leaders. We just heard that amply expressed by the minister for employment. But you cannot ignore the facts, nor rewrite history. The trade union movement in this country has been and will continue to be an important institution, defending and protecting the rights of ordinary people.The minister could be reminded that it is the union movement that has nurtured some of Labor's, and indeed the nation's, greatest leaders, including John Curtin, Ben Chifley and Bob Hawke. I am very confident that soon we will be adding Simon Crean to that list of history and tradition. I think when the minister gets up in this House and vilifies the contribution of the union movement and unionists he would do well to be reminded of the nation's leaders—those of stature, like John Curtin, Ben Chifley and Bob Hawke.The union movement has always worked to defend the interests of ordinary working people. When you look at issues like maternity leave, family leave and the introduction of superannuation, you see that the union movement was behind all of them. Unfortunately, many in the work force today take for granted their conditions of employment, not realising the struggles and sacrifices that led to their attainment. But shamefully there are those in this House who consciously and deliberately set about to destroy those hard fought for gains that we have made over the last century.Unions have always shared with Labor a commitment to a growing economy that delivers jobs and opportunities and a society that is just and fair. I am proud and privileged to have been a part of it. I want to thank the union movement for providing me with a multitude of opportunities and support over a 26-year period. For the record, so that there is no confusion in future, the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations should realise that I am no union bureaucrat: I trained as a teacher, I taught in the classroom and every position that I have held in the 26 years was a representative and elected position.No-one's personal achievements can be seen outside the context of the collective efforts that made them possible. The women's movement gave me great inspiration and courage. My late husband, Paddy George, first introduced me to politics and in later years Bill Kelty was a bedrock of support and encouragement. To my friends, supporters and partner, Denis, I am pleased you can share in this occasion with me. Lastly, but most importantly, I give thanks to my mother, who is here in the chamber.My parents were displaced people at the end of World War II and came to Australia as refugees with no English, no friends or family and with few skills. Demonisation is not a new phenomenon. In those days, they suffered the taunts of wog, dago and reffo. Today, as the member for Sydney so eloquently explained, demonisation is just as insidious, although taking a new form. It says much about my mother and as much about this country and its people that a person from a background like mine—growing up in migrant hostels, in public housing and in a single parent household—is able to address you today in this parliament.Our country is richer for the many refugees and migrants who have settled here. Twenty-five per cent of the population in Throsby were born overseas and have contributed to the rich tapestry of people living in a country noted hitherto for its racial tolerance and vibrant mix of cultures. I am hopeful that the position taken by Australia at the end of the Second World War, when we exhibited international responsibility, compassion and humanity, can again come to the fore in addressing the current plight of asylum seekers and refugees. My personal experiences and my life story help me appreciate the critical role played by this national parliament. It is the decisions made here that have such an important bearing on the wellbeing of our society and our communities. Governments can and should make the difference in ensuring that equality of opportunity continues to be available for all their citizens, as it was for me. We are justly proud of our egalitarian traditions and values, but much of that is now at risk for our society is increasingly divided. Many people and regions are not sharing in the benefits of our nation's prosperity and now more than ever there are winners and losers. I hope that I am able to make a considered contribution to the debates about this growing inequality and, more importantly, to the policy solutions which deal with disadvantage, poverty, unemployment and how we keep the door open to equality of opportunity. I hope in a small way to be able to make some difference to the wellbeing of the people of my electorate.The seat of Throsby covers an area of approximately 392 square kilometres around Lake Illawarra. It is an area of great natural beauty and a heartland of significant economic importance. It has the deepest harbour on the eastern seaboard and is home to the largest integrated steel plant in the Southern Hemisphere. The spin-out of BHP Steel in coming months is a critical issue and one which is understandably creating a good deal of anxiety and uncertainty among the work force and local business. The ongoing viability and success of our domestic steel making capacity is critical not just to the region of Illawarra but to this nation, and I am pleased to hear of the efforts that at least in this regard the government is taking to convince the United States of the folly of their ways.Our region, like so many others in Australia, is going through a difficult transition. Over the past 15 years, the manufacturing and mining sectors in the Illawarra have shed many thousands of jobs, as has the steel making operation. The regional economy is attempting to diversify, with growth in tourism, information and communication technology and business services. Here I want to say that our local university—and I stress the importance of regional universities, which have been suffering under the cuts from this government—is helping drive that future development as a centre of excellence in advanced technology, research and innovation. The community have faced significant economic change, adversity and unemployment, but their keen sense of community and optimistic spirit, I am sure, will help them rise to the challenge of coming years. But it will require of this government more than a blind faith in market forces. A more interventionist approach to industry, regional development, infrastructure funding and employment policy is urgently needed.The seat of Throsby ranks ninth on the index of relative socioeconomic disadvantage. This index includes indicators such as income levels, educational attainment, unemployment, one-parent families and renting households. Throsby ranks in the bottom third of income indicators—a key measure, I think we would all agree, of relative disadvantage. Any suggestion therefore, as is often heard from members on the other side of this chamber, that if you happen to be poor it is your fault—somehow a personal failing— reveals a total lack of understanding of the causes of poverty and the growing inequality in our society.This government's domestic policies, including the introduction of a regressive tax regime, coupled with cuts to our social infrastructure and deregulation of the labour market, have all worked to undermine the living standards of the lowest paid in our community. To be poor in our society is no longer the result of being unemployed or on social security benefits. We are now witnessing families who have paid employment but not enough pay to sustain them and their children—the working poor.As a former President of the ACTU, I was involved in the first living wage case that brought to the public's attention the growing numbers of working poor in our society. Recent research shows that this problem is growing. Under this government there has been a 40 per cent increase in the number of working poor, with an additional 46,000 children raised in these families. While the top end of town continues to benefit under this government from tax cuts and no restraint on their salary increases and remuneration packages, the battlers continue to struggle to make ends meet. They rely only on the small wage increases afforded through the award safety net, now a mere $417 gross per week. Imagine trying to raise a family on that! About 450,000 full-time workers in Australia today earn less than $507 gross per week, or $13 an hour. Many families in my electorate are struggling to make ends meet, to be aspirational, to look after their families on these ridiculously low wage levels. Yet this government, which talks so much and professes to be on the side of the battlers, continues to oppose the ACTU's claim for a $25 a week pay rise for the 1.7 million workers whose wage increases are set by awards and awards alone. This government is clearly out of touch if it does not realise that families are doing it tough through no fault of their own. These trends in pay rates reflect wider movement in income inequality, which has been increasing since the mid-seventies and accelerating rapidly under this government. The top 20 per cent of income earners in this country now get 48 per cent of gross weekly income. At the other end of the scale—and this includes many of the people that I represent—the bottom 20 per cent of income earners are left with just four per cent of gross weekly income to take home to their families. If paid work in this country is no longer a guarantee of lifting your family above the poverty line, just imagine the plight of those not in the work force and the estimated 850,000 children growing up in families where neither parent works.This government's belief that economic growth would see prosperity trickle down has clearly failed, and it has failed particularly for the long-term unemployed. Every church and welfare organisation in my electorate—and I have spent time with a number of them—knows the reality of poverty and inequality for they deal with it on a daily basis, providing assistance by way of emergency relief and, in some cases, food parcels and vouchers for the payment of electricity bills. Despite attempts to blame the victims, people know that poverty and unemployment are serious national issues requiring new policy approaches from this government. Failure to address growing inequality and unemployment puts at risk the social cohesion and egalitarianism that has helped shape this nation. It is time this government took heed of the words of Sir William Deane when he asked us all that we not forget:The unacceptable gap between the haves and the have-nots in this land of the fair go for all.From the time of Gough Whitlam's memorable policy speech of 1972 through to Kim Beazley's promotion of Knowledge Nation, education has always been central to Labor's vision. As Gough explained:Education should be the great instrument for the promotion of equality. Under the Liberals—this is in 1972, but you can read it for today too—it has become a weapon for perpetuating inequality and promoting privilege.It is in the area of educational opportunity that the disadvantages in my electorate are so clearly evident. Forty per cent of people left school aged 15 or under and 63 per cent of them have no post-school educational qualification. We take pride locally in the high proportion of people with trade qualifications and their enormous contribution to the growth of manufacturing industries but, when you look at recent data, attendance at university for these people is still at very low levels. Whitlam believed that the force and sincerity of a nation's commitment to equal opportunity is most clearly seen and readily tested in the field of education. Unlike this government, he actually applied his beliefs in practice. In the first year of his government, as we know, many bold, visionary and lasting initiatives were undertaken. Among these initiatives, federal spending on education was nearly doubled, an independent Schools Commission was established and tertiary fees were abolished from January 1974.Even as late as the early 1980s, the majority of federal funds went to the public education system. Now there is widespread community concern at the fact that, under this government, the 70 per cent of students in public education now receive only about 36 per cent of federal government outlays. While schools in my electorate struggle with problems of overcrowding, demountable accommodation, lack of security and inadequate resources, the government committed an extra $57 million to the 61 wealthiest private schools. While parents in my electorate raise funds to provide the most basic necessities, such as toilets and shade areas, the exclusive King's School received an extra $4 million—a school with 15 cricket fields, five basketball courts, 12 tennis courts, a 50-metre pool, an indoor rifle range, 13 rugby fields, three soccer fields and a gym. How can this expenditure of taxpayer funds be justified? The injustice is so obvious when you consider that in one of my local primary schools one computer is shared between 14 students and they have no wet weather protection or gym facilities. Under this government we continue to witness a redirection of funds to bolster the private education system at the expense of public schools—the propping up of privilege that Gough referred to—at the expense of educational opportunity. Historically, the public education system has played a very important role in helping to build the social capital that keeps our societies and communities together. Perhaps this role is best described in the words of one of our great statesmen, Sir Henry Parkes, who envisaged public schools as making:... no distinction of faith, asking no question where a child was born, what may be his condition of life or what the position of his parents, but inviting all to sit side by side.The primary obligation of all governments, federal and state, must be to ensure that the public education system is properly resourced and funded. It is the system that caters for 70 per cent of our school students. It is open to all and provides the foundation of Australia's cohesive, democratic and multicultural society. I am a product of that system. I taught in it and continue to be one of its many champions. As a community we need also to show greater support for the work and worth of the teaching profession. Their task is extraordinarily demanding, and yet they continue to feel undervalued, often unappreciated and definitely underpaid.As we begin this new century, it is timely to reflect on the first two centuries of European settlement and to see the process of reconciliation as providing the momentum for positive change. Sir William Deane articulated the central importance of indigenous and non-indigenous relationships in one of his many fine addresses. Back in May 2000, he said:Until that reconciliation and peace are achieved, our nation will remain diminished, unable to fulfil its enormous social, cultural and moral potential. For our search for national reconciliation is not a matter of charity or generosity. It is a matter of basic justice and national decency.I am very pleased that a large proportion of Australians now accept that there is a need to address the historical injustices and the contemporary disadvantage of indigenous Australians. The numbers of active supporters involved in the people's movement for reconciliation is a step towards a better future and a healing of some of the injustices of the past. But there remains, in the words of Patrick Dodson, `unfinished business'. As he explained:The Referendum changes to the Constitution are symbolically important but they have not measured up to the high hopes that our leaders of the day wished for.And they were:To end discrimination and allow the Aborigines proper enjoyment of citizenship and Aboriginality.As he said:The dignity to be Aborigines in their own country.Indigenous Australians, as first peoples of the continent, are entitled to a distinct set of political, economic and cultural rights—a reality that has been recognised by the High Court of Australia and the United Nations but, regrettably, not by those who sit on the other side of this chamber. The challenge for us as Australians in the coming decades is, through negotiation, to create workable options for indigenous rights to co-exist with the rights of other Australians within Australian law. Let me conclude with a quote from one of our revered leaders on the Labor side, Gough Whitlam. I think this quote really encapsulates what I believe in and what I have tried to express today. He said:We seek for the Australian people a greater participation in the destiny of this country. We seek for all Australians the same opportunities to share in that destiny and live their lives with the highest measure of material security and wellbeing, and with the highest measure of intellectual and spiritual fulfilment.It is in pursuit of that vision that I will apply myself both in this chamber and in my efforts on behalf of the people of the Throsby electorate.10000Jenkins, Harry (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER(Mr Jenkins)—Order! Before I call Mr King, I remind honourable members that this is his first speech. I therefore ask that the usual courtesies be extended to him.17:19:00148King, Peter, MPMr KING 00AMQWentworthLP11—Mr Deputy Speaker Jenkins and my parliamentary colleagues, I am very honoured to speak in this House for the first time as the elected representative of the people of Wentworth. I congratulate you, Mr Deputy Speaker, on your election, and my Liberal and National colleagues on the election result. I commend the member for Bennelong on being elected for a third term as Prime Minister and I commend the government that he leads for the economic environment that holds our country in such good stead around the world. I also pay tribute to this parliament. We have established our parliament based on the Westminster system. For a century it has been the cornerstone of our democracy. It has directed our nation to its present status as one of the outstanding examples in the world of government by the people for the people.The strivings of our predecessors in this place have laid for us the foundation for its second century. It is a privilege for every member, and me in particular, to have the honour of serving as one of its members and to carry out the trust given to us by the people of Australia. I also wish to pay tribute to those who have served, and continue to serve, in Australia's armed forces. But for the supreme sacrifices of our brave men and women of Australia, our nation would not have survived during its first century. Lastly, I wish to pay tribute to all people who make up our great Commonwealth. Our Aboriginal people, our immigrant forebears and our new Australians have contributed immensely to our cultural heritage. The diversity of rich cultural backgrounds has produced, and is producing, a heritage that reinforces the common bonds so vital to the enormous strength of our great nation.My seat is named after William Charles Wentworth, the intrepid explorer who, with Blaxland and Lawson, first crossed the Blue Mountains to reveal the magnificent potential of our regions. I am used to addressing courts, but while I was out doorknocking I discovered something about Wentworth which I am sure most of my electors know. In Wentworth, the name is held in such respect that in each of the 21 suburbs making up the division there is a street or road referring to Wentworth or his family.My presence in this House today is the result of a collective effort. I sincerely thank my electors for showing such confidence in my capacity to represent their interests. I warmly thank the party members and community supporters in Wentworth who worked tirelessly to ensure an increased majority. Our campaign team was successfully and professionally led by Councillor Sally Betts, ably assisted by Mrs Bev Martin, Mrs Rosemary Foot, Mrs Jessie Bartos, Jill Grove, the Hon. Don Harwin MLC, Peter Debnam MP, Arthur Hankin—a dear friend who now sadly lies ill in St Vincent's Hospital—Trent Zimmerman, the bush poet Michael Darby and a host of wonderful volunteers, with whom it was such a pleasure to work. I also thank the Prime Minister and the ministers who visited my electorate during the campaign, especially the retiring ministers—the Hon. Peter Reith, the Hon. John Fahey and the Hon. Michael Wooldridge. Your visit to the electorate, Prime Minister, with Mrs Howard, immediately after your return from Washington after the September 11 tragedy was a source of great inspiration to me as you were warmly and affectionately greeted by the electorate. I especially acknowledge the presence today of the President of the New South Wales Liberal Party, Mrs Chris McDiven—who vigorously leads the organisation that it was once my privilege to lead during the premierships of the reforming Greiner and Fahey governments—and of the many friends who have made the trip from Sydney. I also thank my devoted and inspirational family for honouring me with their presence—especially my parents, Ted and Col, and my brothers, Ross and Stephen, and their families, for driving all the way from New England. I also thank another irrepressible New Englander, the former father of this House and previous Speaker, the Rt Hon. Ian Sinclair, and his wife Rosemary and my wife's family for attending. Ian and Rosemary have made their own special contributions to our country but to me their greatest contribution will always be Fiona—my wonderful wife, equal partner and mother to our three much loved sons, Hamish, Aldy and Archie.The seat of Wentworth shines, by water and sunlight. Its world famous beaches, from Clovelly to Bondi, and its harbour foreshores, from Watson's Bay to Darling Point, reflect the relaxed lifestyle but also strong and public-spirited local communities. Being close to the centre of Sydney, the most international of all cities as measured by the number of languages spoken, cultural diversity is Wentworth's hallmark. From the large Jewish and Russian communities to the busy Greek and Chinese communities and the vibrant gay and lesbian communities, Wentworth is a microcosm of our changing society. It has been home to me for half of my life and all of my married life. It is a wonderful place to live.As the smallest and most densely populated seat in the nation, it has some of the problems faced by contemporary cities— crime rates that are too high, road congestion and a stressed, ageing infrastructure. But these are offset by some of the most public-spirited, caring people in the Commonwealth. Indeed, four of the five surviving former prime ministers of this country live or have lived in my electorate, including all three former ALP prime ministers. I asked some of them why they chose to live in Wentworth and what they expected of their local MP. As to the first question, they variously confirmed the attractions of a good lifestyle and a diversity of people. As to the second question, the answer was uniform: `Follow my example.'I see my commitment this way: to do my very best to represent the proper concerns and interests of each and every one of my electors, no matter who they are and whom they voted for—Green, Labor, Liberal or Democrat. According to Malcom Mackerras, Wentworth is only one of 35 continuing federation seats. Of those, it is one of only two seats to have consistently returned a conservative candidate. I am very much indebted to each of those predecessors—some very illustrious—for their consistent contribution to our nation's welfare. I would especially mention Dr John Hewson and Caroline for their support of my campaign, and my immediate predecessor, Andrew Thomson. I wish him and Suyura well for the future.For me it is humbling and ironic that, whereas I now represent a closely settled electorate, I was born in Bingara in the electorate of Gwydir—or New England as it is now—a sparse wheat town in northern New South Wales, where the stress of drought and disease meant that life was at times hard. But it was a life that I loved. Around the kitchen table, Mum loved to talk about politics—the new state movement and the status of the government of one of my constituents, in particular. There, too, I learned values that still matter to me—thrift, teamwork, contempt for injustice, respect for religion and family, and a love of the Australian way of life.I see the fundamentals of contemporary liberalism as rejecting all forms of socialism but also as seeing the need to modify the excesses of the free market by adjusting its framework while not interfering in its operation. To me, liberalism is