2002-12-024013REPS923902002-12-02—————The SPEAKER (Mr Neil Andrew) took the chair at 12.30 p.m. and read prayers.Committees92399239923912:31:009239Jull, David, MPMr JULLMH4FaddenLP10—On behalf of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on ASIO, ASIS and DSD, I present the committee's report for 2001-02.Ordered that the report be printed.MH4Jull, David, MPMr JULL—As chairman of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on ASIO, ASIS and DSD, I am pleased to present the committee's first annual report to the House. The report, which has been authorised for publication by all three portfolio ministers, includes a review of the expenditure and aspects of the administration of the three agencies for the period 2001-02 and a summary of the committee's activities in its first four months of operation.Tabling of this report is an important step forward for the committee and the process of legislative oversight of intelligence services in Australia. It marks the first time that the administration and expenditure of the three agencies have been subject to comprehensive review by the Australian parliament. It is also the first time that a committee dealing with intelligence matters has been required to report to the legislature on its own activities. Both are modest, but important, milestones.In preparing the report, the committee considered detailed submissions from each of the agencies on their administration and expenditure. It also held a full day's hearing in camera, at which agencies were cross-examined on evidence provided to the committee, and conducted a number of informal briefings with the agencies, the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, and the ANAO. The report's findings reflect the committee's satisfaction that information on each of the agencies' expenditure is transparent and that the budgetary positions of the three agencies for the current financial year appear sound. Additional appropriations for each of the agencies under the 2002-03 federal budget have been earmarked for new programs and should enhance operational capacity within the Australian intelligence community.The report includes two recommendations which are aimed at improving external oversight of the agencies: firstly, the establishment of an efficiency advisor position within the Office of the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security to enhance its capacity to assess use of resources by the agencies; and, secondly, arrangements to enable DSD to provide separate audited financial statements for review by the committee. The report also contains a useful summary of the committee's activities to June 2002. These include the committee's intensive inquiry and report into the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Bill 2002 and participation by members in the international intelligence review agency conference in London in May of this year.As the report makes clear, these are still early days for the committee and the process of agency review. Further reports will see refinements to the committee's methods and scope of investigation. The committee has already identified a number of areas for further work, such as: recruitment, training and retention of agency staff; the adequacy of contracting arrangements; and the implementation of internal audit and risk management strategies. Of course, the committee also has powers to request separate terms of review, which it may choose to pursue in the coming 12 months. In conclusion, I would like to thank my fellow members of the committee for their support and their commitment to the work of the committee, and I thank the staff for their able-bodied assistance. I commend the report to the House.12:35:009239McLeay, Leo, MPMr LEO McLEAY4I4WatsonALP00—As the chair of the committee has said, this is the first annual report of the committee, which it has been required to table under section 31 of the Intelligence Services Act 2001. The report includes a review of the expenditure and aspects of the administration of the three agencies, as well as a summary of the committee's own activities in its first four months of existence. As Mr Jull noted in his tabling statement, the report is significant because it marks the first time that the finances of all three agencies have been subject to direct review and reporting by the Australian parliament. The report reflects a new standard of accountability and transparency applied to the agencies as a result of the act and a broadening of the parliament's role in the process of oversight. The report also reflects a number of challenges facing the committee in effectively performing the functions assigned to it by the act. The committee, and the agencies themselves, are on substantially new ground. It is our first year and many of the committee's activities have been focused on increasing members' understanding of the context in which the agencies operate. It is a set of rather difficult circumstances: we have to report on the agencies' activities but they cannot tell you anything about their operational activities. So if it all goes wrong we are not quite sure whose fault it is: theirs or ours. The committee are still in the process of developing methods of review, particularly with respect to proper assessment of the budget and expenditure of the agencies. We see that, in future, there will be a lot more consultation between us and the Audit Office in assessing the agencies' finances so that we can adopt a more in-depth approach than we have been able to in this first set of accounts.A more fundamental challenge for the committee will be to develop an adequate understanding of the agencies' needs without all the information on the operational activities being given to us. Evidence that the committee has heard of parliamentary systems in other countries, in particular the UK, suggests that this can be achieved over time with reasonable and timely access to appropriate classified information. The chairman mentioned that he and I had visited the UK and the US earlier this year to talk to the various oversight bodies there. The committee had a meeting with the UK committee here a few months ago. In all those discussions, you become very conscious of limiting the extent to which the agencies can capture you. It is very interesting for people to come and tell you little bits of secret information, where maybe they do not tell you the whole lot and where there is the bait of: `You could participate if you become more of an agent of ours'. The issue of capture is an issue that the committee is going to have to be very careful of in the future.What has been quite important to me and other members of the committee is that the agencies have been quite open and reasonable in their dealings with the committee. The passing of the Intelligence Services Act ensured that we brought some scrutiny to these bodies. The heads of the three agencies that the committee looks at in particular—DSD, ASIS and ASIO—are very accepting of that new transparency. A question for government in the future might be whether they bring the other defence community people into the purview of this committee.The committee have made a couple of recommendations in the report that we hope the government will take up. At least one of those, the one about the efficiency issue, came out of the meeting that we had with the UK committee and the discussions that the member for Fadden and I had with the UK committee people in May this year. I commend the committee's report. I am sure that all my colleagues on the committee would join with me in thanking the member for Fadden for the job he has done as chairman, in thanking the committee secretariat for the work they have done and, in particular, in thanking the heads of the agencies for the cooperation they have given the committee. If this level of openness continues, I have no doubt that the committee will provide a very valuable resource for the parliament.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Does the member for Fadden wish to move a motion in connection with the report to enable it to be debated on a future occasion?12:40:009240Jull, David, MPMr JULLMH4FaddenLP10—I move:That the House take note of the report.I seek leave to continue my remarks later.Leave granted; debate adjourned.Private Members' Business9241924112:40:009241Neville, Paul, MPMr NEVILLEKV5HinklerNP10—I move:That this House:(1) recognises the significance of the credit union movement in the framework of Australia's financial services;(2) recognises the contribution of 200 Australian credit unions and their 3.5 million members not only to the concept of mutuality but also as an alternative source of housing and domestic finance;(3) notes its role in providing banking-type and lending services in country and many other areas vacated by the traditional banks;(4) recommends a reassessment of ASIC and APRA regulations (commensurate with the size and role of credit unions); and(5) requests a re-examination of taxation, franking credits and register requirements as they apply to credit unions.Today I would like to acknowledge the exemplary service given to the community by community banking organisations and acknowledge the role they play in extending the rights of customers across Australia. Credit unions and building societies offer a valuable alternative banking option for the general public, providing a full range of financial services with the benefits of mutuality in a democratic environment. The principle of mutuality is one applauded by this government. The simple act of people helping themselves is the central ethos of the community based banking sector.There is a distinction, however, between credit unions and community based banking. Credit unions operate under a mutual structure and are not profit- driven. Any profits go back into the institutions, as opposed to community banks, where, if payable, a dividend is returned to the shareholder. In my own electorate of Hinkler, we are lucky to have a number of outstanding community banking institutions, including the Wide Bay Capricorn Building Society, which is headquartered in Bundaberg. Wide Bay Capricorn Building Society now has more than $1.1 billion in assets, with around $800 million invested in home loans. It was also the best performing banking body in terms of returns to shareholders last year, outdoing the four major banking institutions, with its share price rising 56 per cent during 2001.However, today I want to focus on the fundamental community financial institution: the credit union. My electorate is very lucky to have four credit unions providing financial services to residents. These are: Credit Union Australia, with branches in Gladstone and Bundaberg, which is one of the largest credit unions in Australia with assets in excess of $1.3 billion; Queensland Teachers Credit Union, with branches in Gladstone and Bundaberg; the Electricity Credit Union, with a branch in Gladstone; and the Capricornia Credit Union, with branches in Gladstone and Miriam Vale.As a point of interest, the presence of a credit union in Miriam Vale shows the contribution these bodies have made to rural and regional Australia. Miriam Vale is one of more than 700 regional towns abandoned by the four big banks between 1993 and 2000. Without this credit union, residents would have had no face-to-face banking facility in their town, apart from limited services available at Australia Post. This is despite the fact that, according to last year's census, Miriam Vale shire is the fastest growing mainland local government area in Queensland, outstripping growth rates in Brisbane, the Gold Coast and the Sunshine Coast. Examples such as this prove the practical commitment that credit unions have shown in `no bank' towns through the CreditCare initiative, which saw access to financial services return to nearly 60 communities nationwide. Along with the provision of banking services in smaller communities, credit unions' cooperative structures mean profits are channelled back to members and members enjoy a very high customer service standard.In fact, research has shown that customer satisfaction rates consistently sit at around 80 per cent—the highest of all financial institutions covered by a recent study—and three-quarters of members would recommend credit unions to their families or friends. The same research shows that our four major banking institutions have less than half that level of support from their clients. So the mutuality concept for credit union members works well not only for the institution but for the wider community. Credit union representatives I have spoken to tell me that in 1992 there were almost 400 credit unions across the country. By 1999 there were 222 credit unions in Australia. These representatives squarely attributed the decline to a `never-ending barrage of government legislation'. Despite this, the popularity of credit unions is quite obvious: during the last decade, credit union membership increased by around 30 per cent, total loans grew by 47 per cent—from $12.3 billion to around $18 billion—total assets were up 164 per cent and deposits grew by 151 per cent. There are two nationally recognised bodies representing credit unions in Australia. The first of those is the National Credit Union Association, or NCUA, which was established in the 1960s as the Queensland state association of credit unions and has evolved to a nationally based payment and financial services provider. The second is the Credit Union Services Corporation of Australia Ltd, known as CUSCAL. These two bodies represent 196 credit unions which currently operate in Australia. At June 2002, total credit union assets stood at around $25.7 billion, which represents a growth rate of 7.5 per cent a year. Australia's credit unions enjoy a large membership base of more than 3.6 million members—the approximate equivalent of one in every five adults.Under the new APRA regulations, all deposit-taking institutions are required to provide the same level of safety to customers. Previously, credit union members were seen to be depositing with and lending from themselves. They were recognised as not being able to make taxable income through dealings with themselves. Any income that credit unions received on loans was tax exempt. That tended to be, and still is, the bulk of their earnings. Of course, there may be odd dealings with non-members that generate profits, but these tend to be relatively small. However, under federal legislation, credit unions are companies limited by shares. Members are seen as shareholders with one vote each. Credit unions are also now taxed like companies and earn franking credits. However, being mutual entities, credit unions cannot distribute their dividends to shareholders without losing their cooperative status. They also have the problem of distributing franking credits to their members.Credit unions fear that this could open the door to demutualisation, which is not an option for the industry now or at any time, according to those representatives I referred to. Credit unions would prefer that redeemable preference shares were an option. They would be of an equity nature rather than a debt nature, which would help credit unions adhere to APRA regulations and enable them to grow at a faster rate. This issue is of great importance to credit unions. For example, looking at the financial report of the CPS Credit Union of South Australia—one taken at random—we find that its franking credits now total $20.1 million and its membership is about 83,000. That means that about $240 per member is tied up in unusable franking credits. Of course, that figure is likely to grow unless there is a change in policy.Under the Corporations Act, credit unions are also bound to make their membership records available to any inquirer, and these records must be provided in electronic format. Although the information gleaned from a company's register of members should not be used to contact members—unless it is relevant to their holding of shares in the company or the use or disclosure is approved by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission—I believe this still leaves credit unions vulnerable to forms of predatory behaviour from their competitors. To some degree it is also deemed to allow intrusions into members' privacy. One would argue that credit union membership is nobody's business except for the individuals in question. I am sure the Privacy Commissioner would be concerned about this. Potential sinister actions could also arise—particularly in today's volatile international climate. (Time expired)10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Is the motion seconded?12:51:009242Hatton, Michael, MPMr HATTONLN6BlaxlandALP00—I am very happy to second the motion and endorse what the member for Hinkler so adequately dealt with in the past 10 minutes. It is not surprising, however, that he came up short in terms of time—15 or 20 minutes might have been more appropriate, because there is a significant range of issues that this motion deals with. Those issues that the member for Hinkler has just been dealing with—franking credits, taxation and the register requirements—directly relate to, one, the essential nature of credit unions and, two, their size compared to the major banks. The key point is that, in dealing with the two bills that will be coming before the House, the government will need to take into account the fact that they are dealing with a different entity. In particular, in the Financial Sector Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2002 there is a question of what the test is for people being fit and proper. The member for Hinkler alluded to the fact that credit unions, because of their democratic nature—having democratically elected boards—are in a different position to the situation of the large banks or, indeed, community banks and that the legislation needs to fit the character and nature of the credit union movement. I am indebted to the credit union movement for having the foresight, given that they had seen I would be speaking on the bill, to provide me and, no doubt, others with background information that clarifies the situation of credit unions in Australia. In the argument they have put they make it very clear that they fully understand and accept that credit unions and banks are subject to the same legally enforceable standards on capital, liquidity and risk management and that they need the community as a whole to understand that—the fact that they are on exactly the same footing now in terms of the prudential requirements. What they say they would like to underline is:... smaller institutions are often required to carry higher capital ratios than larger, more complex banks, increasing costs. As cooperative, member focused entities with a focus on fair costs and charges, it can be challenging to work within a framework that also seeks to regulate large banks with a focus on shareholder return.That is a central problem that the legislation needs to deal with. It is a case of one size does not fit all here. In terms of shareholder delivery, credit unions are a particular case because the people who use them are also the shareholders. As the member for Hinkler indicated, they have expanded dramatically over the last decade in terms of the numbers of people using them, the amounts that have been deposited and the relative strength and depth of the credit union sector as a whole.One of the key points that is made in the motion relates to what has happened in terms of banking type products not being provided in regional Australia and, as it notes at point (3), many other areas that have been vacated by the traditional banks. I can speak fairly clearly about that, coming from the very centre of the city of Sydney. The major banks have vacated suburb after suburb in the electorate of Blaxland and left some suburbs without any banking facilities whatsoever. The Bendigo Bank has not made its way into Bankstown. What has happened is that more people have gone to the Bankstown Credit Union and the Punchbowl Credit Union. The Punchbowl Credit Union has been there for more than 50 years, and the Bankstown Credit Union has been there for a similar amount of time. They have been serving the people of the area more than adequately, on an extremely fair basis, but one of the key things they have suffered from is their lack of visibility. People have tended to see them just as small organisations primarily concerned with serving people—for a number of them, people who have been in trade unions—who were putting their money into a central depositing place and then getting home loans out of it.The credit unions have done a great deal more, but what they have not done is aggressively push their profile in the community. It is important they do that because, as service in the banking area has declined, the fact that the credit unions can provide that so adequately and well fills a space that real people in the electorate of Blaxland and elsewhere in Australia need to have filled. Credit unions are doing a fantastic job. The member for Hinkler has done exactly the right thing in bringing this motion to the House. I am happy to second it. I am happy to endorse it entirely and to endorse the fact that credit unions have done so well and will do so well for their customers. (Time expired)12:56:009243Cadman, Alan, MPMr CADMANSD4MitchellLP10—I wish to express my appreciation to the member for Hinkler and endorse the motion he has moved and the comments he has made in the House today. Credit unions are a very important alternative source of finance for many Australians. In fact, there are 229 credit unions, and the credit union movement as a whole is more significant than three of the four leading banks. That is something that many Australians are unaware of and would wish to know, because there is a high level of concern and distrust for the high fees and charges of banks. People deserve an alternative, and credit unions are the only deposit taking alternative to the banking system. So it is important that this House and the Australian community take notice of the unique ownership of credit unions: they are owned by the customers. It would be terrific if banks asked every customer who came into their institutions whether they were happy, whether the banks were doing the right thing and whether they would vote for the directors and give their endorsement to the banks, because if the banks were required to react to customers in the same way the credit unions must we would see a totally different attitude in the banking system. This is a very significant difference. It is okay for APRA and ASIC and other regulatory organisations to impose on the credit unions the banking requirements that banks must fulfil, but it would be very interesting if the banks were also asked to respond in the way these mutually owned organisations need to respond in their market environment. Credit unions—and perhaps building societies—are the only alternative in many areas of Australia. They are filling the gaps in suburban Australia and in regional and rural Australia. Instead of bank closures, we have the credit union movement working with the government, rural and regional communities. Even AMP and ING, the new banking people on the block, do not have branches—you are supposed to do it all online over the Internet.Personal finances and the housing sector are being more adequately coped with and dealt with by credit unions. They are paying attention to the broad needs of their customers far more than in the past. They have not turned themselves into banks, but they are looking at personal finances and housing requirements. They are authorised deposit taking institutions. Instead of the approach that APRA appears to adopt in some of its preferred regulatory controls—`one size fits all' was the comment by the previous speaker, Mr Hatton—the Senate inquiry into financial institutions has on perhaps three occasions identified differences between credit unions and the main deposit taking institutions that need to be noted and acted upon.APRA and ASIC can focus on large corporations like HIH. We expect them to, and they should do a very thorough job there. They should not spend a lot of time focusing on what are well-run organisations which have limitations imposed on them by the type of structure they have. They have limits on the concentration of investment of funds, they have a focus on their non-transferable share structure and they have rules imposed on them regarding the way in which they must keep their assets. These rules have no regard to the high level and quality of security over loans, which are basically in people and in housing. They do not lend beyond 80 per cent on any house. These investments are in people and in bricks and mortar. The members of the credit union movement have a much more secure type of investment than many banks. That ought to be taken into account when we look at the regulatory process and the requirements that they fulfil certain regulations. This is an excellent amendment and, I believe, a good start for us when focusing our attention on alternatives to the banking structure. (Time expired)13:01:009244Griffin, Alan, MPMr GRIFFINVU5BruceALP00—My electorate of Bruce in Melbourne is home to members of many credit unions, including the former Advantage Credit Union—now Australian National—as well as strong industrial credit unions such as the GMH employees' and the Woolworths/Safeway employees' credit unions. As the sixth largest deposit taking group in Australia after the big four banks and St George, credit unions are an important competitive force in Australia's financial services industry. Nationally, credit union membership has grown by 1.1 per cent from June 2000 to June 2001.The growing importance of credit unions in the financial services industry is illustrated by a number of key figures. In the decade from 1991 to 2001, membership of credit unions grew by more than 29 per cent, total assets grew by 164 per cent and deposits grew by 151 per cent. Since 1996, the total credit union loan portfolio has grown by 47 per cent, from $12.3 billion to $18.1 billion. Credit unions continue to consolidate their position in a rapidly changing financial services marketplace. They are the main financial institutions for 12 per cent of the banking population—in line with National Australia Bank at 13 per cent and ahead of ANZ at nine per cent and Westpac at eight per cent. It is important to recognise the growing importance of credit unions to ordinary Australian consumers. For example, credit unions as a group issue the largest number of personal loans in Australia. With growing concern over the service provision of the banking industry, credit unions should also be congratulated on their customer service performance. According to the Credit Union Services Corporation, or CUSCAL, in a 2001 survey of customer satisfaction eight out of 10 consumers rated the service of credit unions as excellent or very good. Compare this with the recent audit of the ANZ's new customer charter which labelled the results as unsatisfactory. The ANZ Bank Chief Executive John McFarlane said, `We are just scraping in a B grade.' While the ANZ is to be encouraged in its efforts in this area, it is clear that Australia's big banks have plenty of room for improvement.Credit unions have a strong tradition of delivering services to regional and rural communities through both a continued presence Australia wide and programs designed to bring financial services into `no bank' towns. Between 1993 and 2000, over 700 bank branches were closed in rural and remote areas. The CreditCare initiative saw financial services return to almost 60 communities across Australia. In towns such as Moe, Morwell and Yarrawonga, more than 40 per cent of the local community are members of a credit union. In Victoria, Violet Town lost its last branch when the National Australia Bank decided to close earlier this year. Northeast Credit Union surveyed the community and, on the basis of local support, opened a credit union branch.A major issue for many Australian consumers is the fees and charges of the major banking institutions. Reserve Bank of Australia figures show that in 2001 Australians paid almost $7.1 billion in bank fees. In 1996, Australian households and businesses paid around $290 million per month in fees. In 2001, it was just under $600 million per month. According to CUSCAL, less than 30 per cent of Australia's credit union members pay any kind of transaction or account keeping fee. Their research goes on to show that nearly 75 per cent of credit union members would pay only $2.13 on average per month where fees did apply. These services and fee levels indicate that credit unions provide a valuable alternative to the traditional banks, and any examination of their operations needs to be mindful of their status as mutual organisations motivated by the needs of their members.In relation to the specific recommendations of this motion, I would like to deal firstly with the proposal to reassess ASIC and APRA regulations. In supporting credit unions, Labor believe that ASIC and APRA must be conscious of the fact that credit unions are not banks and that the regulations must be sensitive to their smaller scale of operation. APRA recently made some adverse comments about the lending practices of credit unions, describing them as `imprudent'. While APRA followed this up with warnings to banks and other authorised deposit taking institutions, it is important that they also look at the role played by mortgage brokers, which are currently relatively unregulated.Secondly, we would support the re-examination of taxing, franking credits and register requirements. The credit union movement currently has accumulated over one billion franking credits which they are unable to distribute. We would support a re-examination of what is a very important issue facing credit unions at this time. In relation to register requirements, concerns over the privacy of members whose details would be published on a shareholder register need to be examined—in particular, the concerns of some industry based groups such as the police and defence forces. For example, in relation to the Police Credit Union, there are obvious issues relating to the access of members to the names and addresses of other members who are police officers. Labor is sympathetic to this situation and recommends that suggestions such as the use of an independent third party as a kind of postbox for those members who are police officers are examined as part of any review. In conclusion, I encourage credit unions to continue their work both on behalf of their current members and as a viable alternative to the traditional banks. (Time expired)13:06:009246Panopoulos, Sophie, MPMs PANOPOULOS00AMUIndiLP10—I would like to endorse the member for Hinkler's statements and commend him on this motion. I am also pleased that the member for Bruce has kept a very close eye on my electorate of Indi and commented quite positively on the initiatives of local credit unions there. I too am very proud of these organisations that are locally owned and locally run and have tremendous support from people living within their respective towns.After the big banks, there are over 200 Australian credit unions providing everyday banking services to Australian people. Credit unions, as previous speakers have mentioned, are accountable to 3.6 million customers in Australia. The financial services sector is no doubt crowded in numbers, with many providers battling to offer their services to the financial industry. Credit unions traditionally provide services such as savings and loans; they are not, in essence, complex structural organisations.Unlike the banks, credit unions are not wholly subservient to the bottom line, nor are they renowned for generating the large profits that the banks have become accustomed to. They strive to capture one thing that the banks will not—a more personal approach to financial lending with their customers. A more personal relationship with people is to be welcomed, and the credit unions have successfully filled the void left by the powerful profit motives of the banks. One particular upside is that credit union members are actually recognised as registered shareholders within a credit union.It was claimed recently that APRA had warned that risky business ventures by credit unions and building societies were jeopardising investor savings. The CEO of APRA, Graeme Thompson, then stated that Australian credit unions and building societies were sound financial institutions and generally conservative lenders. There has been a noticeable trend in the number of people borrowing from credit unions and building societies for their mortgages. Between January and May 2002, Australian banks suffered a noticeable decline in mortgage approvals. During this period, there was a 12.6 per cent rise in home loan approvals by non-bank lenders, compared to a 2.8 per cent fall in mortgage approvals by Australian banks—another example showing that consumers can vote with their feet. Since August 2001, home loan approvals by credit unions and similar non-banking entities rose by 14.5 per cent, while loan approvals by banks continued in a downward spiral, falling 9.5 per cent.In May 2002, there were more than 52,000 home loan approvals. Over 37,000 were approved by the major banks, while the so-called small players—credit unions, building societies and super funds—approved almost 15,000 loans. This constituted record levels for non-banking lenders. The enormous gulf highlights the importance of this particular motion in recognising the importance of the credit union and non-banking sector within Australia's financial services industry. The notion captured within the credit union sector of mutuality—and mutual obligation more broadly—is another very important facet of this debate. Australians should be aware of the services that credit unions offer to Australian customers. There are alternatives to the main banks, and credit unions should be adequately recognised as alternative sources of financial services to the Australian people.As the member for a rural and regional electorate, I have seen the withdrawal of a great number of previously essential banking services that were traditionally provided to people living in these areas. I commend this motion that effectively gives credit unions adequate recognition for their provision of services to people in rural and regional areas. In my home town of Wangaratta, we have the renowned services of the WAW Credit Union, which also provides banking services to eight other towns within Indi. We are also fortunate to have the Northeast Credit Union in Benalla, and the Yarrawonga Credit Union. All these are locally run and owned and focused on delivering services to individuals and businesses within my electorate. Credit unions have long been undervalued for their services and as alternative financial services providers to the banks. For a sector that represents about 3.5 million people, we could more effectively recognise the contribution of credit unions and the role that they play in providing these services, particularly in non-metropolitan areas. In recent times, customers—understandably—have been more fickle and less loyal to traditional banks. People are rightfully considering their options in a very competitive marketplace. Credit unions have proved to be worthy players in this industry. (Time expired)13:11:009247O'Connor, Brendan, MPMr BRENDAN O'CONNOR00AN3BurkeALP00—I too rise to support the motion by the member for Hinkler. I commend the motion and indeed the member for Blaxland, who seconded it. It is fair to say that credit unions are very important to this country. After a little research, I realised that credit unions in fact originated over 150 years ago in Europe. They have been in Australia since 1946. Just after World War II, Mr Kevin Yates introduced the first credit union to this country. So for more than 50 years Australia's credit unions have been making a major contribution to giving ordinary families access to affordable loans and better services.Members have rattled off facts to try to paint the picture of the importance of credit unions in this country, and I would like to add to those. Firstly—this may have been mentioned but it is probably worth repeating—there are over 3½ million credit union members in Australia. One in every five adults is a member of a credit union, and there are now 190 or so credit unions. As we know, they are very strong on service values. I think the member for Bruce indicated that, even within the last 10 years, credit union membership has grown by almost 30 per cent. Unlike banks, credit unions are democratic in the way they are formed and there are mutual obligations between the members and the institution itself.I would also like to bring to the House's attention the fact that, as a group, credit unions are the sixth largest deposit taking force in Australia, behind the big four banks and St George. As I said, credit unions have traditionally been strong in service values, and they continue to be, with research showing that eight out of 10 customers rate their services as excellent or very good. That is the highest level for all financial institutions in the country.The other thing that is important to note—maybe the banks could learn something from this—is that credit union members are extremely loyal to their credit unions. As a demonstration of customer loyalty, up to 75 per cent of customers of credit unions are likely to recommend credit unions to other people. The same research indicates that less than 28 per cent of the four big banks' customers would be likely to recommend their bank to others. We can clearly see here that there is a strong regard for credit unions and a strong sense of loyalty from members, so they must be doing something right.In recent years, despite the obvious challenges in competing with these giant banking institutions, credit unions have managed to survive and indeed thrive. They have not so much taken on the banks head-on, but instead have managed to create a niche for themselves in the marketplace, which has grown over time. The banks have provided the credit unions with such an opportunity. Bank branch closures, the imposition of increasingly high bank fees and the gradual shift to a more impersonal relationship, particularly where the customer is not inclined towards the use of electronic banking, have given credit unions an advantage.I think it is fair to say that the critical issues for credit unions are whether they will continue to attract new members and whether they can continue to cope in this environment. The KPMG review of building societies and credit unions last year found that credit unions may find it increasingly difficult to compete with the larger-scale competition and the burden of increasing regulatory costs. Clearly, one of the hardest decisions for each of the remaining 190 credit unions in the country is whether they should merge. On the one hand, the merging of small institutions will increase critical mass and, as a result, help the newly amalgamated institution to provide a wider range of services, such as insurance and financial planning. On the other hand, credit unions must not become the creature they currently distinguish themselves from. In short, they must ensure that they remain democratic, are close to their members and put people before profits; but at the same time they must have the wherewithal to mix it with the big banks. This is the challenge that confronts credit unions—a challenge that, in the main, I think they will meet. It is critical for the country that they do so. (Time expired)10000Jenkins, Harry (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER(Mr Jenkins)—Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.924813:16:009248Baldwin, Robert, MPMr BALDWINLL6PatersonLP10—I move:That this House:(1) recognises the need to ease traffic congestion on the New England Highway to assist motorists from areas such as Beresfield and Thornton;(2) acknowledges a recent audit of the New England Highway by the NRMA which found the worst section of the highway is a 12.8km stretch between Hexham and Maitland which includes the Weakleys Drive intersection;(3) further acknowledges the audit which found that this particular stretch of road has a crash and casualty rate 79% higher than the route average;(4) recognises the most recent fatality on the New England Highway when a motorist was killed on the South Seas Drive intersection in August 2002; and(5) calls on all levels of government to progress work along this highway as quickly as possible, including:(a) State Government construction of a link road between Beresfield and Thornton;(b) construction of an interchange at the Weakleys Drive intersection; and(c) funding of improvements to intersections along the highway that have an historically high rate of accidents.I am delighted to be speaking on this motion today, because it is an issue that I have been working on for a number of years now and one that I believe requires priority. I want to focus in this debate on the need to alleviate traffic congestion at the intersection of Weakleys Drive and the New England Highway, which is recognised as one of the worst intersections in the entire Hunter region. The expansion of residential zones and industrial areas in Thornton and Beresfield in particular has resulted in growing traffic congestion at this intersection. There is competing traffic in the form of residential cars, buses and trucks from the transport depot and the industrial zone, trucks from the recycling depot and vehicles using the New England Highway between Newcastle and Maitland.For a number of years now there has been serious discussion in the community about the need for a link road between Beresfield and Thornton and the need for an interchange at the busy intersection. I have always maintained that in this project lie the responsibilities of the state and federal governments. What has prompted this notice of motion today are figures released by the NRMA, based on an audit of the New England Highway a few months ago, which found that the worst section of the highway is a 12.8-kilometre stretch between Hexham and Maitland. The audit found that this particular stretch of road has a crash and casualty rate 79 per cent higher than the route average. This section also covers the Weakleys Drive and freeway intersection and directly affects residents living in the lower part of Paterson. I was horrified by these statistics. Anyone who drives along this road can tell you how bad traffic congestion can get during peak periods, with various forms of vehicles all using the same road. That is the crux of the debate today.The issue here is improving driver safety. As a federal member, I am concerned about the safety of motorists from my electorate. The figures released by the NRMA add tremendous weight to the call for action to be taken and taken now. However, there seems to be a major problem with information sharing, particularly with the New South Wales government failing to provide all the information required by the Commonwealth. In April last year, the Minister for Transport and Regional Services indicated that all traffic management design solutions should be made available, and yet all information about this project has not been handed over. I am also extremely concerned that the refusal of the New South Wales government to work with the Commonwealth on this issue is nothing more than dirty politics. We have to ask: why has the New South Wales Minister for Roads instructed the RTA not to talk to the Commonwealth on this issue? I am absolutely appalled by this matter, and the residents in Beresfield and Thornton should also be appalled. I do not think there should be any doubt that this is political game playing at its worst. The intersection is located in the New South Wales marginal seat of Maitland. In September this year, the New South Wales government announced the successful tender for the link road project, with expectations that it would be completed by the end of 2003. However, it has taken the New South Wales government some five years to get to this stage. I do not think it is any coincidence that the announcement was made just ahead of a state election in March next year. When the announcement was made for the successful tender, a map of the link road project was published. This map failed to show signs of where a possible interchange or other alternatives would fit into the picture in future planning. The RTA has done little planning for solutions to the Weakleys Drive interchange, and one has to wonder whether that has been a political directive of the New South Wales roads minister. I have written and spoken to the Minister for Transport and Regional Services about the Weakleys Drive project and the need for the federal government to come to the party in its area of responsibility. The minister has acknowledged that the intersection where the New England Highway meets the end of the freeway is a federal responsibility. Today I call on the federal government to honour its responsibility and come to the table on this matter. But in order for the Commonwealth to consider its future direction, it must receive all planning information from the state.We need full cooperation from all levels of government and stakeholders to make sure that we get the project right. There is no doubt that Labor members opposite are going to use this debate today to say that, if they had won the election, they would have funded the project or that, if they had won in 1996, the project would have been completed by now. The fact is that the ALP are full of `we could haves', `we should haves', and `we would haves'. The ALP love to make election promises but we have never seen them materialise. Now they are only playing political games on roads. The ALP are desperate to win the state seat of Maitland, and that is why they have announced the successful tender for the link road ahead of the election. On the other hand, they are so bitter about losing the seat of Paterson that they are prepared to play political games and not cooperate with the Commonwealth.The member for Hunter described this motion as a stunt back in September when he tried to bring it on for debate. The simple fact is that he knows that my active and public campaign, which has called on all levels of government to bring this project to completion, has put him in an embarrassing position. I have been the one to raise this matter in federal parliament, which has shown that the member for Hunter is asleep at the wheel and is supportive of projects only during an election. The fact is that I will not rest on the issue. I will maintain my call for the Commonwealth to put funds into this project, and I will maintain my call to the New South Wales government to instruct the RTA to provide long-term solutions. (Time expired)10000Jenkins, Harry (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Jenkins)—Is the motion seconded?13:22:009249Fitzgibbon, Joel, MPMr FITZGIBBON8K6HunterALP00—I am happy to second the motion because I, like everyone living in the immediate vicinity of the Weakleys Drive, Thornton, intersection, know how important the road construction project is. We should not be surprised that the member for Paterson has come in here and made an issue of this state matter, because he is the campaign director for the Liberal candidate in the seat of Maitland. It is no surprise, as I predicted back in September, that he would use this motion to sheet all the blame on the New South Wales government for the hold-up in the construction works at Weakleys Drive. This is a motion about road building. We should not be surprised that the member for Paterson is sponsoring a motion on building. He is one of the great builders; indeed, developers in his electorate have come to call him Bob the Builder. This nickname is a reference to the fact that the member for Paterson has under construction in the Port Stephens area, where he is a local government councillor, a house that the Daily Telegraph has described as a palace style—LL6Baldwin, Robert, MPMr Baldwin—Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The member for Hunter should be addressing the motion before the House today on the New England Highway. I ask you to direct him to bring his remarks back to the debate.10000Jenkins, Harry (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Jenkins)—The honourable member for Hunter knows his obligation to be relevant to the motion before the House.8K6Fitzgibbon, Joel, MPMr FITZGIBBON—It is a great time-wasting device. I will just make the point that the Port Stephens Council is considering taking legal action against its own councillor in relation to this matter.10000DEPUTY SPEAKER, TheThe DEPUTY SPEAKER—Order! The member should not digress too widely.8K6Fitzgibbon, Joel, MPMr FITZGIBBON—I am happy to return to the motion because I am very supportive of it. I recall that one of my first duties as a Labor candidate in the seat of Hunter back in 1995 was to travel to the site with the then transport minister, Laurie Brereton. On that occasion, he committed some $27 million to the treatment on both of those intersections, including a flyover onto the New England Highway.In March 1996, the Howard government was elected and national highway funding was cut. We are still waiting. The member for Paterson represented his electorate in this place between 1996 and 1998, yet not one cent was spent and not one piece of soil was overturned on that site. Suddenly—surprise, surprise!—the candidate for Paterson between 1998 and 2001, and now the member for Paterson, took an interest in the project again. He comes into this place, notwithstanding the fact that, during the last election campaign, the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Transport and Regional Services, John Anderson, went to the member for Paterson's now electorate and visited a number of sites but refused to visit the site we are debating today. He was forced later to apologise to the Maitland community. I have the headline here from the Maitland Mercury. It says, `I am committed and, yes, I am sorry.' That is how committed the Howard government is to this intersection. The Deputy Prime Minister and minister for transport was not even prepared to visit the site when he visited the area.When he apologised to the electorate and said he was committed, he also made a commitment to return. But, alas, unlike General Macarthur, he has not returned in more than 12 months. He did send Senator Sandy Macdonald to the site at one stage to say, `I'm here representing the minister. He is so concerned about this crucial intersection, he does not have the time to come here himself. But Senator Sandy Macdonald is here to save the day.' What an insult that was to the communities in Thornton and those immediate areas.I will say this about the member for Paterson's lines on the New South Wales government's role: yes, they have funded the link road between Thornton and Beresfield and tenders have been let. The intersection is entirely a Commonwealth responsibility. The problem is that the Commonwealth wants to spend less money there, and it is asking the RTA to come back with a design which is less expensive. The RTA have quite rightly said, `No. We believe the $30-odd million treatment of this intersection is the only way to adequately address the economic and traffic safety conditions on this side.' They are rightly telling the Commonwealth to go and jump. The Commonwealth should get on with the job. The RTA have the proper design in place, and it is time for the member for Paterson's government to fund it. (Time expired)13:27:009251Lloyd, Jim, MPMr LLOYDIK6RobertsonLP10—What we have just witnessed in this House is a classic example of why the Australian voters continually reject the ALP.83REdwards, Graham, MPMr Edwards—Haven't you seen the results in Victoria?IK6Lloyd, Jim, MPMr LLOYD—I am sure the federal opposition would like to mirror the results in Victoria, but they are a long way from ever doing that. While ever they behave in the manner in which the member for Hunter has done in the previous five minutes, they will stay in opposition for a very long time. Unlike the member for Paterson—8K6Fitzgibbon, Joel, MPMr Fitzgibbon—Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I was interrupted on the basis of relevance. I suggest to you that what the member is now going on with has no relevance whatsoever to the motion before the House.10000Jenkins, Harry (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Jenkins)—The honourable member for Robertson will be relevant to the question before the House.IK6Lloyd, Jim, MPMr LLOYD—I had been speaking for approximately 55 seconds. I was certainly building the case about what I was going to say. The member for Paterson spent his time working for his constituents. He has brought forward this motion constructively and is working towards getting results for his constituents in his electorate. That is what he does, and that is what makes him such a great local member.It is important to remember that the federal government have increased road funding to a great extent since we have been in government. The Labor Party scrapped the black spot funding when it was in government. When the member for Paterson was first elected in 1996, our government were very instrumental in making sure that that funding for other national highways and roads of national importance was increased.The reason that I am speaking to support the member for Paterson is that most of the traffic that goes through the Weakleys Drive intersection, and the section of the New England Highway that the member for Paterson is concerned about, travels along the F3 and through my electorate. The federal government has provided considerable funds for the widening of the F3—$86 million—and I am very pleased that the first section was opened recently, on 3 October. It has been a great success and enables motorists to get through that area quickly, but when they get to the New England Highway they are faced with an inadequate intersection as a result of inadequate funding there. The member for Paterson is certainly working very hard to highlight these important concerns. We had 12,622 central coast residents sign my `Widen the F3' petition—commuters and others travelling north from Sydney to Newcastle and further. They were concerned about the freeway and the traffic further north. Federal governments of both persuasions have spent more than $1 billion on the F3 freeway since 1975—$1,000 million. What is the point of spending all the money on the freeway between Hornsby and Newcastle, virtually to the Weakleys Drive intersection, and then having a bottleneck? One of the difficulties I have found right from the start, with all the work that we are doing on the national highway, has been the relationship with the New South Wales government. The RTA are the people that organise and manage the construction work—not that there are any difficulties with the people in the RTA; they are very professional people and have the expertise—but the blocking comes when the federal government tries to talk to the state government and it will not provide the information that we need for costings and the issuing of tenders. It is important that the state government works constructively with the federal government to allow road funding and the progressive improvement of our national highways to continue. Again, I commend the member for Paterson for bringing forward this motion. It is an example of the work that he does day in and day out for his constituents. He is a tireless worker for the residents of Paterson and I know that he will continue to have their support and be the hard-working member for Paterson for many years to come. 13:32:009252Ripoll, Bernie, MPMr RIPOLL83EOxleyALP00—The issue of roads and road funding is extremely important. I want to talk about the significant issues that have been raised by members: the need to ease traffic congestion, the dangers and fatalities on our national highways, and, in particular, the need outlined by the member for Paterson for all levels of government to progress the work. For that we can commend him and say it is great. Unfortunately, I was disappointed by his speech. He attempted to draw some facts but spent the rest of the time attacking the New South Wales government, as one would expect. The critical point raised by the member for Paterson is this notion that the federal government would fund this road down through the New England if only the state would cooperate and get on with the job of planning and so forth. I want to raise the very serious issue of the Ipswich Motorway in my electorate, which is directly related to this motion. The difference is that we have done all the planning, we have had the Queensland government spend the money, we have had the commitment from the state, yet the federal government still comes up with excuses. At the end of the day, they are all that exist. If the member for Paterson would more closely look at his motion and the troubles contained within it, he would see that it is just excuses—excuses for a federal government that refuses to commit the money needed to build this road. It will find any excuse in the world. If I talk about the excuses that are being put forward in terms of the New England Highway, I can draw again similarities to the excuses that are being put forward in Queensland with regard to the Ipswich Motorway, particularly those coming from the member for Blair. Since we have been through the process and $2 million was committed, a very good planning process and a fantastic consultation process have been put into place. That consultation process dealt with all stakeholders and was probably one of the best consultation processes I have ever been involved in. But as we drew nearer and nearer to finalisation, and as the government and all stakeholders came closer to D-Day in terms of having a final plan and proposal for the Ipswich Motorway, what did the federal government do? It hit the panic button. Suddenly it knew it was close to having to make a commitment and refused to do it. What does the federal government do? It throws in the big curly issue, and the curly issue in the case of Ipswich is that of alternative routes. If you do not want to build the road, confuse it with some other subject. Suddenly the focus is no longer Ipswich Motorway—and neither will it be the New England Highway when the federal government decides it does not want to fund it. It will come up with alternative route excuses, funding excuses, state government excuses. It will use any excuse, but you will not get your road—not under this government, that is for sure. I am seeing the identical concerns in my electorate that the member for Paterson raises in this motion. That is why I wanted to speak on the motion—when I looked at it, I could draw an analogy directly with my electorate. All I had to do was replace `New England Highway' with `Ipswich Motorway' and it was the same. I am, like him, concerned about the number of deaths on the Ipswich Motorway—they happen on a regular basis and the numbers are way too high. I am concerned that I have 85,000—closer to 90,000—vehicles a day travelling on the Ipswich Motorway, and yet no money is being committed. John Anderson, the minister for transport, recently wrote to me. Over all of this time he has mouthed the words that he is committed to the Ipswich Motorway, but for the first time—IK6Lloyd, Jim, MPMr Lloyd—Mr Deputy Speaker, on a point of order: I draw your attention to relevance. I think we have let the honourable member go on about Ipswich for quite long enough. I would like you to bring him back to the motion. 10000Jenkins, Harry (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Jenkins)—I have listened closely to the honourable member for Oxley. He has clearly outlined how he is relating his comments to the motion, and I hope that he will continue to do that. 83ERipoll, Bernie, MPMr RIPOLL—The key part of this motion calls on all levels of government to progress the work at hand. The relevance of my comments is that I can take this motion and directly mirror what is happening at a federal government level—their refusal to deal with road funding in respect of roads of national importance and all roads funded by the federal government. They are coming up with excuses in this motion put forward by the member for Paterson—blame the states, shift the cost, shift the blame to someone else. This is exactly what they are doing in Oxley. It is exactly what they are doing with the Ipswich Motorway and they should be condemned for it. Your motion, member for Paterson, will not do anything for you in terms of trying to show people that your government is committed. You, yourself, called on your own government to make a commitment and fund the road. I call on the federal government to do the same in my electorate in Ipswich—get on with the job. The planning is all done. Get on with the job, put up the money and make the commitment. (Time expired) 13:37:009253Ticehurst, Kenneth, MPMr TICEHURST00ANFDobellLP10—I am pleased to be able to join with the member for Paterson and the member for Robertson in this debate on the member for Paterson's motion. It is pleasing to see a member of parliament standing up and fighting for his electorate. I notice the second speaker, the member for Oxley, spent much time talking about Ipswich—but he would not know where Weakleys Drive is; he is from Queensland. Where is the member for Shortland? She might have a better idea of where it is. Like the member for Robertson on the Central Coast, who fought hard to bring about the Commonwealth's $80 million investment in the widening of the F3, the member for Paterson is committed to making sure his electorate gets a fair share of road funding. It is interesting to note the lack of comments in the Hansard made by the member for Hunter in relation to Weakleys Drive and driver safety along the New England Highway.8K6Fitzgibbon, Joel, MPMr Fitzgibbon—Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I remind the House that this motion would have failed for want of a seconder if I had not been on the spot. That is how determined the member for Paterson is to get the debate up. On relevance, I was pulled up on two occasions in an attempt to waste my time. The member for Dobell is speaking rubbish.10000Jenkins, Harry (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Jenkins)—The honourable member will resume his seat.00ANFTicehurst, Kenneth, MPMr TICEHURST—It was not the member for Hunter who put up the motion on driver safety. It was not the member for Hunter who raised this issue during the last election campaign—10000DEPUTY SPEAKER, TheThe DEPUTY SPEAKER—I call the honourable member for Hunter—with a point of order, I hope.8K6Fitzgibbon, Joel, MPMr Fitzgibbon—Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point on relevance relating to standing order 146. The member for Dobell has not made any reference to the intersection at hand, except when he indicated at the beginning of his speech that he does not even know where it is.10000DEPUTY SPEAKER, TheThe DEPUTY SPEAKER—The honourable member will resume his seat. Standing order 146 refers to questions, so there is no point of order.00ANFTicehurst, Kenneth, MPMr TICEHURST—It was not the member for Hunter who consistently called on all levels of government to work together to bring about an outcome. He said he tried to bring on this motion for debate during private members' business, when he knew full well that it was not parliamentary procedure. He even had the hide to call the member—83REdwards, Graham, MPMr Edwards—Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The point of order is on relevance. The member is not speaking in any way which is relevant to the motion. He is just endeavouring to denigrate—10000DEPUTY SPEAKER, TheThe DEPUTY SPEAKER—The honourable member for Dobell will continue his remarks based on the motion before the chair.00ANFTicehurst, Kenneth, MPMr TICEHURST—It is outrageous that the members opposite would come here and complain about road funding when, during Labor's 13 years in office, federal road funding was cut back to $840 million a year. When they lost government in 1996, spending on roads was less in real terms than it was in 1982-83. In my electorate of Dobell, the Pacific Highway— 83ERipoll, Bernie, MP10000DEPUTY SPEAKER, TheThe DEPUTY SPEAKER—I suggest the honourable member for Oxley resumes his seat. The honourable member for Dobell will continue.00ANFTicehurst, Kenneth, MPMr TICEHURST—The RTA are spending so much time planning. They spent five years planning a Pacific Highway road through—83NHall, Jill, MPMs Hall—Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The member for Dobell is once again showing that he does not understand the rules of debate.10000DEPUTY SPEAKER, TheThe DEPUTY SPEAKER—What is the honourable member's point of order?83NHall, Jill, MPMs Hall—My point of order is on relevance. He is talking about the New South Wales RTA—10000DEPUTY SPEAKER, TheThe DEPUTY SPEAKER—There is no point of order.83NHall, Jill, MP10000DEPUTY SPEAKER, TheThe DEPUTY SPEAKER—I warn the honourable member for Shortland.00ANFTicehurst, Kenneth, MPMr TICEHURST—In the last election, the ALP made a lot of promises about road funding—including for Weakleys Drive—to the tune of $410 million worth of new roads, but did not plan to increase the existing federal roads budget. But then again, Labor are not known for their economic management. Their infrastructure policy stated:Commonwealth contribution to road projects announced will be met from within existing Commonwealth road funding allocations.In summary, Labor promised to cancel roads in rural and regional Australia to pay for their spending promises. Labor described the $1.2 billion Roads to Recovery program as boondoggle, which highlights their lack of understanding of the needs of regional communities. In the 2001 election campaign, they made it clear they would end the vital black spot program, which fixes so many dangerous locations in many areas.13:42:009254Hoare, Kelly, MPMs HOARE83YCharltonALP00—I rise in support of the substance of this motion. I do not support the call for the state government to fund this link road. We are talking about the national highway system, which should be funded by the national government. For the benefit of members in this place, the road we are talking about—the F3 to New England Highway link road—begins in my electorate of Charlton at the township of Seahampton, continues to the electorate of Hunter and joins the New England Highway. As we have heard, it has a crash and casualty rate 79 per cent higher than the route average.The member for Paterson referred to the previous Labor government. I remind the member for Paterson that the proposed route for this road was not decided upon until 1995, and we went into the 1996 election campaign with a promise that a future Labor government would fund that piece of road. It is no good to call back to previous Labor governments when the Howard government has been in office since 1996 and has done absolutely nothing about it. The member for Robertson referred to the widening of the F3, which runs through his electorate and which would help my constituents in Charlton as well because it runs through my electorate. The member for Robertson must have much more clout with his government than the member for Paterson. He was able to get the road widened through his electorate whereas the member for Paterson has not been able to do anything regarding this link road. There was some research done earlier this year by the Hunter Valley Research Foundation, which reported:The proposed extension would see a 39.5 kilometre four-lane dual carriageway link the Newcastle-Sydney Freeway at Seahampton—as I said, in my electorate—with the New England Highway around Branxton. The construction is anticipated to take six-and-a-half years at a cost of $335 million.Any projects like this would generate jobs. The research foundation indicated that it would generate nearly 2,500 full-time jobs in the Hunter, so of course we support it.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Order! It being 1.45 p.m., the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 106A. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. The honourable member for Charlton will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed. Statements by Members9255925513:45:009255King, Catherine, MPMs KING00AMRBallaratALP00—Tomorrow marks the 148th anniversary of the Eureka rebellion. On 3 December, miners from 16 different nations took up arms against a corrupt and unjust goldfields administration. After years of oppression, the battle at the Eureka Stockade led to the birth of true democracy in Australia. It was not just about taxation; it was about the right of people to have a say in how they are governed. The concerns which underlaid the discontent on the goldfields at the time are the themes which still carry potent meanings for today's Australians—issues of human rights, democracy and national identity—and it is these issues which give the Eureka rebellion its continuing historical significance. In France, it was the storming of the Bastille; in America, it was Gettysburg; and in Australia, it was the battle for the Eureka Stockade. Each represented a step in the march to liberty and a democratic government. The Eureka oath has a potent meaning today: `We swear by the Southern Cross to stand truly by each other and fight to defend our rights and liberties.' Today I call for the Eureka flag—the flag of the Southern Cross—to be recognised under the Flags Act as a national flag. The Eureka flag was first flown at Parliament House in 1973 and it has not flown since. Tomorrow it will fly from the Victorian and New South Wales parliaments respectively. It is time for it once again to fly from this building. Eureka belongs to all Australians. On 3 December 2004, Australia will commemorate the 150th anniversary of the Eureka rebellion, and I call on all members to support this commemoration. (Time expired)925513:47:009255Baird, Bruce, MPMr BAIRDMP6CookLP10—It was my pleasure to visit Bali on the weekend to attend the Christian service at Kuta. It was a very sad time in memory of those many Australians who died at the site, but it was particularly significant to be with the Indonesian Christians to remember those who were lost. Some 6,000 to 7,000 Indonesians took part in that outdoor service. For part of the service it was raining torrents but, nevertheless, the people stood by. It was a great time of coming together to remember the tragic events but also to recognise the assistance the Australians have given. The service continued the next day on Kuta Beach, and that was followed by a march through the streets of Bali which ended at the Sari Club site, where several thousand people gathered in a Christian service. It was a very moving time, and it certainly showed the outpouring of grief of the Balinese and the Indonesians who had come there at that time. It recognised the role that the Australians have played in tracking down those who committed offences which led to this terrible tragedy. It was a time in which we recognised the humanity of those who suffer. (Time expired)925513:48:009255O'Byrne, Michelle, MPMs O'BYRNE84SBassALP00—Sporting associations in Australia continue to struggle for their very survival. They are constantly urged to be more professional, to run their sport like a business and to become more self-sufficient. But the task to achieve any of these things is becoming harder by the day. Sponsorship in particular is more and more difficult to obtain, and it is here that a catch-22 situation of significant proportion now exists. Because sponsors can pick and choose among such a variety of sporting events and programs, more often than not they will prefer those which have television coverage. But in 2002 it appears that just a handful of sports—led by cricket, football, horse and motor racing, and the occasional bigger golf and tennis tournaments—enjoy the position of being offered rights money for their product by the TV networks.The sad situation for the majority of sports is that, to get their product on television—the key factor in obtaining the sponsorship and exposure necessary for self-sufficiency—they have to pay for the production costs. It is a path fraught with financial risk rather than one which leads to prosperity. For the foreseeable future, most Australian sports will need help. One solution is for the Australian Sports Commission to establish a television unit which could work with sporting bodies to provide the networks and pay television with the finished product. Apart from helping sports towards greater financial security, such a scheme would also ensure a greater variety of sport is aired an Australian television sets. That way, the first time Australians hear of a Simon Fairweather or a Lauren Burns might not be the day they win an Olympic gold. 925613:49:009256King, Peter, MPMr KING00AMQWentworthLP10—The issue of aged care is important for each electorate represented in this parliament, and my electorate is no exception. It is therefore with pleasure that I was able to announce on Friday, in the latest Commonwealth funding rounds, the success of three facilities in my electorate—the Illowra nursing hostel at Waverley, the Sir Moses Montefiores Jewish Home in Randwick and the Vaucluse Nursing Home—which were recipients of 103 new additional aged care beds worth some $550,000. Since coming to office in 1996 and the first budget thereafter, the coalition has injected an additional 68 per cent into residential aged care in this country, worth some $1.8 billion. It is sensible that funds are committed to such an extent to aged care, not only because we have an aging population but also because older Australians are seeking more creative solutions to growing old with dignity. I congratulate the three recipients of the funding for their well managed programs.925613:51:009256Livermore, Kirsten, MPMs LIVERMORE83ACapricorniaALP00—I too would like to share with the House some good news from my electorate in the area of aged care. Last week, it was announced that the Capricorn Adventist Retirement Village at Yeppoon on the Capricorn Coast in my electorate would receive funding for 11 high care residential places. Now, 11 beds does not sound like very many, but it is still a recognition of the hard work that the Capricorn Adventist Retirement Village have done over the last five years or so. They have lobbied very hard to provide an excellent service to the elderly residents of the Capricorn Coast. I have spoken a few times in the House about the situation on the Capricorn Coast. It is a very fast growing part of Queensland and it is particularly attractive to retired people, but what has been happening is that the number of aged care services has not kept pace with the huge demand that exists. We have had situations where people have moved to the Capricorn Coast, set up a new life with their partner and made friends but who, when they have required a higher level of care, have actually had to leave and move to Rockhampton, which is 40 kilometres away. I want to congratulate the Capricorn Adventist Retirement Village for not giving up on the people of the Capricorn Coast. They have also put in for funding under the aged care innovative pool for 14 dementia care places. I would commend that application to the government because, even though these 11 places were announced last week, the demand for aged care on the Capricorn Coast is still extremely high. (Time expired)925613:52:009256Schultz, Alby, MPMr SCHULTZ83QHumeLP10—On 12 October 2002 the bombing of a nightclub in Bali reverberated right around the country. Many people were killed and many were injured, and the majority of them were young, healthy, fun-loving Australians in the prime of their lives. It touched the hearts of all Australians, including the young. Last week, in my electoral office, I was honoured to receive a book of condolences from the students, staff and community of the Goulburn South Public School, who wanted to send their words of condolence and grief to all of the families of those affected by the Bali bombing. The reason that I rise in this debate today is to request leave of the House to have the book of condolences from these young people, in sympathy for all of those victims of the Bali bombings, tabled in this House. I seek that assistance from the opposition.Leave granted.925613:54:009256Rudd, Kevin, MPMr RUDD83TGriffithALP00—It was my privilege on 23 November 2002 to attend the 75th anniversary celebrations of St Thomas's Parish Church in Camp Hill, Brisbane. I was able to participate in those celebrations. St Thomas's was established 75 years ago by the Missionaries of the Sacred Heart who have run both the parish and the associated pastoral work of that community in the period since then. Also in that community we have the St Thomas's Parish School, run initially by the Sisters of the Good Samaritan and subsequently by members of the laity. It is a great school in Brisbane's south-side community. I would like to acknowledge the particular role played by Father Tony O'Brien, a fine priest and a fine pastor. The organising jubilee committee was headed and most ably led by chairman, Brian Kilmartin. There were also major contributions from David Cashman, the new principal of the school associated with the parish; the chaplain, Father Chan, from the Chinese community; and Brother John Ellefelt, who is an institution in the parish and one of the parish's quiet achievers who has looked after parish life for the past 20 years. This is a fantastic local parish and local parish school, so integral to community life in the southern suburbs of Brisbane. It has formed part of our local community fabric for these last 75 years and has been a contributor to those experiencing practical and physical need. I commended them on behalf of the local community in my address at their 75th anniversary celebrations, and I do so again in this parliament today. (Time expired)925713:55:009257May, Margaret, MPMrs MAY83BMcPhersonLP10—I recently had the pleasure of visiting the Tallebudgera State School on the occasion of its 125th anniversary. It was a day of celebration and reflection and a time to focus on the future of the school in the 21st century. First, a little bit of history. A school was not easy to establish in this area given that 1877 had been a bad year for the maize producers in that area as prices for local produce were very low. Despite hard times, a local farmer donated a small patch of land, and members of the local community donated the necessary 60 guineas to start the school. The school commenced as a one-room, one-teacher classroom attached to a residence and, from this humble beginning, the school has grown to cater for 670 students from preschool to year 7. I was proud to represent the Commonwealth government at the special celebration by opening two new classrooms which were funded entirely by the federal government with a grant of $427,000. I was also proud to meet with the principal, Judy Blake, and many of her students, who not only live by their school motto `Knowledge, Courage, Compassion' but also remember with pride the sacrifice the school's founders made to establish their school 125 years ago. Congratulations to Judy Blake, her staff and students, the parents and the Tallebudgera community for making the celebrations a day to remember.925713:56:009257Latham, Mark, MPMr LATHAMK26WerriwaALP00—Today marks a great day in Australian history: the 30th anniversary of the election of the Whitlam Labor government in 1972. I want to bring to the attention of the House another significant anniversary: last Friday it was 50 years since Gough Whitlam was elected to this House as the member for Werriwa. At a by-election on 29 November 1952, the people of Werriwa cast 32,561 votes for Gough, who was declared elected with 67.5 per cent of the primary vote. So began 50 years of magnificent public service to his electorate, service to his party and service to our nation: 26 years as the member for Werriwa, seven years as deputy leader of the ALP and then a record 11 years as our leader. He spent three years as Prime Minister of Australia and has the greatest record of political reform and achievement in the nation's history. In his public life after parliament he has been Australian ambassador to UNESCO, head of the National Gallery, and Chairman of the Australia-China Council. He has held numerous university appointments, is a prolific author, is always an inspiration to the Labor movement and is an elder statesman to the nation. No Australian has enhanced our nation and improved our lives as much as Gough Whitlam. He may have been Prime Minister for just three years but his legacy is timeless. Gough changed Australia forever. Look at his achievements: an independent foreign policy, a renewed sense of national identity and the creation of Medibank, now known as Medicare. In education policy, Gough fully funded our universities, abolished tuition fees and ensured that all schools, public and private, were resourced on the basis of need. (Time expired)925813:58:009258Lloyd, Jim, MPMr LLOYDIK6RobertsonLP10—On Friday, 29 November I had the privilege of attending the Kariong Somersby Rotary Club awards night. I also had the honour of presenting four awards on that night. The pride of workmanship