summed up by the word `equity'. In the political context it connotes the familiar liberal values of freedom, choice and independence—but superimposed with compassion, the rule of law and respect for the sanctity of human relationships, especially the family. There are three national issues of currency about which I feel passionately. Of all the achievements of the last term, I believe that one of the most important will be our government's unwavering commitment to the war on terrorism. I feel strongly about this, and not simply because I am an officer in the Naval Reserve. Let me explain. In July of last year I was asked by Mr Matsuura, the Director-General of UNESCO, to lead a delegation to Auschwitz in Poland and to report to UNESCO on the management and upkeep of this significant world heritage sanctuary. What I saw there, nearly 50 years after World War II, would pain all but the hardest of hearts. It brought tears to my eyes. Today in my electorate there are still many Australians who are so physically marked by Auschwitz, Belsen and the other death camps that, as I have observed, they cannot speak of it except with such anguish that is unbearable.My report, which was accepted by UNESCO, and the events of September 11 lead me to ask this House to commit itself to two objectives. The first of these is to do all we can to bring the Middle East conflict to a peaceful resolution so that Israelis can at last have that peaceful and secure homeland which they so earnestly desire, while recognising the legitimate expectation of Palestinians to their own homeland. The second is that we should totally back the government's stand to wipe out terrorism from the globe. This government has positioned our defence forces well for that purpose through the white paper. I would hope, however, that we will not diminish our commitment to that plan by taking from its budget to meet short-term operational needs. I was pleased to hear the Treasurer say that very thing earlier today.The war on terrorism will be difficult to bring to a conclusion. Terrorists do not declare war under the Hague convention. As the conflict spreads, an effective coalition will come under strain. I therefore ask this House to give consideration to suggesting to our American friends and allies that the prosecution of the fight to its best advantage be not by the United States of America alone but spearheaded by a new, small coalition team, including the United States, and assisted by an agency whose tasks are to identify terrorists wherever they may be and to coordinate their pursuit. But let us not forget the broader international context, in which democracy and its values must prevail over despotism and hate and in which we will continue to help to ease the sufferings of humanity—those displaced by war and persecution, those who suffer from AIDS, especially in our region, and those we help through education and cultural programs.Most, perhaps all, of the 22 new members feel fortunate that we enter the parliament in the third term of a government that has brought about major economic reform with good results. The facts show that Australia enjoys a growth rate of three per cent— which is likely to accelerate to the forecast four per cent by year's end—and an underlying inflation rate of between two per cent and 2.25 per cent. Significantly, these outcomes have been achieved as globalisation has gathered pace. The challenge for us now is to ensure that we take full advantage of the opportunities offered by the global economy and especially by what is sometimes called the intangible economy. If Ireland by that means can become the tiger of Europe, Australia can become the lion of Asia. Britain, for example, has responded accordingly by recently establishing its own e-ministry.My electorate has a particularly high number of Internet users and is highly computer literate, but it is not atypical. Therefore, to give impetus and direction to the emerging opportunities, I see five key issues for government to consider and to strive towards: first, to identify the new jobs of the future; second, to develop Australia's network and capital capacity; third, to promote our capacity to the rest of the world; fourth, to work with Austrade to assist the expanding opportunities for Australian business; and, fifth, to ensure equity in access to infrastructure and opportunity throughout Australia. Let me suggest in this same context that every practice and statute that limits Australian business from exploiting global opportunities ought to be reviewed. A good example is the current review of the Trade Practices Act and the limiting definition of `market', with its tendency to restrict the expansion of some growing Australian businesses. For the three years prior to my nomination as candidate, I had the honour of being Chair of the Australian Heritage Commission and also, in 2001, President of the World Heritage Assembly. The protection of Australia's heritage and wonderfully unique environment has always been close to my heart. We live in one of the few countries whose biodiversity is so rich that it has been given the nomenclature of `megadiverse'. Our heritage, both indigenous and post-settlement, is a source of enormous pride to all Australians. When parliament was dissolved in October, it had before it a bill to amend the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act to extend the reforms of that legislation to the identification and conservation of our natural and cultural heritage. I know from my role in the commission that this legislation is vitally important. I sincerely hope the government proceeds with the passage of the bill as a priority.One of the great achievements of this government has been the establishment of the Natural Heritage Trust. Its structure reflects the liberal view that environmental remediation should occur in partnership with local communities and not exclusively by regulatory and bureaucratic processes as favoured by our opponents. In the country, the community remains enthusiastic about this program and its very welcome priorities for dealing with the problems of salinity, land degradation, excessive tree clearing and poor water quality. In the city, the Commonwealth has played an important supporting role to help communities and councils restore remnant bushland, improve coastal water quality and, through the government's greenhouse response, also improve air quality. I favour a continuing Commonwealth leadership role in these areas because for so many of the electors in Wentworth there is no greater concern than the future of the suburbs. I therefore commend the Governor-General in this address-in-reply on the new Natural Heritage Trust programs and greenhouse programs mentioned yesterday.Another area where I believe the leadership role can be enhanced is in the management and protection of Sydney Harbour. Ten years ago as Mayor of Woollahra I promoted and improved the holistic management of the harbour's heritage sites. I was therefore genuinely thrilled when the Prime Minister announced the creation of the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust to ensure that significant Commonwealth owned land is kept in community ownership and used forever.Currently the trust has a life of 10 years, after which the lands will be transferred to the government of New South Wales, largely for inclusion in Sydney Harbour National Park. But recent events suggest—and particularly those concerning the old quarantine station—that we need to refocus on the longer term. This harbour is part of our nation's heritage. Interest in its future lies beyond the borders of my city and state. Indeed, the potential listing of the Sydney Opera House on the World Heritage List— which I support—shows that part, if not all, of the harbour has international significance. I would therefore argue that the Commonwealth should re-evaluate whether it devolves itself fully of responsibility for the protection of sites such as those managed by the trust. To my mind there is a clear case for the federal and state governments to establish a permanent and joint authority for the management of community assets around the harbour, both those currently owned by the Commonwealth and the states. Such an outcome would recognise the legitimate interest that the Commonwealth has in the harbour and enhance its protection in the long term.Looking back, our modern nation has prospered due to the strength of our growing economy and our preparedness to take a stand. Some would say we have defied gravity. In the first century, through sheer grit we got started; in the second, through inspiration a nation was founded; and in this, our third century, the second of Federation and the first of the new millennium, I say, `Let's really get going. Let's build the nation.'The big challenges have often been stated: the need to revive the dry interior, to replenish our inland river system, to repair our struggling farms, to address the problems of salinity and to fill our regions. In the cities, where most of our people now live, perhaps the greatest challenge of all is to build a new infrastructure that will ensure universal access to a good quality of life: user-friendly roads, better transport systems, accessible aged care facilities and a measure of public open space and local amenity—in short, sustainable suburbs. The opportunity is upon us, with a sound economy with an edge, strong and effective leadership—even ideas and inspiration, as the millennial observations of Mr Jeff Kennett and Mr Dick Pratt suggest—and a good start already made on some. In my electorate, I will be conducting a series of forums with all levels of government later this year to consider one possible set of options to address the lack of a sound road and transport infrastructure and the possible future for light rail. I would like to think that each of us perhaps would do what we could to ensure that in 100 years time Australians will look back with pride on a century of nation building.I look forward to being part of a team that has led this country so successfully over the last two terms of the parliament. I have every reason to believe, and confidence, that the next term will be just as successful. I thank the House for the opportunity to make these remarks and I look forward to contributing to the business of this parliament, to the advantage of the Australian people. And in 20 years time, when my two adolescent sons and youngster reflect on the state of our country, I trust that they will be able to say that Australia enjoys a parliament whose decisions have been guided by equity, that our country is strong, that our culture is robust, that the level of prosperity of all Australians has improved and that Dad has played his part in achieving those outcomes.17:38:00152Macklin, Jenny, MPMs MACKLINPG6JagajagaALP00— Mr Deputy Speaker Jenkins, it is good to see you back where you are. I listened very carefully yesterday as the Governor-General read the agenda for the government in this term. We have been through an election campaign where no new initiatives have been put forward in the education or employment areas, so I was waiting to see whether or not we could now look forward to some changes that might address some of the serious problems facing our nation in these critical areas.We just heard from the new member for Throsby about the critical importance of education in addressing inequality in our community, in providing opportunity for the future and in delivering a cohesive society. These are the critical reasons why parents know that education is always going to be a ticket to their children's future, and they also know that it is critical for our country's future. So what we could have expected from the government yesterday was an outline of how they intend to increase investment in education at all levels, from preschool right through to university and on to research, the critical areas of investment that we need to see in this country if productivity is to improve and if our nation is to go forward in a prosperous way.But we saw in that speech yesterday that the Howard government has no policies whatsoever for improving educational opportunity, for expanding employment prospects and for improving productivity in this nation. There are no policies to make sure that the jobs of the future are high wage jobs that Australians could look forward to. It will not be the case that we will have any shared prosperity until we see the government take on these very difficult policy issues in employment and education, problems that continue to get worse under the current government.It seems to be the case that the government really does not know where to start. In the Australian newspaper on the weekend, the new Minister for Education, Science and Training said that his third-term aspirations were to improve education, science and training in all their forms. I am sure that we would all agree with that. But the critical question that everybody would like to ask is how does he intend to go about it. Unfortunately, we do not get any clarification either from the policies that the government took to the election or from the speech that we heard from the Governor-General yesterday.We have heard a lot of comment from the new education minister but certainly nothing about what he actually intends to do. Just today in question time, he said that they were going to have a policy review to try and address some of the problems—further evidence that this government have come in with absolutely no agenda for this their third term. I want to go through a number of the very serious problems facing our education system. We have the new minister for education acknowledging that there is a crisis in our higher education sector but we have also had him admit that the government just elected will do nothing to fix it. In a stark admission of massive pressure on Australia's higher education sector, the new minister said on ABC radio:Most of the people who understand the higher education sector feel that they cannot continue the way they are ...And he goes on:... many people in the higher education sector are arguing for reasons that we would understand, for more resources ...Despite acknowledging that `the status quo is not sustainable', the minister then went on to say that the Howard government would not be increasing university funding in the forthcoming budget. It is hard to see how the government can talk about prosperity into the future while they continue to neglect our universities and the crisis that they face—a crisis fuelled not only by the enormous cuts that took place back when they were first elected but also by the government's failure to index university grants to reflect the actual cost increases that universities face. The Australian Vice-Chancellors Committee have calculated that the gap between what universities should have received from the government in grants and what they actually receive now is $1.7 billion. This shortfall is on top of the six per cent cut to university funding which occurred in the Howard government's first budget and which all universities, their staff and students are feeling so severely now.In 2001, the Howard government short-changed universities by $540 million just in that one year alone. That means fewer full-time staff, more casual staff and higher and higher student-to-teacher ratios, and we all know what that means for our students. The government does not invest what it should be investing in our universities. Unfortunately, it is a government that robs universities of the capacity to plan for the future. It does not make the necessary capital investments, and that removes the capacity for long-term planning. Without an immediate injection of funding—and we have already heard from the new minister that they will not be getting it—universities will be struggling to keep Australia in the international race for a knowledge-rich society. We have now seen the official figures for last year: 44,000 Australians missed out on a university place. Last year there were 44,000 people who wanted to go to university, who wanted to improve their educational and employment opportunities, and who wanted to understand, better than they currently do, how the world works, but those 44,000 people were turned away. This year we know that the numbers will be even greater. If the government had maintained public contributions per student at 1996 levels, two-thirds of the people who missed out this year—that is over 30,000—would have gained a place at university. That is a huge number of people who could have improved their education but who have not been able to because of this government's disinvestment in university education.We saw from the answer given by the Minister for Education, Science and Training in question time today that he has no plans whatsoever to address the huge demand for university places. All he could do was parrot figures from 10 years ago. This is now, not 10 years ago. The government has just been elected to govern this country. It is here to fix the problems; not to look backwards but to take the country forward. In the new economy, where skilled and educated work forces attract international investment—and, most importantly, that means higher living standards—the Howard government is increasing, instead of removing, the barriers to higher education. It is not just the universities that are under financial pressure. More and more students are having to balance paid work with their full-time university studies. In the year 2000, full-time students worked an average of two days every week, nearly three times the hours worked by students in 1984. Many of us, in our families, have students at university. I have a major university in my own electorate. This issue in respect of the amount of time that students have to participate in paid work just to make ends meet has been one of the biggest changes. That takes them away from their studies and takes away the capacity to be involved in university life. Financial pressures are a disincentive for Australians to pursue higher education and no doubt contribute to the 30 per cent drop-out rate for university study—30 per cent of students are dropping out, many of whom do so because of the huge financial pressures they are under. A survey by the Department of Education, Science and Training shows that one-third of undergraduate students are not completing their courses within seven years, and three out of 10 are unlikely to ever graduate. But the government seems unconcerned, once again, and not one policy initiative has been outlined to address this very serious problem. The education minister has dismissed these findings as ranking: In the middle of the OECD range for completion rates.As far as we are concerned, ranking in the middle of the developed countries might be good enough for the Howard government but mediocrity will not deliver Australia higher living standards. A university education is the gateway to higher living standards but this drop-out rate shows that the gate is closed for many, many students. This is especially so for students who cannot afford to study full time or who live in country areas. The survey also shows that older students, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students, country students, and students from disadvantaged backgrounds drop out at a higher rate. Even though we have this report showing that students are finding it harder and harder to complete their degrees, the government has no plans and no policies to provide students with greater support.Rather than being concerned about this high drop-out rate, the minister has found solace in it because, in the words of his spokesman—and I found this remark the most shocking of all:It opens the way for full fee paying students to move into HECS positions.In other words, we can have this big drop-out rate and that allows people who can afford to pay fees to come in and take those slots later on in their university life.The financial pressure facing students at university is further compounded by the debts that are mounting because of what they have to repay on finishing their university education. Students are feeling the burden of soaring fees for their university courses— fees that are leaving students with debts of up to $40,000. Is it any wonder that they are delaying having their families and delaying setting up their homes? I think it is high time that we address the longer-term implications of these major debts that students are facing. A 2002 student will pay twice as much in higher education contribution fees as the average student did in 1992. This year, on average, students will be paying just over $4,500 in HECS fees. These HECS payments are the result of the introduction in 1997 of the three rates of HECS, each higher than the previous single rate, and the lower income thresholds for repaying the loans.More and more, the government is shedding its responsibility for funding our universities and transferring the cost of a university education to students. This is no path for our country to be taking if we are serious about a prosperous future. We all benefit from an educated work force but, under the Howard government, the costs are becoming more and more prohibitive for individual students. Another serious national problem that the government seems unconcerned about is that our labour force is ranked third last amongst the industrialised nations, according to qualification levels achieved. Once again, we do not have any response from the Howard government about how it intends to address this very serious problem.The report that this information has come from, the Productivity Commission's Report on government services 2002, found that the Howard government has failed to meet official targets for the number of young Australians undertaking higher education. Australia is at the bottom of international post-secondary education rankings. The Productivity Commission's report shows that the number of 19- and 22-year-olds involved in higher education of some kind—university, TAFE or some other form of vocational training—is 10 percentage points lower than the official 1991 targets for both the 19-year-old age group and the 22-year-old age group. These targets aimed for 95 per cent of all 19-year-olds and 60 per cent of all 22-year-olds participating in post-secondary education. Our labour force is ranked third last amongst 16 industrialised countries, according to qualification levels achieved. Only Italy and Portugal have a less qualified work force. That is where we find ourselves. I think we would all agree that Australians must become world leaders, not struggling stragglers. But the government has no policy response to the fact that we are not even remotely close to meeting these official targets and certainly will not meet them without policy change. This means that far too many young Australians are missing out on making the transition to further education and a higher standard of living. Surely we all know—certainly on this side of the House we know—that skills are the currency of the future. But the Productivity Commission's report shows that the government is failing to equip young Australians with the skills that they will need to compete in a changing job market. The minister might think that it is okay for teenagers not to finish high school but he only needs to look at how this view is being received in other countries to see how extraordinarily out of touch he is. According to the OECD's Economic survey of Australia for 2000:Many school leavers remain at considerable risk of being locked into marginal labour market activities that may not lead to better skills and employment prospects. And this is the critical point:More needs to be done to reduce the incidence of early school leaving.Otherwise we will have more and more children marginalised at the edge of the labour market and they will not be able to take advantage of future employment prospects. We know that one-third of early school leavers do not make a successful transition to further study or full-time work, compared with one-fifth of year 12 leavers. In 1999, only 39 per cent of year 12 leavers and 43 per cent of year 10 leavers went on to higher education—TAFE, including new apprenticeships, or some other form of further education— compared to over two-thirds of 1999 year 12 leavers. That shows that what we need to be doing is encouraging young people to stay at school, not saying that it is okay and relegating children to a marginal labour market attachment in the future. That is not the role that any education minister who is actually concerned about young people's futures should be taking. Unfortunately, in the face of all of this compelling evidence that early school leaving limits young people's future work and study options, we have an education minister now in this country who says it does not matter. What he should be doing is encouraging students to finish year 12 so as to maximise their options. That is what it is all about. That is what getting an improved education is all about—maximising options so that choices are available to students as they grow older and look for further opportunities. We should be reducing the number of children that leave school early, not encouraging it to increase. Unfortunately, year 12 retention rates have fallen from 77.1 per cent in 1992 to just 72.3 per cent in 2000. If we get more of the talk that we have had from the new education minister, we might see that figure go even further down. What I am most concerned about and why I have wanted to speak in this debate today is that we really see an attempt by the government to divert attention away from this extraordinarily poor education record rather than being concerned about the enormous pressures that students face and that our higher education institutions face. That in the end means that these pressures will affect the future of our country. Unless we put the effort and the investment into education at all levels and unless we encourage students to do their best, to continue at school for as long as possible, then the options that they can look forward to in their future will be severely curtailed. I hope that, as the new education minister gains more experience, these problems will find some solutions rather than be put into the too-hard basket. 