award was presented to Mr Paul Lack. The three community service awards were presented to Ms Kay Blomfield, the Reverend John Price and Mrs Barbara McCarthy. I would also like to congratulate Rotarian Graeme Catt and the president, Roger Wilson, for organising a very prestigious night. Kay Blomfield received her award for her services to Guides. She has spent more than 20 years in that service and became the Central Coast regional commissioner for Guides, New South Wales, in 1996. Paul Lack was the first employee of Future School, a very good company on the Central Coast. He started as a casual employee in 1990, became a full-time employee in 1991 and has spent more than 10 years with this very progressive company. Reverend John Price was ordained as a priest in 1978. It says in the brief that it is difficult to estimate the number of funerals, weddings and baptisms which John has conducted in the local area. Barbara McCarthy, who also received an award, has been involved as a member of the Gosford Netball Association for over 20 years and since 1994 has been involved with the Rural Fire Services catering division. (Time expired)10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Order! It being 2.00 p.m., in accordance with standing order 106A the time for members' statements is concluded.Condolences9258925814:00:009258SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER10000PON/A10—I inform the House of the death on Monday, 25 November 2002 of Gordon Sinclair Davidson CBE, a former senator. Gordon Davidson represented the state of South Australia from 1961 to 1981. As a mark of respect to the memory of Senator Gordon Davidson, I invite honourable members to rise in their places.Honourable members having stood in their places—10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I thank the House.Miscellaneous925814:01:009258Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—On indulgence, Mr Speaker, I wish to make a short statement. Like all members of this House and all Australians, I was deeply shocked to hear of the terrorist attacks in Mombasa, Kenya, on 28 November. Those attacks, which have claimed the lives of Kenyans and Israelis, were repugnant to Australians and to Australian values. They involved the ruthless and indiscriminate targeting of innocent Kenyan civilians and Israeli holiday-makers. The fact is that the nationals of our Commonwealth partner Kenya have borne the brunt of this attack.We, having recently experienced the attacks claiming so many lives in Bali, feel particularly for the people of Kenya and the people of Israel as a consequence of this attack. I am conveying formal condolences on behalf of the Australian government and the Australian people to the Prime Minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon, and to President Moi of Kenya. Our thoughts are very much with those who are grieving for lost loved ones and who are recovering from injuries. It is another example of the despicable reach of terrorism and it is another reason why the free nations of the world must redouble their efforts to fight, wherever it breaks out, the scourge of terrorism.14:03:009258Crean, Simon, MPMr CREANDT4HothamALPLeader of the Opposition00—On indulgence as well, Mr Speaker, I join with the Prime Minister in expressing deep sorrow and sadness for the relatives of those who lost their lives in Kenya. Reports indicate that at least 16 people were killed. It was a direct attack on Israeli citizens and is to be condemned in the strongest possible terms. Thankfully, no Australian lives were lost, but it is one of those circumstances, like Bali, where Australians could easily have been at the resort or could have been in the aeroplane which, thankfully, escaped two direct missile attack attempts. It is not clear who was responsible for these acts but, as in all of these circumstances, we join with the government in saying that every effort must be taken to track down the perpetrators of these heinous acts, to bring them to justice and to resolve again that collectively we have to fight the war against terror. We stand ready to join with the government in efforts designed to achieve that result. Our sympathies and our thoughts go out to the families of the victims so tragically taken in yet another terrible circumstance.Questions Without Notice9259925914:04:009259Crean, Simon, MPMr CREANDT4HothamALP00—My question is to the Prime Minister. I ask him if he is aware of statements made at lunchtime today by the Minister for Foreign Affairs in relation to your comments yesterday on Australia's new doctrine of pre-emptive military strikes. The Minister for Foreign Affairs said:The Prime Minister is, of course, not suggesting that Australia is going to mount military action against any of our neighbours.Prime Minister, if your Minister for Foreign Affairs is suggesting today that you are not going to mount military operations against our neighbours, why did you canvass that very possibility yesterday?9259Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—The answer is, of course, that I did not make any such suggestion, and the Leader of the Opposition knows that. Isn't it interesting that once again we have a classic operation of the Labor Party doctrine that—PG6Macklin, Jenny, MP10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Order, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition!ZD4Mr HOWARD—whenever there is a difference between a position taken by the leader of the government in Australia and some spokesman from another country, Australia is always wrong in their eyes.2V5Swan, Wayne, MPMr Swan—Guilty!10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Order, the member for Lilley!ZD4Mr HOWARD—Let me take the House through exactly what I said—and may I say at the outset that I do not resile in any way from the remarks that were made yesterday. I was asked a question by the interviewer on a Channel 9 program, and this is what I had to say:Oh yes, I think any Australian Prime Minister would. I mean, it stands to reason that if you believed that somebody was going to launch an attack against your country, either of a conventional kind or of a terrorist kind, and you had a capacity to stop it and there was no alternative other than to use that capacity then of course you would have to use it.I ask not only members on my side but also members on the other side: do you seriously dispute that proposition? Could any Australian parliamentary representative seriously dispute the proposition? I find it fascinating that the Labor Party is saying that there is something wrong with an Australian prime minister saying to the Australian public that, if he were aware of a circumstance where there might be an attack on this country and he had a capacity to stop that, he would not—if other alternatives were not available—use that capacity. Let me just say again that, if any Australian prime minister were to be guilty of that, he would be failing the most basic test.It is very interesting to examine the reaction of those who sit opposite. We had the member for Griffith out this morning, getting himself into a lather of sweat on this particular subject, and then we had the Leader of the Opposition. Very interestingly, the Leader of the Opposition was asked this question, amongst many other questions. The journalist said:Getting back to the threat of a terrorist attack—which, of course, was the context in which I was asked the question.DT4Crean, Simon, MPMr Crean—You were asked about a pre-emptive strike!10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The Leader of the Opposition has asked his question.ZD4Mr HOWARD—The question continued:though, if you became aware of that and it were imminent— 83TRudd, Kevin, MPMr Rudd—It was about a pre-emptive strike!10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The member for Griffith! If the member for Griffith persists, I will have to deal with him.ZD4Mr HOWARD—I will repeat that question asked by the journalist:Getting back to the threat of a terrorist attack, though, if you became aware of that and it were imminent, you may not have time for talking. Would you support a pre-emptive strike in that case?The answer:CREAN: That is a different proposition.`That is a different proposition,' he says!XH4McGauran, Peter, MPMr McGauran—How?ZD4Mr HOWARD—How indeed? My learned friend for Gippsland asks the rhetorical question: `How?' That is exactly the context in which I was asked the question. But it gets even better! The Leader of the Opposition goes on to say:Under the UN charter, there is already the capacity for member nations, in self-defence, and where they can identify clear and present danger, to take appropriate action.The question may well be asked—DT4Crean, Simon, MPMr Crean—That's right! But you were saying you would change it!10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The Leader of the Opposition! ZD4Mr HOWARD—What is the Leader of the Opposition getting into a lather of sweat about? The reality is that, when it comes to standing up for Australian interests, you can always rely on the Australian Labor Party to take the point of view of those who would criticise this country. I want to make two other points. The first of those points is that nothing that I said yesterday was in any way directed against the countries of our region. It was not in any way directed against the governments of the countries of our region. In fact, only yesterday I signed a personal message to President Megawati of Indonesia, thanking her very warmly for the very effective cooperation between the Australian Federal Police and the Indonesian police in the pursuit of those responsible for the Bali atrocity. I emphasise that, notwithstanding what has been falsely alleged by others, nothing that I said yesterday was directed against our friends in neighbouring countries. The other point I would make is about this canard that was put around by the member for Griffith that, in some way, what I was saying yesterday was related to Australia's attitude in relation to Iraq. It was not. It related to the willingness of this country to defend Australia's national interest. It related to the determination of this government to take legitimate measures if other alternatives were not available, if there were a clear, precise, identifiable threat. I repeat what I said yesterday: any Australian prime minister unwilling to do that would be failing the most basic test of office.926014:11:009260Bishop, Julie, MPMs JULIE BISHOP83PCurtinLP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Would the minister inform the House of recent threats to Australian interests in the Philippines? What is the government doing to ensure the security of Australians in the Philippines?9260Downer, Alexander, MPMr DOWNER4G4MayoLPMinister for Foreign Affairs10—First, I thank the honourable member for Curtin for her question. Naturally enough, this question of the closure of our embassy in the Philippines has generated a certain amount of publicity. I returned from East Timor on the evening of Wednesday, 27 November, to be confronted with intelligence which led me to conclude that the only thing to do was to immediately close the embassy in the Philippines, at least, of course, on a temporary basis. The information we had was credible and it was specific in relation to a threat against our embassy. I also note that the Canadian embassy and the European Union mission in Manila were also closed on the basis of the same information. There have been some media reports that the threat came from Jemaah Islamiah, but I believe the threats are from a terrorist group in the Philippines. The precise identity of the group cannot be confirmed at this stage.The Australian Ambassador to Manila informed the Philippines authorities of our decision on Wednesday, 27 November, and she has continued to be in close touch with Philippine ministers and senior officials as the situation develops. On Friday, 29 November, I spoke with the Philippines Foreign Secretary, Blas Ople. As a result of that conversation, I am confident that Foreign Secretary Ople accepts the reasons behind our decision and understands that we have to put, first and foremost, the safety and security of the 140 people who work in the Australian embassy in the Philippines as a paramount consideration. The Australian embassy is located in a building which is surrounded by busy streets and has significant glass frontage. There is very little distance between the street itself and the chancery, making it extremely difficult, despite efforts made by the Philippines police and marines, to secure the building. I have made it clear to Foreign Secretary Ople that we are only closing our embassy on a temporary basis. We hope that in the next week or so it will be possible to reopen the embassy for normal business. We are working with the Philippines government also to secure the site, and I think a good deal has been done to achieve that already. I am also looking at the longer term security options for our embassy there, given its location, including the possibility of moving the embassy to a new site. Naturally enough, the government does give a lot of priority to the security of our diplomatic staff abroad, as we do to all Australians abroad and indeed to those local staff who work for our embassies. The government has now approved an additional $31.7 million to be spent over the next five years to introduce a range of new security measures at our overseas posts. This will enhance the security of our missions in the region and some of our missions beyond the region.Finally, let me say in answer to the honourable member for Curtin's question that, in response to the threat we received last week in relation to our embassy, we have revised our Philippines travel advice to recommend that Australians defer non-essential travel. We have put in place arrangements to ensure that embassy staff remain in close contact with the Australian community and to provide emergency consular assistance.926114:16:009261Crean, Simon, MPMr CREANDT4HothamALP00—My question is to the Prime Minister. Has he seen reports in this morning's Sydney Morning Herald that land tax has not been paid on Senator Coonan's family's million-dollar property at Pittwater? Prime Minister, given that you lead the highest taxing government in Australia's history, isn't it unacceptable for very high-income families such as Senator Coonan's to avoid their fair share of tax? What action will you take to ensure that the minister for taxation is not a tax avoider?9261Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—I have a couple of comments in response to that. The first is that land tax, the last time I checked, was a state tax. The second observation I would make is that taxes have been reduced under my government very significantly. Coming to Senator Coonan's situation, I have read that article. I understand that in another place the senator will be saying something about it. On the information that is available to me, Senator Coonan has not in any way breached the ministerial guidelines. Of course I expect everybody to meet their taxation liability, including all members of parliament.926114:18:009261Baird, Bruce, MPMr BAIRDMP6CookLP10—My question is addressed to the Treasurer. Would the Treasurer advise the House of the economic forecasts contained in last week's Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook? What have been the major developments since the May budget?9261Costello, Peter, MPMr COSTELLOCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—I thank the honourable member for Cook. I can inform him that last week the government released the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook. The government revised down the growth forecast for the current financial year from 3¾ per cent to three per cent, largely as a consequence of drought. At budget time we were forecasting that the rural sector—the farm sector—would grow at about 3¾ per cent. As a consequence of the drought, we are now forecasting that it will contract by 17 per cent in 2002-03. That in itself accounts for the downgrade in the growth forecast from 3¾ per cent to three per cent. In addition to that, the international economy continues to disappoint, with weakness in the United States and Europe and ongoing problems in Japan. The domestic economy, notwithstanding that, continues to perform strongly. Since the mid-year review we have had capital expenditure results, which have been brought out for the September quarter, showing that capital expenditure increased 2.3 per cent in the September quarter and is 14.4 per cent higher than a year ago. That is telling you that business is picking up investment and taking over to some degree from the housing sector. In addition to that, company profits released today show that gross operating profits increased 4.7 per cent in the September quarter and are up 17.8 per cent over the year. That is a very strong growth in company profits. Again, that bodes well for capital investment. If companies are profitable then they have investment opportunities, and investment will start to pick up some of the slack as the housing sector comes off.In addition, we had trade data for the month of October released today, showing some strengthening in capital imports. Overall, there was a trade deficit of $926 million, with exports rising 1.8 per cent and imports rising 1.5 per cent. So notwithstanding a difficult international situation and drought, the news in relation to October is that exports were up. However, I should make this point: rural goods exports showed an increase in prices, whereas rural goods volumes, as shown by the September quarter, are down. That is telling you that, as rural goods production contracts, those that are still able to sell overseas are getting better prices—but the volumes are contracting. We expect that the effects of drought will continue to keep those volumes down through the course of 2002-03, with the current account deficit rising to above four per cent, as we put in the mid-year forecast.It is a difficult international environment and it is a very severe drought. The drought is affecting Australian growth. The good news is that the budget remains in sound shape, with a moderate surplus forecast for 2002-03. According to international forecasts, Australia is forecast to perform better than the developed economies of the world in 2002-03. Notwithstanding our own difficulties, the Australian economy remains one of the most resilient of the developed world. Unlike previous international downturns, we managed to avoid recession in 2001 and keep people in work.What does this mean for the average person? The average person has been able to have much better job opportunities than they did during previous international downturns—in, say, the recession of 1990: remember when all those people were put out of work by the Keating high unemployment regime. We have not been affected by that.LN6Hatton, Michael, MP10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—If the member for Blaxland seeks the call I will grant it to him, but it will be one more question to the opposition.CT4Mr COSTELLO—If strong economic policy can continue, we can keep more Australians in work and avoid the kind of tragedy that the member for Blaxland's predecessor inflicted on the Australian economy back in 1990.926214:23:009262Latham, Mark, MPMr LATHAMK26WerriwaALP00—My question is to the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, why has your minister for taxation, Senator Coonan, been party to an arrangement whereby her husband, Andrew Rogers, has been falsely enrolled at their Pittwater property? Is the Prime Minister aware of Senator Coonan's interview with the Australian Financial Review in July, when she said:... the weekender at Pittwater has not been visited this year.Prime Minister, do you acknowledge that this arrangement allows the Coonans to avoid the payment of land tax and capital gains tax? How can you tolerate this situation? While honest PAYE taxpayers around Australia are carrying a bigger tax burden under your government, your minister for taxation has rearranged her family properties to avoid the payment of tax.9262Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—As I indicated in answer to the Leader of the Opposition, the senator is dealing with those matters in another place. I would add that in relation to capital gains tax it is my understanding that one of the properties in question was purchased before capital gains tax legislation came into effect. As to the other matters, I am not aware of any arrangement to avoid tax. If there were any arrangement to avoid tax, and I was satisfied of that, I would take appropriate action. 926314:24:009263Schultz, Alby, MPMr SCHULTZ83QHumeLP10—My question is addressed to the Treasurer. Would the Treasurer advise the House how the government has strengthened Australia's health system? Are there policy alternatives that threaten the budgets of Australian households?9263Costello, Peter, MPMr COSTELLOCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—I thank the honourable member for Hume for his question. I can inform him that the government has strengthened Australia's health system immeasurably with the measures that it has put in place, including the private health insurance rebate. The private health insurance rebate gives all Australians a 30 per cent rebate on their private health insurance—that is how it strengthens Australia's health system. As a consequence of that, nearly nine million Australians now have private health cover, and each and every one of them enjoys the benefit of a 30 per cent rebate. The latest figures from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare show that in 2000-01 public hospital admissions fell nationally by 0.1 per cent but private hospital admissions rose by a massive 12.1 per cent. So people had the opportunity to take out private health insurance, private health insurance admissions rose and the burden which would otherwise have fallen on the public health system has been minimised.This government has strongly supported moves to restore private health insurance cover levels because of the benefits that brings, not just to those who have private health insurance but to those who are relying on the public health system as well. We thought that was the policy of the Labor Party. That is what we thought. At the time of the last election the member for Jagajaga, then health spokesman, said this:Labor will retain the 30 per cent rebate, without a means test or cap.That would be pretty obvious, wouldn't it? On 5 February this year, the Leader of the Opposition said this:We have said that this is now a large part of people's budgets and we went to the last election retaining the private health rebate. We won't be changing that.That is what the Leader of the Opposition said on 5 February 2002 on the AM program. Yet the old flip-flop that you start to see of the Labor Party began on Sunday as the Leader of the Opposition began softening up the public for a massive tax increase. Let us be clear about this: wiping out the private health insurance rebate is a massive tax increase on the ordinary people of Australia and particularly the elderly. We had the Deputy Leader of the Labor Party today in the Canberra Times:“It is a huge area of expenditure and a lot of people are figuring out that it isn't worth having,” she said.On the John Laws program this morning, the shadow minister for health rang in to start attacking the private health insurance rebate. And at last Friday's Commonwealth-state health ministers meeting, every one of the Labor health ministers called for the abolition of the private health insurance rebate. We know, even if they will not say it, that the socialists on the Labor side of the parliament are itching to take away the private health insurance rebate which gives ordinary Australians the opportunity to take out private health insurance.I want to say this to the people of Australia, particularly the struggling families and the elderly: if you are taking out a Medibank Private Healthy Plus policy, Labor's policy means an increase in your premium of $638 a year. How many people would be forced out of private health insurance as a consequence of that? If you are taking out the Advantage Plus policy, Labor's policy means an increase in your private health insurance of $989 a year. And if you were taking out the Premier Plus, like many families throughout Australia, Labor policy now wants to take away from you $1,272, as a 30 per cent private health insurance rebate.Why is that Labor Party policy? It is not about helping families. It is not about helping the aged. It is all about ideology. What Labor does not want to see is people given money to have choice in their health care arrangements, to have the opportunity to take out private health insurance. This government introduced the private health insurance rebate. When you were within the sniff of an election, you said that you supported it: the Labor Party never supported it, and the Labor Party now has a plan to slug the families of Australia with increasing health costs by taking between $600 and $1,200 away from them. We say to the people of Australia: the coalition will stand up for you and the coalition will oppose Labor's attempt to hike taxes and to take money from struggling families. 926414:30:009264Latham, Mark, MPMr LATHAMK26WerriwaALP00—My question is again to the Prime Minister. In her ministerial declaration of pecuniary interest submitted to the Prime Minister at the end of last year, what ownership and residential arrangements did Senator Coonan declare for her million-dollar properties at Pittwater and Woollahra? In appointing Senator Coonan as the minister for taxation, was the Prime Minister aware of the tax payments outstanding on the Pittwater property?9264Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—I would have to look again at the declaration she made before answering that question in full, and I will do that. I do not have the declaration with me. I do, however, understand that the only property—this is what I have been informed— owned by Senator Coonan in New South Wales is her home in Woollahra. I am advised that the property in Clareville is not a property which has Senator Coonan's name on the title. That is my understanding, Mr Speaker.Opposition members interjecting—ZD4Mr HOWARD—I am glad that members of the opposition invest me with a capacity to carry in my mind the details of every title deed in New South Wales. I am flattered beyond belief that the members of the opposition think I can do that. I will have another look at her declaration and, if there is anything I should add, I will. I only repeat that, on the information in my possession and made available to me, Senator Coonan has not breached the ministerial code.926414:32:009264Cobb, John, MPMr JOHN COBB00AN1ParkesNP10—My question is addressed to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Transport and Regional Services. Would the Deputy Prime Minister inform the House of progress the government has made in airspace reform? What benefits to the travelling public will flow from these reforms, and are further reforms being undertaken?9264Anderson, John, MPMr ANDERSON4K4GwydirNPMinister for Transport and Regional Services10—I thank the honourable member for his question. We have been pursuing quite a bold and aggressive program of aviation reforms, and a key element of that is airspace reform. Whilst it has been acknowledged that in Australia for many years we have had the best upper level airspace system in the world, it is also the case that in relation to low level airspace there is room for improvement in Australia. Properly carried forth, those reforms can produce improved safety outcomes and a more economically competitive environment, particularly for light aviation, and we want to see light aviation in Australia continue to grow and to enjoy better growth prospects, frankly, than perhaps has been the case in recent years.We are seeking to reform the present system in a way that will make it easier to use, reduce costs for the industry and for the travelling public, and at the same time maintain the highest possible safety standards. To progress this, I established a special aviation reform group, comprising the chairman of CASA, Ted Anson; the chairman of Airservices Australia, John Forsyth; the secretary of my department; the head of the Air Force, Air Marshal Angus Houston; and Mr Dick Smith. They have been reporting on how best to harmonise Australia's airspace arrangements with best international practice, and it has been an engaging process.Opposition members interjecting—4K4Mr ANDERSON—I am glad that the opposition is so interested and supportive. The group reported at the end of March and recommended the adoption of the American national airspace system, NAS. On 13 May the government considered it and agreed with the recommendation. We set up an implementation group. That is well and truly under way, established and operating out of Fairbairn with the cooperation and help of Defence. The implementation of NAS will proceed in three stages. I am delighted to be able to say that the first two elements of stage 1 took effect on 28 November. We are now formally embarked on airspace reform in Australia. The third element, which will involve new procedures for the climb into E airspace will be introduced in March 2003. The aviation reform group is currently finalising the timing for stages 2 and 3, and I expect to be advised shortly in relation to this. That is only one element of our aviation reform program. A couple of weeks ago I announced major changes in relation to CASA that will involve the establishment of a regulatory reform task force and new, enhanced and fairer enforcement procedures which have been very widely welcomed by industry. I welcome that. They have been welcomed too, I think, by CASA, recognising that they will improve relationships between the regulator and the aviation industry and the players in it. I note too, and welcome, the opposition's support.We are also moving to corporatise Airservices Australia, which, incidentally, has just announced a cut in the costs of its services, a welcome boost to aviation at a time when it needs all the competitive pressures being brought to bear that are possible. That, incidentally, amounts to a very significant real reduction in its charges over recent years—always something to be glad of. So there is a lot happening in aviation. We have a very forward looking reform agenda, but I am particularly pleased to be able to tell the House that airspace reform—long needed, in my view, in this country—is now under way and cannot be stopped.926514:37:009265Latham, Mark, MPMr LATHAMK26WerriwaALP00—My question is to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations in his capacity representing the Special Minister of State. Has the minister seen media reports today of a false electoral enrolment, involving Mr Andrew Rogers, at 16 Paradise Avenue, Pittwater? What investigation is the government making into this matter; and can the minister assure the House that his ministerial colleague Senator Coonan did not witness the false enrolment application in March 2001?9265Abbott, Tony, MPMr ABBOTTEZ5WarringahLPMinister for Employment and Workplace Relations and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service10—I am aware of some media reports, although I have not studied them with the kind of semiotic intensity that the shadow minister for community security appears to have. I will refer the shadow minister's question to the Special Minister of State—but this government is determined to uphold the law, and everyone, including ministers in this government, should uphold the law.926514:38:009265Washer, Dr Mal, MPDr WASHER84FMooreLP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations. Would the minister inform the House of action by a militant union at the North West Shelf gas project in Western Australia, which is part of the $25 billion Woodside gas contract? What is the effect of this industrial action on jobs and investment; and what is the government's response?9265Abbott, Tony, MPMr ABBOTTEZ5WarringahLPMinister for Employment and Workplace Relations and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service10—I thank the member for Moore for his question.Opposition members interjecting—10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The minister will resume his seat.DT4Crean, Simon, MPMr Crean—Are you campaigning for the next one?EZ5Mr ABBOTT—The Leader of the Opposition was warned off the hustings in Victoria because he is electoral poison!10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The minister will come to the question.Opposition members interjecting—EZ5Mr ABBOTT—I thank the member for Moore for his question.DT4Crean, Simon, MP10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The minister will resume his seat.K26Latham, Mark, MPMr Latham—Bowl him from both ends!10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I warn the member for Werriwa. The minister has the call.BV5Adams, Dick, MP10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—If the member for Lyons has any difficulty with any ruling I make, he will seek the call of the chair. EZ5Mr ABBOTT—In answer to the member for Moore's excellent question, let me tell the House that construction on the Burrup Peninsula is essential for the success of the North West Shelf gas project, and this project in turn has enabled Australia to win a $25 billion gas sale to China.83VEmerson, Craig, MP10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I warn the member for Rankin.EZ5Mr ABBOTT—Unfortunately, work at various sites on the Burrup Peninsula is now being plagued by a series of wildcat strikes organised by a Western Australian CFMEU official, Joe McDonald, who has had his federal right of entry permit revoked by a full bench of the Industrial Relations Commission and who has recently been convicted and fined for breaches of the freedom of association laws. Joe McDonald has been warned off by Woodside, who are the promoters of the North West Shelf gas project, he has been warned off by the Western Australian state police and, most significantly, he has even been warned off by his own union colleagues. Let me quote the Western Australian president of the AMWU, Colin Saunders, who says:Joe's trying to get on the Burrup, but all he is doing is certainly costing workers a lot of money for no result. My other concern is investors may think twice about the Burrup now and I guess that is why Woodside, given the CFMEU's track record, didn't entertain them being on site.Glen Anderton from the AWU said:The CFMEU is certainly trying to force its way onto the Burrup. If they get onto the site—and that is what worries all the companies up there—they would run amok.On this subject, I am very happy to form a unity ticket with the AMWU and the AWU. CFMEU officials like Joe McDonald and Kevin Reynolds are dinosaurs from the Dark Ages, and they should not be allowed to jeopardise Australian jobs and Australia export projects. Joe McDonald is now trying to gain, under state law, the right of entry permit that he has been appropriately denied under federal law. The federal government will continue to intervene to ensure the primacy of the federal law when it is challenged by state laws and state governments.926614:43:009266Gillard, Julia, MPMs GILLARD83LLalorALP00—My question is to the Minister for Immigration, Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs. Can the minister confirm that the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission has found that the minister's department breached the human rights of a seven-year-old child detainee, causing the child post-traumatic stress disorder that is `likely to be long term in nature' and will `require ongoing treatment', resulting in the child exhibiting `development delays and deviations in social, cognitive and behavioural areas'? Can the minister confirm that the commission has recommended that the government pay $70,000 and apologise to the child and his family? Minister, when will the government stop harming children and adopt Labor's policy to get children out from behind the razor wire?9266Ruddock, Philip, MPMr RUDDOCK0J4BerowraLPMinister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Reconciliation10—I am not familiar with all the details of the reports that the member for Lalor refers to. I have found on a number of occasions that HREOC has reported on matters of detention, and that the commissioner in relation to those matters has indicated he has a view about detention and detention policy and is of the view that mandatory detention ought not to be part of the regime that is in place to deal with unauthorised arrivals. For that reason, I have found, in relation to many of the claims that are made about detention issues, that people who have some very strong views about detention policy often allow it to affect their judgments. I simply make that point.83MPlibersek, Tanya, MP10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The member for Sydney would be well advised to check the Hansard following question time. The minister has the call.0J4Mr RUDDOCK—There is a proper procedure for responding to the reports from the commission. We will be involved in responding appropriately, but we have not found, in relation to these matters, any proper basis for reflection either on the policy that we implement in these matters or on the way in which it should be conducted. 926714:46:009267Hawker, David, MPMr HAWKER8H4WannonLP10—My question is to the Minister for Trade. Minister, what have been the results of the government's efforts to improve the access of developing countries to essential medicines? Will these help to open up access for Australian exporters to overseas markets?9267Vaile, Mark, MPMr VAILESU5LyneNPMinister for Trade10—I thank the honourable member for Wannon for his question. I acknowledge his interest in the opportunities we are trying to create for Australian exporters, particularly agricultural exporters. One of our very strong hopes and policy positions with regard to the multilateral trade negotiations that are being undertaken is that we can significantly improve the circumstances for Australia's farmers in getting access to the markets of the world. One of the issues that needed to be addressed early on in this round and that still needs to be addressed is that of access to much-needed medicines for epidemics in the developing world. On 14 and 15 November, I chaired an informal mini ministerial meeting of the WTO, in Sydney. It was a great success because we made significant progress in creating a framework that will enable the poor countries of the world to get affordable access to these much-needed medicines. Whilst it focused on a large number of purely economic issues within the WTO, it also focused on what I termed the `moral obligations' of the developed world to look after the interests of the developing world in this regard. Twenty-five countries were represented at the meeting, representing about 80 per cent of global trade. The meeting was very successful in that it moved a long way towards developing a framework that will enable countries like Lesotho, in southern Africa, to get affordable access to medicines, particularly for HIV-AIDS. In that country, 31 per cent of the population between the ages of 15 and 25 suffer from HIV-AIDS. It was part of the mandate from Doha that this year the WTO address this issue. Certainly, the meeting in Sydney went a long way towards doing that.Going to the member for Wannon's question, it is important to unlock the door to the next stage of substantive negotiations next year on market access for agriculture. We had a lengthy discussion at the meeting about the range of market access with regard to agriculture, industrial goods and services. We heard for the first time at that meeting that the Japanese delegation intended to make public on 18 November their position on agriculture, which they did. The European Union delegation indicated for the first time, at that meeting, that they also would endeavour to put down publicly their position on agriculture by the end of this year. The meeting was a great success in keeping the momentum moving forward. As far as the negotiations are concerned, it is our No. 1 trade policy priority to achieve an outcome in this round. The series of mini ministerial meetings, of which Sydney was the third, have all been extremely successful in continuing to maintain that momentum, particularly in areas of interest to Australia.The meeting in Sydney was particularly unusual in that it focused on what I call a moral issue rather than a pure economic issue, which is to help developing countries in the area of access to medicines. It is a very complicated process of waiving intellectual property rights for those medicines where the intellectual property rights are held by the wealthy, developed countries, particularly the United States and the European Union. Those who attended from the developing countries went away feeling very comfortable that something was going to be done within this economic forum about their dilemma and their concerns. I recently received a letter from the European Union Trade Commissioner, Pascal Lamy, who attended the meeting. It states, in part:Dear Mark,Just a short note to thank you very much for organising a successful mini ministerial. We really managed to open up all the issues in a relatively short space of time in a productive way and we passed the acid test. The outcome, particularly on access to medicines, gave the system more energy and has materially advanced the round.That is proof positive of the role that Australia plays in this multilateral forum in moving forward this process that will, in the end, significantly benefit Australia's producers, farmers and exporters. It will also significantly benefit the developing countries that need and are entitled to better access to world markets, as are Australian farmers and producers. Again, Australia continues to lead the way in its engagement and involvement in this multilateral system and in ensuring that it achieves those goals. 