10000Jenkins, Harry (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Jenkins)—Before I call the honourable member for Dobell, I remind the House that this is the honourable member's first speech and I ask the House to extend to him the usual courtesies.17:59:00156Ticehurst, Kenneth, MPMr TICEHURST00ANFDobellLP11— Firstly, Mr Deputy Speaker Jenkins, I would like to congratulate you on your re-election to the high office of Deputy Speaker of this House. I hope that you will also pass on my congratulations to Mr Speaker on his election. I am sure that you will carry out your duties with great distinction. I would also like to thank my parliamentary colleagues for being here, offering support today. I owe my presence here today to a number of people, but most importantly to the people of Dobell. Without their support on 10 November I would not be here. They have vested in me an enormous privilege and responsibility. It is an honour that I intend to uphold to the best of my ability. To represent the people of Dobell is a particular honour, as I am only the second person in the seat's history to have been given this opportunity.The seat of Dobell was created in 1984 and is situated on the beautiful Central Coast. The main townships in the electorate include The Entrance, Wyong, Bateau Bay, Wyoming, Berkeley Vale, Wamberal and Ourimbah. A new town centre with a rail and road interchange is planned for Warnervale. It already houses 15,000 people and it is expected to grow to over 50,000 in the next 10 or 15 years. The seat stretches over 952 square kilometres and it includes areas of both Wyong Shire and Gosford City Council. Dobell contains Tuggerah Lake, many surf beaches, numerous bays, rivers, forests, farms and valleys.For such a picturesque area, it is not surprising that the seat was named after one of Australia's best known painters, Sir William Dobell. William Dobell is considered one of Australia's greatest landscape and portrait painters. What political affiliation Sir William had is not clear by any means, although I note that the first speech in this place made by my predecessor made reference to the two Dobell portraits dominating a wall in the then Labor party room. I have further discovered that in 1960 Sir William Dobell was commissioned by Time magazine to paint a portrait of Sir Robert Menzies for their front cover. However, apparently the final result was less than complimentary—to the point that even Arthur Calwell thought the portrait was not `handsome enough'. Labor supporters were apparently delighted, while Liberal Party supporters turned against William Dobell. While Menzies never publicly commented on the matter, it is widely acknowledged that he was decidedly unimpressed with what Dobell had created. Perhaps Sir Robert would be smiling now with the knowledge that Dobell has finally been won by a Liberal!It has taken six years of the Howard government to convince the people of Dobell to support the Liberal Party for the first time in their electoral history. The policy direction set by the government has resonated within the electorate, while the lack of policy from the other side has left many in the electorate feeling let down by the Labor Party and willing to shift their support. Accordingly, I do not underestimate the challenge that lies ahead for me in retaining the seat of Dobell for the coalition, and I look forward to working with the member for Robertson to lift the identity of the Central Coast to a region in its own right.The Central Coast is a rapidly growing area, extending north into the electorate of Shortland as well as into the Liberal-held seat of Robertson to the south. It is an area that has been closely identified with a retiring Australia. To some extent that is understandable when you consider that 25 per cent of Dobell residents are aged over 55. It has also long been considered a popular holiday destination for Sydneysiders. Early pictures of Wyong show a ferry linking the railway station to The Entrance. It was just a short trip across Tuggerah Lake. Today it would probably be a quicker trip than to drive around the local roads. Many local business make their money for the year in the busy periods of Christmas, new year and Easter. Anyone driving north on the F3 on a Friday afternoon in summer would know how popular the Central Coast has become. But the Central Coast is changing. We now have an increasing number of people permanently relocating to the coast from Sydney in search of a much better lifestyle. Around 30 per cent of the working population on the Central Coast commute to Sydney. Put simply, Dobell is a better place to live and bring up families. The lifestyle available on the Central Coast is second to none, and more and more people are discovering it. Many young families have been in the area and have taken advantage of the government's First Home Owners Scheme. The challenge is to develop and grow without compromising the lifestyle we all cherish. I have lived on the Central Coast since 1977. Over the past 25 years I too have come to cherish the lifestyle that is available on the Central Coast. In 1978 we were lucky to buy a large block of land down a dusty, bumpy road. In 2002 it is still a dusty, bumpy road. We are compensated with a panoramic view of part of Dobell—across to Tuggerah Lake, The Entrance and the Pacific Ocean. It is also a great vantage point for thunderstorm watching.A country boy at heart, I was born in Forbes, New South Wales. I would like to remind the member for Parkes that there are still quite a few Ticehursts living in his electorate. My education began at the age of four. My mother says that I started a year early, as I had to keep the dogs away from my elder sister as we walked to school. But my wife thinks otherwise. Even at a young age I had to test the boundaries. When I was aged two, Dad had to put hooks on my highchair to stop me rocking it until it toppled over and I had freedom. We left Forbes when I was six. My Dad was a butcher, and he retained that trade until he retired. He wanted to provide better opportunities for his three children, so we moved to Sydney.My education was furthered with six months in Manly, then completing high school at Granville and Fairfield, after my parents bought a house in Merrylands in 1952. In those days we did not have a family car. We could walk to the station and then take a train to Cronulla Beach, or a train and ferry to Manly. It was the real era of rock and roll—the fifties and sixties—a great time to grow up. I was able to combine my love of radio music and electronics by making crystal radios. My first sales were to kids at school. I studied electrical engineering at Granville and Sydney TAFEs and began a career in the manufacturing industry. My first job was building switchboards for Central Coast power stations. In this job I met and worked with people from many nations. They were mostly people who came to this country from war-torn Europe. What a tremendous contribution they made to our country. I also had my first `taste' of the Electrical Trades Union. As always, I preferred to do my own bargaining.Much to dad's concern, I moved through a number of jobs—always to a new part of the electrical field and always to greater opportunities and greater rewards. Sometimes I stayed 12 months; sometimes a couple of years. I then took a job that led to designing high voltage switchgear and instrument transformers. That was an unusual endeavour in those days. At one stage, we needed a high voltage test transformer to deliver 200,000 volts. The company could not afford to buy one from Switzerland, so I designed one and we built it in-house. I am happy to say that that transformer is still working today in Melbourne. Indeed, it was a conservative design!In 1977 I moved to the Central Coast to work for a then Australian multinational company. My job was to sell electrical power transmission line components within Australia. I travelled the country far and wide, visiting every capital city and many regional centres. From 1982 to 1990 I was the managing director of an Australian operation of a British multinational company. We manufactured lightning arresters and high voltage fuses at Caringbah in Sydney's south. On the occasion of winning a major contract for the SEC in Victoria, I was able to invite the then member for Cook, the late Don Dobie, together with the Premier of New South Wales at the time, Nick Greiner, to visit the works. I am pleased to say that my marketing director at that time is here as a friend in the gallery today. Each year I made a pilgrimage to the UK to present the Australian business plan. We represented other companies within the group, so I also visited Europe, the United States and many other destinations. Despite extensive travel over many years, I can find few places that could match the lifestyle of the Central Coast. My interest in high voltage electrical storms led me to leave the weekly visits to the bright lights of Caringbah to begin my own business on the Central Coast, smack bang in the centre of Dobell. The challenge of introducing a new commercial service of real-time lightning tracking was just too great.It took 20 months from the commencement of the business until we received the first cheque for our new service. Several times I have been down `struggle street'. The diversity of the work force in Dobell is reflective of my own varied professional history. While I never presume to understand each person's particular circumstances—because each person is different—I believe that I can at least have a greater empathy for the challenges that they face. Together with my family we built our house in 1983. There were no first home buyer schemes at that time, and we built it at weekends. I have worked on the factory floor and I have been managing director of a multinational company. I have also started my own business, which is what I was doing up until November last year. I would not profess to understand every problem faced by the electorate of Dobell, and I would not claim to be able to solve them all. However, what I can commit to is to give my all to provide the best representation I can for the people in my electorate. For too long they have laboured under poor representation.I come to this place not only as the representative of the 82,000 electors in Dobell but also as a representative of the Liberal Party, so I would like to take a moment to thank the Liberal Party, without whose support I would not be standing here today. The support I received from the state and federal secretariats, led by Scott Morrison and Lynton Crosby respectively, was fundamental to my success. They both run highly professional outfits with immensely talented staff—staff very skilled in their craft. Also, my thanks go to Senator Coonan and Senator Tierney, and state members Chris Hartcher and Mike Gallacher, who assisted in my campaign and made sure we got across the line. Also, my thanks go to the others who visited during that time—Mrs Bishop and Senator Ellison.One of the highlights of my campaign was having the Prime Minister and Mrs Howard visit the electorate on Melbourne Cup day. Less than a year ago the pundits predicted the defeat of the Howard government, not an increased majority. Indeed, when I spoke to my father in February last year and told him that I would be the candidate for Dobell, he too thought we had no chance. I told him that when both sides were required to face the electorate with their plans for the future only one team had the goods. The leadership of John Howard has been and remains an inspiration. It is something that Australia has not seen since Robert Menzies. I would like to place on record my thanks to the Prime Minister for his support both during the campaign and since I have been elected.I have always believed in the Liberal Party. It is the party that I have supported all my voting life. It is the party which I believe better represents modern Australia. It is a party whose beliefs I share: the freedom of the individual, the right and freedom to choose one's destiny, and a belief in the balance of individual rights and responsibilities in an open, modern democracy. I have lived by the credo that says that if you work harder and put more into your community then you deserve to be rewarded for your efforts. I have also believed that you make your luck happen. The harder you work, the luckier you become.Since becoming the candidate for Dobell in February last year, and since my election on 10 November, I have spent a great deal of time meeting people in the electorate, getting to know them and also the issues that affect them and are important to the local community. One of the greatest attributes that I believe anyone, particularly a member of parliament, can have is the ability to listen. The best way to understand people is to listen to them. Many years as a salesman and business manager have reinforced this lesson. In the short time that I have been the member for Dobell I have been working with the local community to identify the key areas where together we can advance the interests of the electorate. I have been bringing community leaders together, whatever their political viewpoints, because I believe that through a consultative process I will be able to provide a higher level of representation. Three areas in particular are vitally important to Dobell: education, employment and the environment. Not only are they vitally important, they are also intrinsically linked together. The Central Coast Campus provides a unique learning centre. It contains a university, a TAFE and a community college, as well as some operational small businesses. By expanding the educational opportunities, and in particular the VET training, our work force will have school leavers who are ready for duties. In my experience, a university education is not of paramount importance. In Dobell, more than 70 per cent of jobs do not need a university education. We will always have a need for good trades and service people, just as we have a need for more highly educated people.An area such as Dobell, with such a rich and important environment, provides almost endless opportunities to advance not only the education of the electorate but also the local employment opportunities. Dobell has high rates of youth unemployment that need to be reduced. Government programs such as Green Corps, Green Reserves and Work for the Dole have been enormously successful, but there is still much more that can be achieved. The unfair dismissal laws have been an enormous impediment to the advancement of small business in Dobell. I welcome the comments of the Governor-General when outlining the government's plans to make further advancements in this area. Small business needs to be able to create full-time jobs, not just short-term and casual jobs. People need the level of stability that only full-time employment can provide. It is important that we increase the attractiveness for business to invest in new projects and to take on new staff if we expect to expand and develop areas such as the Central Coast. There is no reason why the Central Coast cannot be equally considered as an alternative employment destination and a holiday destination. The 30 per cent of the working population that currently commutes to Sydney could be reduced if more opportunities existed locally.The government faces a number of great challenges over the next three years in these areas. The tragic events of September 11 have forced us all to re-evaluate our lives. We have been forced to look at our place in the world, yet we have had the strength and conviction to face those challenges and come through well. It is often said that you do not appreciate what you have until you lose it, and that was never so true as after the terrorist attacks on the free world perpetrated in the United States. We lost our innocence on September 11 and we realised that complacency brings with it an enormous cost. Many of my friends and former colleagues in the USA were most gratified by the support and comfort provided by the Australian government and the Australian people.Our freedom and our democratic process are things that we have all taken for granted, for they are things that we have considered sacrosanct. However, recent events have reminded us that we are not infallible and that we need to take solid steps to protect that which we hold dear. This government has taken those steps. We stand with our close ally, the United States, in the war against terrorism. We stand strong in protecting our borders and we stand strong in ensuring that Australia remains safe, free and democratic. Direct policy action achieved this aim. Determination and a desire to act in the national interest, despite the critics, achieved this. The people of Dobell, along with the majority of Australians, appreciate strong leadership.To the staffs of the parliament and the Government Members Secretariat who have made my transition to public life as seamless as possible, I record my thanks. We have started with largely a blank sheet of paper in Dobell and they have provided much support in the process of setting up our offices both in the electorate and in this place. I would also like to thank my colleagues who have welcomed me and who have offered much advice and assistance over the past three months. I thank the people who have travelled here today—in particular, my wife Trisha; without her tremendous support I would not have accepted this challenge. I thank my family, my friends, my former work colleagues and customers and, last but not least, my staff Clem, Jo and David, who are all in the gallery here today. There are many people who deserve a specific mention, so as to avoid leaving anyone out, I offer my sincere thanks to all those who have supported and assisted me—you know who you are. I would also like to offer a special thankyou to my mother-in-law, now in her 92nd year, who is also in the gallery. Unfortunately, my own parents were unable to travel to be with us here today, but I thank them most sincerely for all the sacrifices that they made in my upbringing. We owe a lot to our older generation for the many things that they endured in order to give us this great nation of Australia. I stand here today as the representative for all the people of Dobell. I thank them sincerely for the privilege, honour and opportunity they have given me. I will devote my energies to making a real difference for them and I sincerely hope to earn their continued support.18:17:00160Crosio, Janice, MPMrs CROSIO7T4ProspectALP00—At the outset, I congratulate all those members of parliament who have contributed today to the 40th Parliament by making their first speeches. I congratulate them all most sincerely, but particularly I would like to put on the record my congratulations to the Speaker of the House, to the Deputy Speaker and to you, Mr Jenkins, on your elections to that high office.In this debate on the address-in-reply, I would like to bring to the attention of the 40th Parliament of Australia some of the issues and problems which I believe parliament must urgently address. First, I would like to place on the record, as I have stated, the input from all those new members of parliament and what great representatives they will be of the Australian people. It is a great honour and a special privilege to be elected to the federal parliament, and I am sure that those, like me, who have been re-elected understand and appreciate what this honour means.Since parliament last sat, we have experienced yet another harsh Australian summer. As this new year unfolded, we were overcome with admiration for our volunteer bushfire fighters who, while many other people were enjoying the luxuries of a typical Australian summer, spent many days defending other people's property and protecting lives while raging bushfires threatened homes. I would personally like to thank all the Australian volunteer firefighters, and I join the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition in the motion today when we congratulated them on their tireless work and unshakeable commitment in helping their fellow Australians when they were in need. It was a fitting but unfortunate reminder of the year which had just past—the International Year of Volunteers—to see not only the volunteer bushfire fighters but also their helpers who supplied the food and refreshment to the firefighters and the neighbours and friends who helped the victims whose properties had been destroyed all working to help each other. Let us not only as members of parliament but as Australians take heart from this experience and build on it to ensure that good deeds and acts of generosity towards our fellow Australians continue to be encouraged.February 12 saw the 40th federal parliament sworn in. This sitting year has one of the lowest number of parliamentary sittings that I can remember. The elected federal government determines when parliament sits and the pattern of parliamentary sittings for the forthcoming year. Today we are in parliament for the first time in 139 days. It is an insult to the Australian people who voted in a general election on 10 November 2001 that the parliamentary sitting timetable has only 33 sitting days until August and 19 sitting weeks for the entire 12 months. The public have a right to hear the government state on the public record the truth about current issues such as the full extent of Australia's commitment in helping to rebuild Afghanistan and to assist the refugees; how the government plans to solve the current detainee crisis; and how much of the Australian taxpayers' money is being spent on the detaining and processing of asylum seekers on Pacific islands, because, as we saw before the November election, what the Howard government found to be their fix-all solution to the problem of asylum seekers involved them being processed on Pacific Islands such as Nauru and Papua New Guinea without any specific costs being provided. The Howard government have struck a new deal with Papua New Guinea to make available around 800 extra places for the processing of asylum seekers and they have also recently made two new arrangements with Nauru to take another maximum of 1,200 asylum seekers. Despite our Minister for Foreign Affairs claiming that this new deal with Papua New Guinea means that the so-called Pacific solution has been consolidated, the Howard government have not at any time detailed the true cost of the exercise. The Australian public has a right to know, first and foremost in this parliament, what the full cost of the so-called Pacific solution is. During the election campaign, the government made it no secret that the government would determine who will come into this country and they owe it to the electorate to disclose the full costings of their main election policy as a first priority of this parliament.According to information obtained by the ABC, the Prime Minister claims that a