926814:51:009268Smith, Stephen, MPMr STEPHEN SMITH5V5PerthALP00—My question is to the Minister for Ageing, representing the Minister for Health and Ageing. Minister, is it not the case that the recently released September quarter GP bulk-billing figures showed a fall in GP bulk-billing of 9.4 per cent since 1996 and a fall of 4.9 per cent in the 12 months since September last year? Minister, don't these figures, and this graph which reflects them, show that the decline in bulk-billing is not just what the government calls a `disappointment' but in fact a catastrophe for Australian families seeking health care?9268Andrews, Kevin, MPMr ANDREWSHK5MenziesLPMinister for Ageing10—I thank the honourable member for Perth for his question. The honourable member for Perth's response to the health system in Australia is to slug those Australian families who have taken out private health insurance an additional $600 to $1,200 per year. Let us look at what that means and start with the figures for private health insurance in the member for Perth's electorate.UK6Thomson, Kelvin, MPMr Kelvin Thomson—Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The minister was asked about the figures concerning bulk-billing and was asked whether they showed a decline in bulk-billing. I ask you to draw him to the question.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The member for Wills's point of order is relevance, I presume. It would have been helpful if that had been pointed out to me. The minister was asked a question about bulk-billing and is responding with comments about private health insurance, which I can see is related to bulk-billing.HK5Mr ANDREWS—On the latest figures I have available to me, there are some 35,000 people affected in the member for Perth's electorate. The member for Perth is promising them a tough slug of between $600 and $1,200 a year. That is your promise! Let us go to the Leader of the Opposition. There are almost 30,000 people affected in the electorate of the Leader of the Opposition, the member for Hotham. He wants to slug them an average of $800 as his response to health in Australia. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the member for Jagajaga, has over 35,000 people in her electorate.UK6Thomson, Kelvin, MPMr Kelvin Thomson—Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order which goes to relevance. He was asked about bulk-billing, and he has not said a word about bulk-billing.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I had indicated that the Minister for Ageing's comments about private health insurance levels do have a relationship to bulk-billing, but I invite him to bring his remarks to the question.HK5Mr ANDREWS—Mr Speaker, let me give you a couple more examples of the Labor Party's response. The member for Brand, for example—2V5Swan, Wayne, MPMr Swan—Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. My point is relevance, under standing order 145.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The Manager of Opposition Business will be aware that I have already taken action under that matter, and I will follow it up.2V5Swan, Wayne, MPMr Swan—I would ask you to expedite that action, Mr Speaker. He has been talking for two minutes, and bulk-billing has not been mentioned.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I have invited the minister, whom I had allowed to make comments that were related to the matter of private health insurance and bulk-billing, to bring his remarks to the questions of bulk-billing.HK5Mr ANDREWS—This is entirely relevant. The Labor Party's response to the matters that were raised by the member for Perth is to slug every Australian family with private health insurance somewhere between $600 and $1,200. The member for Lilley is on his feet. I think there are about 30,000 in your electorate.2V5Swan, Wayne, MPMr Swan—Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. My point of order relates to relevance, section 145. The minister is defying your ruling. 10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—If the minister defies my ruling, I will deal with him. I am listening to his answer, and I have invited him to bring his comments about private health insurance to the matter of bulk-billing.HK5Mr ANDREWS—What I can say is that the level of bulk-billing in Australia is higher now than it was for the average of the Labor years.926914:56:009269Secker, Patrick, MPMr SECKER848BarkerLP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for Ageing, representing the Minister for Health and Ageing. Would the minister provide details to the House of the latest Commonwealth aged care approvals and how this reinforces the government's commitment to providing more aged care places for older Australians in my electorate of Barker and in other electorates?9269Andrews, Kevin, MPMr ANDREWSHK5MenziesLPMinister for Ageing10—I thank the honourable member for Barker for his question. I can indicate to him and to the House that last week the government announced the allocation of 6,561 new aged care places at a cost of $144 million in additional recurrent funding. This brings the number of aged care places that have been allocated over the last four years by this government to 44,112. For the member for Barker's electorate, there was an allocation of an additional 74 residential aged care places at a cost of an additional $1.7 million in recurrent funding. His electorate will also benefit from an additional $1.8 million in capital funding—indeed, 50 per cent of all of the places allocated last week were allocated to aged care facilities in rural areas. These included the honourable member for Dawson's electorate; the electorate of the honourable member for Indi; the electorate of Corangamite, which includes Torquay, Ocean Grove and other towns; and the electorate of Eden-Monaro. Places were also allocated to aged care facilities in metropolitan electorates such as Cook, Dunkley, Aston, Moore and right throughout Australia.84HZahra, Christian, MPHK5Mr ANDREWS—The member for McMillan is interjecting. The member for McMillan has received places for Trafalgar. The member for Corio—83REdwards, Graham, MPMr Edwards—Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. If the minister is going to run us through the whole of Australia, could he advise what the outcome was in Cowan?10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Order! The member for Cowan will resume his seat. Every member must know the obligation they have to indicate to the chair what the point of order is about—whether it is relevance, or some other matter.HK5Mr ANDREWS—What this indicates is that the government is on track to meet its target of providing 200,000 aged care places in Australia by 2006. In addition to this 6,500 there will be an additional 1,500 places allocated for innovative trials for extended aged care in the home for multipurpose services and for other allocations. This stands in stark contrast to the 10,000-bed shortfall which we inherited from the Australian Labor Party in 1996. Indeed, expenditure on residential aged care has increased under this government from $2.5 billion to over $4.3 billion, a 68 per cent increase. It also stands in stark contrast to what the state and territory governments have done with public hospital beds. Over the period when we have seen a 26 or 27 per cent increase in residential aged care beds there has been a 22 per cent reduction in the number of public hospital beds. In fact, 14,000 public hospital beds have been taken out of the system by state and territory governments in just over a decade. We are on track, as I said, to achieve a target of 200,000 aged care beds for older Australians. This is one of the ways this government is dealing with the ageing of the population. 926915:00:009269Smith, Stephen, MPMr STEPHEN SMITH5V5PerthALP00—My question is again to the Minister for Ageing, representing the Minister for Health and Ageing. Minister, is it not the case that last year private health insurance funds paid out $64 million in benefits for so-called `lifestyle' ancillaries, to which taxpayers contributed $20 million through the 30 per cent private health insurance rebate? Minister, why is the government prepared to waste taxpayers' money on classical music CDs, gym shoes, golf clubs and camping tents rather than supporting Medicare and reversing the catastrophic decline in bulk-billing? 9270Andrews, Kevin, MPMr ANDREWSHK5MenziesLPMinister for Ageing10—I note that on radio this morning the honourable member for Perth said that the Labor Party would remove $64 million from health funding. I indicate to the House that this funding includes programs such as the Quit Smoking Program, and the diabetes and heart disease management programs. 5V5Smith, Stephen, MP10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The member for Perth has asked his question.HK5Mr ANDREWS—Is the honourable member for Perth saying to Australians that these worthwhile programs—5V5Smith, Stephen, MP10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I warn the member for Perth!HK5Mr ANDREWS—which are aimed at ameliorating and overcoming chronic illness within our community, would be slashed by the Labor Party? So on top of the $600 to $1,200 tax slug that the Labor Party is now promising via private health insurance abolition, we now have the abolition of the Quit Smoking, diabetes and heart disease management programs. Is that a responsible health policy? 927015:02:009270Forrest, John, MPMr FORRESTNV5MalleeNP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. Would the minister update the House in regard to the ABARE wheat production estimates for the 2002-03 harvest as affected by the current drought? What is the government doing to facilitate a better understanding amongst various livestock and cropping industries in regard to grain supply and demand issues, particularly in regard to the quarantine of imported grain? 9270Truss, Warren, MPMr TRUSSGT4Wide BayNPMinister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry10—I thank the honourable member for Mallee for his question. As a representative of one of the major wheat-growing areas in Australia, his region, amongst many others, is experiencing the impact of significantly reduced yields. Indeed, ABARE in its crop forecast released this morning has confirmed the impact of the substantially reduced winter rainfall. That impact on Australia's winter grain crop will be to essentially halve the available grain harvested this year. The wheat crop will be less than 10 million tonnes, compared with 24 million tonnes last season; barley is down about 60 per cent, to three million tonnes; canola is forecast at 0.7 million tonnes, a decrease of 0.9 million tonnes from last year; and lupins are also down very substantially. These figures confirm recent reports by ABARE that we will have a very small winter grain crop for the 2002-03 harvest. The ABARE forecast this morning also provided some initial data about the projections for the northern summer cropping region. It is clear also now that the absence of early summer rains is having an impact on the potential for our summer cropping prospects for the season ahead. The estimates from ABARE are that the cotton area sown will be down about 45 per cent, that rice will be down 70 per cent, and that there will be very significant reductions in summer grain production. It is still possible that it could rain in time for some of this crop to be planted, but the prospects of having a good summer harvest now are obviously a matter of concern. Today I am hosting a meeting of the Feed Grains Roundtable, which includes participants from the grain supply sector, and also those users of grain such as the feedlotters, those who use grain as emergency feed during dry times and others who have links with the industry. The roundtable will look at issues of supply and demand. We have, from the estimates of ABARE, sufficient grain being produced in Australia to meet the feed needs but a lot of it will not be conveniently located, and obviously the cost will be quite substantial. From an economic perspective it is sometimes better to export our high value prime hard wheats and look at whether we may be able to source cheaper feed grains in other parts of the world. The Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service has issued permits for the imports of some grain into Australia and there is anticipation that there may be some shipments arriving early next year. I want to emphasise, however—and assure the honourable member—that, in allowing grain imports, the government will not compromise quarantine standards. We are not prepared to in any way adjust our scientific rationale. We are not prepared to make concessions that might put at risk the pest and disease free status of our grain industry. Grain, on arrival, will essentially have to be denatured, if it is not denatured before departure, so that any risk of weeds or pests coming into this country on the seed can therefore be discounted. But it will be a very high priority for us, in an environment where feed imports may be necessary, to ensure that our quarantine standards are in no way compromised. This is a difficult year for Australian farmers. It has obviously been difficult for the grain industry because of lost production. That has an impact then on the users of grain in Australia. Their costs will be higher. The government is seeking to assist wherever it can. Ultimately I hope that today's meeting will help to put some degree of balance into the debate and help people to a better understanding about where grain can be sourced to meet their needs over the months ahead.927115:08:009271Murphy, John, MPMr MURPHY83DLoweALP00—My question is to the Minister for Ageing, representing the Minister for Health and Ageing. Minister, is it not the case that, since the Howard government came to office and as the rate of bulk-billing by GPs has fallen by almost 10 per cent, the average out-of-pocket cost of seeing a GP who does not bulk-bill has risen by more than 50 per cent, from over $8 to $12.57? Minister, isn't it also the case that last year individual Australians and their families paid almost $290 million in GP co-payments, $120 million more than they did in 1996? Minister, why is the government so determined to shift the costs of health care onto battling Australians and their families?9271Andrews, Kevin, MPMr ANDREWSHK5MenziesLPMinister for Ageing10—I thank the honourable member for Lowe for his question. As to the precise figures he quoted, I will have to check the detail. I do not have that at my fingertips. Earlier, the member for Perth waved around a graph in relation to bulk-billing. I have had the opportunity to look at a graph of bulk-billing since 1984. If one wants to look at a graph in relation to the history of bulk-billing, then one finds that we are back down to under 50 per cent and that we have had a substantial increase in bulk-billing. As I said earlier, the rate of bulk-billing today in Australia is still well above the average of the rate in the years in which the Labor Party was in government. What the government is doing is, more importantly, in relation to the distribution of doctors. For example, the number of doctors practising in rural and remote areas has increased from 5,700 in 1997-98 to 6,363 in 2000-01. It is these real, practical measures to get more doctors into the system—one which you allowed to run down whilst you were in government—and not the tax increases you are proposing for the health system that are going to work in terms of providing and continuing to provide good quality health care to all Australians.5V5Smith, Stephen, MPMr Stephen Smith—I call on the minister to table the graph he produced which showed bulk-billing rates going up under Labor and falling every year under the current government, and I seek leave to table the graph that he invited me to flourish during question time.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I am inviting the member for Perth not to display the graph, which has always been a matter of irritation to the chair, as the member for Perth is aware. There are two questions before the chair. The first is whether or not the minister was quoting from a document and whether the document was confidential.HK5Andrews, Kevin, MPMr Andrews—Yes, it is, Mr Speaker.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The second, unanswered question—PG6Macklin, Jenny, MP10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I warn the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The second and unanswered question—and I am outraged that I have to raise my voice to be heard—was whether or not leave is granted for the tabling of the document.EZ5Abbott, Tony, MPMr Abbott—No. 10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Leave is not granted.927215:12:009272Bartlett, Kerry, MPMr BARTLETT0K6MacquarieLP10—My question is addressed to the Minister for the Environment and Heritage. Will the minister advise the House of government measures to protect Australia's cultural heritage? Is the minister aware of any threats to the protection of Australia's national heritage?9272Kemp, Dr David, MPDr KEMPBT4GoldsteinLPMinister for the Environment and Heritage10—I thank the honourable member for Macquarie for his question. This government is putting in place the most effective regime to protect heritage of national significance that Australia has seen.84HZahra, Christian, MP10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I warn the member for McMillan.BT4Dr KEMP—Unfortunately, this country inherited no regime to protect heritage of national significance from the 13 years of Labor government. In fact, Labor left this country in a situation where, if you wanted to protect national heritage, you had to go to the United Nations in order to get approval for it to be classified as World Heritage. There was no regime whatsoever to protect national heritage. Our national heritage is a key part of our national identity and, through our heritage, all Australians can gain a better sense of who they are as a people and of the nature of the journey they have travelled as a nation.I was very pleased to announce yesterday some $3.6 million in grants to help protect and preserve Australia's nationally significant cultural heritage places, as we undertook to do in the last election campaign. Some 64 projects around Australia will receive grants under the 2002 round of the Howard government's Cultural Heritage Projects Program. One example of these grants is in the electorate of the member for Macquarie. He would have been pleased to see that some $99,000 will be used to undertake restoration of three stained glass windows at historic St Matthew's Anglican Church. This church was built by Francis Greenway, the convict architect and architect of some of our most important early public buildings. I announced these grants at Quamby Homestead in Hagley, Tasmania, where $90,000 was provided under the program to undertake structural conservation works. Quamby was the home of the Irishman Richard Dry, whose son was part of the Patriotic Six who brought an end to transportation to Tasmania. Preservation of these very significant parts of our national heritage is helping young Australians learn the democratic story of this country, the various stages of the development of this country and how Australian democracy was built. By contrast, the Labor Party has not only left us with no regime to protect national heritage but has opposed the government's attempt to put in place the strongest regime to protect national heritage that this country has seen. The Labor Party has given in to noisy pressure groups.UK6Thomson, Kelvin, MPBT4Dr KEMP—It has not consulted with any of those who really value Australia's national heritage. The member for Wills should be grateful that the government has saved him from the embarrassment of putting forward the most absurd set of amendments to legislation in the heritage area that we have seen. These were amendments that ignored existing sections and that would have made the act totally unworkable. If they had been passed, they would have shown that the Labor Party still has no credibility—UK6Thomson, Kelvin, MP10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I warn the member for Wills!BT4Dr KEMP—in the protection of Australia's national heritage. It is this government which has put forward the legislation and the program to protect the heritage which symbolises to Australians the great democratic story that this nation has engaged in. 927215:17:009272Latham, Mark, MPMr LATHAMK26WerriwaALP00—My question is to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister aware that the minister for taxation, Senator Coonan, answered a question in the Senate earlier today in which she said that she did not know whether she had witnessed a false enrolment application for her husband, Mr Andrew Rogers, at 16 Paradise Avenue, Pittwater. Prime Minister, will you personally ensure that the minister has not witnessed a false enrolment and take appropriate action if she has? Prime Minister, earlier in question time you promised that Senator Coonan would make a full explanation on the question of tax avoidance and electoral fraud at the Pittwater property. This has not happened in the Senate today. Prime Minister, when will you ensure that the senator answers all the allegations against her? 9273Howard, John, MPMr HOWARDZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—Because I have been answering questions in the House of Representatives, I am not fully across what has been asked in the Senate. I will, as always, act appropriately. Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the Notice Paper.Questions Without Notice9273927315:18:009273Ruddock, Philip, MPMr RUDDOCK0J4BerowraLPMinister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Reconciliation10—Mr Speaker, I would like to add to an answer I gave earlier today to the honourable member for Lalor. 10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The minister may proceed.0J4Ruddock, Philip, MPMr RUDDOCK—I was somewhat surprised that reference would be made to a HREOC report with which I was unfamiliar. The reason I was unfamiliar with it is that it has not been tabled in this parliament by the Attorney, but it has been the subject, I understand, of some judicious leaking, which I find somewhat curious. 83TRudd, Kevin, MP10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—I think the member for Griffith has a very short memory.0J4Ruddock, Philip, MPMr RUDDOCK—In relation to obviously an effort to raise the matter to greater prominence than it deserves, let me just say that my department does fully cooperate with HREOC's investigations. It does not mean that one agrees with the conclusions that HREOC might reach. I think it is important in relation to this matter to know that, where people are detained, whether they are adults or minors, they are detained in accordance with law. That law is quite clear and it is law which I understand is largely supported on both sides of this parliament.In relation to international instruments to which we are a party, the primary instrument that is spoken of is the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Article 3 provides that all actions concerning children be in their best interests as a primary consideration. The instruments also underline the importance of keeping families together. In line with this obligation, the department believes that in all but a limited number of cases where parents are required to be detained, it is more than likely to be in their best interests that they remain together with their parents. Article 5 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child recognises the responsibilities and rights of parents. In immigration detention facilities, the role of parents as primary care givers and guardians is fully met and respected. In relation to the particular matters, it was certainly judged at all times that it was in the best interests of the child concerned in this report initially that he remain with his family in detention. That was a consideration that was looked at. In mid-2001, it was determined that it was in the best interests of the young boy that he be removed into foster care. That decision was based upon medical advice and advice of the state department on welfare issues, and it was made with the agreement of the boy's father and stepmother. In relation to HREOC's findings that the department did not take all appropriate measures to prevent the child from witnessing acts of self-harm and other violent situations, the fact is that there has not been evidence that the boy witnessed acts of self-harm as claimed. In fact, I recall the matter well, because some of the incidents that were described as incidents that he recalled were not incidents of that character that took place in the detention centre at the time he was there. I do not accept that medical treatment provided to the boy was in any way inadequate. He has always been provided with timely access to appropriate medical care on every occasion it was thought necessary. In relation to HREOC's recommendation that compensation be paid and an apology be made, when the basis upon which the recommendations are made are not accepted, then obviously the issues of compensation and apology do not arise. Questions to the Speaker9274927415:22:009274Mossfield, Frank, MPMr MOSSFIELDMK6GreenwayALP00—Mr Speaker, I seek your indulgence to make a short statement and inquiry regarding an incident that occurred in my electoral office on Sunday, 24 November.10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—The member for Greenway may proceed.MK6Mr MOSSFIELD—On Sunday, 24 November 2002, a break-in occurred at my electoral office at approximately 3.50 p.m. Together with local police I attended the office within 10 minutes but the thief or thieves had already vacated the premises. Only one item was stolen: a primary work station computer which, as you would be aware, contained the Y drive for the office. The Blacktown police are investigating the theft, and the Federal Police have also been made aware of the situation. The computer contained a number of confidential documents, such as letters to constituents, as well as a number of documents that were subject to parliamentary privilege, such as draft chapters of House committee reports that are yet to be finalised or tabled. I am concerned these documents may now be available to the public and would seek your advice about whether this may be a matter for the Privileges Committee.9274SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER10000PON/A10—I would indicate to the member for Greenway that I will look closely at the statement he has just made. I would doubt that this is a matter of privilege, but I share his concern that documents that are entirely the property of the parliament may have been made public. It is difficult to see it as a matter of privilege, and I do not see it as directly affecting his immediate capacity to represent the constituents of Greenway.9274927415:24:009274Thomson, Kelvin, MPMr KELVIN THOMSONUK6WillsALP00—Mr Speaker, I have two questions for you. The first is a request that you examine measures that would cut the consumption of water by Parliament House and, in particular, examine the ongoing appropriateness of maintaining Parliament House's lush green lawns through the sprinkler system. Given the seriousness of the drought—it is something that you, as a South Australian, would be well aware of in terms of its impact on Adelaide and on the Murray River—and given the fact that Canberra itself is now officially in drought, I think it is important that we show some national leadership here in Parliament House. It is my understanding that we are not bound by ACT local laws; nevertheless, I do not think it would be appropriate for us not to be bound by ACT water restrictions or to in any way seek special treatment. I think that we should set an example in curbing our water consumption. I would appreciate your advice in due course on measures Parliament House can take to curb its water consumption both immediately and in the longer term.9274SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER10000PON/A10—I will deal with that question and then recognise the member for Wills immediately afterwards. I will take the question on notice, as intended, and then report back to the House. I think, though, that all members should be aware that Parliament House, under successive administrations, has had a proud record of reducing energy use and, as I understand it, there have also been steps taken to minimise water use. But I will get more detail and report back to the House.UK6Mr KELVIN THOMSON—My second question is that, of the first 100 questions lodged on the Notice Paper since the parliament resumed this year, 85 have been answered and 15 have not. All 15 that have not been answered have not been answered by the Treasurer. I would ask that you write to him pursuant to standing order 150 in relation to questions 91 to 98, which are in my name.9274SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER10000PON/A10—I will follow up the matter as the standing orders provide.927415:26:009274Bevis, Arch, MPMr BEVISET4BrisbaneALP00—Mr Speaker, on the same matter, in accordance with standing orders, I would ask you to pursue the Treasurer in relation to a question I asked on 12 March: question No. 202 on the Notice Paper. 9275SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER10000PON/A10—I will follow up that matter as the standing orders provide.927515:26:009275King, Catherine, MPMs KING00AMRBallaratALP00—Mr Speaker, I note your response to my letter of 29 November, requesting that the Eureka flag be flown from Parliament House tomorrow, on the anniversary of the 148th year since the Eureka rebellion. In your answer to me, you state that the flag is not recognised under the Flags Act, and that is the reason why it is not able to be flown from Parliament House. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that, in 1973, the Eureka flag did, in fact, fly from Parliament House, and my understanding from discussions with those who were ministers at the time was that that was to be an ongoing arrangement. I would request that you look into that matter please.9275SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER10000PON/A10—I will look into the matter raised by the member for Ballarat and report back to her. I would indicate that what I have done has been consistent with what all previous occupiers of the chair have done since 1973.927515:27:009275Murphy, John, MPMr MURPHY83DLoweALP00—Mr Speaker, on 19 August and on 14 May I asked you to write to the Treasurer under standing order 150 in respect of question No. 43 in my name, which first appeared on the Notice Paper on 13 February 2002, with regard to what percentage of barristers and solicitors pay the top marginal rate of income tax. It is a very serious question and I want to know why the Treasurer is not providing that information to the parliament and my constituents.9275SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER10000PON/A10—The member for Lowe is aware that the facility given to the chair is simply to request that the matter be followed up and I will do that, as standing order 150 provides.92751The ClerkThe Clerk—Petitions have been lodged for presentation as follows and copies will be referred to the appropriate ministers:927526008K0Mr ByrneTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled:Whereas the 1998 Synod of the Anglican Diocese of Melbourne carried without dissent the following Motion:That this Synod regrets the Government's adoption of procedures for certain people seeking political asylum in Australia which exclude them from all public income support while withholding permission to work, thereby creating a group of beggars dependent on the Churches and charities for food and the necessities of life;and calls upon the Federal government to review such procedures immediately and remove all practices which are manifestly inhumane and in some cases in contravention of our national obligations as a signatory of the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.We, therefore, the individual, undersigned Members of the Communion Breakfast Dandenong Uniting Church, Dandenong, Victoria 3175, petition the Senate in support of the above mentioned Motion.26Mr Byrne008K0Mr Byrne (from 26 citizens)927566008K0Mr ByrneTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled:Whereas the 1998 Synod of the Anglican Diocese of Melbourne carried without dissent the following Motion:That this Synod regrets the Government's adoption of procedures for certain people seeking political asylum in Australia which exclude them from all public income support while withholding permission to work, thereby creating a group of beggars dependent on the Churches and charities for food and the necessities of life;and calls upon the Federal government to review such procedures immediately and remove all practices which are manifestly inhumane and in some cases in contravention of our national obligations as a signatory of the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.We, therefore, the individual, undersigned Members of the St Anthony's Catholic Church, Noble Park, Victoria 3174, petition the Senate in support of the above mentioned Motion.66Mr Byrne008K0Mr Byrne (from 66 citizens)927617008K0Mr ByrneTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled:Whereas the 1998 Synod of the Anglican Diocese of Melbourne carried without dissent the following Motion:That this Synod regrets the Government's adoption of procedures for certain people seeking political asylum in Australia which exclude them from all public income support while withholding permission to work, thereby creating a group of beggars dependent on the Churches and charities for food and the necessities of life;and calls upon the Federal government to review such procedures immediately and remove all practices which are manifestly inhumane and in some cases in contravention of our national obligations as a signatory of the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.We, therefore, the individual, undersigned Members of the Staff, Students at Chisholm Dandenong TAF, Dandenong, Victoria 3175, petition the Senate in support of the above mentioned Motion.17Mr Byrne008K0Mr Byrne (from 17 citizens)927611009CWMs CorcoranTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled:Whereas the 1998 Synod of the Anglican Diocese of Melbourne carried without dissent the following Motion:That this Synod regrets the Government's adoption of procedures for certain people seeking political asylum in Australia which exclude them from all public income support while withholding permission to work, thereby creating a group of beggars dependent on the Churches and charities for food and the necessities of life;and calls upon the Federal government to review such procedures immediately and remove all practices which are manifestly inhumane and in some cases in contravention of our national obligations as a signatory of the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.We, therefore, the individual, undersigned Members of the St Nicholas' Anglican Church, Mordialloc, Victoria 3195, petition the Senate in support of the above mentioned Motion.11Ms Corcoran009CWMs Corcoran (from 11 citizens)927610009CWMs CorcoranTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled:Whereas the 1998 Synod of the Anglican Diocese of Melbourne carried without dissent the following Motion:That this Synod regrets the Government's adoption of procedures for certain people seeking political asylum in Australia which exclude them from all public income support while withholding permission to work, thereby creating a group of beggars dependent on the Churches and charities for food and the necessities of life;and calls upon the Federal government to review such procedures immediately and remove all practices which are manifestly inhumane and in some cases in contravention of our national obligations as a signatory of the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.We, therefore, the individual, undersigned Members of the St Columba's Anglican Church, Edithvale, Victoria 3196, petition the Senate in support of the above mentioned Motion.10Ms Corcoran009CWMs Corcoran (from 10 citizens)927655VU5Mr GriffinTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives in Parliament assembled:Whereas the 1998 Synod of the Anglican Diocese of Melbourne carried without dissent the following Motion:That this Synod regrets the Government's adoption of procedures for certain people seeking political asylum in Australia which exclude them from all public income support while withholding permission to work, thereby creating a group of beggars dependent on the Churches and charities for food and the necessities of life;and calls upon the Federal government to review such procedures immediately and remove all practices which are manifestly inhumane and in some cases in contravention of our national obligations as a signatory of the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.We, therefore, the individual, undersigned Members of the St Leonard's Catholic Church, Glen Waverley, Victoria 3150, petition the Senate in support of the above mentioned Motion.55Mr GriffinVU5Mr Griffin (from 55 citizens)9277109009CW84HMs Corcoran;Mr ZahraTo the honourable the speaker and members of the house of representatives assembled in parliament.The petition of certain general pension, superannuant/part government pension, citizens of Australia, draws the attention of the House that in view of the difficult circumstances that such citizens are experiencing with their reducing quality of life due to a burgeoning cost of living created by the GST, there exists an urgent need to upgrade the pension.Notwithstanding periodic increases to the pension and other once only, much qualified gratuities, we strongly contend that the basic formula for the pension is a source of hardship in that it has been set-too 'low even for normal circumstances. and in comparison to many European pension, let alone in the current climate of increased prices, fees and premiums in Australia.Your petitioners therefore pray that the House act to increase the Base Formula -of the Pension to equal 35 % of the Adult Male Average Weekly Earnings (AMAWE).80Ms Corcoran009CWMs Corcoran (from 80 citizens)29Mr Zahra84HMr Zahra (from 29 citizens)9277356KL6Mr AndrenTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:The petition of certain citizens of Australia draws to the attention of the House the widespread concern and disquiet held by many Australians with the possibility of a US led attack on Iraq and Australia's involvement in such an action.Your petitioners therefore request the House to:· use its influence to dissuade the US Government from the threat of precipitating military action in Iraq;· refrain from all support of such threats;· continue with diplomatic efforts to reach a resolution of the problems of the region; and· work through the United Nations, as the duly constituted international body, for building a secure basis for world peace.356Mr AndrenKL6Mr Andren (from 356 citizens)9277264WF6Mr DanbyTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:We the citizens of Australia note that the practice of suicide bombing is a crime against humanity. This crime and its participants, organisers and supporters are guilty of a crime which has been committed against innocent civilians.Further, we the undersigned note that there is no moral, religious or political justification for this crime.Your petitioners, declare therefore, that the perpetrators of these crimes should be prosecuted and punished by the appropriate international courts of justice.We the citizens of Australia call on the House to act immediately to facilitate a debate at the next United Nations conference to declare clearly and unequivocally, that the practice of suicide bombings is a crime against humanity.264Mr DanbyWF6Mr Danby (from 264 citizens)927735083VDr EmersonTo the Honourable the Speaker and members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament.The petition of certain electors in the State of Queensland draws to the attention of the House that a Medicare Office is not located in the western suburbs of Logan City.In the main, these signatories are from residents of the suburbs of Logan, the northern suburbs of Beaudesert Shire and the southern suburbs of Brisbane.This area has been consistently recognised in consecutive censuses as being amongst the highest population growth areas in the country.This area contains a large percentage of young families who have indicated that a Medicare Office in the area is important to them. In addition, the residents of this region have indicated that the office should be located in the Grand Plaza Shopping Centre which is a major regional centre and is the hub of retail, community and social interaction for the western suburbs of Logan City Council, together with the residents and signatories to the petition, believes it to be an ideal location for the establishment of this desperately required service.Your petitioners therefore, request the House and, in particular, the Federal Minister for Health and Ageing, Senator the Honourable Kay Patterson, to carefully consider establishing a Medicare Office in the western suburbs of Logan, preferably in the shopping centre precinct known as Grand Plaza.350Dr Emerson83VDr Emerson (from 350 citizens).927778LS4Mr Martin FergusonTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:The petition of certain citizens of Australia draws the following issues to the attention of the House: (a) The Federal Labor Opposition has consistently advocated against Australia supporting pre-emptive military action by the USIA against Iraq as a substitute for action under the United Nations framework.(b) The case for a pre-emptive strike against Iraq by the USA has not been made sufficiently.(c) Following the mass murder of Australians and others in the terrorist attack in Bali on 12 October 2002, Australia's defence forces should give absolute priority to Australia's security interests in our immediate environment.We therefore pray that House join Labor in opposing Australian involvement in military action by the USA against Iraq outside the United Nations Charter.78Mr Martin FergusonLS4Mr Martin Ferguson (from 78 citizens)927868LS4Mr Martin FergusonTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:The petition of certain citizens of Australia draws the following issues to the attention of the House:(d) The Howard Government is determined to sell Telstra even though submissions to it's own inquiry, the Estens Inquiry, overwhelmingly show that services are still inadequate.(e) These submissions also reflect widespread concern that services will decline further if the rest of Telstra is sold.(f) The Greens, Democrats and Independents may make deals with the Liberal Government to allow the sale to go ahead, despite increasing community opposition to the sale.(g) A fully privatised Telstra will focus on profits not people; shareholders will be more important than customers.(h) Services will suffer under a fully privatised Telstra, particularly in outer metropolitan, rural and regional Australia.We therefore pray that the House oppose the Liberal/National plan to sell Telstra and that all Greens, Democrats and Independents join Labor in opposing the sale of Telstra.68Mr Martin FergusonLS4Mr Martin Ferguson (from 68 citizens)9278297HX4Mr KatterTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:The Petition of the citizens of Australia draws to the attention of the House:We the citizens of inland towns find the comments made by University of Queensland Professor of Geographical Sciences and Planning, Bob Stimson, to be ill informed and counter-productive to the future development of Australia.We do not agree that inland towns should be left to die as argued by Professor Stimson. We feel the federal government should be doing more to offer incentives for people to move to more rural and isolated areas. We feel increasing the zonal tax allowance for people in these areas to be the first step in assisting the population of these areas.The petitioners thereby request the, House to:Note:(i) The policy of the usa and realise that food is a national security issue - i.e. That we must produce our own food;(j) In order to have people prepared to produce this food in rural and remote areas they must have access to an adequate level of services and goods;(k) That inland towns provide this support; andLegislate:To encourage population growth in inland Australia commencing with vitally needed legislation to implement the zonal tax rebate to people living in rural and remote areas.Your petitioners therefore ask that the House consider these requests.297Mr KatterHX4Mr Katter (from 297 citizens)92786685HX4Mr KatterTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:The petition of certain residents of Regional Queensland draws to the attention of the house, the urgent need to revitalise regional Australia.Your petitioners therefore request that the House pass legislation that would allow for a drastic increase in zonal allowance rates.6685Mr KatterHX4Mr Katter (from 6,685 citizens)92782466JK6Mr McClellandTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:This petition of certain citizens of Australia draws to the attention of the House that the Federal Government has approved a grant of $5 million to fund a facility in Churchill, Victoria, for the breeding of laboratory monkeys to be used in research. The billions of dollars invested annually in animal research would be put to much more efficient, effective and humane use if redirected to clinical and epidemiological research and public health programs.Your petitioners therefore ask the House to:1. Rescind the grant to fund the building of a facility for the breeding of monkeys which will be harmed or killed in the course of research.2. Instead provide funding for the development and utilisation of research techniques which do not use animals at any stage.2466Mr McClellandJK6Mr McClelland (from 2,466 citizens)927983783CMs Jann McFarlaneTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament:Re: Impending war on IraqThe petition of certain citizens of Australia draws to the attention of the House that the people of Australia have not been consulted on a commitment made that Australia will support an impending war against Iraq.We are concerned that such a war will -(l) Result in the deaths of many Iraqi civilians, as well as Australian US and Iraqi troops.(m) Goad Saddam Hussein to use any weapons he has at his disposal in a bid to retain power.(n) Cause a civil war in Iraq, enlarge the refugee problem and further destabilise the Middle East.(o) Enhance the perception that The West is at war with the Islamic World, thus consolidating the recruitment power of anti-Western extremists.Your petitioners request that the House shall refuse to commit Australia to join the United States of America in this impending war, and further, that Australia uses what influence it has over the U.S. to convince it to use non-violent strategies such as seeking a Zone Free of Weapons of Mass Destruction over the entire Middle East.837Ms Jann McFarlane83CMs Jann McFarlane (from 837 citizens)92792196J4Mr SciaccaTo the Honourable the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives assembled in Parliament.The petition of certain citizens of Australia draws to the attention of the House the impact of sea cage fish farms in Moreton Bay.(p) Sea cage fish farms will significantly increase level of nutrients into the bay derived from excess feed, faeces, dead fish, operational pollution and cage cleaning;(q) Increase the risk of algal blooms;(r) Contribute to lowering dissolved oxygen in the water which leads to the death of marine life;(s) Place at risk the wild populations of fish, bird and flora species through introduced diseases, genetically modified breeding stock and pollution plumes;(t) Require the use of tetracycline and formalin as medication in the feed and anti-fouling agents to clean cages, the long-term environmental effects of which are not known;(u) Create a blight on the visual amenity of Moreton Bay significantly affecting the tourist potential of Moreton Bay;(v) Compromise the millions of dollars that has been invested to date to remove nitrogen from Moreton Bay to protect the fragile ecosystem.Your petitioners therefore request the House to immediately enact legislation that will prevent the establishment of sea cage fish farms in Moreton Bay.219Mr Sciacca6J4Mr Sciacca (from 219 citizens)Petitions received.Private Members' Business9279927915:30:009279Vamvakinou, Maria, MPMs VAMVAKINOU00AMTCalwellALP00—I move:That this House:(1) recognises that youth suicide is becoming an increasing cause of death amongst young people with youth suicide figures in 2000 at 2,363 with 1,860 of those males;(2) recognises that the youth suicide rates for males and indigenous people, particularly in rural areas, are amongst the highest in the western world and that males are three times more likely to complete a suicide attempt;(3) recognises that admissions to hospitals for intentional self-injury are close to 10 times as common as fatalities for suicide, with males more likely to take far more drastic suicide methods; (4) recognises there is a role for families, education, role models and health workers in identifying and supporting young people at risk of depression and self-harm;(5) notes The Sydney Morning Herald 7 February 2002 article regarding government alarm on suicides rates with the Minister for Youth Affairs stating that “Australia is losing the war against youth suicide and needs a fresh approach.”; and(6) calls on the Government to implement further measures to lower the rate of juvenile depression and youth suicide.I thank the parliament for the opportunity to discuss this difficult and challenging matter of juvenile depression and youth suicide. As a parent it is an issue that I feel strongly about, and as a politician I feel it is my responsibility to say something about youth suicide because as policy and decision makers we have the capacity and the responsibility to do something about it.Depression is a leading cause of ill health amongst young Australians, with juvenile depression often cited as a major contributing factor in suicide attempts. It is the third largest killer of young Australians, and in the last 30 years it has been on a steady increase, with a worrying 300 per cent increase in the suicide rate of young men. The World Health Organisation's Global burden of disease study predicts that by 2020 depression will be the second leading cause of death and disease worldwide. This is a worrying prognosis given the current trends here in Australia.World Health Organisation comparative figures for youth suicide and self-inflicted injury have Australia second only to New Zealand amongst OECD countries. Australia has a rate of 23.1 per 100,000 for males and 6.1 per 100,000 people for females. Coming from a southern European background, I noted that some of the lowest rates of youth suicide are in southern European nations. Comparing some of these figures with our own rates for male and female youth suicides, we see that, for males and females respectively, the figures are: in Portugal, 3.7 and 0.8; in Italy, 7.3 and 1.6; in Greece, 5.6 and 0.8; and, finally, in France, 12.8 and 4.2. Those figures are, arguably, attributable to the nature of the family in those societies, with strong family ties and the power and value of the extended family providing support structures and alternative avenues of communication for youth generally but in particular for those at risk.From the mid-nineties, the state and federal governments legislated for programs to alleviate this crisis. Recognition of this issue has now permeated all levels of our community, from the government down to the grassroots. Today, organisations from the Scouts to Rotary and other non-government organisations such as Here for Life are doing their bit to help in the fight against depression and youth suicide. In fact, a few weeks ago I met up with Andrew Kay and Terry Stuart from the Here for Life organisation, which deals daily with youth depression and suicide. I can tell you that these people are doing a tremendous job in their extensive daily contact with youth at risk.There are some experts and professionals who believe that bringing youth suicide into the public arena runs the risk of drawing too much attention to it—glamorising it, perhaps—or giving kids ideas and encouraging copycat syndrome, or just causing a general desensitisation to the issue. I understand the basis of these concerns, but I believe that to not place this serious issue in the public arena runs the risk of closing off precious avenues of communication with our young people, because in this fight against youth suicide communication is vital. We need to speak to our children and educate them about depression and distress, no matter how difficult or morbid the issue may seem to us.A recent Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study from the United States shows that where these education awareness programs are in place youth suicide has dropped. The centre for adolescent research also encourages discussion in classrooms on mental health and wellbeing issues along with the discussion of youth suicide. I understand that about 85 per cent of schools in America have youth suicide programs built into the curriculum. This is an example we need to seriously consider for Australian schools—within the context of general health, depression, bullying and other issues—because schools and the peer group are a key to tackling this issue. It is important that we discuss these issues today because young people want us to, as attested by a recent Mission Australia survey which showed that depression is a high preoccupation amongst our young people. They certainly want to talk about it. In the same way as we concentrate on teaching children to read and write in their early years, so too do we, as they enter the challenging years of adolescence, need to teach them life skills—in particular, how to deal with adversity. Twenty years ago sex education was considered radical and controversial, with fears that if we talked about sex in schools then kids would have sex and girls would get pregnant. Experience has shown the contrary to be true. It is the same with suicide: we need to acknowledge it is an issue and deal with it at all levels—in particular, in schools.More importantly, if we do address depression and anxiety, we know that recovery is possible. Evidence suggests this. Over the past three years youth suicide as a cause of death amongst 15- to 24-year-olds has dropped. This is a figure that the Here for Life organisation attributes to increased awareness and to education programs. It is these programs that need further expansion, but we need a whole-of-government approach at both the state and the national levels to tackle this issue and save our young people from depression and self-harm.Statistics will never carry the pain felt by victims and families of young people lost to depression and suicide, but they do assist us to see through the fog of popular misconceptions relating to mental health and youth depression. Statistics prevent us from being lulled into false sense of security. One misconception is that most young people who commit or attempt suicide are clinically diagnosed with a mental illness with visible signs. Only one-quarter of those young people who take their life are actually said to be suffering from a diagnosed mental illness; the other three-quarters are considered normal young people.Another fact is that 95 per cent of all youth suicide victims do display telltale signs: they leave a note, make comments to peers or family or begin to give away their possessions. How many parents who have lost their children utter the devastating words, `I did not know' or, `If only we knew'? Youth suicide in satellite and regional centres continues to increase. Some outer suburban and regional centres are considered hot spots, in particular for bullying and depression amongst young residents. The Dianella Community Health Service in Broadmeadows in my own electorate deals with such hot spots, where school bullying, isolation and depression form a potent mix in growing suburbs such as Sunbury and Craigieburn on Melbourne's outer edge.Depression is not a new concept—it is part of human nature—but its increase is a concern. Similarly, youth suicide is also not new and is a part of life, albeit a destructive one. To believe otherwise is to be naive. You would be surprised how many kids consider suicide when they are feeling rejected or angry with the world and, because young people do not always understand the finality of death, they play out their fantasies. All it takes is a split second and it could all be over, sadly, without them ever really meaning to go that far.Indigenous suicide rates in 15- to 24-year-olds in Australia are amongst the worst in the world. The rate of male and female youth suicides amongst our Indigenous community is 108 and 18 per 100,000 for male and females respectively. The same rate amongst young people in the general population is 27 for males and 6 for females per 100,000. A disturbing story told to me recently referred to a problem in the Tiwi Islands, where cages are placed around power poles to combat young males attempting suicide as a form of emotional blackmail to win over a girl's affections or in similar circumstances. Males are seemingly unable to deal with relationships in a healthy manner and are vulnerable to significant self-esteem problems.As a result, some Here for Life programs target males in particular. Their Life's a Ball program brings professional sporting heroes into the classrooms. It uses young male sporting heroes to guide boys into healthy relationships and to improve their self-esteem. It is an innovative way to reach out to young men in order to teach them better life skills. In fact, it is almost a preventative cutting edge. There is a strong view, however, that the mix of government funding support is wrong and that funding is too top-heavy, focusing too much on research and academic surveys rather than on more practical and effective on-the-ground support for young people. We need to review these funding priorities to ensure money is put where it can help the most. Our children rely on us. The decisions we make will determine how they develop their talents, their dreams and their aspirations. Therefore, let us not turn a deaf ear to their fears and concerns. Instead, let us ask ourselves some fundamental questions about young people today. What do young people aspire to today? Do they view the world as their oyster? Do they feel that they can do anything because they are young and have their entire life ahead of them? Are they coping with the fast-changing society around them?Today's approach in this parliament to the issue of juvenile depression and youth suicide is an opportunity to show the public that both sides of politics can work together to connect the dots. This leads me to my final point: an overall approach by government must involve the issue of youth suicide being considered across all portfolios, not just the current youth affairs portfolio. When we decide our health, education, family, recreational, social welfare and even industrial relations and immigration policy objectives and initiatives, we should be conscious of how those policies, budgets and programs will impact on the hopes, the aspirations and the opportunities we give to our young people. They are after all—and we say this often—our most precious resource, and we need to treat them with greater care and give them a greater priority than I believe we are doing at the present moment.10000DEPUTY SPEAKER, TheThe DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Mossfield)—Is the motion seconded?849Sidebottom, Sid, MPMr Sidebottom—I am pleased to second the motion and would like to reserve my right to speak.15:41:009282Lindsay, Peter, MPMr LINDSAYHK6HerbertLP10—First of all, I would like to correct an error in part (1) of the member for Calwell's motion. In 2000, 338 young people took their own lives, not 2,363. By making this correction, I am not by any means suggesting that the true figure is not very serious indeed, simply that we must not exaggerate just to get a point across. The youth suicide statistics speak for themselves. They do not need to be beaten up to cause community outrage and concern. From my area of Townsville and Thuringowa, I certainly know exactly the problem related to youth suicide. It was only last Friday that I was speaking to one of our prominent funeral directors, who outlined in very clear and concise terms the difficulty that he sees each week and each year and the effect that it has on those of the family who are left behind.The statistics from 2000 are the most recent statistics we have and, in that year, as I have mentioned, 338 young people took their own life. Suicide was the second leading cause of death for 15- to 24-year-olds in Australia, behind motor vehicle accidents. This figure was 6.9 per cent of the total suicide figure of 2,363, representing approximately 12.5 deaths per 100,000 in this age group. This is slightly higher than the overall number of deaths from suicide per capita, which was just a little lower, at 12.2 per 100,000, but—and this is wonderful news—it is a decrease from a peak of 510 in 1997. These figures do not indicate that youth suicides are spiralling out of control, as some people would have us believe. What they do indicate, however, is that we are facing a very grave challenge to ensure that these figures continue to remain on the downward trend.I am not going to dwell on statistics here today, but there are some useful statistics that provide an overview of the situation Australia finds itself in with regard to suicide. Young men are three times more likely to complete suicide than young women. Over the past decade, six times as many young men from rural and remote regions have completed suicide, as have young women from the same areas. Indigenous people are more likely to suicide than non-Indigenous people. Eighty-six per cent of suicides in Indigenous communities are male. I certainly know that from my own experience, having the deed of grant in trust island, Palm Island, in Halifax Bay, in my electorate. Fortunately, as with the national trend, the number of suicides on Palm Island has been considerably reduced. The overwhelming theme of these statistics is that our young men, who are at the greatest risk of suicide, should be considered—something that the federal government is well aware of and is actively seeking to address. The statistic that really hits home for me is that for every suicide death there are 40 to 50 suicide attempts. That means that for those 338 young people who took their own lives in 2000 almost another 20,000 attempted to do so. I am not trying to sensationalise these figures or sensationalise suicide—far from it. By the same token, I am not suggesting that the figures are continuing to worsen—they are not. I am simply highlighting the precipice we are teetering on where youth suicide is concerned. I acknowledge the challenge we face, and so does the federal government. A lot of hard work, a lot of heartache and a lot of determination from families, friends, health workers and governments has led to a steady decrease in the number of youth suicides in Australia. As I have already stated, in 2000, 338 young Australians took their lives. That was 42 less than the year before and 172 less than the highest figure of 510 in 1997. We are still a long way from winning the battle, but perhaps this suggests that we are beginning to get on the front foot.As the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs stated in his speech at the National Conference of Suicide Prevention in June this year, `one suicide is one suicide too many'. The federal government will not rest until the battle is won. Another thing I would like to draw from the minister's address at the conference, and something I have mentioned here, is the importance of not sensationalising suicide and suicide statistics. While we need to raise the profile of suicide prevention, we have to make sure we raise the profile of the reality of suicide rather than the sensation of suicide. We have to walk a fine line between presenting the community with the facts and realities of suicide to help them combat it and beating the facts out of proportion so as to ensure it gets the attention it requires or deserves.Having a child commit suicide is a devastating event for parents and other family members. Compounding this grief is the taboo still associated with suicide and the sense of shame, guilt or blame that so many families feel. This self-recrimination by parents, siblings or friends can continue indefinitely after a suicide, and prevents the normal healing process taking place. At a time when family members should be coming together to share their grief, they are being torn further apart with feelings of guilt, shame and hurt. The only way to prevent this is to teach our young that suicide is not the answer to their problems and that support is only ever a question away. They have to know that there is always someone who will talk to them to help them find solutions to their problems. Whether it be a family member, a friend, a youth worker or a counselling telephone line, someone is always there.One of the things I have learnt from talking to local community groups and churches is that the feeling that suicide should not be talked about is a direct causal factor in not only the suicides themselves but also the confusion and self-recrimination felt by family members who have lost a loved one. We have to remove this reluctance to discuss suicide. One of the biggest myths about suicide is that talking about suicide will lead to suicide. That was a point made by the member for Calwell. It is patently untrue. Indeed, it would appear to be quite the opposite. One of the most effective ways to prevent a suicide is to get the person contemplating taking their life to talk about what they are going through and why they feel life is no longer worth living.In Townsville, Lifeline receives about 700 calls a month—65 per cent are from females, 23 per cent are from males and in the remaining 10 per cent there has been no determination of the sex of the caller. These percentages are almost the direct reverse of the percentages of males and females who commit suicide. I find that interesting. Based on the 2000 figures, approximately 78 per cent of young people who commit suicide are male and 22 per cent are female. I think it is fair to draw the conclusion from this that the reluctance of young men to ask for help or to discuss their problems is a big factor in the fact that they are four times more likely than young women to complete a suicide attempt. This is something we need to combat if we are going to make further inroads into reducing youth suicide. Young people, men especially, need to feel that it is okay to talk to someone about their feelings; that it is okay to turn to someone for support. That person does not have to be a parent. It can be a friend, a teacher or a youth worker—basically, anyone they feel comfortable with. The federal government has spent a great deal of time with stakeholders in formulating its suicide prevention strategies to ensure that they take into account not just the need to show young people that suicide is not an option but the need to educate them, their parents and their families on how to deal with depression, how to communicate effectively and how to deal with issues such as substance abuse. Last Friday, the Minister for Health and Ageing, Senator the Hon. Kay Patterson, announced another $550,000 for 12 projects as part of the federal government's $66.4 million National Suicide Prevention Strategy. The strategy grew out of the National Youth Suicide Prevention Strategy, and I was very pleased to see that result.The Youth Roundtable has also been working closely with the federal government and providing highly valuable insights into the issues facing young Australians. In the short moment I have left to me, I would like to conclude with a quote from a Youth Roundtable member's executive summary. Rebecca Ebert states:... youth suicide cannot be solved by just one strategy or my passion alone. It needs to gain strength from not only community initiatives and support, but also political endorsement.Let me assure you, Rebecca, that this government does endorse youth suicide prevention strategies, and it does recognise that one strategy alone will not be sufficient. (Time expired)15:51:009284Sidebottom, Sid, MPMr SIDEBOTTOM849BraddonALP00—Being a young person in Australia today can be pretty tough. Tragically, for some, it is unbearable. Most young people are forced to confront increasingly complex issues, such as unemployment, illicit drug taking, parental and peer pressure, the pressures of achieving excellence in education on a daily basis and the unrelenting dilemmas associated with sexuality and the difficulty in establishing one's identity. Many young people feel unable or ill-equipped to deal with these constant pressures. Tragically, as a consequence, they become desperate enough to take their own life. According to the conservative figures of the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 41,000 Australians died from suicide between 1979 and 1998.Tragically, approximately 50 Tasmanians commit suicide each year and between 15 and 20 come from the north-west coast. The majority of individuals committing suicide are young males aged between 18 and 30. Whilst young females in Tasmania are far more likely to contemplate suicide, young males are four times more likely to actually take their own life. According to a comprehensive study conducted in 1996 by a Hellyer College senior secondary student Kelly Farrow, a study which received nationwide interest and publicity, 53 per cent of Tasmanian youths know a friend or family member who has attempted suicide whilst 30 per cent know a friend or family member who completed suicide. Of the 3,900 youths surveyed, 51 per cent of females and 48 per cent of males had contemplated suicide. In addition, it is estimated that one in five individuals in Tasmania suffers from depression each year. These figures clearly indicate that depression and suicide are major health problems in Australia and in my home state of Tasmania.Traditionally, measures implemented by the Commonwealth to reduce youth depression and suicide have been largely crisis driven rather than preventative, and it is prevention that needs more attention. In treating the effects of depression and suicidal thoughts as a complex amalgam of causes and effects which requires a holistic approach to tackling it, we have certainly come a long way. Treatment for depression was once considered solely in physical terms. Depression was considered the consequence of too much blood within the body and was treated by removing this so-called `excess' blood, generally with leeches, as parodied in the Blackadder episode `Bells'. Sadly, not only are the effects of depression and suicidal thoughts traumatic for the individual but they are also both confusing and exhausting for the family. Families often feel helpless bystanders to their loved one's illness. Following a completed suicide, the family are exposed to many conflicting emotions—bewilderment, guilt, anger and resentment are the most common. More funds are needed to increase the information available to families about depression. Families in particular need to be educated about the behaviours associated with, and the emotions experienced by, an individual suffering from depression. Likewise, support for families should be made more available in the battle for prevention. They, too, need to know they are not alone in their concerns, their heartache and their endeavours.The role of schools is also very important in reducing youth depression and suicide. Young people spend easily half their young life at school, which makes it an essential target area. The Commonwealth should concentrate more funds and programs on establishing learning packages about mental health issues—helping to educate schools and their learning communities on the special needs of those suffering from depression and other mental disorders. If people in the school community are fully informed of the seriousness of depression and enlightened as to the warning signs of the illness, they will be able to comfort and support a depressed individual through these difficult times. Depression is an illness, not a stigma.There are a number of government initiatives in place that have played a positive role in informing our society about youth depression and suicide. National Youth Week is valuable in promoting the important role that Australian youth play in our country, but the fact that we have a specific focus week probably reflects more on our neglect of youth in general rather than on our capacity for valuing youth. Non-profit organisations such as Here for Life, Lifeline and Kids Helpline also play a crucial role in providing ongoing support to depressed and suicidal youth. So too will the On the Spot program, with funding of $200,000 over the next three years to combat the problem of youth suicide in my electorate. Education and information is the key to preventing youth suicide. I would like to thank my young staffer Eliza Young for her invaluable contribution to my appreciation and understanding of this important issue. (Time expired)15:56:009285Hunt, Gregory, MPMr HUNT00AMVFlindersLP10—I rise to support the motion presented by the member for Calwell and thank her for her thoughtful work in crafting it and presenting this important problem to the parliament. Youth suicide is an issue which unfortunately has personal significance and relevance to me. A very close family friend took his own life some years ago. It was not evident; the signs were not altogether clear. It is something that has left the family with great pain and with scars that have yet to heal—and may never heal. Yet, from my own personal experience, I know this was a very strong family. The causes are not always evident, the triggers are not always obvious, but in every case it is a tragedy. So I think that there are three important things to examine: firstly, the trends; secondly, some of the causes; and thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, the responses.The trend we face in Australia is genuinely disturbing. If youth suicide refers to the occurrence of suicide amongst people between the ages of 12 and 24, what we find is that the suicide rate in Australia has increased dramatically. Between 1979 and 1997 the suicide rate for males aged between 12 and 24 rose by 71 per cent. In 1999 there were 2,495 recorded cases of suicide, of which approximately 80 per cent were male. Although this figure dropped marginally, to 2,363 in 2000, it remains a problem of stunning impact on our young people. These figures may in fact be lower than the reality because in many cases it is difficult to establish if death was intentional or unintentional, most particularly in cases of motor accidents involving a single driver where there was no restraining device. We see in particular that suicide in rural areas and amongst Indigenous communities and amongst those who are unemployed is a significant problem far beyond even that faced in Australia more generally. What are the causes? We find that suicide is driven at two different levels. First, there is the personal crisis or the short-term trigger, whether this be school based, relationship based or law based. Secondly, this often comes against the background of larger risk factors or longer-term predispositions. In particular, these include issues such as childhood adversity, social disadvantage or psychiatric illness.As the member for Calwell mentioned, although an overwhelming link between mental illness and suicide does not exist, there is clearly a relationship. When we look at that and see the relationship between unemployment and social disadvantage as being a major trigger in the cause of suicide, particularly amongst males and particularly within the rural area, there is obviously a clear pattern; and, as there is a clear pattern, it is possible to identify some of the responses we can take. So how do we prevent suicide?In the 1999-2000 federal budget, approximately $48 million was committed for a National Suicide Prevention Strategy, the theme of which is twofold: firstly, that every life counts; and, secondly, that we seek to save each individual. The National Suicide Prevention Strategy includes, firstly, targeting the community in general through work force education and through training—because bullying is one of the things that leads to low self esteem and loss of self worth and it goes to the question which is raised; and, secondly, acknowledging that it is critical to highlight and target high-risk groups and to identify those behaviours. So there is a $48 million program; it is a start. It has helped with the delivery of over 2½ thousand training programs, it has helped with the Reach Out program and it has helped to boost rural and regional youth counselling services. But there is no easy answer. Ultimately, it is about identification of risk factors; it is about intervention following triggers, as we see them; and, above all else, it is about helping develop a sense of self worth. (Time expired)16:01:009286Byrne, Anthony, MPMr BYRNE008K0HoltALP00—First of all, it is a pleasure to speak on the issue raised in the motion presented by the member for Calwell. Mental illness and its aftermath and youth suicide are two of the few remaining subjects existing within this community that are taboo. At the outset I commend the member for Calwell for raising this issue. It is a heartbreaking issue. I am sure that many of us here and around the country have experienced the after-effects of youth suicide. It is something like a stone being thrown hard into a pond, with its ripples continuing for a number of years—across family members and those who knew the person who committed suicide. A large degree of guilt is associated with it as well, particularly for those who are closest to the person who has successfully committed—if you can `successfully' commit—suicide. There have been recent examples of suicide among people I have known, and guilt is a very large part of the survivors'—for want of a better term—experience. Consequently, it touches lives across our nation every day. As elected representatives, we have a responsibility to tackle this problem head-on and to raise this issue in and with the community and to amplify it.I would like to talk about the action that is needed to address youth suicide. I cannot emphasise enough the importance of paragraph (6) of the motion that has been put forward by the member for Calwell, which:calls on the Government to implement further measures to lower the rate of juvenile depression and youth suicide.I would also briefly like to outline the services that are already in place and the roles that they play in identifying young people at risk, with a particular emphasis on an innovative service that is being offered in my electorate of Holt.When young people intentionally harm themselves we, as a society, have let them down, because it can be prevented. Mental health problems are attributed to 90 per cent of all suicides, and one of those problems is depression. Each week, on average, 10 young people in Australia will take their own lives and many more will try. These statistics are drawn from the age category of 15- to 24-year-olds. Regardless of the spin that is put on them, these statistics are a national tragedy. Despite a decrease in suicide since 1997, with injury being listed as the leading cause of mortality for this age group, intentional self harm is still