budget of $400 to $500 million for the Pacific solution was approved by cabinet in September. That is when Nauru first agreed to house and process asylum seekers. However, when the Prime Minister was confronted with this information—only a month later, I might add, and on air—he could not confirm what the cost was. All the comment he gave Neil Mitchell on 3AW was `it's expensive'. I would like to put into Hansard the transcript:MITCHELL:Is it correct that it was costing $600,000 a day to keep the Manoora there?PRIME MINISTER:I'd have to check the exact figures but it's not cheap.MITCHELL:Do you know what the overall cost of the ...PRIME MINISTER:No, I don't, it's expensive.This just goes to show some of the complacency and arrogance that we can expect from this next term of this government. What kind of a leader of a country admits about his major policy of an election campaign and during it that he did not know what it was costing but `it's expensive'? The Australian government are responsible for the total cost of housing, feeding and clothing detainees. They are responsible for the Australians who staff the facilities and they are responsible for the help they receive from the defence forces.But the precise financial and other obligations undertaken by Australia remain secret. The comment `I don't know, but it's expensive' cannot suffice. Surely, the Howard government knows the total cost of offshore detention. The Australian taxpayers are entitled to know how much is being spent on this government program. The Howard government argues the so-called Pacific solution is an effective program, but it is up to the Australian taxpayers to judge this claim and they can only judge that claim when the full costs are disclosed. If the Howard government will not come clean on this matter, I can guarantee them that in this House and in the Senate estimates committee process Labor will pursue them for full disclosure.This government need to be held accountable and it is the role of opposition to hold them to account. The people in my electorate need to know what is happening in regard to the erosion of health and education services in the western and south-western suburbs of Sydney and the parliament is a forum where these issues should be raised and brought to the attention of the government. Allocating only 33 sitting days until August sends a clear message to the Australian people, and the people within my electorate, that this government are reluctant to be held accountable for their policies.I can relay to this House that, while the Howard government may have a new term— and I congratulate them—the voters in the electorate of Prospect overwhelmingly voted against the Howard government. They voted for the Australian Labor Party and I am honoured to be elected once again to represent the people of my electorate of Prospect. The people of Prospect voted for the Labor Party for a reason, and that is because they know first-hand the reality of living under a Howard government. For the entire term of this government, the issues which I believe are most important to the people in my electorate have been cut out completely, starved of funds or just plain ignored. Recently, the Western Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils—or WSROC, as it is referred to—published a study entitled Who cares about Western Sydney? which reported on what the people of Western Sydney are most concerned about in their region. Crime, community safety, unemployment and drugs and alcohol abuse were very high on the list but better funding for health services, more available child care and better access to high-quality education facilities were also a main priority.The six years of a Howard government that have now passed provided no plan for this government to address the problems of the people in Western Sydney. Let me just state some of the concerns of my constituents to the House. A major report that was released towards the end of last year comparing the effect of child-care cuts between western and northern Sydney has shown that the Howard government's devastating attack on child-care services had the greatest impact on families in the Fairfield-Liverpool area.In 1996, when the Howard government first came to office, $850 million was cut from the federal government's child-care budget. Already, in the Prospect electorate, we have seen two child-care centres close: one in Villawood North, which, although it is not now in my electorate due to the redistribution, is still in the south-west region; and the other in Greenfield Park, which most certainly still remains in my electorate. This has occurred while, to my knowledge, there have been no closures in Liberal Party heartland areas such as Sydney's lower North Shore.Recent research has shown that the parent gap fees have increased by at least $20 to $30 per week and many child-care centres in my electorate remain strapped for cash, have been refused federal funding for upgrading of important facilities and some are still in danger of closing. This government had made several changes to welfare payments but, despite this, the fact remains that child care was still 16 per cent more expensive in 2001 than it was when the Howard government came to office. Working mothers and families need to have a reliable system of child care so they can better balance their work and family commitments. We clearly have a long way to go before affordable and quality child care is available to families who need it. That is something I believe should be addressed in this term of the Howard government; however, I am not optimistic.The WSROC report that I mentioned earlier reported that, according to those people living in Western Sydney, the federal government's top priority is to decrease unemployment and create jobs. I can tell them that in my electorate the unemployment rate has been—for the entire term of the Howard government—unacceptably high. I believe the most effective way to bring the unemployment rate down is to create suitable economic conditions for businesses and also to provide the education and training opportunities for job seekers so they can acquire the skills needed to secure employment. However, in August 2001 it was reported that the Howard government slashed the number of research training places at the University of Western Sydney by almost half—almost 50 per cent. This decision has seriously limited the learning opportunities of the people in the electorate of Prospect and, thus, their opportunities to find employment.Figures from the government show that research training places at the University of Western Sydney have been reduced from 687 places in 2000 to 346 places in 2001, and this is a change of almost 50 per cent. I am still waiting for the current figures. Further analysis shows that one in every eight research training places at Australian universities will be abolished. This means there will be fewer research training places for students wanting to undertake study in the new economy industries such as information technology, biotechnology and environmental science. The University of Western Sydney once stood as a symbol of hope and promise for our people in Western Sydney so that they could have access to a quality education system. It is now in danger of becoming yet another education casualty of this government. The government's attitude to education is no more clearly seen than in the May 2001 budget, which showed the Howard government's complete neglect of its funding responsibilities for public schools, universities and TAFE colleges. In 1996, the government cut funding for TAFE employment and training programs by $240 million but have only now in the budget past decided to fund TAFE and employment opportunities back to their pre-1996 levels. However, the point is that the Howard government must increase funding to the education sector and must continue to increase funding for training programs year after year. You cannot cut back and then five years later go back to a pre-1996 funding level. Training programs are vital for job seekers to obtain the skills and the training needed to find stable and lasting employment in today's competitive labour market.Other than jobs, education and child care in Western Sydney, the WSROC report mentioned that health issues should also be a priority for this Howard government, and these include the provision of affordable aged care beds. There can be no doubt that the Howard government has continually failed in its duty to ensure that frail, older Australians are provided with proper and affordable care. Australian Bureau of Statistics 2001 figures show that the Howard government will fall 398 beds short of its own target for the number of aged care beds needed in south-western Sydney. My electorate of Prospect has a very high population of elderly Australians who have lived and worked in south-western Sydney and paid tax most of their lives, and they want to stay in south-western Sydney, but they are now looking with their families and relatives at where else they can go because they cannot find an aged care bed. Our elderly deserve nothing less than affordable, readily available and quality care in nursing homes—and the Howard government must start to ensure that this is achieved. Due to the federal government's failure to reach its own targets in 2001, many elderly Australians in my electorate are being denied access to aged care services they need and deserve. The federal government's responsibility to provide health services goes far beyond the confines of aged care. Since gaining office six years ago, the government has systematically set about making more and more health services unaffordable. As a result, people in areas like my electorate suffer—especially our low income earners and our pensioners. In 1996, the Howard government abolished the Commonwealth dental health scheme, which provided assistance to many people who could ill afford the high cost of essential dental work. Many people in my electorate who used to rely on that federal government program for dental assistance can no longer afford dental health services. Approximately 500,000 Australians remain on the government's waiting list for urgent dental treatment, but our Prime Minister, Mr Howard, says his government has done enough in the area of dental health.Besides the lack of essential funding for health services, educational facilities and job opportunities, the Howard government has made comments in the media that in this term it will look at and reform workplace relations—and today we have already seen the introduction of the Workplace Relations Amendment (Fair Dismissal) Bill 2002. Let me remind the minister who introduced that bill today that fewer than 0.3 per cent of small businesses are involved in any one year in a federal unfair dismissal case. What happened to a fair go for all Australians, especially if they are coming about to lose their job? We only have to cast our minds back to the images of the Patricks dispute, when workers were sacked from working on wharves that were productive, because they belonged to a union, to know what this so-called reform means. Workers all over Australia can look forward to a continual decreasing of their job security, to a continuation of schoolyard style union busting activities and to still no means to protect 100 per cent of their entitlements in case of insolvency. One thing that the Australian people have learnt from the last term of this parliament is that, despite the government having the means to do so, there is currently no legislation which secures 100 per cent of workers' entitlements in the case of employer insolvency. Over four years ago, I introduced a private member's bill—as I have done every year since, and I will reintroduce it next Monday—to protect workers' entitlements in the case of employer insolvency through an employer paid levy of close to 0.1 per cent of payroll cost. I plan, as I said, to reintroduce that bill every year until 100 per cent of Australian workers' entitlements are protected. The Howard government has presided over some of Australia's largest corporate collapses, with workers having no guarantee that their entitlements will be paid. It is inevitable that during this term there will be more corporate collapses and insolvencies, and workers who have lost their jobs will be left waiting to be paid. I refer all members of the parliament, if they feel that I am being unjust or unkind in talking about workers' insolvency, to page 11 of the speech given yesterday by the Governor-General. It is stated:In the first weeks of parliament, the government will introduce bills to ban compulsory union fees, ensure secret ballots before strikes, prevent one-size-fits-all industry bargaining and establish fair dismissal procedures.I am sure, as elected members of parliament, you can all read; I will not continue. There are 14 lines of the Governor-General's speech given to union bashing and to what the government is going to do to workers of Australia. I remind the members on the government side of the House who are showing great delight and mirth that there are two lines in the speech delivered yesterday dedicated to aged care. In other words, in 14 lines we can deny the workers of Australia their rightful opportunities to have jobs, but we can say to the elderly in Australia, `We think so much of you that we will give you two lines of mention.' Those two lines being:In its third term, the government will give particular attention to addressing the challenges of an ageing population ...The people are not going to accept that. Gone are the days when you can tell a few and expect the majority to comply. The people of Australia are more educated than that and are going to demand a lot more in this third term of the Howard government. Members of the government need to hang their heads in shame for what has not been spent on the people compared with the money that has been squandered by this government in endeavouring to continue wedge politics in its third term. This is not acceptable by any standard, nor will the voters of the future continue to accept it. We need a little bit of truth in accountancy. But, more importantly, as members of this parliament, we need to provide an era in which we can debate the issues, not an era in which we have only 19 sitting weeks so that this arrogant government can hide itself in shame and not be held accountable in this, the people's House. The people should have their representatives in this place debating important issues on which Australia and Australians want answers.10000Causley, Ian (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER(Hon. IR Causley)—Order! Before I call Mr Ciobo, I remind honourable members that this is his first speech. I therefore ask that the usual courtesies be extended to him.18:38:00165Ciobo, Steven, MPMr CIOBO 00AN0MoncrieffLP11—Thank You, Mr Deputy Speaker. What is our purpose? For me, this question will underscore all I say and everything I do here in this most special place. Our purpose, both individually and collectively, is the keystone upon which our nation is built and for which our parliament was established. In coming to this place I am certain that each member has their purpose in mind. This purpose, however, can sometimes fade—a victim of exposure to the intensity of life in this role. In rising today, I hope to sketch my purpose. I hope to provide, as much for myself in future years as for all those present now, a piece that conveys my commissioning and that will not fade with the years.The foundation of my canvas and the pillar of my purpose is the individual and a belief in the supremacy of the market. My focus, however, lies on the electors of Moncrieff and the future of Australia. Standing now in this place, draped as it is in the tapestry of our nation's history and composed from the rich and diverse fabric of our society, I am humbled and truly honoured to have been selected. I have been commissioned by the electors of Moncrieff as only their second representative. The former member, the Hon. Kathy Sullivan, held Moncrieff since its inception in 1984 and will be remembered for the length of her service. Moncrieff is a young seat, only 18 years of age, and together with the other Gold Coast seats of McPherson and Fadden forms a unique part of Australia, embracing some of the most magnificent country and people in our nation. I do not say this flippantly. On any given day, 53,000 people are holidaying on the Gold Coast. Their presence provides the best evidence possible of the attraction of a region with 57 kilometres of beaches, 270 kilometres of waterways and lush hinterland forests. The Gold Coast is Australia's sixth largest city and our population is growing by 3.4 per cent each and every year. By the year 2011 it will be home to over 550,000 people. It is a population explosion fuelled by remarkable opportunities and a free enterprise culture.In being charged to represent the people of Moncrieff in this House, my purpose is to hail the success of my city, to properly portray the challenges we now face, to be a strong and passionate advocate for continuing investment by government and to deliver the infrastructure we need. From the 1890s, when the Queensland Governor Sir Anthony Musgrave took a shine to the Gold Coast, tourism has been our principal industry. We have enjoyed unparalleled success and led the charge as a tourism innovator. Today, almost 5 million visitors, each spending an average of four nights on the Gold Coast every year, inject $3.1 billion into the economy. Tourism constitutes 25 per cent of our local economy and employs more than 36,000 people. We are not, however, resting on the success that we have achieved so far. Like the towers that sprinkle the Gold Coast beachfront, we intend to reach for the sky.We are Australia's innovation city and are wholly committed to developing those industries that are the future and not the past of Australia's competitive advantage in the world. From superyachts to supercomputers, our region recognises that knowledge professionals choose where to work and play on the basis of lifestyle, and lifestyle is the Gold Coast's biggest asset. It is an asset, however, that is under threat. As each new wave of people rolls into the Gold Coast, our city's infrastructure labours to keep up with the increasing pressure. At a time when so many parts of Australia are struggling to maintain their population, we are struggling to contain it. Crucial therefore to our city continuing to grow, continuing to generate wealth for ourselves and our nation, is an understanding by government of the true picture of the Gold Coast in 2002.A victim of our own success, we are a city with an identity crisis. Too many of the problems associated with rapid growth have been masked to governments by a successful tourism campaign to highlight the gold—a campaign of warm beaches, smiling faces and relaxed people. However, this campaign should not blind us to the challenges. Many view the Gold Coast, quite unfairly, as a haven for the wealthy and the retired. Certainly, there are many who have benefited from—as I would hope all Australians have the opportunity to benefit from—a relatively open market economy and many years of economic success brought about by the good policy of this government. These people, however, do not paint the picture for the whole electorate. The real Gold Coast is middle Australia. The real Gold Coast is families, small business men and women, tradespeople and hospitality workers. Far from being an oasis for the super rich, in terms of average household income Moncrieff is in the bottom one-fifth of electorates in Australia. The gold is a veneer, and my purpose is to present to this House the case for middle Australia and to highlight the challenges we face ahead.Throughout our peak tourism months our population swells from our resident base of 430,000 to around 900,000 people. The significance of this number of people and the demands it places upon our city must be recognised by this House. Historically, the Gold Coast's population growth has simply not been incorporated into the development of policy. Unfortunately, we often find ourselves playing catch-up with the infrastructure vitally needed for a city of our size. As a member of the government benches, I have been delighted with recent increases in social provisions. These increases, however, have only served to reduce the disadvantage of the Gold Coast relative to Australian averages. Griffith University Gold Coast remains, for example, several thousand funded places below the Australian average. On a practical level, this means thousands of the Gold Coast's best and brightest must leave to pursue opportunities elsewhere. With infrastructure, especially transport infrastructure, largely unable to support our current resident population, the stress of an additional 450,000 people is profound. We run the risk of our visitors becoming disgruntled at a city struggling to cope with its own popularity. To meet this challenge, the stark decision I put to this House is a choice between the philosophies of Adam Smith and Karl Marx. As a government, are we going to invest taxpayer money to build and improve infrastructure? Are we going to foster the Gold Coast economy to generate thousands of jobs, to realise a revenue source such that the investment is essentially self-funding, or are we going to divert our resources to propping up failing industries, artificially sustaining stagnant work forces and protecting industries in which we have no competitive advantage? Too often in history it seems governments choose the latter. It is my purpose, however, to be an advocate for the former. It is my purpose to highlight that the Gold Coast, built on free enterprise and a can-do culture, is and will remain one of our country's greatest exports. With such a significant proportion of the Gold Coast economy and so many livelihoods dependent on one industry, it is clear great care must be taken with the environment that nurtures this economic activity.The Howard government's measured initiatives, long-term planning and unparalleled economic discipline have anchored a period of economic sunshine for the Gold Coast, a period of sunshine that is only surpassed by a weather pattern from which the slogan `Beautiful one day, perfect the next' was born. However, there are also days of rain. Success lends itself to complacency and at times our policy approach toward tourism— Australia's fourth largest export industry— has been cavalier. Recent international events have demonstrated the fragile nature of this industry. The temptation to take the vitality and vibrancy of this sector for granted without due regard to the careful nurturing required to protect it from the elements has often been too strong. To this end, it is my purpose to promote, protect and nurture it.As the small business capital of Australia, Moncrieff comprises hardworking, enterprising households. Fewer than 14 per cent of residents work for the government. It is a city, as testified by the result of the last election, with a consensus of thought for the future that is shared by all on this side of the chamber. I am humbled by the belief the people of Moncrieff have shown in the Liberal Party's ideals and by the knowledge that I have been chosen to promote their interests. Likewise, I am humbled by the many friends, believers and advocates who toiled so that I could stand here as the member for Moncrieff. Although I can recognise only a few by name today, hundreds of Liberal Party branch members, election day volunteers and wise counsellors have cleared a path for me to climb here to the summit of Capital Hill. No matter the mountains I face in the future, I will remember my base camp was the Gold Coast Young Liberals, for this is where my expedition began; this is where I discovered politics.The friendships I have forged have harnessed me through many rough and windy days. Each of you has an ally in me; likewise, my friend, Santo Santoro, who has never feared wild weather and who taught me how to build a shelter that would anchor me in any storm. Senator Brandis, thank you for being a most eloquent voice of reason. Senator Mason, you have challenged me in so many ways and are a living testament to the finest traits of any senator. Margaret May, the member for McPherson, generous of self and of spirit, your standards remind me of why I want to serve our community and our country. To one of my dearest friends and a man in whom the Liberal Party's future will always be assured, Lee Benjamin, your political ability is infinitely more senior than that