the second leading cause of death, with car accidents being the first. It is clear from paragraphs (2) and (3) of this motion that mortality rates for young males caused by self harm are a great deal higher than for females— four times higher, according to the most recent statistics for the year 2000. Males from the lower socioeconomic group die at a rate of 1.7 per cent more than those in the higher socioeconomic group. The horrifying situation is exemplified by the statistic that one in five deaths in the age group of 25- to 34-year-olds is suicide. I believe that, as a society, we urgently need to address the following issues which will help combat youth suicide and ultimately save lives. We need to actively promote and resource the mental health services in our communities that currently exist for young people, particularly those provided by non-government organisations which offer fantastic services at a very low cost at the grassroots of the community, at the coalface—services that can assist and identify at risk young people and help break down the problems, particularly lack of awareness, lack of diagnosis and lack of treatment.As I said—I need to emphasise this—these services need to be promoted; they cannot just be hidden behind the so-called shame that is associated with mental illness. Our youth need to know that help is out there. We desperately need to destigmatise depression and mental health issues in our communities and our schools. We need to educate Australia about mental health as a matter of absolute urgency, because its cost is just too great to blithely ignore. We need a greater amount of research into youth suicide. Currently, there is no or very little research that exists which examines suicide rates amongst young people from non-English-speaking backgrounds. In particular, though, promotion and extra resourcing also needs to occur for services that exist to help young people in housing, legal aid, employment, education and health at a community level. It is not good enough just to expect Centrelink to do this.I am running out of time but, before I do, I must state that in Holt the community is fortunate enough to have a Visy Cares centre, which is located in Clow Street, Dandenong. The centre provides a broad range of services for young people and it has about 24,000 contacts per year. This service that is being offered is a great one. The manager of the Visy Cares centre, Dave Glazebrook, has informed me that, to his knowledge, since the centre's inception five years ago, not one young person who has contacted the centre for assistance has taken their own life. (Time expired)16:06:009287Southcott, Dr Andrew, MPDr SOUTHCOTTTK6BoothbyLP10—I am pleased to be able to support the motion moved by the member for Calwell and to make a number of points in speaking to it. First of all, Australia is not No. 1 for its rate of youth suicide. Although our rate is far too high, we are not top of the rankings, as is sometimes said. Secondly, the youth suicide rate is falling and has been since 1997. Thirdly, the National Suicide Prevention Strategy is well based on current research on the prevention of harm to and the treatment of those at risk.Since we have discussed some of the aspects that might assist, it might help the House to talk a little about some of the things that are already part of the national strategy. The role of families is recognised, and resources are given to recognise early warning signs for mental health problems, to access professional help and to support children and young people with a mental health program. There is a school program called MindMatters, which is focused on prevention and early intervention in school and offers a mental health promotion resource for teachers and the like who each day are in contact with young people at risk. There is also a FamilyMatters program, which again deals with mental health promotion, prevention and early intervention, in conjunction with the school program.Over the last 40 years, as we have seen a fall in the rate of suicide amongst older adults and a dramatic fall in deaths from motor vehicle accidents, we have seen a large rise in the rate of youth suicide amongst young males. Suicide is now the second leading cause of death amongst young Australians—second only to motor vehicle accidents. The rate of suicide amongst Australian males aged 15 to 24 has increased 3½ times between 1964 and 1997. Over the same period, the rate for females rose only 1.4 times the 1964 rate. As I mentioned, it is often said that we have the highest rate in the world. In fact, a 1996 UNICEF study examining youth suicide rates in 32 countries ranked Australia as having the ninth highest rate of male youth suicide, behind Eastern European countries and some developed countries, such as Finland, New Zealand and Norway. In 1996, the WHO ranked Australia 13th for male youth suicide. Youth suicide increased up to 1997, but since then youth suicide has declined significantly in terms of both the number of suicides and the rate of suicide. Since 1997 there has been a 35 per cent fall in suicide amongst the 15- to 24-year-old age group. Disaggregated figures since 1998 show that rural areas have a higher rate of suicide. Some ABS data have shown that the rate is 50 per cent higher in rural areas than in metropolitan areas. The ABS has also found that the suicide rate for Indigenous Australians is 1.6 times the rate for non-Indigenous Australians and that suicide rate amongst Aboriginal males aged 15 to 19 is four times higher than for non-Aboriginal people.There is some recent research on this rise. In a paper published in 2000 in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, Lynskey, Degenhardt and Hall found that societal and other changes may be responsible for the rise in youth suicide since the 1960s. They also concluded that this cohort would not be at increased risk of suicide throughout life. Over this time frame, there has been a rise in psychosocial disorders such as substance use disorders, affective disorders and antisocial behaviour. However, they cautioned against attributing the increased suicide rate to a rise in psychosocial disorders alone. Their conclusion was that, to reduce youth suicide, we need to focus on identifying and treating psychiatric illness and improving the effects of disrupted and dysfunctional parenting. As members of the House will know, mood disorders are eminently treatable.There is some recent research on risk factors. Annette Beautrais has also published a paper in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry. She examined risk factors, and she found them to include social and family risk factors such as parental separation, mental health factors such as affective disorders, substance use, antisocial behaviour, stressful life events such as interpersonal losses and conflict, and individual vulnerability—those with certain personality characteristics. The article concluded by suggesting that suicidal behaviours in young people are frequently, although not invariably, the end point of adverse life sequences in which multiple risk factors combine to encourage the development of suicidal behaviour.Prevention should focus on improved public understanding of mental health issues, education programs for those who work with youth, the provision of adequate specialised mental health services for young people, follow-up and treatment of those at high risk, and development of general mental health programs. (Time expired)16:11:009288Sawford, Rod, MPMr SAWFORD3J4Port AdelaideALP00—Youth suicide, intentional self-harm and depression have continued unabated in this country for the last 25 years. Young males commit suicide at four times the rate of females; young females are admitted to children's and women's hospitals in this country suffering from anxiety, depression and self-harm at five times the rate of males. You have to have different solutions for boys and different solutions for girls. The Sydney Morning Herald of 7 February this year, as was referred to in the motion by the member for Calwell, calls for a fresh approach. I do not care what you call it but an honest approach would be a beginning. Honesty on children and youth—in government, in public service, in business, in unions and in religious and ethnic organisations—would be a start. In the late 1970s in Australia, dramatic change occurred in the way children and young people were portrayed and represented in our community. Whilst it is true that great changes were also occurring in wider society at every level, our children and our young people paid the highest price. It is important to remember that a civilised country cares for its old and its young. Significant change occurred in many areas, but in this five-minute speech I have time to talk about only three: resource allocation, advocacy for children and young people, and connectedness—or the lack of connectedness—by the wider community with all the groups dealing with children and young people.In 1979, in my state of South Australia and nationally and internationally the continued expansion of funding for children and young people which had occurred since 1950 stopped and went into reverse. It was the year unemployment began to become the entrenched scourge it still is today. It was the year that funds began to escape from public education at primary and junior secondary levels. The year 1979 was when state and federal governments, in a small way at first, greatly expanded funding to the business sector and the privileged classes in our society. It was the year in which there began the decline of children's and young people's share of the gross domestic product, which in all the figures that are given is the only figure that gives you an honest comparison and validity.The 10 years from 1979 are the decade which marks the beginning of the increasing power of the philosophically ignorant and alien economists in treasuries and financial institutions in our nation and government. They saw the rise of the sophisticated criminal classes who, by greed and incompetence, destroyed state banks and demutualised public companies like NRMA, AMP, Colonial Mutual Life and so on; the questionable distribution of assets which had been gathered over some 150 years; and the wrecking of such modern companies and icons as Ansett and HIH. All this occurred when state and federal governments never had so much money. The Howard federal government is the highest taxing government in the nation's history, yet we allow reductions in funding for primary and junior secondary schools in real terms when we are dealing with alarming levels of literacy and numeracy, and social and health dysfunction. Successful and well-adjusted children and youth do not suicide, nor are they as prone to depression and self harm. The money is there but the will is not. Where have all the advocates for children and youth gone? Who are the champions at the political, institutional and community level? They have gone missing. Who could name a politician, a bureaucrat, an academic or a business, union or religious leader who has successfully advocated for all our children and youth, particularly the vulnerable, those at risk and the most needy? That is not to say eminent people have not tried; of course they have. They have just failed, and children and youth know it. That is the real problem: they know it all too well.This brings me to the third aspect of what I want to address in this chamber today: the failure to connect all the groups who should be advocating for children and youth rather than simply speaking for their own self-indulgence and their own expansionism or diminution, irrespective of the consequences for individuals, families and the nation. Governments are handing out money to the already privileged; businesses with no social responsibility are managed at the whim of the financial markets; unions are too interested in propaganda and social engineering; religious and ethnic organisations are knowingly taking public money away from the most needy and saying nothing about it—the replacement of the public good with the private good. The balance is out of kilter. We know it, and the kids know it.Leadership is an oft confused concept, particularly in the current climate of spin, image and self-indulgence. But this nation needs leaders as it never has before. The irony is that, at the very time leadership is required, those most able to lead are simply put off by the tawdry, shallow character assassinations occurring to public figures in this country and internationally almost on a daily basis. If we are serious about halting the increasing trend in youth suicide, self harm and induced depression, we had better find some real leaders because the money is there. (Time expired)16:16:009290Moylan, Judi, MPMrs MOYLAN4V5PearceLP10—As we have heard, suicide, particularly youth suicide, is a very serious problem that has perplexed many affluent societies—Western countries in particular—in the last several decades, as the number of young people dying from episodes of self harm soars. How we wish this was as simple as the member for Port Adelaide made it out to be. Unfortunately, depression and the results of depression—suicide—do not discriminate. People who suicide come from all walks of life. Many of them are very successful young people in our community, and parents and communities are completely puzzled and perplexed as to why they should want to take their own lives. Of course, there are many reasons for that.In 1996-97 the number of people, particularly young males, taking their own lives in Australia was alarmingly high. The Prime Minister, the Hon. John Howard, took a leading role in establishing the National Youth Suicide Prevention Strategy. As the then Minister for Family Services, I was tasked by the Prime Minister to establish that national program. Arm in arm with the National Youth Suicide Prevention Program was the national Youth Homeless Taskforce, also initiated by the Prime Minister and also part of my portfolio responsibilities. We know from established data that homeless people are at risk and that young people who are not living with their family and who have a communication problem with their parents carry a twofold risk of suicide. But there are many causes of suicide within our community.The programs initiated by the Prime Minister were also financially supported by the government, and the government has recently committed further funding of $40 million over the next four years to continue youth suicide prevention programs. In 1997 I announced funding of about $48 million not only to go indirectly to support youth suicide prevention programs but also to support other family based programs to try to deal with this growing problem.The Youth Homeless Taskforce had the primary objective of reuniting young people with their families. If that was not possible, assistance was given to ensure that young homeless people received coordinated assistance with health, housing, education and job opportunities. The National Youth Suicide Prevention program took a whole of community focus and sought the cooperation of everyone in the community. Some of the approaches aimed at improving awareness and training among health professionals in particular, as they are the first point of contact for help for many young people contemplating self harm. A reduction in suicides did appear to result, as the figures for males aged 15 to 24 went from 25 and 31 respectively in 1996-97 to 23 and 19 respectively in 1999-2000. However, I speak to this motion because I believe that, without continued focus on this community problem, the number of young people dying due to self harm will continue to be unacceptably high.I was impressed by the attention this issue received from the Prime Minister's Youth Roundtable participants. In her executive summary on youth suicide, Rebecca Ebert advocated a youth help page: one page at the beginning of every phone book listing help service phone numbers for issues from youth suicide and mental health to life options and transport. An executive summary by Adrian Pattra, another participant, suggested a practical life skills program to complement the current MindMatters program, which my colleague spoke about earlier today. Adrian Pattra suggested that the program would fulfil the criteria of interaction, relevance and information and would be based on the trial of his company, Little Leaps of Logic.Young people are very capable of analysing the problems of youth and making recommendations that can work, as has been demonstrated by the work of the young people participating in the Prime Minister's Youth Roundtable. What we now need is the political will to ensure that youth suicide programs are given priority and continue to work, to reduce the appallingly high deaths from self harm and to alert the community to the fact that this issue and the senseless loss of young lives is a problem that belongs to all of us. As a community we need to be reminded of the real values and priorities in life and to pause occasionally to inquire what is going on in the lives and minds of young people within our sphere of influence. The prevention of the needless deaths of our young people must continue to be a national priority. (Time expired)16:22:009291Hall, Jill, MPMs HALL83NShortlandALP00—I would like to congratulate the member for Calwell for bringing this very important motion to this parliament. It is very appropriate that youth suicide should be discussed in this House because it is an issue of such magnitude affecting so many Australians and their families. Youth suicide is an epidemic that is attacking young Australians from all economic and social backgrounds. Unfortunately, to date the Howard government—for that matter, all governments and social institutions—have failed to implement initiatives to stem this tragedy, a tragedy that is taking the lives of so many young Australians, particularly young men and Indigenous Australians.Suicide is a very sad and complex issue. Research shows that when a person takes their life they do so because they feel helpless and do not believe their situation will ever change. It is a response to intolerable pain. Isn't it sad that we have so many young people feeling such intolerable pain that they are prepared to take their own lives?Suicide involves a complex set of interacting factors. There are biological factors such as chemical imbalances; emotional factors, which relate to sadness, stress, anxiety, guilt and coming to terms with sexuality; and social factors, which deal with acceptance and the feeling that people must be accepted by their peers, not be seen to be different and not be labelled as crazy. It is all about ensuring that their self-esteem is maintained. When that is affected and when people feel they are not part of their peer group is, problems arise. Mental illness contributes to suicide, as does substance abuse and the fact that young people are more likely to take risks than other groups in our society.The government's adherence to the cult of the individual and the promotion of competition I believe have added to the pressure that has been put upon young people. There is a feeling that exists in this society that success is all that counts: if you are not successful, you are a failure and therefore you are useless. And if you are useless what hope have you got for the future? I believe that, unless this is addressed at the core and young people see that there is more to being a success than being the best at this or the best at that—they have such enormous pressures placed on them—we will not be looking at some of the issues that are causing this epidemic in our society.Suicide impacts more on young men—four times more on young men than on young women. Young women are five times more likely to inflict harm upon themselves. I believe there is more suicide among young men because there is greater pressure on them to perform than there is on young women. I chased around trying to find statistics of youth suicides within my local area. I found that on the Central Coast there were 39 per 100,000 males between the age of 15 and 24, and 14 young women per 100,000 who committed suicide in 2000. In the Hunter, there were 34 young men per 100,000 and three young women per 100,000 who committed suicide in 2000. These are young people whose lives are cut short and who had so much to offer our society.There is a lack of preventative programs. The main area that you get information is through help lines. I had a young work experience student in my office last week. She spent 10 hours ringing organisations. She had difficulty finding any sort of information. Her comment to me was, `If I had a knife or a gun and was about to kill myself, I would do it because I have become so frustrated with being unable to access the information.'It is time for the government to act. As a nation we cannot allow this epidemic to continue. The youth of Australia is our future. Every time a young person takes his or her life we lose the opportunity to benefit and gain from their contribution to our nation. As a society we are a poorer society. Unless this government and all governments act to stop this epidemic, we as a country will be poorer. (Time expired)16:26:009292Hull, Kay, MPMrs HULL83ORiverinaNP10—Comprehensive data available since 1986 indicates that males living in our rural areas have a consistently higher rate of suicide than their urban counterparts. More detailed data suggests that there is also significant variation among rural districts, with remote settlements of fewer than 4,000 people being most affected. I represent a rural and regional electorate. All of the Riverina is affected by drought. Events such as this can have a terrible toll on people of all ages, especially many farming families and many small business families. Some of those families can simply see no way out. It does impact on everybody in the family situation. It is not only the drought that has a toll on farmers and small businesses and those in rural communities but the fact that life in regional Australia has many challenges. Some young people living in rural and regional Australia may also see that there is little future, little future for their whole community and indeed for themselves.The fact that young men are much more likely to complete suicide than young women may in some way be attributed to the increase in our young ladies relocating from rural and regional areas to metropolitan centres. Perhaps their statistics are not counted or perhaps it is because this makes the social life of a young male in a rural area very difficult to endure. They perhaps can see no future and have no ability to meet and attract a partner. They seem to be at a loss as to how they can go about this.Nobody should have to feel so much pain and loss that they see the only way out is to end their life. It has been interesting to listen to the contributions in this debate this afternoon. Some have taken the time to put blame on governments and many areas; some have taken the time to appeal for some understanding of depression and suicide. I guess it is very difficult for somebody looking to find an answer through a path of depression. They would find that very difficult to access, as the member for Shortland said.It should not be acceptable that anyone should see that the only way out is to end their life. It should not be acceptable for a parent, a sibling or a friend to have to deal with the hurt of losing a loved one through suicide. Statistics available from Here for Life, an organisation which works to save many young lives and raise awareness about suicide and ways in which to prevent it, reveal that 10 young Australians will kill themselves this week alone—that is a horrific figure—and as many as 90 per cent of these people will give a warning of their intent to commit suicide.In 1998, suicide was the second leading cause of death for 15- to 25-year-olds and now youth suicides are beginning to be at their lowest rate for a decade. This provides a glimmer of hope. In 2000, only one male aged between 15 to 24 years committed suicide in the Greater Murray area, which largely covers my electorate. One female also in this age group committed suicide. But in 1997, the number of males aged between 15 to 24 years in the Greater Murray Area Health Service who ended their lives was recorded at eight. The decreasing suicide figures stand in proud testament to the success of the work for Suicide Prevention Australia. The government has committed $48 million over five years to the National Suicide Prevention Strategy. To all the stakeholders involved in suicide prevention, to have some decrease in the number of these horrific events has been an enormous feat.It is a sad day when a suicide prevention line such as operates in Griffith is a burgeoning business with demand far outstripping supply. It is incumbent upon us to ensure that we are aware of all the possible areas of assistance that are available, like the beyondblue web site. I urge you to enter the world of depression by visiting this site where you will see many stories, such as Hannah's. Hannah indicates that she was diagnosed with anxiety and severe depression. She indicated that her teacher, her family and her schools assisted her to come through the physically and mentally debilitating illness that she faced. She said that all she wanted was not to be sick any more. (Time expired)10000DEPUTY SPEAKER, TheThe DEPUTY SPEAKER—Order! The time allocated for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.Grievance Debate9293Question proposed:That grievances be noted.929316:32:009293Grierson, Sharon, MPMs GRIERSON00AMPNewcastleALP00—Tomorrow marks the anniversary of the declaration of the poll in Newcastle that formalised my election to this parliament. One year has passed and now I can reflect on what being a member of the House of Representatives entails and exactly what the realities are in representing the people of Newcastle and the federal Labor Party. To represent the people of Newcastle has been both a pleasure and a challenge and I hope to do it for a lot longer. Newcastle has demanded strong representation from its new federal representative and rightly expects this member to be vocal, visible and accessible. It is a diverse electorate and all portfolio areas and all age groups in our changing city are represented. My constituents also experience a wide range of economic wealth. For example, 40,000 people who are health cardholders in my electorate are on low to moderate incomes. In Newcastle, the take-up of disability support pension is the second highest in the country, a legacy from our industrial past and a reflection of our status as the regional capital and centre for health and support services. The value of new harbourside properties in our revitalised CBD has now approached the million dollar mark. Newcastle's needs and interests will continue to be very diverse indeed.In the past year, over 4,000 people have sought help from my office on a wide range of issues arising from their dealings with Commonwealth departments. It has been an amazing involvement and those people have, I hope, all been assisted in some way. A professional and dedicated staff supported by a very willing band of volunteers makes it possible to provide such extensive assistance. I thank all those people.It has also been a pleasure to have attended over 200 functions and events and to have directly met with over 200 individuals and organisations regarding their problems, needs, successes or the ventures that they believe in. This has given me a great deal of insight into and understanding of the social and economic fabric of our city. Fortunately, in Newcastle community is what we do best. I am proud that my experiences have confirmed for me over this year that Newcastle is a city that supports collective success, cooperative partnerships and positive networking, with an organised army of community organisations and volunteers all working to ensure the community of Newcastle prospers.Throughout this year, I have also been proud and amazed at the number of times Newcastle has emerged as an example of best practice during presentations to parliamentary committees of which I am a member. This has been particularly evident in the science and innovation committee's inquiry into research and development in Australia. Many submissions and contributors have noted the advanced nature of industry clustering in Newcastle. They acknowledge the success of our genuine commitment to skill sharing and knowledge transfers, as well as our outstanding partnerships with research centres and our university. The strong foundation laid in Newcastle for training, particularly in all fields of engineering and the sciences, has been both praised and lamented amongst warnings and predictions of a crisis in skill shortages facing Australia's manufacturing industry. Similarly, the inquiry into wireless broadband found Newcastle leading in the regional provision of broadband services with a thriving and competitive information technology industry emerging.The quest for employment was well aired in Newcastle this year at the Productivity Commission's inquiry into the Job Network system. I will continue to pursue employment issues in parliament and these will be further developed at a job summit to be held in Newcastle next week. Although employment and economic figures show a local trend of growth, many mature age unemployed and unskilled youth continue to face a very uncertain employment future in Newcastle and the Hunter region. Local solutions appropriate to our region supported by cooperation between local, state and national governments would certainly assist. The Newcastle public hearings into veterans' entitlements also reflected the honesty of Novocastrians, who are always diligent in looking after the needs of those who have served this country. This year has also highlighted for me that this is indeed a time for government. Although I anticipated that legislation in parliament would deal with items that were important to my region and important to the nation, I perhaps did not predict that issues would also arise this year that had major implications for all of humanity—issues of human cloning, stem cell research, war and terrorism and, in particular, the outrage of the events in Bali that caused such tragic loss of life, grief and pain to so many Australians. This is a time for strong, stable, intelligent and informed government, intent on uniting the people of our nation and willing to contribute positively to unify all peoples in our Asia-Pacific region.Issues of what constitutes life, issues of what constitutes quality of life and the issue of the survival of human life have been debated in this House this year, reinforcing that in Australia we need a government that builds on the characteristics that best distinguish mankind. This is vital as we prepare to again consider this nation's role in securing peace in our world. Unfortunately, it seems that, for some nations, war is seen as the only way to secure peace. History suggests that that is not the path to follow. Apparently war in Iraq creeps inevitably closer. There are 12,000 US troops already in Kuwait, with 50,000 troops presently in the Gulf. Four or five aircraft carriers will be in the Gulf in the new year, and weapons of war—not mass destruction—flood into Iraq at the present time via Europe and Syria in preparation for impending war. With the continuing and ever escalating conflict between Israel and Palestine spreading its tentacles into other countries and killing innocent bystanders, one wonders why Australia would not leave these regions to sort out their own problems—problems, unfortunately, in many cases fed by greed, self-interest, exploitation and disregard for human rights.Events since September 11, such as the flood of refugees and displaced people all around the world, the tragic loss of life from the outrage in Bali and the threat of regional terrorism, reinforce that this is a time for convincing the Australian people to have faith in themselves as a strong and resourceful people, as people of great intellect, skill and compassion, and as people of fairness and decency who possess community and national pride based on equity, tolerance and compassion. It is also a time to secure this nation and its future, and for me that means electing a Labor government in the future. While I reflect that it is time for these directions, it is also time today, on the 13th anniversary of the Hon. Gough Whitlam as Prime Minister of Australia, to pay homage to a great man who truly led for all the men and women of Australia. Thank you, Gough, for three decades of inspiration.As a new member, I remain proud to be a member of the federal Labor opposition. I believe that the Labor Party has a vision for this nation and that one day it will again gain government to lead this nation on behalf of all the men, women and children of Australia, with policies that show a way forward for a strong, secure and fair Australia. A genuine approach to border security and community safety—including a coastguard; a home affairs portfolio; a more humane approach to detention centres and asylum seekers—will become the task of a future Labor government. Other policies which will provide a legacy for the future generations of the 21st century include a better deal for education and health services, a fairer but less burdensome taxation regime, a more interventionist industry policy, a population policy that incorporates regional strategies, a new simplified structure of superannuation, significant reform of family payments including paid maternity leave, a national research strategy, a Kyoto based model for environmental sustainability, a system of tax credits targeted at low- and middle-income earners that acknowledges equity issues and promotes and rewards aspirations, the building of a skills rich and innovative nation able to respond to the changing world and its demands, and genuine support for regional development. Only a Labor government will integrate economic and social policy, with an economic and social wealth creation agenda that value adds and builds wealth into all the activities of the nation. Australia needs a Labor government that will pursue an economic agenda that promotes productivity, investment, innovation and nation building. Such a Labor government would balance market forces with a strategic national agenda, supporting a market that is both well regulated and strategically supported. Such a Labor government would also pursue a social agenda that rewards success but acknowledges the disadvantage of some to achieve the goals of success that everyone shares no matter their personal circumstances or their chosen place of residence. The right to a good education, good health services, gainful employment and some security in all phases of life—youth, family raising and ageing—are aspirations we all share.In my first year I have had confirmed for me my pride in the people of Newcastle and I have gained a deeper understanding and respect for their economic and social activities. I remain convinced that Australia needs and deserves a quality of government that does not exist at this time. I remain a proud member of the Labor opposition and am even more determined to be a part of a Labor government after the next election. It has been a pleasure to represent Newcastle and to be a member of this parliament.929516:42:009295Thompson, Cameron, MPMr CAMERON THOMPSON84CBlairLP10—Today I wish to raise an issue that is of direct concern to the people in the electorate of Blair—that is, roads. The Commonwealth government, being responsible for the national highway network, plays an important part in moving traffic through the electorate of Blair. Today I want to speak about the route through the Warrego Highway and the Ipswich Motorway in the electorate of Blair, because it has been a very topical issue in recent times. I will leave the Cunningham Highway for another day and will focus purely on the Warrego Highway and the Ipswich Motorway.Just the other day I was pleased to attend the launch of the Gatton bypass project, with Senator Ron Boswell and the Queensland state transport minister, Steve Bredhauer. The Gatton bypass project is worth $46 million. As part of that project, we are duplicating the highway west from Gatton through to Withcott. That will mean that next Christmas—not this Christmas just coming but the one after that—for the first time we will be able to drive the whole way from Toowoomba to Brisbane without having to drive in any area in which there is not a divided highway. That will be a significant thing for local people, because there have been many serious accidents along the Gatton bypass where there is opposing traffic. The problems have been significant. Since that section of undivided highway was created in 1989, there have been 19 fatalities, many near misses and a great deal of heartache caused by it. So it is great to see the Commonwealth working effectively to provide $46 million for the funding of that project.Of course, it is not all beer and skittles. We have a cooperative arrangement between the state and the Commonwealth whereby the Commonwealth funds the national highway and, in many cases, the state government is responsible for the planning. But, as has been noted today in the Queensland Times in Ipswich, there have quite often been opportunities for disparaging comments one way or the other, resulting in the public getting the idea that things are not advancing as quickly as they should. In relation to the Gatton project, we have a good, cooperative arrangement and it is working very effectively.Senator Ron Boswell arrived at the opening of the Gatton bypass project white in the face because on the way he had passed through the Plainland intersection where there had been a big pile-up. I had been speaking to Ron about this area and the need for us to do something to improve it, because it is a huge traffic risk—there have been many accidents and fatalities there in the past. We are working very hard to get the area upgraded. When Senator Boswell arrived at the Gatton bypass launch, having just witnessed a big traffic pile-up, he said: `We've got to make that a top priority.' To give him credit, he went straight to the Queensland state transport minister and said, `Will you tick off on advancing this?' Mr Bredhauer, who had witnessed exactly the same pile-up on his way out to Gatton, responded positively. So let us hope that that results in an advancement of the Plainland intersection in terms of work along the Warrego Highway. Let me turn to an area where planning obviously is not working as effectively as we would like—the Ipswich Motorway. The Ipswich Motorway carries a huge amount of traffic and is the only link between Ipswich and Brisbane. It picks up all the traffic from the Warrego and Cunningham highways and funnels all that traffic through to Brisbane. It also links up with the Logan Motorway, so there is an awful lot of traffic moving south down to the Gold Coast that has to pass through this area as well. State government planning in this exercise has been a disaster. They have tried to avoid, it seems to me, any danger of upsetting someone politically by trying to confine the entire negotiation to upgrade the existing road, regardless of whether or not we are going to still be able to get 80,000 vehicles a day down that road during the construction process. Planners and engineers have visited me to explain what is going on. Everything I have learned during the consultation process indicates that the task of trying to maintain a reasonable flow of 80,000 vehicles down the motorway each day, while undertaking a project to upgrade to six lanes largely on the existing alignment—in fact, significantly on the alignment through Goodna—really is impossible. It is impossible to believe that that amount of traffic can continue to flow effectively. We are likely to face a situation where, for many years, the Ipswich Motorway will turn into a car park!The first day that state government planners turned up in my office I said to them that they had to look at alternative routes. We need network redundancy—the ability, if there is an accident, to go on another road. The fact is that the state government has roads on the drawing board that they just have not built. The Moggill Pocket arterial road—I will name for one—could be taking thousands of vehicles a day off the Ipswich Motorway, if only it existed, but it does not exist. As a result, we are left with this traffic imbroglio. I told them that they had to look at alternatives. They went away and studied those alternatives. When they came back they reported that they were positive that, by building a road on a northern alignment, parallel to the existing motorway where it goes through Goodna, they could split local and commuting traffic off from the through traffic—from all the B-doubles and trucks—locate that through traffic north of the river and turn the Ipswich Motorway over to local and commuting traffic. That is what their study found. It also found that the proposal to upgrade the existing alignment had a very short life—something like 10 years. So, practically, by the time the project was completed, we would be back to the unacceptable amount of congestion, accidents and delays that we face today without any improvement—after having spent something like $600 million, which is an outrageous waste of taxpayers' money. We have to find ourselves a better outcome.By comparison, creating a northern alignment would result in a great deal more flexibility—it would have a much longer life before supplementary work would be necessary—and would be a significant positive for the people of Ipswich. Significantly, the state government, having found those things, then decided that, regardless of what the modelling found, they were going to persist with the upgrading along the existing alignment. This is absolutely crazy. They have gone out to consultation and asked the federal transport minister, `Should we stop the consultation while we study alternative routes?' He said, `No, you go ahead with the consultation, but I still want more study done.' They will not accept what is staring them in the face: the need for this northern alignment. By having two alternative routes, we would achieve beneficial, positive outcomes for the people of south-east Queensland, particularly for the people of Ipswich. At the moment, we are saddling them with an absolute dog. The idea that people involved in business and the community of Ipswich should get off the motorway to make way for through traffic is absolutely pathetic. This proposal is being put forward by the state government. They are looking to wind back the Ipswich economy and Ipswich business—priorities which local Ipswich people see as important—in order to get out of the way to let the B-doubles flow. This would be a very bad outcome. By building a northern alignment, we could move those vehicles onto their own road and turn over the Ipswich Motorway, as it stands, to local traffic and commuting traffic. That would be the best of both worlds. To have B-doubles travelling right next to commuting traffic is an absolute recipe for disaster. There have been many accidents caused by this inappropriate mix. The other night in the rain I nearly got mown down by a B-double. My car slipped and I was nearly road kill. It is not a good option. We have to split those two types of traffic, and there are many other reasons why we have to look much more seriously at a northern alignment. For people who live north of the river, it would also provide many positive alternatives and give them traffic links which they do not have. It will resuscitate local public transport options, particularly rail. The option that is being pursued by the state government will, unfortunately, result in access to local rail stations being strangled by an ever increasing motorway that people are loath to cross because it is too much of a traffic hazard. I commend the idea of a northern alignment to the House.929716:52:009297George, Jennie, MPMs GEORGEJH5ThrosbyALP00—I would like to use the opportunity provided by today's grievance debate to raise two matters of concern to my constituents in the electorate of Throsby. One is a general matter and the other is a specific matter that has been brought to my attention by two constituents.The first issue is the lack of GPs to service the electorate of Throsby, whose population is both growing and ageing. I have had a number of calls from constituents who have raised this problem. I asked the Illawarra Division of General Practice to provide some data for me so that I could establish the ratio of GPs to population in Throsby. For some inexplicable reason, the most recent data that I have been able to obtain dates back to 1998. The situation has probably got worse since 1998, when the GP to patient ratio in the Illawarra was one per 1,275 people. That compared very unfavourably with the then national average of one GP per 898 people and with the New South Wales average of one GP per 904 people. Back in December 1998, the GP to patient ratio in the Illawarra region was about 40 per cent worse than the national average, and there were very serious regional variations. My electorate covers the local government area of Shellharbour, where the ratio was one GP per 1,646 people. That compares with the national average of one per 898, which is almost twice the number of GPs per head of population. Those are December 1998 figures; with a growing population, young families moving in and an ageing population in my electorate, I contend that the situation in Throsby is becoming critical. The federal government and the minister are not doing enough to address this growing problem. We know that this is a serious problem in regional and country Australia, but Throsby is only 20 kilometres south of a major city—the city of Wollongong. Let me assure the government that they need to address this problem in a national context and do much more to provide the kinds of services that people in my electorate believe that they are entitled to in terms of access to primary health care.I want to give one specific example. The Illawarra Medical Services in my electorate ran large practices in Port Kembla and Berkeley—which are both very disadvantaged communities. Port Kembla has a high migrant and non-English-speaking population. Until very recently there were seven doctors working in both locations but, by the end of this year, there will be only three doctors, two of whom are near retirement age. This means that the practice at Port Kembla—which has been there for over 50 years—will close, leaving only one GP, who is nearly 70 years of age, to service the needs of the community of Port Kembla. As I said, it is an area with elderly, migrant and disadvantaged people. The doctors tell me that they have had immense difficulty getting provider numbers not just in Port Kembla and Berkeley. Similar problems exist at the southern end of my electorate, at Albion Park Rail. I want to place on record my concern about this growing problem. I have asked the Illawarra Division of General Practice to do some more specific analysis on a suburb-by-suburb basis in Throsby, and I will no doubt bring this information back to the chamber at some appropriate time. The second issue that I want to raise is the non-payment of the Medicare rebate for a CT spiral angiography. This matter was brought to my attention by a constituent, Mr William Harvey, who is 69 years of age, a self-funded retiree and privately insured with Medibank Private. About two-thirds of my constituents are in the public health system; about a third are covered by some form of private insurance, and Mr Harvey is one of them. Of course, for a lot of self-funded retirees and pensioners, the cost of private insurance is quite an additional burden. In May this year, Mr Harvey underwent an operation for an endoluminal repair of an abdominal aortic aneurysm. On 30 July he was sent by his vascular specialist for a CT spiral angiography, which was deemed essential by his doctor. The cost of the procedure was $428.90. When Mr Harvey went to claim the Medicare rebate, his claim was refused on the basis that it was the second CT spiral angiography in a period of 12 months. It is true that he had a similar procedure in January 2002, prior to his operation. The matter was taken up with the Health Insurance Commission, which stated in a letter that, although they were sympathetic to Mr Harvey's situation, his account for $428.90 would not attract a Medicare rebate on the basis that 12 months had not elapsed since his last CT on 17 January 2002. The letter went on to say—and this is what concerns me—that `the HIC has no discretion to override the rules outlined in the Medicare Benefit Schedule', as it is bound by legislation. Representations were then made by my office to the Minister for Health and Ageing, and she too stated that, while she was sympathetic to Mr Harvey's situation, there is currently no process under the existing legislation to pay a Medicare benefit if the service provided does not `exactly fit the description of the item as described in the current schedule'. A similar set of circumstances applies in the case of another constituent, Mr Neville Nicholls, an age pensioner. I find this quite an appalling situation. Both constituents have been referred for a CT spiral angiography because it was deemed an essential procedure by their vascular specialists. On medical grounds, their specialists believed that it was necessary for their ongoing medical treatment. The cost of $428.90 for both men is prohibitive—one being an age pensioner, the other a self-funded retiree covered by private insurance. One might ask, where is the health system heading? While some funds continue to pay out, as we heard today in the House, for such things as designer gym shoes and fitness classes, the poor are being denied access to assistance for basic medical services. It is grossly unjust for people who have a serious and often life-threatening medical condition to be forced to carry the financial burden of procedures deemed essential by their specialists because those procedures are non-refundable through Medicare rules, which provide for no discretion at all. I contend that the minister should amend the Medicare benefit schedule to allow patients, such as my constituents who require essential procedures, access to a Medicare rebate where their practising specialist deems that a procedure is necessary for their ongoing medical treatment. Clearly there can well be circumstances where a CT spiral angiography needs to be accessed more than once in a 12-month period. These rules should clearly allow for some measure of discretion, which currently does not exist. I am very concerned about the plight of my constituents. The matter has been aired in the local media and, as a result of their bringing these matters to my attention, I have today forwarded a detailed list of questions on notice to the minister for health. I await her urgent reply.929917:01:009299Cobb, John, MPMr JOHN COBB00AN1ParkesNP10—Firstly, I would like to thank the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister for visiting my electorate last week, and for taking on board what people like John Anderson, Warren Truss and I have been saying. I thank the Prime Minister for giving hope and reassurance to country people and for recognising that this is a different and more expensive drought than anything we have seen before. It demands a much more innovative and proactive approach, and I am confident that as a government we can assist farmers to retain core breeding stock and support our rural communities.During the two-week recess, I took the opportunity to travel to the far west areas of my electorate to speak once again with farmers, graziers and the many small business people there about their concerns, especially in the areas of fodder and water. It depends which area you go to as to which one they are lacking most, but the reason this is a different drought is that in a lot of cases they are running out of both. For people who have developed their breeding stock over decades, there is no greater tragedy than seeing them dying in paddocks or being trucked off to the saleyards because you simply cannot afford to feed them any longer or your water supplies have expired. Mr Howard, John Anderson and I had the job of pulling a sheep out of an almost dry dam during our visit to Cobar last Wednesday. In Sydney, it was seen as a photo opportunity, and some had the audacity to call it a publicity stunt. But in the country, we know that it is a sad reality—farmers are doing that every day. The sad reality is that drought kills. It kills animals. It kills people's aspirations and their hopes for the future. That is what drought does—it kills.Our government must realise that more than exceptional circumstances assistance is needed—and I believe it realises that—to preserve not just Australia's most productive sector but also the communities that are attached to it. A Nyngan farmer made a comment to me during this fortnight, and it has stuck in my mind ever since. He said, `There's no incentive for farmers to hold out any longer,' when they are running out of feed and water. Some farmers sold off a lot of stock early in the piece, and got good money for their sheep and cattle. Others chose to hold on, hoping that the situation would improve. The quality of their stock has certainly gradually deteriorated, and now they are faced with a devastating reality— they missed the window of opportunity to cash in while the stock were in good condition and prices were good, and now they have very little to hold those stock. They are desperate to protect their core breeders, but they face the danger that this drought is not yet over. However, had they sold their stock as well, there would be no stock for the rest of us to source when the drought is over. Graziers need fodder and they need the ability to source water, whether that be by better dams or by sinking bores—it is as simple as that. Most land-holders are very forward thinking. They are already looking forward to when the drought breaks and how they can prepare for even tougher times ahead. But the question quite simply is: where will restockers come from and how will people pay for them? A lot of graziers are left with a quarter of their stock, some with far less and some with none. They are asking for low-interest loans to get the capital they need to get back on their feet after the drought. This is an issue that I know the government takes seriously, and it is one that we are looking at.On my travels I was able to spread some good news about EC for the western division of New South Wales. Unfortunately, the state government failed to put north and south-east Cobar up, and the people in those areas are understandably damn angry. Like the Prime Minister, I am relieved that the exceptional circumstances assistance in the region is finally in our hands, and I am confident that the much needed support will start to flow where it is needed. North and south-east Cobar should be declared a buffer zone so people in those areas can access the same funding as their neighbours. I have been through north Cobar a number of times over the past few months, and it is every bit as barren as those areas that are now provisionally EC declared. The people of Nyngan are just as angry because the state has refused to put them up to be considered for EC thus far. Very soon areas like Condobolin and West Wyalong will come into the equation. If the state government will not take this drought seriously and accept its part of the responsibility, we have no option but to step in. There has been a great deal of criticism of exceptional circumstances, but it is the state government that is holding up the process. We are being delivered a double blow. Unlike previous droughts, fodder and water are both required immediately. This is something we have not seen before, or certainly not of the magnitude of this drought. People want help to clean out dams, sink bores and lay polythene pipe. They are serious about being better prepared next time. At our property near Condobolin, we have about six weeks of water left, and I am currently trying to sink a bore over an old mine shaft. I understand, more than most people here, just how desperate it is for a farmer who is trying to keep stock alive when his resources are fully extended.This is a perfect time to reflect on how to better prepare for the next drought. This government has made farm management deposits a practical reality, which they were not before, and the Prime Minister has identified areas where they can be further improved. However, we also need to look at physical drought measures attracting greater tax relief. Farmers are very practical people, and they much prefer the opportunity to see the benefits of drought measures on farm by way of preserving water and preserving fodder. It is a fact of life that they will do everything they possibly can—if we make it possible for them tax-wise—to store that fodder, to have that water on hand and to better prepare. A national water policy makes a lot of sense, and I think John Anderson and Warren Truss have to be congratulated for starting that process. The Kimberley, the Clarence and other areas can yield a lot of water that is otherwise running straight out into the sea with little or no use. It is absolutely impossible to drought-proof Australia. In terms of water, though, we can go a long way towards it on most farms in Australia.930017:09:009300Jackson, Sharryn, MPMs JACKSON00AN2HasluckALP00—During the last sitting fortnight, I was fortunate to attend a seminar hosted by Senator Ridgeway and the National Sorry Day Committee. The seminar was titled `Are we helping them home? Surveys of the progress in the implementation of the “Bringing them home” report recommendations'. As many of you would know, the Bringing them home report arose from the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from their Families, and it was released in May 1997. I think it is well known. In a summary in the paper he prepared for the seminar with the assistance of John Bond from the National Sorry Day Committee, Peter O'Brien wrote:The inquiry revealed that Indigenous children had been taken throughout the 20th century. It revealed that governments had had a role in racially discriminatory practices to the extent that they created “a gross violation of human rights”. It revealed that such practices had produced trauma and grief for individuals and devastation for families and communities; it revealed that the impact of the taking of children was reverberating down the generations, with ongoing, unresolved grief and increased risks in Indigenous communities of mental health problems.The recommendations went to a number of different areas. The first, and perhaps the most significant, was the area of acknowledgment and apology. I guess we are all aware of the present government's refusal to make a real and genuine apology, allegedly because of the fear of compensation claims, despite what is overwhelming evidence that removal seriously injured the children. In the area of mental health services, additional funding was provided for some four regional centres as well as for additional counselling staff. There is little evidence that the centres themselves and the counselling services are actually being accessed by the target group—that is, the stolen generations. In many cases, it seems the additional funding has been absorbed into general program delivery rather than into assisting the stolen generation.Parenting and family support services were areas also targeted by the recommendations. Again, the funding for programs to assist those who were removed with parenting and family skills seems to have been taken up into existing programs within the Department of Family and Community Services. For the very significant area of family reunion services, the federal government put up $11.2 million for a four-year period to provide a Link-Up service in every state and territory. Link-Up was based on a very successful model already in place in New South Wales, which assists people to make connections with their families. Of all of the services that have been provided to the stolen generation to date, this perhaps provides the best service of all. It is a pity that there is little national coordination of the work, as many children who were removed finish up in different states from those of their families. Link-Up services require far greater assistance in the search for records and the like for families to be able to come together. There was also funding for an oral history project, and the book Many Voices has been published. I hope the recordings of many of the oral histories or stories that were taken of people who were removed as children may somehow be kept and used in a memorial to further record and have regard to their history. Another area of recommendation went to language and culture projects. Funds in that area have generally been directed to language projects, particularly to language revival and maintenance, rather than to cultural projects. The recommendations going to assistance with record finding—that is, records held by not only state, Commonwealth and territory departments but also churches and other non-government welfare organisations—are absolutely vital for people in their search for identity. It is still very hard for people to access those family and other identity records. I was particularly concerned to find that, in my own state of WA, there is no coordination of these records to assist members of the stolen generation.The recommendations of the Bringing them home report and the progress of implementation of those recommendations was the subject of an inquiry by the Senate Legal and Constitutional References Committee. It looked at not only the implementation of the recommendations of the Bringing Them Home inquiry but also the federal government's response to them. Unfortunately, the analysis of those three reports that were handed down by the Senate indicates that, while some effort has been made, we still have a considerable way to go. In fact, of the original grant of $63 million, only $54 million was new funding provided specifically for the government's response to the Bringing them home report, and the $9 million invested in the Language Access Initiatives Program was existing funds which were redirected within ATSIC. Perhaps of greater concern was the fact that there was little or no consultation with the people of the stolen generation except for those who were represented on the steering committee of the oral history project and some who have been involved in the steering committee of the design and management of the family reunion program. Other than that, the very group of people who were to be the target group for the recommendations and for the funding to assist and resolve some of their issues have not been the beneficiaries of that funding.I was appalled at the lack of effectiveness of the government's response to this report and to the Senate report. You have to ask: where is the leadership so desperately required in this debate? It seems to me that great leaders should be promoting healing, reconciliation and diversity, not—as ours are—helping to create and build a climate of fear, suspicion and distrust. A great deal of energy and commitment has been demonstrated by the Australian people, particularly in 2000 with the signing of thousands of sorry books by members of the community and by participating in bridge walks and the like, to the reconciliation process. I am very saddened that it appears that that energy has been dissipated. I suspect it is our first victim of the war on terror. I think the current climate is such that people with perhaps less than perfect intentions are able to add to that climate of suspicion rather than promoting reconciliation.I put this plea on the record: if the government proceeds with its advertising campaign to help alert Australians to some of the issues associated with terrorism, somehow through those advertisements it must actually teach and promote personal and community safety and not promote suspicion and distrust simply because people look different or are behaving differently from some accepted notion of what is the norm. When I commenced my first speech in the House of Representatives, I referred to Labor's value statements. One of those statements is: 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.I indicated that, during my time in the parliament, I hope to participate in and be witness to real and meaningful reconciliation with Indigenous Australians. That is why I met with representatives of the National Sorry Day Committee this morning to find out what steps I could take to promote the journey of healing and reconciliation, both here in the parliament and in my own state of Western Australia and my electorate of Hasluck.The National Sorry Day Committee believes that to advance healing among the stolen generation a number of significant objectives need to be achieved. The first is for Australian governments—not just the Commonwealth government but also the state governments—to commit themselves afresh to healing. Governments and the Australian community each have a vital role. I have already referred to a national apology to be offered to the stolen generation. The specific objectives are set out in the report from the National Sorry Day Committee. I urge all members to read the report and take up these matters in their own states and territories so that Australia can become a truly proud and just nation.930217:19:009302Draper, Trish, MPMrs DRAPER0L6MakinLP10—On Friday, 29 November 2002, as chair of the government's health and ageing committee, I had the honour of opening the forum on childhood obesity in beautiful Launceston, Tasmania. The forum was organised by my colleague Senator Guy Barnett, who is secretary of the health and ageing committee, along with support from Eat Well Tasmania and the Tasmania School Canteen Association Inc. It has been estimated that one in five Australian children is at risk of contracting diabetes, as childhood obesity has tripled over the last 10 years.The Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, the Hon. Larry Anthony—who, I am delighted to say, is here with us in the chamber at the moment—recently released a statement in which he reported that Australia has the second highest rate of obesity in the world. Research shows that most children aged between two and 14 weigh more than they should: 18 per cent of boys and 22 per cent of girls are considered to be obese. Diabetes is the sixth major cause of death in Australia and people with type 2 diabetes are twice as likely to suffer cardiovascular disease. Diabetes can also lead to blindness, kidney failure, lower limb amputation and stroke.The latest annual report by the World Health Organisation has found that preventative health measures could provide Australians with an extra six years of life expectancy. The report highlighted the increasing level of obesity in industrialised nations, including Australia. Responding to the report, the federal health minister, Senator the Hon. Kay Patterson stated:Successful risk factor reduction must involve government, the community and individuals taking their share of responsibility. Obesity must be tackled through physical activity and nutrition initiatives and major differences can be made if we work together.The minister also committed the federal government to further work on obesity prevention in partnership with the states and territories. One of the major reasons for this growing problem is our modern lifestyle. Previous generations of Australian children were a lot more physically active than today. Now about 40 per cent of them are not involved in organised sport, and 95 per cent of Australian children spend 20 hours or more per week watching television, playing computer games or surfing the Internet. Anyone who has ever tried to pry a teenager away from the latest Nintendo computer game will know the immensity of the task before us.Governments obviously have a major role to play, but the role of parents is of paramount importance. As parents, we seek to protect and nurture our children from the day they are born. We protect them from the dangers which lie outside the home, but perhaps one of the greatest dangers to their health lies within. Unregulated hours of play on the computer and watching television are, the statistics show, endangering our children. No government, no school, no church and no community organisation has the power to alter this. Only the parents can. At a national level, this problem was first recognised in a report released in 1997 entitled Acting on Australia's weight: a strategic plan for the prevention of overweight and obesity. The National Obesity Prevention Group was established two years later, chaired by Professor Ian Caterson of the University of Sydney. Two working groups were established, one dealing with adult obesity and the other specifically focusing on obesity in children and adolescents. The aim of the working groups was to provide the government with a report on the priorities for action, and a number of their recommendations have since been actioned. In August 1999 a symposium entitled `Acting on Australia's weight: children and families' was held. As with last Friday's forum, the symposium brought together people from a variety of backgrounds to discuss and exchange ideas about how to encourage healthier lifestyle choices among Australians, particularly our young people.To build on the information from these two sources, the government commissioned experts in the field to research and recommend intervention and prevention strategies which would specifically address childhood obesity. Professor Caterson's National Obesity Prevention Group highlighted the problem of the lack of a standard definition of overweight and obesity for children which made it difficult to properly assess the extent of the problem in this country. As a result, the government commissioned a group of experts to develop an Australian standard. The National Health and Medical Research Council is also developing national clinical guidelines for weight control and obesity management for use by general practitioners.At the political level, there has been an increasing awareness of the importance of creating programs for early childhood which deal with issues such as child obesity. For the first time, a ministry specifically focusing on children and young people was created at the federal level and a task force on child development, health and wellbeing was established. At the most recent federal election, the government announced funding of $15 million under the National Child Nutrition Program—a national initiative to improve the eating habits of children under the age of 12 and pregnant women. Already, $2.1 million has been allocated to 25 nutrition projects in Indigenous communities. The government has recently launched a newsletter, Health Kids Australia, to provide families with the latest information and advice on keeping their children healthy and active. The emphasis is on a balanced diet and regular exercise. The newsletter is issued quarterly and is available at child-care centres, Centrelink and Family Assistance offices and through the Active Australia Schools Network across the country.In my home state of South Australia, the previous state government led by Premier Rob Kerin introduced the Food and Nutrition policy, which had as its core aims the reduction of diet related illness, disability and early death amongst South Australians. Its focus was on improving people's health through what they eat, and nutrition studies within the state's high schools were given greater focus. I was pleased to see recent publicity in the local Adelaide Advertiser given to nutrition studies students studying for their exams. The new government in my state has yet to take up the challenge left by its predecessor, which again reminds us of the need to lift the profile of this issue throughout the country so that it cannot be ignored.I truly believe that nothing short of a campaign equal to the size, intensity and duration of the antismoking campaign is needed to tackle this growing problem. We have the evidence of the success of a concerted strategy to improve health outcomes. It was a policy commitment of the Howard government when it first came to office to lift the rate of childhood immunisation in Australia. As at September this year, 91 per cent of all Australian children at 12 months of age and 89 per cent of children at 24 months of age were fully immunised. As a result of this concerted campaign, there has been a 77 per cent decline over the past decade in the number of haemophilus influenza type B disease cases in children under five years, an 87 per cent reduction in measles and a 75 per cent reduction in the number of reported cases of rubella. The long and consistent campaign warning of the dangers of tobacco consumption has led to a significant decline in the use of tobacco. Figures released by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare in September this year show that the number of deaths in Australia from heart disease has dropped by almost one-third. The drop was linked to the decline in smoking and the efforts to reduce cholesterol. This is an example of what can be achieved when we all work together on a clear and consistent campaign of public education, advice and assistance. The success of any action will depend upon governments at all levels, non-government agencies and the community collaborating to gain the ear and support of parents, thus ensuring a healthier future for Australia's children. In closing, I would like to congratulate Senator Guy Barnett for organising such a successful forum. I also take this opportunity to thank the Hon. Larry Anthony, Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, for his support of the conference and his concern about the issue of childhood obesity.930417:28:009304O'Connor, Brendan, MPMr BRENDAN O'CONNOR00AN3BurkeALP00—I rise to make some remarks regarding bulk-billing and the effect that the decline in bulk-billing is having on the country and, in particular, on my electorate of Burke. As I think most people would be aware by now, this week the Leader of the Opposition and the shadow minister for health have raised the growing concern that we on this side of the House have about the fall in access to bulk-billing. This decline in access is of particular concern to those in our communities who have health problems and are not able to afford health services without the assistance of bulk-billing.Today in question time the minister representing the Minister for Health and Ageing—unintentionally, I think—got it right, although he might in future require some assistance in understanding graphs. The minister, in an effort to defend the government's record on bulk-billing, produced a graph showing that in the area of bulk-billing there had been a steady incline from 1984 until 1996 and then, since the election of the Howard government, a steady and increasingly dramatic decline. In other words, bulk-billing had remained at a low base during the Fraser years, the period in which this Prime Minister was Treasurer, after which the Labor government steadily improved its application across the country to reach a high point in 1996, when it then fell away. It is no coincidence that 1996 will be known as a watershed in bulk-billing and the beginning of the decline of this very important and critical service for the Australian population.For six years now the Howard government has contrived to see bulk-billing return to or at least move rapidly in the direction of where it was in the late seventies. This is a major worry for many, but it should come as no surprise to anyone who knows the Prime Minister's view on bulk-billing. The Prime Minister historically has held, and currently holds, an ideological loathing for Medicare and, indeed, its predecessor, Medibank. But he has a problem with tearing it down overnight, and that is that Medicare is supported overwhelmingly by the Australian population. So, instead, the Prime Minister and this government want to see our cherished, publicly run universal health system wither on the vine. They want to see a systemic decline in bulk-billing. That will provide one of the means by which the Prime Minister can start to ensure the deterioration of a public health system which he is on the record as indicating his abhorrence for.I understand the concerns that people in the community—and certainly those within my own electorate—have regarding access to bulk-billing. I am very concerned that overall there has been a decline in bulk-billing. There was a time not too far past when I could have said that the electorate of Burke had a very good record, or at least a fair to average record, with access to bulk-billing. However, decisions made only two months ago by health centres in Melton, the largest community in the electorate of Burke, have meant that that decent record is certainly on the decline. Those three medical centres in Melton—in Unitt Street and Scott Street, and at Melton Westcare—have announced that they will no longer provide bulk-billing. In this area many people are low-income earners or retirees. They do not have the wherewithal or the ability to very easily find the resources to ensure they can attend the doctor, knowing that they can pay their way for the provision of that service. This is the worst of it: how it affects people who cannot afford to pay. Clearly, some have a greater capacity for discretion with the money they might save, earn or have. But for those who do not have a lot of money, those who do not earn a great deal or those who receive a pension after working most of their life and are not in a position to part with much money, it comes as a real problem. At this point I do not know what I can say to my constituents in Melton about the problems now associated with these three medical centres having indicated that, without having money in their pockets, the capacity no longer exists for these people when they are sick to go to the doctor and be attended to in the way they should expect to be able to. This is an absolute tragedy and I think it is something that the government should be addressing itself to. But in question time today we saw the government instead playing all sorts of games with this issue. It refused to talk about the issue of bulk-billing and made some diversionary references to other matters. In fact, it did not answer one question on what it would be doing to assist in ensuring that the bulk-billing record is improved and that a further decline is avoided. The government will make no efforts with this issue because, in the end, it has no concern for it. It demonstrated that fact today with its contemptuous responses to four or five significant questions that were put by the shadow minister for health.This is a critical issue for the parliament to focus upon: health. For the community there can hardly be a more important issue than health. Certainly at the state level, in the areas of his jurisdiction Steve Bracks, the Premier of Victoria, knows how important health is. He attended to those things that are in his jurisdiction in the areas of health and education. Therefore, it is perhaps not surprising that in the Parliament of Victoria the Liberal Party now finds its numbers not even reaching the size of an AFL football team. This has happened because the community in Victoria had to make a decision about the way in which the state government was delivering on health. They also had to listen to the policies of the opposition, which clearly came up short. The Liberal Party has come up dreadfully short in terms of the numbers that now represent it in the two chambers of the Victorian parliament. I am hoping that the federal government learns from that. This government, where it has jurisdiction in the area of health, must learn that it has to attend to these issues instead of hoping to see the decline of bulk-billing and disregarding the concerns of the community with respect to this matter. That is something for this government to consider. But it will not get any community support if it continues to treat the issue with such little regard and as contemptuously as it did today.That is a critical issue. An associated issue—an issue also of concern for the constituents of Burke—is the ratio of patients to doctors in some areas across the country. In my electorate, the ratio of patients to doctors in outer metropolitan areas is becoming a major problem. Indeed, in Melton, for example—the area which is unfortunately now going to be worse off for bulk-billing—we have a situation where the ratio of patients to doctors is 2,500 to one. That average is just not sustainable. I sought a meeting with the minister. I met with Senator Patterson and I explained to her the concerns we have. She seemed to take the issue seriously, yet there has been no formal response as to how the Commonwealth will look at improving the situation in that area.This government has a big task on its hands. It has to start considering bulk-billing as an important issue. We know it is important out there for people in need of proper health care. The government has to start addressing the ratio of patients to doctors—not just in the rural regions but in the outer metropolitan rings of the cities in this country—so that in future there is proper, affordable, accessible health care not only for people in my electorate but for people in the country at large. 