of almost anyone I have met. Thank you most of all for your loyalty. To my parents, thank you for instilling in me the values that have led to my vision. Mum and Dad, your gentle guidance taught me that all is possible if you find the courage to take the first step. To Astra, my best friend and most cherished wife: Aristotle, when speaking of friendship, said it was one soul inhabiting two bodies. I feel that way about you and could never hope to replicate the absolute strength, support and love you have shown me throughout the years. Our quote: I love thee with the breath, smiles and tears of all my life and, if God choose, I shall but love thee better after death. The strength all of you have provided me I know flows from your belief in the philosophy of the Liberal Party, the belief in the sovereignty of the individual and their empowerment over the collective, in the responsibility every one of us has in a civil society, in the promotion of the family as the bedrock of any sustainable society and in the limited role for the state in wealth redistribution and market intervention.Since the nefarious attack on all liberal democracies on September 11, I am steeled in my resolve to defend our freedoms. I am strengthened in my view that the Liberal Party remains in this country the greatest mechanism for resisting the incursion of the collective over the individual. My purpose in this chamber and outside is to uphold this most precious philosophy, as well as to fight fiercely for my electorate. Historically, those opposite were of the view that a social democracy provided best for the individual. With well-intentioned inspiration drawn from Karl Marx's `from each according to their ability, to each according to their need', they set about consulting the elites and fashioning policy that would, as I recall from watching television as a youngster, mean no child would live in poverty by 1990. It failed. I do not gloat though; that is not my purpose. The real issue at hand is why the social democratic project failed. Why did it fail here, as it did throughout the world? What lies at the core of that belief structure such that it is uninspiring to the individual and to the market? In my humble view, the fundamental and fatal tenet is arrogance; it is the arrogance to presume to know, the arrogance to compel on the often false promise of something better, the arrogance of promising to deliver but then delivering what was not promised. Little wonder then that the public is increasingly cynical toward this institution.As Friedrich von Hayek wrote in The Road to Serfdom, `the increasing discredit into which democratic government has fallen is due to the democracy having been burdened with tasks for which it is not suited'. Each of us, as the representatives of the aspirations of approximately 85,000 Australians, must bear the full responsibility we owe to them all. This weight is best enunciated by Edmund Burke, who, more than two centuries ago, observed:Your representative owes you not his industry only but his judgment, and he betrays instead of serving you if he sacrifices it to your opinion.I cite this to highlight our responsibility to exercise judgment and to provide strength of leadership. In all of our deliberations we must raise our eyes from the decision at hand and truly appreciate the judgment that will be brought to bear on our actions. Arrogance and policy expediency must be recognised as two of the greatest enemies of this place. I believe we will all walk this line between the arrogance of the expert and ideology on the one hand and the jaded expediency of the cynic on the other. This walk is fraught with difficulty for we as Australia's parliament now walk an uncharted course and must be guided purely by our knowledge, experience and faith in our destination.I am not so youthful that I stand in this place with starry-eyed idealism. I do not immediately claim to recognise where arrogance ends and where expediency begins. I understand there is no one-line answer to the problems we face and no textbook in which each generation gives its own account. That said, whether we act in the roaring flames or in the early morning flicker of our philosophical fire, we can always draw comfort from the fact that it is present. The alternative would be to traverse our political landscape through the consensus of the loudest. I define good governance by the standard of egalitarianism—equality of opportunity, not necessarily of outcome. This premise is the true separation between those on this side of the chamber and those on the other. Any injustice of which we are accused is visited upon few but affords freedom to all. The injustice of those opposite, however, is visited upon all in the name of a few. This good governance will remain my purpose for as long as I stay in this House.18:54:00168Adams, Dick, MPMr ADAMSBV5LyonsALP00—I congratulate you, Mr Deputy Speaker Causley, on your election to that great office. You are a very experienced man. You have had a lot of experience in the New South Wales parliament and no doubt you will bring a lot of grace to that chair. I wish you very well in it. Also, I congratulate Mr Speaker on his return to the Speakership of the House. I congratulate the member for Moncrieff on his maiden speech and look forward to commenting more on his philosophy in the future.I would like to point out to the House that Mike Rann will form a government in South Australia and that he has won the support of Independent member Peter Lewis. The Parliamentary Library has confirmed that this is the first time in the history of our Federation that Labor has held government in all states and territories at one time. So we have a pretty interesting set of circumstances for our democratic processes to deal with.I want to contribute to this debate on the address-in-reply to the Governor-General's speech. When I listened to it yesterday I was struck by it. I was very disappointed in that speech. Looking for the country's future, I thought it was tied closely to a backward thinking agenda. A very backward thinking agenda was presented. Terrorism has been here for thousands of years; it is only of late that it has become a more multinational affair where disaffected people find it easier to wreak havoc on innocent people. The leaders can use refugee camps to draw on for their cannon fodder, but those same leaders are not to be found anywhere near them. Our problem is to ensure that we are dealing with the two issues, one being terrorism and the other being Australia's responsibility towards world refugees.It has been very obvious since 1996 that Australia has been isolating itself in the Pacific, and now it is isolating itself by half a world. Yet our nation is made up, I understand, of 97 different nationalities, many of whom come from the countries that Mr Bush and Mr Howard now seem to want to target. I am a little nervous about the likely outcomes from the directions this government is heading in. We have to engage and we have to ensure that whatever actions we take now do not have an effect in 10 years time. Communications and respect must be part of the agenda.The Governor-General talked of shared prosperity. Some of those people who have will be getting some more, maybe. But those people who have not or who have very little do not appear to be in the picture. The speech talked of families and choices, yet the Liberals are determined to cut funding to public schools and universities while topping up the private sector, which has access to other forms of funding. Shared prosperity? I doubt it! The Liberal way will not let that happen.Choice and access to health care were raised. Please tell me where the choice and access are in country Australia. It is becoming harder to find medical care in the country. Doctors are leaving through stress and lack of opportunities. Country hospitals are being run down. Nursing homes are still increasing their phantom beds, without producing any real outcomes. The care that is there is becoming more rushed and stressed. Our nurses are simply packing up and moving overseas because of the lack of incentives and job satisfaction to stay. Without pumping considerable amounts of money into the health care system, Australians will end up like our American counterparts: the rich get serviced and the poor are left waiting—queuing and hanging about until they die, recover or eventually get some treatment for which they will probably have to hock their house. Centrelink was another point. This underresourced and overstretched agency attempt to deliver some assistance to their clients, but as often as not their information is wrong— people are cut off for minor and technical infringements and this leads to homelessness and despair. We want to try to do something about suicide in our country. Let us start where it really matters—in the home, in the street and in the emergency accommodation around the place.Workplace reform, in the government's view, means attacks on the trade union movement of Australia so that ordinary workers have to bear the brunt of an employer's misdeeds without support. Good employers have nothing to fear from unions and union participation in the workplace. In fact, there are many benefits in unions and employers working together to keep employees happy, healthy and satisfied within their workplaces. I am proud to have been a unionist since I was 15 years old.I would like to take the opportunity to point out a case in my own electorate where union action has worked very well—where its involvement has improved the lot of a whole community. Here I would like to congratulate the Australian Workers Union and its members for achieving a reduction in working hours and the dumping of the 56-hour shifts at Queenstown, a mining town in my electorate. Robert Flanagan and his AWU members have been working hard to try and bring some sense to the working hour dilemma that faced Queenstown and the other mining towns on the west coast of Tasmania. The union went out into the community and heard what the problems were. It then took those concerns to the state government, which instigated an inquiry. The management of Mount Lyell has agreed to end the 12-hour shifts, and I now hope that that will run through to the other mines in the area. It is a great result. I do not believe management will regret the moves and I am sure that it will bring a greater commitment to the employer and to productivity.I have seen the effects of those long shifts on miners. At the end of the shift some workers could barely keep their eyes open. They were so exhausted that they could not spend time with their families, and they were a danger in the workplace. It is clear that, while the longer hours paid good money, it was risking health and safety and the whole community structure of the town. This had to be dealt with, and the result proved the value of unions. They were taking a much greater role in representing not only the workers in a particular industry but also the community in which they live. Being a union member means that you can help to care for your community and the problems it faces as well as improving workplace conditions and wages. I believe that this result spells a new era for unionism and that all unions will benefit from the example set here. Well done to Robert and his team.To allow a union to work properly, it is best to have compulsory unionism and compulsory membership, just as we have compulsory voting in this country. It allows everyone in a union to have a say in the collective future of their workplace—to help solve problems, to seek better pay and conditions and to stop any vindictiveness on the part of an employer who may pick off unionists one by one.It is the dodgy companies who will benefit from the government's so-called workplace reform—those who do not want to pay superannuation or proper workers compensation, or who even forget to take out tax instalments and then say that they have gone into a contract without informing the tax office or the contractor. There are also those who pay below award rates—who try and employ young people for lower rates without informing them of what they should be getting, what the going rate is, or what their rights might be. Those employers should have their backsides kicked every so often by an attentive union. Fair and proper legislation is needed to allow employees to have the same rights as their bosses. They can only achieve these rights through collective action and bargaining.Union members in the past have given up pay and jobs to fight for better working conditions for us today. People forget that the conditions we enjoy have been painfully gained through constant struggle and negotiation. So I would say that the government's so-called reforms in the workplace are based on misinformation. We will be going backwards—back to Dickens's days, when no-one had work rights, no-one could bring a pay issue before an employer without risking their employment and no-one could seek a redundancy package or workers compensation claim with any confidence of success. We need a national scheme to allow a safety net for when companies fail. There should be none of this stuff about one company paying out and another not. There should be a national indemnity scheme to allow workers' entitlements to be paid into a group fund so that if a company fails then the entitlements are enshrined in an agency that cannot be breached or used fraudulently. It has been promised by this government, and I see from the Governor-General's speech yesterday that they are now going to consult on it. It was a promise; it is now going to be consulted on.As for the government being innovative in technology and education, unless we can give some breaks to industry to encourage them along this path—along with funding the CSIRO to allow it an independent role in overseeing change—Australia will not keep up with its competitors. We need skills, yet we are preventing the creation of more places in Australian universities. Many of our clever young people cannot afford to attend university. They are forced to find work and then cannot get the time to study or they are ineligible for assistance as an independent until they are over 25, which puts an enormous burden on parents who are barely making ends meet. There is no real help in that system.Our public schools are being downgraded. `If you want a good education, pay for it!' That is this government's philosophy. It does not matter that many of our brightest graduates are products of public schools and have benefited from their time in the Australian education system, which was one of the best in the world. Now we are looking at welfare education. What a shocking thought. Back to the workhouse for the local beadle—picking up the young boys to put into virtual slavery instead of school. Girls were farmed out to clean houses and generally go into service almost as soon as they could be taken. The equivalent now is the dole. Kids who cannot afford to continue in education have very little hope of finding meaningful work. An article in the Hobart Mercury on Tuesday this week said that, to continue their education, a number of children were picking subjects on the basis of cost rather than interest. Many parents could not afford leavers' dinners, sports and excursions for their children; in fact, children were being kept from school because parents were not able to afford school related expenses and did not want their children to be ridiculed because of it.There is a tragic truth that the state schools are being short-changed because the federal government's funding priorities are against government schools. So I was not impressed with the proposed government program that the Governor-General listed for us. The Labor leader, in his efforts to bring reform to the parliament, had a much more refreshing approach to where we should be going, with an independent Speaker and his deputy and a more caring parliament that listens rather than shouts. It sounds to me as if we are missing opportunities to improve parliamentary debate and procedures.I want to take this opportunity to thank the electors of Lyons for returning me to the parliament. I am honoured to once again serve in this place with my fellow colleagues and people on the other side whom I have got to know over the years. It is a great honour. Fewer than 1,000 men and women have been elected to this chamber since Federation, so it makes those of us who win the confidence of our electors a very privileged lot. I thank my friends and colleagues who supported my return.I thank the electors of Lyons for renewing my contract for another term. It is my job now to represent Lyons to the best of my ability. Once again we have a federal Liberal government and a Labor state government, and now we have state Labor governments in every state and territory of Australia. This can sometimes present problems when we have to make decisions and deal with two authorities. I certainly hope that that does not apply in Tasmania and that we can tackle some of the debates that we need to have head-on. However, the role of government is to perform their duties to electors, whatever political persuasion they may be. We all vote and pay taxes and expect efficient and courteous service from government and their employees. If people are not satisfied with a government's actions, they take their views to their local representative. If nothing happens, or if they feel there is scant attention paid to their needs, it is at the ballot box that they will express their displeasure.AV5Quick, Harry, MPBV5Adams, Dick, MPMr ADAMS—Luckily, I must have been doing my job for many years now, as the member for Franklin said, to have been returned to the electorate of Lyons. I give my commitment to continue in the same vein. I was disappointed that I was not able to assist in the shadow cabinet this time, but it does give me an opportunity to represent the state more completely. I will be ensuring that the interests of Tasmanians are put forcefully in the parliament and that issues are taken up promptly. It will also allow me to develop policies and ideas for the future. Change is all around us, and we must continue to review and consider our position on many issues. When you live on the periphery of the periphery, as we do in Tasmania, it stretches us to face the changes that globalisation is forcing upon us. In this new year, with a new government, I hope that we will have a fruitful year—one in which we can point out that change is not frightening and that we can improve parliament and make sure that all Australians can have a very positive future.19:13:00171Hardgrave, Gary, MPMr HARDGRAVECK6MoretonLPMinister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs10—I am absolutely delighted to stand here as the member for Moreton, having been elected now for the third time. I wish to take the opportunity in this debate on the address-in-reply to renew my commitment to the people of Moreton, to thank them for the faith that they have shown in me and for their support on 10 November.When I first rose in this place on 1 May 1996, I promised to be Moreton-centric. Following the 1998 election, I renewed that promise. Tonight I again state that, despite the additional duties which have been conferred upon me—the high honour of serving as a minister in this third Howard government—my priorities rest still with the electorate of Moreton. I will represent them in a vigorous way through the usual channels that I have been representing them over the last almost six years.We have a very multicultural community in Moreton, so my appointment to the ministry to look after citizenship and multicultural affairs has been regarded by many people in my electorate as a vote of acknowledgment by the Prime Minister of the very cohesive local community that we have. That multicultural community came out to support my candidacy on 10 November, with people who have come to this country as refugees from a variety of parts of the world, including the Horn of Africa, standing out there in the warmth and wet—it was a very wet and horrible day on 10 November, but a hot, warm day, if you get my drift—to hand out how-to-vote cards that entire day.It just goes to show that, despite the attempts of those to try to paint some division and some difficulty as a result of the government's tough stand on matters to do with our national sovereignty, the law and order issue of our border protection measures, those who have in fact come through the immigration system see the integrity of that system as being very important, so much so that they wanted to actively campaign for a government member to be returned and to send that message clearly to this place.It is important for migrants, refugees, people who have come to this country through a variety of programs, that the government does maintain its strong measures of integrity with regard to our border protection to ensure that our migration system never allows in people of bad character and bad health. The fact that we now have security checks adds to the dimension of credibility that every migrant and every person with a permanent migration outcome actually brings to Australia. The Australian Labor Party's campaign of lies on 10 November was always going to be rewarded with complete failure—they spent so much of last year campaigning strongly and misleading people on the question of school funding. As the member for Lyons has just rightly observed, there are Labor states all over the place. In Queensland we call government schools `state schools'. There are Labor state governments all over the place, and we call government schools `state schools'. They are the schools that are funded by the states. Of course, when you couple that with the fact that the Commonwealth has now reached record levels of funding in education for state schools as well as non-government schools, to provide support to parents who want to make those choices, you can see the fallacy in the campaign and how so many people saw through it.The same is true in health care. The Queensland government's health care system is in crisis, with a minister who is crisis prone, who is not quick to react to the real problems, who wants to try and flick people who are old out of the system into aged care, because it is cost shifting to the Commonwealth, instead of realising that they are sick first and foremost and dealing with that problem. These are the sorts of problems that we are getting from Labor state governments around Australia, despite the efforts of the Commonwealth to increase funding.Mr Deputy Speaker, as you know, the more the Commonwealth seems to increase expenditure in a variety of portfolio areas, the more the state governments back out of their commitment to match on a dollar for dollar basis the Commonwealth's contribution. We both know, I am sure, that both systems are needed in the health care area and that both systems are needed in the school area of the government and non-government contribution.The member for Moncrieff, amongst the three fine new members to this place—the member for Ryan and the member for Dickson being the other two—made a very fine contribution a few moments ago. I would like to reflect briefly upon a similar theme because in preparing for this address today one of the things that occurred to me that needs to be talked about, that is of great importance to the people in my electorate, is the arrogance factor of the Australian Labor Party.In my own electorate, despite increased funding in areas to do with local roads from this government and more funding that has been forecast for the term of this government, the Queensland state government continues to show absolutely no understanding of the needs of local people on the issue of the Southern Brisbane bypass and the fact that the Griffith arterial road—the continuum of Riawena, Granard, Kessels and Mount Gravatt-Capalaba Roads—and the roads which run parallel to this major road are in fact choking on traffic, traffic that is avoiding a toll, a toll that the toll king of Australia, Steve Bredhauer, will not do anything about.He has been dragged kicking and screaming into a study to look into community views on this, a study in which he attempted to try to focus on just one road. Of course, as the local member, I rightly forced the terms of reference to include all of the consequences of alternative options to this one particular road. Yet Minister for Transport Bredhauer and the Queensland government showed so little interest in the matter after me writing to him when he was first appointed to that position in July 1998 that it took him 1,200 days to come to my electorate to try and talk to me about that. He did that—wait for it—17 days out from the last federal election and brought a gaggle of media and the Labor Party candidate along with him for the fun of it all, and he expects me to take seriously his commitment to or interest in the people in my area.Steve Bredhauer's complete lack of interest in my area and his arrogance extend to the people of Salisbury, for whom money was given by this government to the Queensland government for noise barriers. But the Queensland Department of Transport have decided that noise barriers along Riawena Road in Salisbury are not a priority and are not even going to do anything about planning for it, despite having the money from the Commonwealth. It is a matter that I intend to pursue with John Anderson, the Minister for Transport and Regional Services. The arrogance factor continues to the state member for Yeerongpilly, Matt Foley, another minister in the Queensland government, who has made a choice of his department's infrastructure at the Yeronga TAFE which now involves emissions coming out of that TAFE. The local residents are complaining that they are being covered in soot, that there are emissions and smells, and he has made a choice between his department's facility and the residents across the street by backing the department's facility. He does not care about the people in his own electorate. The problem in Queensland now is that, with the Australian Labor party having such a large number of seats—R36Albanese, Anthony, MPCK6Hardgrave, Gary, MPMr HARDGRAVE—I will point it out because that in itself is part of the arrogance: they actually do not care about the large number of people in each electorate who did give them support last year. The bigger the margin, the bigger the arrogance—that seems to be the motto of the Beattie government. But it is not just the Queensland state government. The Brisbane City Council has the divisive Jim Soorley at the helm—a man who wants to go, but after the member for Denison attempted to go the Labor Party in Queensland apparently have polled Brisbane and found that, if Soorley goes, the Labor candidate will not get up; so the arrogance factor may be tempered, but we will find out. This is the man, the great conciliator, who the other day described a Scotland-born union official—from, I think, the Transport Workers Union, representing bus drivers who were upset about a bus driver being sacked by the council—as a `foreign import' and described bus drivers in Brisbane as terrorists. The arrogance of the Soorley era must end and I hope he goes soon. What is worse is that underneath this arrogance that Soorley brings to the running of Brisbane is the fact that there are Brisbane city councillors all over the place not working. There is an arrogance factor: a member of Civic Cabinet, Councillor Kerry Rea, Councillor for Holland Park, was breathless prior to Christmas when she told a public meeting that she could not decide whose side she was on in relation to rezoning properties in the Holland Park west Tarragindi area of my electorate. It was an issue that was raised for about two months prior to the federal election. I kept my commitment to the local people by attending a public meeting. It was the Monday night after the federal election when Kerry Rea could not decide whose side she was on. Ultimately, the sheer level of public outcry and embarrassment—and I guess the Labor Party pollsters—ruled this rezoning should not go ahead. The arrogance factor is not just in Kerry Rea's domain alone.There are, however, many good news items occurring in the federal electorate of Moreton which are very relevant to the Governor-General's address given to this place yesterday. The government promised prior to the last election, and is delivering in full, a law and order pilot project in my electorate which is named `Spot-It'. It is about securing our local schools and ensuring that—rather like Neighbourhood Watch—local school communities will have properly vetted volunteers to check out the school grounds to make sure that some of the nasty activities that may occur at night do not result in `sharps', or whatever, left around the school grounds. It will also make sure that people who park at schools and in a variety of places for whatever sick reason they might have are all passed on to the police. It is a worthwhile project. Mission Australia are coordinating that and Wellers Hill State School was the first school to agree to be part of that pilot scheme, and I am pleased to see that they were.Likewise, I know that on National Service Day last Saturday national servicemen marched in Brisbane and were very proud to receive the first of the national service medals, which is also a part of this government's ongoing commitment to fulfilling an obligation to respect and remember the contribution of those who have served. The national servicemen's medal will be, upon application, going out to many tens of thousands of people. I congratulate the former Minister for Veterans' Affairs, the member for Maranoa, for his persistence in ensuring that this medal did come to fruition. There was also a rather nice intersection, in my activities as a minister, with the local community on Australia Day when the Lions Club of Brisbane, Macgregor, held the first citizenship ceremony in my part of the world for many, many years. There were some 57 new Australians who were conferred that day. Immediately after that, I was able to present my Moreton area community service awards. There are so many people who have served our local community so well. I would suggest to all honourable members that they look at ways of involving their local community in that sort of activity—where successful local residents who have made a difference come together with new residents and new citizens. The bonding for about 350 people, I believe, was a very important event for each of them.I would like to read into the record the names of those who received that community service award, because they are great Australians and they have served our local community extremely well. I give my heartiest congratulations to Len Abbott, Ron Baker, Lena Bazzo, Alan Beale, Winifred Bristow, Joyce Bylett, Henry Chen, Melody Chen, and another Melody Chen, and Benjamin Chen—none of them are related but it certainly does show that the local Chinese community are as enthusiastic about community service as others are—Jocelyn Clarkson, Walter Costello, Jack Curtis, Patricia Dormer, Edith Edwards, Judith and Rodney Ellerington, Miles Farmer, David Floyd, Darel Green, Yong Huang, Russell Kelly, Yung-Fu Lee, Eric Lin, Jason Lin, Kevin Ludgater, Narelle Morris, Jack Orr, Imaan Yusuf Peer—from the Kuraby mosque; Imaan provided real leadership in our local community following the attack on that place late last year—Merv Reid, Bob Robinson, Neil Scanlan, Margaret Smith, Owen Stewart, Bill Temple, Bill Thirkill, Joan Wakefield, Dennis Webb, Austin Wilkins, Dulcie Winbank and Julia Wu. It is right that I place your commitment to the local community on the public record in this most important place.I would also like to register my support and thanks to the many people in the Liberal Party branch in the federal electorate of Moreton. From time to time, people have cause to comment on Liberal Party activities in the state of Queensland. I am very happy to report to this place that the united Liberal Party in the federal electorate of Moreton, I believe, has been part of the reason why I am here today. Chris Penglis, my FEC chairman; Angela Owen-Taylor, the vice-chairman; and particularly Denise Button, the secretary of the FEC, amongst others, stand out in my mind as people who made a marvellous contribution. The Sunnybank Wishart Young Liberals brought a vitality you would expect from such an organisation, an organisation which has produced such fine people, as the new member for Moncrieff, the new member for Dickson, and indeed the new member for Ryan. Like the Queensland division of the Liberal Party and the Young Liberal Movement, I believe they should be heralded. We in Queensland are very proud of our new members in this place. We believe we have brought a great sense of renewal and vitality to this third Howard government. We are very appreciative of the contribution that each of these people will make. But, at the heart of it, the Moreton FEC of the Liberal Party is proving the way forward for so many other divisions within the Queensland organisation.Finally, Mr Speaker, as you know, because you often talk about it in this place upon reflection, none of us as members can operate in the isolation of just our own ability. It is important to note on the public record my absolute appreciation for the stress and the strain that I, as a very active member of parliament, have put my own electorate staff under during the last three years in particular. To Lorraine, who has been the team leader and continues to play a vital role in my ministry office; to Tanya; to Adrian in particular; and we are now joined by another Tania as well; and also to Jan, who comes in a couple of days each fortnight, I say thank you for the tremendous work and effort that you have put in to making a difference. From each of those people I have gathered a great deal of inspiration, an enormous sense of purpose and an understanding of the duty that I must perform to maintain my Moreton-centric approach, as I promised in 1996, to maintain a vigorous representation of the good people of the federal electorate of Moreton and to ensure that their voice is always heard in this place. Adjournment17510000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Order! It being 7.30 p.m., I propose the question:That the House do now adjourn.17519:30:00175Albanese, Anthony, MPMr ALBANESER36GrayndlerALP00—The news of Steve Waugh's dropping from the Australian one-day cricket team has left tens of thousands of cricket fans bewildered and outraged. As the Labor Party's shadow minister for ageing, I want to put on record here that experience is a valuable commodity, not just in cricket but in all aspects of life. Cricket is not just a game of skill and youthful strength but it is also an intellectual pursuit, in which the role of the captain is paramount. Steve Waugh not only has matured into one of the world's best players but in my view has excelled as captain to the point where he is arguably Australia's best ever. During his tenure as captain of the Australian cricket team, Steve Waugh has displayed nothing short of total dedication and professionalism, both on and off the field. As a batsman and bowler, he is tough, competitive and highly skilled. As a captain, he has fostered comradeship amongst his team-mates and respect for the history and culture that go with wearing the baggy green. Under his captaincy, Australia secured the mantle of No. 1 test nation in the world, and Australia's one-day team won 67 out of the 106 games it played, including the 1999 World Cup final. It is the best record of any permanent captain of Australia's one-day team ever. Waugh's capabilities as a leader were exemplified by the Australian team's recent streak of 16 consecutive test wins—a world record. The success on the field has provided endless hours of exhilarating entertainment, not only for cricket fans here in Australia but in all cricket-loving nations. The success of the Australian team in large part mirrors the personal achievements of Waugh himself. He is easily Australia's most capped one-day player, with 325 games. He is the only Australian to have played in two World Cup winning teams—in 1987 in India and in 1999 in England. He has scored in excess of 7,500 runs in international one-day games, at an average of 32.9 and with a strike rate of 75.91. In addition, he has taken some 195 wickets in one-day internationals. In the recent series, the results of which his critics have used to justify his unfair dismissal—if I can use that term—as captain, the fact is that Australia, South Africa and New Zealand each won four games and lost four games. Against arguably the world's best one-day team—South Africa—Australia defeated them three times out of four. New Zealand performed exceptionally well and deserved credit in playing perhaps beyond what was expected of them in securing three wins against Australia. That is to their credit but it should not be to Australia's denigration, and Steve Waugh should certainly not suffer for that. In the end, we only missed the finals due to manipulation by the captains of South Africa and New Zealand. Who can forget the 120 not out that Steve Waugh scored in the 1999 World Cup game against South Africa, which ensured that we would progress? Were it not for that innings, Australia would not have won the World Cup. When there is a crisis, there is no-one we would want more walking out to represent our nation than Steve Waugh. In recognition of his contribution, Steve Waugh won the 2001 Allan Border Medal. That was just last year. Along with all Australian cricket fans, I wish him all the best in his efforts to regain his place within the Australian one-day team, and his position as captain. He took today's news with great dignity, which you would expect. He said he had `never shied away from a challenge'. I am certain that that is the case and I am certain that, as Steve Waugh is identified with introducing the slower ball as a bowler and the slog-sweep as a batsman, he occupies a place in Australia's one-day history as well as in Australia's test history which I do not believe will be surpassed. It is appropriate, I think, that he does succeed in coming back, and I certainly hope that he takes his rightful place back in the team in time for the World Cup in 2003. (Time expired)17619:35:00176Gallus, Christine, MPMrs GALLUSCU4HindmarshLPParliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Foreign Affairs10—I would like to take the opportunity in this adjournment debate to mention—following yesterday's condolences motions—my own condolences for two people who preceded me in my seat. Neither of them were actually the member for Hindmarsh but both of them held seats that now take over part of the electorate of Hindmarsh. The first was Kay Brownbill, who took over the seat of Kingston in 1967. At that time, Kay Brownbill had the distinction of being the third woman in Australia to sit in this House and the first woman from South Australia to do so. At that time, at the age of 52, she was the youngest woman to sit in this House, and the headlines said: `One woman with 123 men'. The odds have improved, but not that much. On her election—it was not absolutely auspicious—she was reported in the paper as saying that the first thing she wanted to do was to buy a new hat. I do not think we would hear many of the women today saying that. Having said that, she turned out to be a formidable member of this House and refused to be labelled as a spokesman for women. She was a member of this House and represented all Australians. She did not see that the men only represented the men, and therefore she refused to be seen as only representing the women. She had a particular interest in tourism, especially in relation to South Australia, and in her speeches she was wont to mention such things as the Hills Hoist factory, which was then in the electorate of Kingston and is now in my electorate of Hindmarsh. She unfortunately was defeated in 1969, which brings me to the second person I wish to pay tribute to tonight, and that is Ralph Jacobi.Ralph Jacobi came into parliament in 1969 and he left in 1987. He was the first member for Hawker. As I have said, he held that seat from 1969 until 1987, when it was taken over for one term by Elizabeth Harvey, and I succeeded Elizabeth Harvey in that seat. When I took over the seat of Hawker, Ralph Jacobi's presence was everywhere. People talked about Ralph Jacobi. At every meeting I went to, whether it was Rotary, Lions or anything else, people talked about Ralph Jacobi, as did the senior citizens groups. I learnt a lot from following what Ralph Jacobi had done, which was to work out when the elderly groups had their afternoon teas. He would drop in to say hello and therefore would sit down and have a cup of tea and a piece of cake. He got the reputation of being a very approachable, good local member. But more than that, he was a very distinguished member of this House.The other day I had the pleasure, quite accidentally, of coming back from Melbourne to Adelaide with Barry Jones, another former member of this House. We talked about Ralph Jacobi. Barry had already sent to me an obituary he had written on Ralph Jacobi. I am sorry I do not have it here, but it did get the essence of the man: without a formal education, he was nonetheless an erudite man. He knew his subjects—whether it was the Murray River or communications—back to front and often much better than the experts knew them.A particular story that appealed to me is about a leadership disagreement or a fight between Hayden and Whitlam. Whitlam, then leader, saw that Jacobi was sitting alone, so he went to him to try to talk him into voting his way. Jacobi said, `What are you doing up here? You've never been up here before. Go away.' Hayden's people, seeing that as an opportunity, went up and said, `If you would like to come into the ministry and support Hayden, we will certainly give you a ministerial position,' to which Mr Barry Jones reported Jacobi as saying, `Well, go away then; I'm going to vote for Whitlam.' That sums up the essence of the man as somebody who was not what politicians are accused of being. He was a great man. It is unfortunate that his seat of Hawker was abolished in my first year in that seat and that it disappeared, to be eaten up by Boothby at that stage and by Hindmarsh. All the people in my electorate who were served by Ralph Jacobi would like to put on the record their condolences to his wife and children. 17719:40:00177Mossfield, Frank, MPMr MOSSFIELDMK6GreenwayALP00—I rise tonight to inform the House that this year is the 50th anniversary of the first British atomic test on Australian soil. These tests took place on Montebello Islands off the coast of Western Australia on 3 October 1952. I wish to advise the House that a number of Australian citizens are still suffering ill health as a result of these tests. A commemorative service is being arranged by the Atomic Ex-Servicemen's Association on 3 October this year at HMAS Creswell naval base at Jervis Bay in honour of those ex-servicemen who have since died or who are suffering ill health as a result of these tests.During the 1950s the British government conducted atomic weapons tests at Maralinga and Emu Field in South Australia, as well as Montebello. More than 15,000 Australians were involved with these tests in some capacity. In all there were 12 atomic bombs detonated in Australia between 1952 and 1957. The Australian servicemen directly involved with the tests were exposed to harmful radiation from contaminated ships, aircraft and other forms of military equipment, including backpacks and webbing, which were recycled to other servicemen not directly involved in the tests. There is general dissatisfaction by the Atomic Ex-Servicemen's Association about the way governments of both persuasions have failed to fully assist ex-servicemen involved in the atomic tests.I have been campaigning to get the government to recognise all ex-servicemen who were directly involved with the tests as veterans under the Veterans' Entitlements Act so that they can be entitled to medical treatment for any illness that they are currently suffering from. I have been conducting this campaign on behalf of all atomic test ex-servicemen, but in particular a resident of western Sydney, Mr Keith Harrison, who was involved in the atomic test aboard HMAS Hawkesbury. When I first wrote to the first Minister for Defence, Mr Moore, in December 2000, I was advised that, although Mr Harrison had served a total of six years in the Navy, he did not serve in an operational area during `specified dates'; therefore he is classified as an ex-serviceman and not a veteran. Mr Harrison has advised me that during the test the men aboard the Hawkesbury were not given any protective clothing or breathing apparatus and were not informed of how to protect themselves during the explosion. Mr Harrison has suffered from a plethora of health problems since that time.Another ex-serviceman involved in the atomic tests whom I would like to refer to is Victor Herman. Victor was conscripted into the compulsory six months national service training in August 1952. Vic was posted along with other national servicemen to HMAS Murchison. These servicemen were not informed that they were being sent into a nuclear testing area at Montebello. On the day of the nuclear blast the crew were assembled on the upper deck, informed about the impending test and told to turn their backs to the blast area and not to turn around until after the blast was over. Victor Herman advises that when the crew turned around the telltale mushroom cloud was beginning to form and the crew watched as the cloud spread across the sky. The Murchison continued to patrol the eastern side of Montebello Islands for another two days. Victor has suffered a number of health problems as a result of his exposure to radioactivity during these atomic tests. The government, however, refuses to accept that these national servicemen were in a war zone but only on a normal training exercise.The government has for years claimed that these ex-servicemen have adequate access to medical treatment, provided they can prove the illness is related to the tests. This is the problem. Each new illness requires a new round of doctors' reports—the patient's doctors, the government's doctors, experts and specialists. It is very complicated, drawn-out, expensive and distressing for those patients involved. If they were classified as veterans, the treatment would be immediate. These ex-servicemen do not want compensation, they simply want to be treated for the illnesses they have. They want to be treated with dignity and not have to go through a complicated rigmarole every time they get sick. They simply want peace of mind and a recognition that what was done to them was both wrong and hazardous. I do not think that that is too much to ask. I believe that, in this 50th anniversary year of the first atomic blast on Australian soil, the federal government should be compassionate enough to amend the Veterans' Entitlements Act 1986 to include those Australian servicemen involved in the atomic test so that they can receive full medical treatment for their ongoing health problems.17819:45:00178McArthur, Stewart, MPMr McARTHURVH4CorangamiteLP10—At the opening of the 40th parliament I wish to raise a very lively and difficult community debate about the 300 per cent increase in public liability insurance premiums. Throughout Australia all those small communities are complaining to their local members, be they on the government side or the opposition side, about this new phenomenon. Golf clubs, cricket clubs, local football clubs and local community groups are very concerned that they will no longer be able to operate at the local level because of the public liability premiums and payout. For instance, I have had representations from the Bannockburn Golf Club. They tell me that they had paid a $2,000 premium for public liability and they are now liable for a premium of $9,000. They ask me, `How can the members pay this premium along with their subscriptions?' I have just had a letter in the last 24 hours from the Portarlington Development Association. Mrs Gwenda Wilkinson, the honorary secretary, says in her letter:Re: public liability insurance—small community groups ... we wonder if a blanket cover of some type would indemnify Office Bearers and the Group to enable it to run events in their own community. ... I am sure that many voluntary groups will disappear to the detriment of small communities.The question facing this parliament and local community groups is why have premiums increased so dramatically and what can be done to make them more affordable? Have the increases been brought about by a litigious culture, as in the USA where lawyers move in and sue on any issue? Is it the lawyers' `no win, no pay' position that has brought about this increase in premiums? It is interesting to note that in 1998 there were 55,000 claims on public liability policies and two years later there were 88,000 claims. The value of the claims over this period was 10 per cent up. The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority data due later this month is expected to indicate a continuation of this trend. This litigation culture no longer accepts that there are reasonably dangerous sports such as rugby or skydiving. They say, `You will just have to pay the premium'.Something that has been very close to my heart is the payment by gynaecologists. I understand they pay between $40,000 and $50,000 for public liability insurance for negligence by them that may be proved in a court. This is a very serious matter facing the parliament and the medical profession. Other causes of increased premiums could be that HIH, which has been mentioned in this parliament, was selling insurance at unviable premiums. Eventually this caused that particular insurer to go broke, so premiums had to be increased all of a sudden. This, of course, has impinged on local community groups.The question in this ongoing debate is what can be done? Can we cap the amounts that courts will award? Say we put a figure on the loss of an arm, a leg or an eye, as in the case of workers compensation. In Victoria there was a proposition to cap the payments and make the workers compensation process work reasonably well. Personally, I would be very concerned about a proposal to abolish common law claims in the courts with a national no-fault scheme funded by the taxpayer. New Zealand has looked at this problem, but of course eventually the taxpayer will take up the liability without a due direct liability to the premium payer and those who bring about the claims. The other problem that has been brought to my attention is the number of years taken before claims have been resolved.We need an inquiry. We need the insurers and the lawyers to look at this problem. There will be an ongoing debate because people out in the community are very concerned that members of parliament, both state and federal, are doing nothing about this issue and that those people cannot go about their daily lives for fear of being involved in a major insurance claim. They cannot pay these massive premiums. Because of this ongoing problem, to which there appears to be no solution, there is a chance that small community groups, especially in country areas, will close down. I quote from a comment on the final position: Many stakeholders apart from insurers, governments and lawyers are involved in this issue. In the end, it is for the community to decide what is fair compensation for injury and how much the community can afford to pay. That is the nub of the issue: can the community afford to pay these massive premiums when the lawyers and the insurance companies are loading the other end of the argument with the massive payouts that the courts continue to award to some of those unfortunate victims? (Time expired)17919:50:00179McFarlane, Jann, MPMs JANN McFARLANE83CStirlingALP00—Tonight I am going to bring to the attention of the House an issue that has really got my blood boiling. This is the subject of corporate arrogance, the arrogance of a large company towards its employees and to the people of Western Australia who are its clients. I find it somewhat ironic that I am the one making the public announcement that Suncorp Metway is closing all its AMP and GIO customer service operations in Western Australia. This closure, I am told by employees, will cost the state approximately 80 local jobs and mean that all Western Australians who have insurance policies, or try to take out a policy with the firm, will now have to deal with people on the eastern seaboard rather than a local employee.Western Australia always seems to be a target of corporate downsizing and centralisation. We seem to be an easy target for companies taking a hatchet to their operations. This statement is not based on parochialism but on reality. I will not try to tell Steve Jones, managing director of Suncorp Metway Ltd, how to run his business. I see from an article in the Financial Review on 5 January, entitled `Suncorp proves the sceptics wrong', that Mr Jones has done a great job for his shareholders in reducing costs. Mr Jones and his company are obviously skilled at keeping their costs under control—but their treatment of their Western Australian work force could best be described as appalling.A number of my constituents are losing their jobs as a result of the transformation process of the company. They came to me and asked me to tell their story. On 10 December 2001, GIO Perth was notified by an email bulletin from Mr Jones about some of the changes to the organisation. I have a copy of the email. The only specific mention of WA was that claims processing in Western Australia, South Australia and Tasmania would be centralised to Melbourne for personal and commercial claims.Just before Christmas, representatives from head office visited the Perth office with a PowerPoint slide show explaining the company's future direction. The company had a great Christmas present for its employees—they were officially told the Perth office would close and that they would lose their jobs. These company representatives did not give employees any details of when they were to lose their jobs, just that they were losing them. This is just before Christmas, when family expenditure is at its highest. How did these people feel spending the whole of the Christmas period knowing that they could lose their jobs at any moment when they returned to work? Some of the employees are going through this process for the third time—three times not knowing whether you had a job or not is pretty stressful, but this is the reality of a job in the constantly merging insurance sector.Employees were given an email contact for Mr Jones in Sydney and in his email he stated:I will answer you personally if I am able, or I'll refer your question to someone who can.I spoke to employees today who had contacted Mr Jones and the human resources department, and they are still waiting for answers as the matter has been referred to management. Employees are frustrated at what they perceive to be the total lack of respect for employees by management. They still have no firm answers. After Christmas, management offered to conduct a second slide show outlining more information. The Perth offices refused this opportunity and instead were sent a paper copy of the slide show. There are problems. The first is that although the slides talk about communication, only two sections of the Perth office have been given an idea of when they close—the rest are still in limbo. Call centres are being relocated to Toowoomba in Queensland. However, it would be almost impossible for Perth employees to be relocated, as on slide 14 of the company's presentation they state that first choice goes to people in the same geographical location. It is a bit hard to get a fair shot at another job when there will be no business left where you live.An interesting question to ponder is that on the company's web site there is a page about the construction of the new call centre in Toowoomba. The page states that the Mayor of Toowoomba warmly welcomed the construction of the new site at a ceremony late last year. I wonder if the ceremony was before the 10 December email from Mr Jones. If it were, that would be a bitter pill for the Western Australian staff to swallow. To sum up the situation, there are 80 people in Perth who are about to become unemployed. They do not know the date they will be finishing. They cannot go for another job now as they will miss out on their redundancy packages as they would have to resign. Their chances of getting another job at the firm are low as the eligibility criteria are stacked against them and management is not giving them any of the answers they need and should be given. It seems to me that they are being treated with contempt.The final issue I want to speak briefly on is the arrogance of the company towards its Western Australian policyholders. I have been told by staff that AMP policyholders have been informed that they have merged with Suncorp, but not that the Western Australian office is closing down. The GIO customers have been left completely in the dark. This shows contempt for the company's clients. Most people, especially Western Australians, do not like talking with a call centre in another state. Perhaps Suncorp will follow Coles Myer and eventually relocate its call centres to India. People would not feel safe giving their banking, insurance and other financial details over the phone when the person is overseas and not subject to our laws, especially our consumer protection laws. On a final note, I call on the Western Australian state government to become more vigilant about job losses in Western Australia due to corporate restructuring. (Time expired)18119:55:00181Billson, Bruce, MPMr BILLSON1K6DunkleyLP10—I begin by wishing all those with love in their hearts the best of wishes for Valentine's Day tomorrow and hope that they have made appropriate arrangements to recognise those dear to them.I rise tonight to talk about the unilateral decision of Pacific Access—the company that produces the White and Yellow Pages for communities around Australia—to discontinue the production of the local Frankston Chelsea Community Directory White Pages as part of a single directory. Last year, Pacific Access circulated to households and businesses in my community a new community directory that only contained Yellow Pages listings. That has been justified to me and to a number of people in our local community as a decision made by Pacific Access in response to community sentiment. We have tracked this thought down and Pacific Access advise us that they undertook quite a deal of community surveying and market research to arrive at a decision to produce a local community telephone directory with no White Pages—no residential numbers are listed in the current directory circulated in the Frankston and Chelsea areas.I do not know who Pacific Access or their consultants spoke to, but I have yet to meet anybody in the Frankston and Chelsea areas who thought this was a good idea. Our community still has a strong community spirit. We are a regional centre where the urban sprawl of Melbourne stops and the terrific Mornington Peninsula begins. A lot of people still think very parochially, want to get behind their local community and support local businesses, and find their friends and associates conveniently within their local community directory. Prior to last year's publication, the Frankston Chelsea community phone directory was an asset for the whole community. It was a simple volume not more than 1½ centimetres thick which could sit beside the phones of businesses and households right around the community I represent. It replaced the two volumes of about three centimetres each of White and Yellow Pages. You could actually use those phone directories like you see on television as a shortened stool to stand on to reach things on top of the fridge. As useful as that may be for people who are vertically challenged like myself and your good self, Mr Speaker, that is not terribly helpful when you are looking for a telephone number in your local community. I am calling on Pacific Access to undertake some serious community consultation. I have not met anybody in the community I represent who thinks that last year's decision was a good idea. We are approaching March this year when a new local community telephone directory is to be produced and circulated. The community I represent is looking for both the White and Yellow Pages listings in that directory. Businesses in our area are dissatisfied with not having the White Pages as a companion to the local Yellow Pages business listings. Residents are saying that they now have to wade through these two and three centimetre volumes of the Greater Melbourne metropolitan phone directory to find simple phone numbers. I do not know anybody who is happy with the current arrangements. I have offered to undertake some local community research of my own for businesses are unhappy and they pay the bills for the advertisements in the Yellow Pages. They are not happy that the White Pages are not part of the publication. They were not consulted about that prior to their placing advertisements in last year's version.Frankston Mitre 10 wants to be recognised in a community directory that has residential listings as well, as do Marketline Property Services, SkillsPlus and even the terrific cafes in Frankston. When you are looking for a cafe for a quality cafe latte you do not want to go through two- or three-centimetre volumes. My community has a distinct character and it is very supportive of its local businesses, and Pacific Access should not be making it more difficult to find those businesses than it already is.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Order! It being 8 p.m., the debate is interrupted.20:00:00182House adjourned at 8.00 p.m.Notices182The following notices were given:0J4Ruddock, Philip, MPMr Ruddock to present a bill for an act to amend the law relating to migration, and for related purposes.8V5Worth, Trish, MPMs Worth to present a bill for an act to amend the Therapeutic Goods Act 1989, and for related purposes.7V5Williams, Daryl, MPMr Williams to present a bill for an act to amend the Marriage Act 1961, and for related purposes.7V5Williams, Daryl, MPMr Williams to present a bill for an act to amend the Sex Discrimination Act 1984, and for related purposes.7V5Williams, Daryl, MPMr Williams to present a bill for an act to amend the Disability Discrimination Act 1992, and for related purposes.0V5Slipper, Peter, MPMr Slipper to present a bill for an act to amend the Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Act 1911, and for related purposes.0V5Slipper, Peter, MPMr Slipper to present a bill for an act to amend the Ministers of State Act 1952, and for related purposes.RW5Nelson, Dr Brendan, MPDr Nelson to present a bill for an act to amend the States Grants (Primary and Secondary Education Assistance) Act 2000, and for related purposes.RW5Nelson, Dr Brendan, MPDr Nelson to present a bill for an act to amend the Higher Education Funding Act 1988, and for other purposes.RW5Nelson, Dr Brendan, MPDr Nelson to present a bill for an act to amend the Student Assistance Act 1973, and for related purposes.SJ4Tuckey, Wilson, MPMr Tuckey to present a bill for an act to amend the Airports Act 1996, and for related purposes.EZ5Abbott, Tony, MPMr Abbott to move: (1) (a) That a Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade be appointed to consider and report on such matters relating to foreign affairs, defence and trade as may be referred to it by:(i) either House of the Parliament;(ii) the Minister for Foreign Affairs;(iii) the Minister for Defence; or(iv) the Minister for Trade.(b) Annual reports of government departments and authorities tabled in the House shall stand referred to the committee for any inquiry the committee may wish to make. Reports shall stand referred to the committee in accordance with a schedule tabled by the Speaker to record the areas of responsibility of each committee, provided that: (i) any question concerning responsibility for a report or a part of a report shall be determined by the Speaker; and(ii) the period during which an inquiry concerning an annual report may be commenced by a committee shall end on the day on which the next annual report of that Department or authority is presented to the House.(2) That the committee consist of 32 members, 12 Members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Government Whip or Whips, 8 Members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Opposition Whip or Whips or by any independent Member, 5 Senators to be nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate, 5 Senators to be nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and 2 Senators to be nominated by any minority group or groups or independent Senator or independent Senators.(3) That every nomination of a member of the committee be forthwith notified in writing to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.(4) That the members of the committee hold office as a joint committee until the House of Representatives is dissolved or expires by effluxion of time.(5) That the committee elect a Government member as its chair.(6) That the committee elect a deputy chair who shall act as chair of the committee at any time when the chair is not present at a meeting of the committee and at any time when the chair and deputy chair are not present at a meeting of the committee the members present shall elect another member to act as chair at that meeting.(7) That in the event of an equality of voting, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, shall have a casting vote.(8) That 6 members of the committee constitute a quorum of the committee, provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall include 1 member of either House of the Government parties and 1 member of either House of the non-Government parties.(9) That the committee have power to appoint subcommittees consisting of 3 or more of its members and to refer to any subcommittee any matter which the committee is empowered to examine.(10) That, in addition to the members appointed pursuant to paragraph (9), the chair and deputy chair of the committee be ex officio members of each subcommittee appointed.(11) That the committee appoint the chair of each subcommittee who shall have a casting vote only, and at any time when the chair of a subcommittee is not present at a meeting of the subcommittee the members of the subcommittee present shall elect another member of that subcommittee to act as chair at that meeting.(12) That the quorum of a subcommittee be 2 members of that subcommittee, provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall comprise 1 member of either House of the Government parties and 1 member of either House of the non-Government parties.(13) That members of the committee who are not members of a subcommittee may participate in the proceedings of that subcommittee but shall not vote, move any motion or be counted for the purpose of a quorum.(14) That the committee or any subcommittee have power to send for persons, papers and records.(15) That the committee or any subcommittee have power to move from place to place.(16) That a subcommittee have power to adjourn from time to time and to sit during any adjournment of the Senate and the House of Representatives.(17) That the committee have leave to report from time to time.(18) That the committee or any subcommittee have power to consider and make use of the evidence and records of the Joint Committees on Foreign Affairs and Defence and Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade appointed during previous Parliaments. (19) That the foregoing provisions of this resolution, so far as they are inconsistent with the standing orders, have effect notwithstanding anything contained in the standing orders.(20) That a message be sent to the Senate acquainting it of this resolution and requesting that it concur and take action accordingly.EZ5Abbott, Tony, MPMr Abbott to move:(1) That a Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories be appointed to inquire into and report on:(a) matters coming within the terms of section 5 of the Parliament Act 1974 as may be referred to it by:(i) either House of the Parliament; or(ii) the Minister responsible for administering the Parliament Act 1974; or(iii) the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives;(b) such other matters relating to the parliamentary zone as may be referred to it by the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives;(c) such amendments to the National Capital Plan as are referred to it by a Minister responsible for administering the Australian Capital Territory (Planning and Land Management) Act 1988;(d) such other matters relating to the National Capital as may be referred to it by:(i) either House of the Parliament; or(ii) the Minister responsible for administering the Australian Capital Territory (Self-Government) Act 1988; and(e) such matters relating to Australia's territories as may be referred to it by:(i) either House of the Parliament; or(ii) the Minister responsible for the administration of the Territory of Cocos (Keeling) Islands; the Territory of Christmas Island; the Coral Sea Islands Territory; the Territory of Ashmore and Cartier Islands; the Australian Antarctic Territory, and the Territory of Heard Island and McDonald Islands, and of Commonwealth responsibilities on Norfolk Island.(2) Annual reports of government departments and authorities tabled in the House shall stand referred to the committee for any inquiry the committee may wish to make. Reports shall stand referred to the committee in accordance with a schedule tabled by the Speaker to record the areas of responsibility of each committee, provided that: (a) any question concerning responsibility for a report or a part of a report shall be determined by the Speaker; and(b) the period during which an inquiry concerning an annual report may be commenced by a committee shall end on the day on which the next annual report of that Department or authority is presented to the House.(3) That the committee consist of 12 members, the Deputy Speaker, 3 Members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Government Whip or Whips, 2 Members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Opposition Whip or Whips or by any independent Member, the Deputy President and Chairman of Committees, 2 Senators to be nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate, 2 Senators to be nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and 1 Senator to be nominated by any minority group or groups or independent Senator or independent Senators.(4) That every nomination of a member of the committee be forthwith notified in writing to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate.(5) That the members of the committee hold office as a joint standing committee until the House of Representatives is dissolved or expires by effluxion of time.(6) That the committee elect a Government member as its chair.(7) That the committee elect a deputy chair who shall act as chair of the committee at any time when the chair is not present at a meeting of the committee, and at any time when the chair and deputy chair are not present at a meeting of the committee the members present shall elect another member to act as chair at that meeting.(8) That, in the event of an equality of voting, the chair or the deputy chair when acting as chair, shall have a casting vote. (9) That 3 members of the committee (of whom one is the Deputy President or the Deputy Speaker when matters affecting the parliamentary zone are under consideration) constitute a quorum of the committee, provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall include 1 member of either House of the Government parties and 1 member of either House of the non-Government parties.(10) That the committee have power to appoint subcommittees consisting of 3 or more of its members and to refer to any subcommittee any matter which the committee is empowered to examine.(11) That the committee appoint the chair of each subcommittee who shall have a casting vote only and at any time when the chair of a subcommittee is not present at a meeting of the subcommittee the members of the subcommittee present shall elect another member of that subcommittee to act as chair at that meeting.(12) That the quorum of a subcommittee be 2 members of that subcommittee, provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall comprise 1 member of either House of the Government parties and 1 member of either House of the non-Government parties.(13) That members of the committee who are not members of a subcommittee may participate in the public proceedings of that subcommittee but shall not vote, move any motion or be counted for the purpose of a quorum.(14) That the committee or any subcommittee have power to send for persons, papers and records.(15) That the committee or any subcommittee have power to move from place to place.(16) That a subcommittee have power to adjourn from time to time and to sit during any adjournment of the Senate and the House of Representatives.(17) That the committee have leave to report from time to time.(18) That the committee or any subcommittee have power to consider and make use of the evidence and records of the Joint Standing Committees on the National Capital and External Territories, the Joint Committees on the Australian Capital Territory, the Joint Standing Committees on the New Parliament House, the Joint Standing Committee on the Parliamentary Zone and the Joint Committee on the National Capital appointed during previous Parliaments and of the House of Representatives and Senate Standing Committees on Transport, Communications and Infrastructure when sitting as a joint committee on matters relating to the Australian Capital Territory.(19) That the foregoing provisions of this resolution, so far as they are inconsistent with the standing orders, have effect notwithstanding anything contained in the standing orders.(20) That a message be sent to the Senate acquainting it of this resolution and requesting that it concur and take action accordingly.EZ5Abbott, Tony, MPMr Abbott to move:(1) (a) That a Joint Standing Committee on Migration be appointed to inquire into and report upon:(i) regulations made or proposed to be made under the Migration Act 1958;(ii) all proposed changes to the Migration Act 1958 and any related acts; and(iii) such other matters relating to migration as may be referred to it by the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs.(b) Annual reports of government departments and authorities tabled in the House shall stand referred to the committee for any inquiry the committee may wish to make. Reports shall stand referred to the committee in accordance with a schedule tabled by the Speaker to record the areas of responsibility of each committee, provided that:(i) any question concerning responsibility for a report or a part of a report shall be determined by the Speaker; and(ii) the period during which an inquiry concerning an annual report may be commenced by a committee shall end on the day on which the next annual report of that Department or authority is presented to the House.(2) That the committee consist of 10 members, 3 Members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Government Whip or Whips, 3 Members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Opposition Whip or Whips or by any independent Member, 2 Senators to be nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate, 1 Senator to be nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and 1 Senator to be nominated by any minority group or groups or independent Senator or independent Senators. (3) That every nomination of a member of the committee be forthwith notified in writing to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.(4) That the members of the committee hold office as a joint standing committee until the House of Representatives is dissolved or expires by effluxion of time.(5) That the committee elect a Government member as its chair.(6) That the committee elect a deputy chair who shall act as chair of the committee at any time when the chair is not present at a meeting of the committee, and at any time when the chair and deputy chair are not present at a meeting of the committee the members present shall elect another member to act as chair at that meeting.(7) That, in the event of an equality of voting, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, shall have a casting vote.(8) That 3 members of the committee constitute a quorum of the committee, provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall include 1 member of either House of the Government parties and 1 member of either House of the non-Government parties.(9) That the committee have power to appoint subcommittees consisting of 3 or more of its members and to refer to any subcommittee any matter which the committee is empowered to examine.(10) That the committee appoint the chair of each subcommittee who shall have a casting vote only and at any time when the chair of a subcommittee is not present at a meeting of the subcommittee the members of the subcommittee present shall elect another member of that subcommittee to act as chair at that meeting.(11) That the quorum of a subcommittee be 2 members of that subcommittee, provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall comprise 1 member of either House of the Government parties and 1 member of either House of the non-Government parties.(12) That members of the committee who are not members of a subcommittee may participate in the public proceedings of that subcommittee but shall not vote, move any motion or be counted for the purpose of a quorum.(13) That the committee or any subcommittee have power to send for persons, papers and records.(14) That the committee or any subcommittee have power to move from place to place.(15) That the committee have leave to report from time to time.(16) That the committee or any subcommittee have power to consider and make use of the evidence and records of the Joint Committees on Migration Regulations and the Joint Standing Committees on Migration appointed in previous Parliaments.(17) That the foregoing provisions of this resolution, so far as they are inconsistent with the standing orders, have effect notwithstanding anything contained in the standing orders.(18) That a message be sent to the Senate acquainting it of this resolution and requesting that it concur and take action accordingly.EZ5Abbott, Tony, MPMr Abbott to move:(1) That a Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters be appointed to inquire into and report on such matters relating to electoral laws and practices and their administration as may be referred to it by either House of the Parliament or a Minister. Annual reports of government departments and authorities tabled in the House shall stand referred to the committee for any inquiry the committee may wish to make. Reports shall stand referred to the committee in accordance with a schedule tabled by the Speaker to record the areas of responsibility of each committee, provided that:(a) any question concerning responsibility for a report or a part of a report shall be determined by the Speaker; and(b) the period during which an inquiry concerning an annual report may be commenced by a committee shall end on the day on which the next annual report of that Department or authority is presented to the House.(2) That the committee consist of 10 members, 3 Members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Government Whip or Whips, 2 Members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Opposition Whip or Whips or by any independent Member, 2 Senators to be nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate, 1 Senator to be nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and 2 Senators to be nominated by any minority group or groups or independent Senator or independent Senators. (3) That every nomination of a member of the committee be forthwith notified in writing to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.(4) That the members of the committee hold office as a joint standing committee until the House of Representatives is dissolved or expires by effluxion of time.(5) That the committee elect a Government member as its chair.(6) That the committee elect a deputy chair who shall act as chair of the committee at any time when the chair is not present at a meeting of the committee and at any time when the chair and deputy chair are not present at a meeting of the committee the members present shall elect another member to act as chair at that meeting.(7) That, in the event of an equality of voting, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, shall have a casting vote.(8) That 3 members of the committee constitute a quorum of the committee, provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall include 1 member of either House of the Government parties and 1 member of either House of the non-Government parties.(9) That the committee have power to appoint subcommittees consisting of 3 or more of its members and to refer to any subcommittee any matter which the committee is empowered to examine.(10) That the committee appoint the chair of each subcommittee who shall have a casting vote only and at any time when the chair of a subcommittee is not present at a meeting of the subcommittee the members of the subcommittee present shall elect another member of that subcommittee to act as chair at that meeting.(11) That the quorum of a subcommittee be 2 members of that subcommittee, provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall comprise 1 member of either House of the Government parties and 1 member of either House of the non-Government parties.(12) That members of the committee who are not members of a subcommittee may participate in the proceedings of that subcommittee but shall not vote, move any motion or be counted for the purpose of a quorum.(13) That the committee or any subcommittee have power to send for persons, papers and records.(14) That the committee or any subcommittee have power to move from place to place.(15) That a subcommittee have power to adjourn from time to time and to sit during any adjournment of the Senate and the House of Representatives.(16) That the committee have leave to report from time to time.(17) That the committee or any subcommittee have power to consider and make use of:(a) submissions lodged with the Clerk of the Senate in response to public advertisements placed in accordance with the resolution of the Senate of 26 November 1981 relating to a proposed Joint Select Committee on the Electoral System, and(b) the evidence and records of the Joint Committees on Electoral Reform and Electoral Matters appointed during previous Parliaments.(18) That the foregoing provisions of this resolution, so far as they are inconsistent with the standing orders, have effect notwithstanding anything contained in the standing orders.(19) That a message be sent to the Senate acquainting it of this resolution and requesting that it concur and take action accordingly.EZ5Abbott, Tony, MPMr Abbott to move:(1) That, in accordance with section 242 of the Australian Securities Commission Act 1989, matters relating to the powers and proceedings of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Securities shall be as follows:(a) That the committee consist of 10 members, 3 Members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Government Whip or Whips, 2 Members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Opposition Whip or Whips or by any independent Member, 2 Senators to be nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate, 2 Senators to be nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and 1 Senator to be nominated by any minority groups or independent Senators.(b) That every nomination of a member of the committee be forthwith notified in writing to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives. (c) That the committee elect a member nominated by the Government Whips or the Leader of the Government in the Senate as its chair.(d) That the committee elect a deputy chair who shall act as chair of the committee at any time when the chair is not present at a meeting of the committee, and at any time when the chair and deputy chair are not present at a meeting of the committee the members present shall elect another member to act as chair at that meeting.(e) That, in the event of the votes on a question before the committee being equally divided, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, have a casting vote.(f) That 3 members of the committee constitute a quorum of the committee, provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall include 1 member of either House of the Government parties and 1 member of either House of the non-Government parties.(g) That the committee have power to appoint subcommittees consisting of 3 or more of its members and to refer to any subcommittee any matter which the committee is empowered to examine.(h) That the committee appoint the chair of each subcommittee who shall have a casting vote only, and at any time when the chair of a subcommittee is not present at a meeting of a subcommittee the members of the subcommittee present shall elect another member of that subcommittee to act as chair at that meeting.(i) That the quorum of a subcommittee be 2 members of that subcommittee, provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall comprise 1 member of either House of the Government parties and 1 member of either House of the non-Government parties.(j) That members of the committee who are not members of a subcommittee may participate in the proceedings of that subcommittee but shall not vote, move any motion or be counted for the purpose of a quorum.(k) That the committee and any subcommittee have power to send for persons, papers and records.(l) That the committee and any subcommittee have power to move from place to place.(m) That a subcommittee have power to adjourn from time to time and to sit during any adjournment of the Senate and the House of Representatives.(n) That the committee have leave to report from time to time.(o) That the committee have power to consider and make use of the evidence and records of the Joint Committee on Corporations and Securities appointed during previous Parliaments.(p) That the foregoing provisions of this resolution, so far as they are inconsistent with the standing orders, have effect notwithstanding anything contained in the standing orders.(2) That a message be sent to the Senate acquainting it of this resolution and requesting that it concur and take action accordingly.EZ5Abbott, Tony, MPMr Abbott to move:(1) That a Joint Standing Committee on Treaties be appointed to inquire into and report upon: (a) matters arising from treaties and related National Interest Analyses and proposed treaty actions presented or deemed to be presented to the Parliament; (b) any question relating to a treaty or other international instrument, whether or not negotiated to completion, referred to the committee by:(i) either House of the Parliament, or(ii) a Minister; and(c) such other matters as may be referred to the committee by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and on such conditions as the Minister may prescribe. (2) That the committee consist of 16 members, 6 Members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Government Whip or Whips, 3 Members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Opposition Whip or Whips or by any independent Member, 3 Senators to be nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate, 3 Senators to be nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and 1 Senator to be nominated by any minority group or groups or independent Senator or independent Senators. (3) That every nomination of a member of the committee be forthwith notified in writing to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.(4) That the members of the committee hold office as a joint committee until the House of Representatives is dissolved or expires by effluxion of time.(5) That the committee elect a Government member as its chair.(6) That the committee elect a non-Government member as its deputy chair to act as chair of the committee at any time when the chair is not present at a meeting of the committee and at any time when the chair and deputy chair are not present at a meeting of the committee the members present shall elect another member to act as chair at that meeting.(7) That in the event of an equality of voting, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, shall have a casting vote.(8) That 3 members of the committee constitute a quorum of the committee, provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall include 1 member of either House of the Government parties and 1 member of either House of the non-Government parties.(9) That the committee have power to appoint not more than 3 subcommittees each consisting of 3 or more of its members, and to refer to any subcommittee any matter which the committee is empowered to examine.(10) That, in addition to the members appointed pursuant to paragraph (9), the chair and deputy chair of the committee be ex officio members of each subcommittee appointed. (11) That the committee appoint the chair of each subcommittee who shall have a casting vote only, and at any time when the chair of a subcommittee is not present at a meeting of the subcommittee the members of the subcommittee present shall elect another member of that subcommittee to act as chair at that meeting.(12) That the quorum of a subcommittee be 2 members of that subcommittee, provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall include 1 member of either House of the Government parties and 1 member of either House of the non-Government parties.(13) That members of the committee who are not members of a subcommittee may participate in the proceedings of that subcommittee but shall not vote, move any motion or be counted for the purpose of a quorum.(14) That the committee or any subcommittee have power to send for persons, papers and records.(15) That the committee or any subcommittee have power to move from place to place.(16) That a subcommittee have power to adjourn from time to time and to sit during any adjournment of the Senate and the House of Representatives.(17) That the committee have leave to report from time to time.(18) That the committee have power to consider and make use of the evidence and records of the Joint Standing Committees on Treaties appointed during previous Parliaments.(19) That the foregoing provisions of this resolution, so far as they are inconsistent with the standing orders, have effect notwithstanding anything contained in the standing orders.(20) That a message be sent to the Senate acquainting it of this resolution and requesting that it concur and take action accordingly.EZ5Abbott, Tony, MPMr Abbott to move:(1) That, in accordance with section 54 of the National Crime Authority Act 1984, matters relating to the powers and proceedings of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on the National Crime Authority shall be as follows:(a) That the committee consist of 10 members, 3 Members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Government Whip or Whips, 2 Members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Opposition Whip or Whips or by any independent Member, 2 Senators to be nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate, 2 Senators to be nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and 1 Senator to be nominated by any minority group or groups or independent Senator or independent Senators.(b) That every nomination of a member of the committee be forthwith notified in writing to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.(c) That the committee elect a Government member as its chair.(d) That the committee elect a deputy chair who shall act as chair of the committee at any time when the chair is not present at a meeting of the committee and at any time when the chair and deputy chair are not present at a meeting of the committee the members present shall elect another member to act as chair at that meeting. (e) That, in the event of an equality of voting, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, have a casting vote.(f) That 3 members of the committee constitute a quorum of the committee, provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall include 1 member of either House of the Government parties and 1 member of either House of the non-Government parties.(g) That the committee have power to appoint subcommittees consisting of 3 or more of its members and to refer to any subcommittee any matter which the committee is empowered to examine.(h) That the committee appoint the chair of each subcommittee who shall have a casting vote only and at any time when the chair of a subcommittee is not present at a meeting of the subcommittee the members of the subcommittee present shall elect another member of that subcommittee to act as chair at that meeting.(i) That the quorum of a subcommittee be 2 members of that subcommittee, provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall comprise 1 member of either House of the Government parties and 1 member of either House of the non-Government parties. (j) That members of the committee who are not members of a subcommittee may participate in the proceedings of that subcommittee but shall not vote, move any motion or be counted for the purpose of a quorum.(k) That the committee or any subcommittee have power to send for persons, papers and records.(l) That the committee or any subcommittee have power to move from place to place.(m) That a subcommittee have power to adjourn from time to time and to sit during any adjournment of the Senate and the House of Representatives.(n) That the committee have leave to report from time to time.(o) That the committee or any subcommittee have power to consider and make use of the evidence and records of the committee appointed during previous Parliaments.(p) That, in carrying out its duties, the committee or any subcommittee, ensure that the operational methods and results of investigations of law enforcement agencies, as far as possible, be protected from disclosure where that would be against the public interest.(q) That the foregoing provisions of this resolution, so far as they are inconsistent with the standing orders, have effect notwithstanding anything contained in the standing orders.(2) That a message be sent to the Senate acquainting it of this resolution and requesting that it concur and take action accordingly.EZ5Abbott, Tony, MPMr Abbott to move:(1) That, in accordance with section 204 of the Native Title Act 1993, matters relating to the powers and proceedings of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Native Title and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Land Fund shall be as follows:(a) That the committee consist of 10 members, 3 Members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Government Whip or Whips, 2 Members of the House of Representatives to be nominated by the Opposition Whip or Whips or by any independent Member, 2 Senators to be nominated by the Leader of the Government in the Senate, 2 Senators to be nominated by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and 1 Senator to be nominated by any minority groups or independent Senators.(b) That every nomination of a member of the committee be forthwith notified in writing to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.(c) That the committee elect a Government member as its chair.(d) That the committee elect a deputy chair who shall act as chair of the committee at any time when the chair is not present at a meeting of the committee, and at any time when the chair and deputy chair are not present at a meeting of the committee the members present shall elect another member to act as chair at that meeting. (e) That, in the event of the votes on a question before the committee being equally divided, the chair, or the deputy chair when acting as chair, have a casting vote.(f) That 3 members of the committee constitute a quorum of the committee, provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall include 1 member of either House of the Government parties and 1 member of either House of the non-Government parties.(g) That the committee have power to appoint subcommittees consisting of 3 or more of its members and to refer to any subcommittee any matter which the committee is empowered to examine.(h) That the committee appoint the chair of each subcommittee who shall have a casting vote only, and at any time when the chair of a subcommittee is not present at a meeting of a subcommittee the members of the subcommittee present shall elect another member of that subcommittee to act as chair at that meeting. (i) That the quorum of a subcommittee be 2 members of that subcommittee, provided that in a deliberative meeting the quorum shall comprise 1 member of either House of the Government parties and 1 member of either House of the non-Government parties.(j) That members of the committee who are not members of a subcommittee may participate in the proceedings of that subcommittee but shall not vote, move any motion or be counted for the purpose of a quorum.(k) That the committee and any subcommittee have power to send for persons, papers and records.(l) That the committee have power to examine and report on such annual and related reports as may be referred to it by the President of the Senate or the Speaker of the House of Representatives.(m) That the committee and any subcommittee have power to move from place to place.(n) That a subcommittee have power to adjourn from time to time and to sit during any adjournment of the Senate and the House of Representatives.(o) That the committee have leave to report from time to time.(p) That the foregoing provisions of this resolution, so far as they are inconsistent with the standing orders, have effect notwithstanding anything contained in the standing orders.(2) That a message be sent to the Senate acquainting it of this resolution and requesting that it concur and take action accordingly.