930617:38:009306Wakelin, Barry, MPMr WAKELINHV5GreyLP10—I am pleased to make a few comments about contemporary politics in my part of the world. In some ways, the more things change the more they stay the same. But some issues are a continuing theme and are important to my constituents. This is an opportunity to remind the House and anybody who cares to listen that equity, fairness, national unity and giving people an opportunity, wherever they live in Australia, are still an important ethos. Today my remarks address those subjects.I will start with transport. I commend the government for the Roads to Recovery program and the new developments in AusLink that the minister is bringing before the nation. That will look at the very significant increase in transport tasks that this nation will have to address over the next decade or so. In talking about transport, it would be remiss of me not to talk about rail and the very significant improvements that rail has seen, particularly since 1996, when the Howard government was elected. There have been changes to the old Australian National, which is now a private company. Dynamism has come to the rail industry.One of my great regrets is to see the east coast not maximise the opportunities from the Melbourne-Sydney-Brisbane run. There are great challenges there for the nation. It is always interesting to listen to my eastern state colleagues being very critical of the Alice Springs-Darwin railway line. The Commonwealth contributed something like $190 million to that $1.3 billion project. That was really castigated very seriously. It did not matter what side of politics you were on; very few in the nation really believed in the Adelaide-Darwin railway line—and the new Alice-Darwin railway line in particular. It is very important to remember that the Commonwealth, with the support of the Territory government and the South Australian government, leveraged that up to make it the reality that it is very quickly becoming. Anyone who has been along that Alice Springs-Darwin road would have seen the 1,400 kilometres of activity. It is a unique opportunity. If you are heading that way, I recommend it to you.As I said, with the Roads to Recovery program the government really hit the mark at a local level. It is an extremely popular program. I acknowledge the Commonwealth government for the fairness that it showed to South Australia in that policy development a couple of years ago.Let me turn to fuel excise. It is still the reality in this country that, if you live in certain parts of regional Australia, you will pay a tax rate two or three times greater than your urban counterparts. The urban areas of Australia have a $6 billion or $7 billion subsidy—at least that—through the way transport is subsidised. People do not address those costs. They are not sheeted home to the consumer. Yet the fuel excise that most regional people are expected to pay is significantly greater per head of population. There is still a continuing matter of equity. This government has done more than any other government. It stopped the CPI indexation on excise, and that was very welcome. It cut excise on road freight for vehicles over 4.5 tonnes. There has been very significant progress, but it still does not get away from the fact that we in regional Australia carry more than our fair share at the same time as urban Australia has huge subsidisation of its transport.Trade is the lifeblood of most of regional Australia. In corrupt world markets we are still responsible for 60 or 65 per cent—that would be my estimate—of exports out of regional Australia. They are very important to this nation, whether they are in aquaculture, a fast-developing industry; agriculture, a traditional industry; or the mining industry. There are dynamic industries in regional Australia. In my opinion, there is significant subsidisation of urban Australia, particularly when you realise that regional Australia carries an additional load through the subsidisation of many commodities in the USA and Europe. To bring out this regional-urban difference, I remind the House of one program that has been very popular with urban Australia: SBS television. I took great delight in recent weeks and months in launching many black spot programs throughout my electorate. Finally a government has recognised the inequity. Let us look at the basic facts of life. SBS has been going for about 25 years. It has current costs of $80 million or $90 million. Subsidies went straight into metropolitan Australia and the larger Australian centres; smaller communities did not get the benefit of taxpayer support. So when this black spot program came along it was very welcome. I am delighted to see people in the smaller communities of Australia getting a much fairer go. There are still some communities to go, but we are getting there at a far quicker rate than I may have anticipated.The issue of health was mentioned earlier. It is worth noting that many health professionals simply have great difficulty in coming to terms with working in regional Australia. That is at the core of our problem. Many initiatives have been undertaken and are still being undertaken by this government: the rural clinical schools; the rural and remote health clinics we are developing on a state-by-state basis; and the outer metropolitan program, which has been under way for some time. We still struggle to attract people of capacity and ability to much of regional Australia, particularly in the specialist areas. In many areas we struggle simply to attract GPs, although that is improving significantly. The huge challenge here is bulk-billing. I know that in my part of the world it is much more convenient for doctors to bulk-bill than to go through the book work of the alternative. It is very important to recognise that the cost to the taxpayer for regional Australia per head of population per annum is significantly less.Education is a key issue for regional Australia. Something like $5 billion per annum is spent on education, mainly in our cities. Access is one thing if you live in the city; it involves greater difficulty if you live outside our cities and larger regional centres. This is a very significant issue for smaller communities throughout Australia. It is little wonder that we have a significantly lower participation rate for many regional Australians at a time when we need professional skills and degree type skills all over Australia, not just in our cities. There is still this matter of equity and fairness for many regional Australians.Many Aboriginal people in regional Australia face significant disadvantage and significant difficulties. I ask urban Australia to be much fairer in their assessment; to base their advice and views on practical experience, not on what they see in the newspaper or on the latest story, and not on ignorance. I ask them to come and look, and to apply practical solutions to these issues.Finally, I turn to nuclear waste. They want to put low-level nuclear waste into my electorate. It was deposited there by the Labor federal government many years ago—at the time, it was to get most of it out of Sydney. The Land and Environment Court of New South Wales said that that was what they wanted to do. It certainly has to be worth something to my electorate to do that, even if the waste is as safe as we are told. This is a prejudice against regional Australia, in my opinion, because the urban community did not want to accept it. (Time expired)10000Adams, Dick (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Hon. D.G.H. Adams)—Order! The time for the grievance debate has expired. The debate is interrupted and I put the question:That grievances be noted.Question agreed to.Committees93079307930717:49:009307Charles, Bob, MPMr CHARLESOT4La TrobeLP10—On behalf of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit, I present the report entitled Report 392—Annual report for 2001-2002.Ordered that the report be printed.OT4Charles, Bob, MPMr CHARLES—by leave—I thank the House. I take pleasure in tabling the JCPAA's annual report 392 for 2001-02. The committee had a very productive year last year, despite the break between parliaments. Toward the end of the 39th Parliament the committee experienced an unprecedented period of disharmony, leading to the tabling of three dissenting reports. There had been a total of only three such dissents in its 89-year history. Happily, the 40th Parliament in the 90th year of the committee has seen a return to a spirit of constructive cooperation with attempts to achieve shared outcomes. Major inquires completed during the financial year include report 384, Review of Coastwatch, an extensive examination of the Coastwatch organisation in the context of the challenges currently facing it. The report contained 14 recommendations, including some with resource intensive implications for the government. All of those recommendations were accepted in the government's response, which was tabled on 19 September 2002.Report 386, Inquiry into the Auditor-General Act 1997, was a timely examination of the operation of the legislation after three years. It was the final review of the suite of financial framework legislation, including the Financial Management and Accountability Act and the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act, undertaken by the committee in the previous parliament. In report 386 the committee's overall finding was that the Auditor-General Act provides an effective framework for the ANAO to carry out its functions. However, recommendations in the former proposed amendments to the act, which will enhance the power of the Auditor-General to carry out his responsibilities effectively, were accepted by the government in its response tabled on 19 September 2002. In addition to the major inquires tabled during the last financial year, the committee reviewed all Auditor-General's reports tabled during 2000-01. The reports reviewed dealt with a wide range of subject matter, including aspects of the Department of Defence administration and contract management in areas such as fraud control, Defence Force Reserves, Defence estate management and the amphibious transport ship project. The handling of outsourced service delivery by Centrelink was the subject of two reviews and there was also a review of the implementation of the outsourcing of IT services across the whole of government.With respect to this range of matters generally, the committee found that contract management and the oversight of large and complex outsourcing programs continued to provide serious challenges to the Commonwealth public sector. I am nevertheless pleased to be able to report to parliament that most of the committee's recommendations on both the major inquiry reports and the administrative recommendations contained in reviews of the Auditor-General's reports continue to be accepted. This is in itself the most telling indicator of the committee's continued effectiveness in scrutinising executive government.I ask leave of the House to present an erratum to report 390 and executive minutes on reports of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit.Leave granted.OT4Charles, Bob, MPMr CHARLES—I present an erratum on report 390, Review of Auditor-General Reports 2001-02, first, second and third quarters and the executive minutes on reports 373, 382, 383 and 385 of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit.9308930817:53:009308Price, Roger, MPMr PRICEQI4ChifleyALP00—I ask leave of the House to make a statement entitled Review of Australia's preparedness to manage the consequences of a terrorist attack: a progress report on the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade's watching brief on terrorism—and to present a copy of my statement.Leave granted.QI4Price, Roger, MPMr PRICE—I am pleased to announce that the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade will be conducting a series of public hearings on Australia's preparedness to manage the consequences of a terrorist attack in Australia. The hearings will allow the committee to report to the parliament on the state of Australia's preparedness to manage the consequences of a terrorist attack. The hearings are part of the committee's ongoing watching brief on Australia's involvement in the war on terrorism and related actions in response to terrorism. The watching brief, which commenced in May 2002, has involved regular private briefings from diplomatic representatives, government officials, Defence Force personnel and other experts in the field of counter-terrorism. We have, for example, met with the US ambassador, His Excellency Mr Thomas Schieffer; Mr Dennis Richardson, the Director-General of ASIO; Hugh White from Australia's Strategic Policy Institute; Clive Williams, the Director of Terrorism Studies at the Australian National University; senior officials from the Australian Defence Force; aviation security experts; and officials from the Protective Security Coordination Centre, the Commonwealth agency responsible for coordinating national counter-terrorism arrangements and programs. We have also travelled to Kuwait, the Persian Gulf, Kyrgyzstan and Afghanistan to visit the defence forces deployed to the international coalition against terrorism. The report of this visit was tabled in the parliament on 21 October.To date, the focus of our watching brief has been to develop an understanding of the nature and extent of Australia's current commitment to the international coalition against terrorism, the nature of the terrorist threat at home and abroad, and the measures in place domestically and internationally to counter the threat of terrorism. When we began these briefings we viewed them from a perspective of a world changed by terrorist attacks in America on 11 September 2001. The bombings in Bali on 12 October 2002 have tragically demonstrated that the threat of terrorism is always present.Most of our briefings have focused on identifying terrorist threats and discussing some of the preventative measures that have been put in place. Of necessity, these briefings have been conducted in private session. While we have learnt much about the work of our intelligence and law enforcement agencies and our Defence Force, we have taken the view that public disclosure of some of this information would affect the government's capacity to protect Australian citizens and their interests.The briefings have nevertheless been valuable, allowing senators and members on the committee to develop a better understanding of these issues, to make informed contributions to parliamentary and community debate and to oversee more effectively the government's counter-terrorism policy responses. Our briefings have highlighted the importance of maintaining a multifaceted counter-terrorism strategy involving close domestic and international cooperation to detect, apprehend and prosecute terrorists, and to degrade and destroy terrorist organisations and structures.Identification and prevention of the threat is clearly important and is likely to remain a focus of government attention. But it is equally important to acknowledge that no matter how sophisticated and well connected our intelligence and law enforcement operations, prudent planning must assume that further terrorist attacks will occur. While we must continue to do all we can to prevent an attack, we must also do all we can to prepare for the consequences of an attack. It is this end of the spectrum, the capacity of our governments to successfully respond to a terrorist incident, which will be the focus of our new program of public hearings.The hearings are scheduled to begin in Canberra on Monday, 9 December with a focus on the role of the Commonwealth government and its agencies in coordinating the immediate response to, and managing the consequences of, a terrorist attack. We will seek evidence from the Protective Security Coordination Centre, Emergency Management Australia, the Australian Federal Police, the Australian Defence Force and a number of non-government experts. We will then travel to a number of states and territories to hear from local coordinators of the national counter-terrorism strategy, police and emergency service organisations, health service providers and state based representatives of key Commonwealth agencies. Key issues for us will be the response and management of capabilities in each jurisdiction, the capabilities that can be provided at short notice to supplement local resources and the nature and likely effectiveness of the mechanisms in place to ensure a swift and well coordinated response. Our aim is to critically examine the state of our preparedness to respond to terrorist attack, hopefully providing a measure of confidence to the community that appropriate arrangements are in place or, if they are not, to make recommendations aimed at correcting any identified shortcomings. It is likely that we will report to the parliament in the 2003 budget sittings. We will consider at this time whether to conduct further public hearings on other aspects of Australia's involvement in the war on terrorism. This is an important series of events, and I look forward to active support and cooperation from all relevant authorities.Bills9310The following bills were returned from the Senate without amendment or request:Excise Tariff Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2002Customs Tariff Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2002Egg Industry Service Provision Bill 2002Egg Industry Service Provision (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) Bill 2002Higher Education Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 3) 2002New Business Tax System (Consolidation and Other Measures) Bill (No. 1) 2002New Business Tax System (Franking Deficit Tax) Amendment Bill 2002Medical Indemnity Agreement (Financial Assistance—Binding Commonwealth Obligations) Bill 2002 Bills9310R15799310Message received from the Senate returning the bill and acquainting the House that the Senate does not further press its request for an amendment which the House has not made and has agreed to the Bill.Bills9310R14829310Message received from the Senate returning the bill and acquainting the House that the Senate does not insist on its amendments Nos 4 and 5 disagreed to by the House.Committees93109310931018:01:009310Adams, Dick (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Hon. D.G.H. Adams)10000PON/A10—I have received a message from the Senate acquainting the House that Senator Bartlett has been discharged from the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade and Senator Stott Despoja has been appointed a member of the committee; Senator Greig has been discharged from the Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories and Senator Stott Despoja has been appointed a member of the committee; Senators Barnett and Bartlett have been discharged from the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties and Senators Santoro and Stott Despoja have been appointed members of the committee; and Senator Moore has been discharged from the Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit and Senator Lundy has been appointed a member of the committee.Bills9310R15259310Bill returned from the Senate with amendments.Ordered that the amendments be considered forthwith.Senate's amendments—(1) Schedule 1, item 127, page 29 (lines 19 and 20), omit the item, substitute:127 Subsection 149S(1)Omit “6 months”, substitute “2 years”.(2) Schedule 1, page 37 (after line 19), after item 172, insert:172A Subsection 215A(1)Repeal the subsection, substitute: (1) A resolution that is passed at a meeting of creditors and purports to: (a) nominate one or more persons under subsection 204(4) to be a trustee or trustees; or (b) appoint a person under subsection 220(1) to a vacant office of trustee of a deed of assignment, deed of arrangement or composition;is void unless the person or each of the persons: (c) gave written consent before the meeting to act as a trustee of the deed or composition; and (d) made a declaration in writing of the person's professional, business and personal relationships and connections (if any) with the debtor and with the creditor or creditors who proposed the resolution, and gave all persons entitled to vote on the resolution a reasonable opportunity to inspect the declaration.(3) 1, page 37 (after line 19), after item 172, insert:172B Subsection 215A(1A)Repeal the subsection, substitute: (1A) As soon as possible after the resolution is passed, each person (except the Official Trustee) nominated or appointed by the resolution must give to the Official Receiver a copy of the consent and the declaration that relates to that person.(4) Schedule 1, page 37 (after line 21), after item 173, insert:173A After subsection 222(5)Insert: (5A) Where the Court, on the application of the Inspector-General, the trustee or a creditor, is satisfied that: (a) if the vote or votes of a related creditor or related creditors on a proposed resolution at a meeting of creditors under this Part were disregarded, the proposed resolution: (i) if in fact it was passed—would not have been passed; or (ii) if in fact it was not passed—would have been passed; or (iii) would have had to be decided on a casting vote; and (b) the passing of the proposed resolution, or the failure to pass it: (i) is contrary to the interests of the creditors as a whole or a class of the creditors as a whole; or (ii) has prejudiced, or is reasonably likely to prejudice, the interests of the creditors who voted against the proposed resolution, or for it (as the case may be), to an extent that is unreasonable having regard to: (A) the benefits resulting to the related creditor, or to some or all of the related creditors, from the resolution, or from the failure to pass the proposed resolution; and (B) the nature of the relationship between the related creditor or related creditors and the debtor; and (C) any other relevant matter; the Court may make an order declaring the deed or composition to be void or declaring any provision of the deed or composition to be void. (5B) In subsection (5A), related creditor means a creditor who is any of the following: (a) a relative, or de facto spouse, of the debtor; (b) a relative of a spouse, or of a de facto spouse, of the debtor; (c) a beneficiary under a trust of which the debtor is or has at any time been a trustee; (d) a relative, or de facto spouse, of such a beneficiary; (e) a relative of a spouse, or of a de facto spouse, of such a beneficiary; (f) a trustee of a trust under which the debtor is or has at any time been a beneficiary; (g) a relative, or de facto spouse, of such a trustee; (h) a relative of a spouse, or of a de facto spouse, of such a trustee. (5C) In subsection (5B), relative, in relation to a person, means the spouse, parent or remoter lineal ancestor, son, daughter or remoter issue, or brother or sister of the person.(5) Schedule 1, page 37 (after line 21), after item 173, insert:173B Subsection 222(6)Omit “(2) or (4)”, substitute “(2), (4) or (5A)”.(6) Schedule 1, page 37 (after line 21), after item 173, insert:173C Subsection 222(7)Omit “(2) or (4)”, substitute “(2), (4) or (5A)”.(7) Schedule 1, page 39 (after line 29), after item 177, insert:177A At the end of section 237AAdd: (3) Unless the creditors, by special resolution, agree that such of the provisions of sections 120 to 124 (inclusive) as the creditors determine do not apply to a deed of arrangement, those provisions apply, subject to such modifications and adaptations (if any) as are prescribed, to and in relation to the deed of arrangement as if: (a) a sequestration order had been made against the debtor on the day on which he or she executed the deed; and (b) the trustee of the deed were the Official Trustee.(8) Schedule 1, page 41 (after line 27), after item 178, insert:178A Subsection 265(8)After “has contracted a debt”, insert “other than to meet necessary household or personal expenses”.(9) Schedule 1, page 42 (after line 3), after item 182, insert:182A Section 271Repeal the section.(10) Schedule 1, page 49 (after line 13), at the end of the Schedule, add:Part 3—Amendments relating to bankrupt corporationsCorporations Act 2001238 At the end of Division 6 of Part 5.7BInsert:588YA Liability of a company for the debts or liabilities of a related company (1) When a company is being wound up in insolvency, the liquidator, a creditor of the company, a nominee of a creditor of the company or the ASIC may apply to the Court for an order that a company that is or has been a related body corporate pay to the liquidator the whole or part of the amount of a debt of the insolvent company. The Court may make such an order if it is satisfied that it is just to do so. (2) In deciding whether it is just to make an order under subsection (1), the matters to which the Court shall have regard include: (a) whether the company provided services for or on behalf of the related body corporate; and (b) whether the company occupied premises which are owned by the related body corporate; and (c) the extent to which the related body corporate took part in the management of the company; and (d) the conduct of the related body corporate towards the creditors of the company generally and to the creditor to which the debt or liability relates; and (e) the extent to which the circumstances that gave rise to the winding up of the company are attributable to the actions of the related body corporate or an officer or officers of the related body corporate; and (f) any other relevant matters as the Court considers just and appropriate. (3) An order under this section may be subject to conditions. (4) An order shall not be made under this section if the only ground for making the order is that creditors of the company have relied on the fact that another company is or has been a related body corporate of the company.18:01:009312Williams, Daryl, MPMr WILLIAMS7V5TangneyLPAttorney-General10—I move:That the amendments be disagreed to. I would like to make some short comments on the amendments that have been moved in the Senate to the Bankruptcy Legislation Amendment Bill 2002. Labor's proposal to retain early discharge but make it available after two years makes no sense. It could hardly be described as `early' discharge. Labor has provided no arguments explaining why early discharge should be available after two years. The amendment does not address the problems the bill is seeking to address. As the government has said on previous occasions when this bill has been considered, the current qualifying criteria are not working. They are not an adequate test of whether the bankruptcy arose from misfortune rather than misdeed and the current regime has produced discriminatory results. For this reason, the government does not accept this amendment. The government does not support an amendment to repeal section 271 of the Bankruptcy Act, which provides an offence for rash and hazardous gambling prior to bankruptcy. Problem gambling is a serious issue and affects many people. These are not the people at whom this offence is directed. The government has decided to retain this offence for the small number of cases in which a person has, prior to becoming bankrupt, lost money in a calculated way which ignores the interests of his or her creditors. In practice, very few people are prosecuted for this offence. The bankrupt will only be guilty of an offence under that section if the gambling was rash and hazardous and materially contributed to his or her insolvency. It is necessary to establish in relation to each instance of gambling that it was both rash and hazardous. The courts have approached this offence on the basis that, although all gambling is of its nature hazardous, not all gambling is rash. This refers to conduct which a person can be expected to anticipate seriously risks insolvency. This is unlikely to be the case in relation to problem gambling which constitutes an illness. Therefore, Insolvency and Trustee Service Australia would attempt to prosecute someone only where the gambling is criminal in nature.It is inappropriate to include amendments to part 10 of the act in this bill. I have recently announced a comprehensive review of part 10. ITSA and the Attorney-General's Department released an issues paper on 9 October and during November they have been conducting focus groups in each state. Labor's amendments have been developed with no consultation and are not based on any real evidence that there is a problem. They also make the system more complex for people who use part 10 arrangements. The government's review will determine whether any problems exist, the extent of these problems and, in consultation with a wide range of stakeholders, the best solutions to these problems. ITSA and the Attorney-General's Department will report to the government on the findings of the review early next year. If the review finds that legislative changes are necessary, the government will introduce those changes as soon as possible.Labor's amendment to subsection 265(8) is misconceived. That subsection makes it an offence for a debtor to contract a debt greater than $500 in the two years prior to bankruptcy where the debtor has no reasonable prospect of being able to repay it. The bill proposes to remove the $500 threshold. This is to correct an anomaly in the current law which allows an insolvent debtor to contract a large number of debts, each of which is less than $500, and not be liable to prosecution. It is not aimed at debtors who fail to pay one or two small bills such as utilities or groceries, which the prosecutor is unlikely to decide to prosecute. The amendment would exclude `necessary personal or household expenses' from the scope of the offence and the amendment is unnecessary.It is inappropriate in the context of a bill to amend the Bankruptcy Act to consider amendments to the Corporations Act. The corporations agreement with the states requires the approval of the Ministerial Council on Corporations before the Corporations Act is amended. The ministerial council has not considered these amendments. The Corporations Act already provides substantial protection against asset stripping to defeat creditors. It provides that holding companies can be liable to debts incurred by their subsidiaries while insolvent. This places sensible and workable restrictions on the liability of companies for the debts of their subsidiaries. Consequently, this amendment is not appropriate and the government does not accept it. (Extension of time granted)The Bankruptcy Legislation Amendment Bill 2002 contains important measures to address the perception that bankruptcy has become too easy and to encourage more debtors to consider seriously the alternatives to bankruptcy. The measures contained in the bill have broad support amongst stakeholders in the bankruptcy industry. The bill was first introduced in 2001, and industry has been waiting for these changes since then. I call on the opposition to support the bill as originally introduced to the parliament so that these important measures can be implemented without further delay.18:07:009314McClelland, Robert, MPMr McCLELLANDJK6BartonALP00—The opposition will support the government's motion to facilitate the passage of the Bankruptcy Legislation Amendment Bill 2002. We recognised at the outset that the bulk of the legislation is appropriate and necessary, and for that reason we facilitated debate in the Main Committee. It is disappointing, however, that the government has not heeded criticisms that the opposition has made of the bill. Essentially those criticisms are in two categories. We thought it was necessary to introduce provisions to alleviate the harsher consequences of the bill for low income bankrupts and, at the other end of the spectrum, we thought it was necessary to address the abuse of the Bankruptcy Act by high income individuals intent on avoiding tax. In the media in recent months we have seen a number of examples of that occurring.The Attorney addressed some of the issues, but I would like to place on the record the essential points of the amendments moved by the opposition. Firstly, we proposed retaining the early discharge mechanism in the Bankruptcy Act and, to establish a midway point between the government's abolition of the mechanism and the currently specified six months, we proposed a period of two years. We understood that that had been considered within the Attorney-General's Department as an option. We believe that would have facilitated those on low incomes to achieve a clean slate in circumstances where their indebtedness had resulted from misfortune as opposed to deliberate or reckless expenditure.We also proposed that a person could not be prosecuted under section 265(8) of the Bankruptcy Act for incurring reasonable or necessary personal or household expenses. The government, as the Attorney indicated, proposes to abolish the $500 cap. We believe that the abolition of that cap should certainly not be implemented. We note the Attorney referred to the discretion of the prosecutors; however, we believe these things are too important when they affect the basic—literally, when it is down to this level—ability of the very poor to survive in terms of, for example, paying a rental bond or paying for orthodontic treatment on their kid's teeth. We believe they should not be the subject of penal sanction if the expenses are of the nature of a necessary personal or household expense.We also proposed repealing section 271 of the Bankruptcy Act, which we believe—on advice from organisations involved in the treatment of chronic gambling—has the potential to retrospectively criminalise problem gambling; indeed, on our advice, actually may result in an impediment to people coming forward to admit that they have a gambling habit in circumstances where, as a result of them incurring gambling debts, they could be faced with imprisonment. We also proposed strengthening the protections contained in part 10 of the Bankruptcy Act. Our proposal would have strengthened the protections against abuse by high income individuals intent on defrauding the Australian Taxation Office. We welcome the fact that, in response to the opposition's concerns about the abuse of part 10, the Attorney-General has asked the Insolvency and Trustee Service Australia to review that part of the Bankruptcy Act, and we welcome the opportunity to make a contribution to that review.In the main, however, it is regrettable that the government has failed to acknowledge the inequities in its approach to reforming bankruptcy laws at the lower end of the scale, particularly with respect to the incurring of a debt of $500 for necessary household and personal expenditure and with respect to problem gambling and, at the other end of the scale, with respect to failing to address abuses by high income earners. We feel that was a misjudgment. (Extension of time granted) As I indicated previously, there are however measures in the bill that the opposition supports—and indeed has supported from the outset—and for that reason we will not oppose the passage of the bill. I should indicate, however, that we will monitor—to the best of our abilities and with the assistance of organisations involved in assisting, in particular, the very poor—the impact of these changes on low to middle income earners who struggle under this government's policies, including the impact of the indirect taxation system with the goods and services tax. We will revisit these issues when the information becomes available and, if necessary, move appropriate amendments. Question agreed to.18:14:009315Williams, Daryl, MPMr WILLIAMS7V5TangneyLPAttorney-General10—I present the reasons for the House disagreeing to the Senate amendments and I move:That the reasons be adopted.Question agreed to.Bills9315R16409315Bill returned from the Senate with amendments.Ordered that the amendments be considered forthwith.Senate's amendments—(1) Schedule 1, item 35, page 13 (after line 25), at the end of section 7C, add:Informing the Inter-Governmental Committee (5) The Chair of the Board must, within the period of 3 days beginning on the day a determination under subsection (2) or (3) is made, give a copy of the determination to the Inter-Governmental Committee.When determination takes effect (6) A determination under subsection (2) or (3) has effect immediately after it is made.(2) Schedule 1, page 16 (after line 25), after item 36, insert:36A At the end of subsection 8(5)Add “There must be a minimum of 2 meetings each calendar year.”.(3) Schedule 1, page 16 (after line 25), after item 36, insert:36B Subsection 8(7)Repeal the subsection, substitute: (7) A resolution: (a) which, without being considered at a meeting of the Committee, is referred to all members of the Committee; and (b) of which: (i) if subparagraph (ii) does not apply—a majority of those members, or if a majority including a particular member or particular members is required for the resolution to have effect, a majority including that member or those members, indicate by telephone or other mode of communication to the member of the Committee representing the Commonwealth that they are in favour; or (ii) if the resolution is that the Committee make a request under subsection 9(2) or that the Committee revoke a determination made under subsection 7C(2) or (3)—the member of the Committee representing the Commonwealth is in favour and at least 5 other members indicate by telephone or other mode of communication to the member of the Committee representing the Commonwealth that they are in favour;is as valid and effectual as if it had been passed at a meeting of the Committee duly convened and held.(4) Schedule 1, item 38, page 17 (after line 11), at the end of section 9, add:Request for more information about special determination (2) Within the period of 30 days beginning on the day the Committee is given a copy of a determination (a special determination) under subsection 7C(2) or (3), the Committee may by resolution, with the agreement of the member of the Committee representing the Commonwealth and at least 5 other members of the Committee, request the Chair of the Board to give further information to the Committee in relation to the determination. (3) Subject to subsection (4), the Chair of the Board must comply with the request. (4) If the Chair of the Board considers that disclosure of information to the public could prejudice the safety or reputation of persons or the operations of law enforcement agencies, the Chair must not give the Committee the information. (5) If the Chair of the Board does not give the Committee information on the ground that the Chair considers that disclosure of the informationto the public could prejudice the safety or reputation of persons or the operations of law enforcement agencies, the Committee may refer the request to the Minister. (6) If the Committee refers the request to the Minister, the Minister: (a) must determine in writing whether disclosure of the information could prejudice the safety or reputation of persons or the operations of law enforcement agencies; and (b) must provide copies of that determination to the Chair of the Board and the Committee; and (c) must not disclose his or her reasons for determining the question of whether the information could prejudice the safety or reputation of persons or the operations of law enforcement agencies in the way stated in the determination.Revoking the special determination (7) Within the period of 30 days beginning on the day the Committee makes a request under subsection (2) in relation to a special determination, the Committee may by resolution, with the agreement of the member of the Committee representing the Commonwealth and at least 5 other members of the Committee, revoke the determination. (8) The Committee must notify the Chair of the Board and the CEO of the revocation. The revocation takes effect when the CEO is so notified.Note: One of the effects of the revocation is that the coercive powers in Division 2 of Part II are no longer able to be exercised in relation to the ACC operation/investigation concerned. (9) To avoid doubt, the revoking of the determination does not affect the validity of any act done in connection with the ACC operation/investigation concerned before the CEO is so notified.Committee under no duty to consider whether to exercise powers (10) The Committee does not have a duty to consider whether to exercise the power under subsection (2) or (7) in respect of any special determination, whether the Committee is requested to do so by any person, or in any other circumstances.(5) Schedule 1, item 253, page 55 (line 23), omit “Subject to subsection (2), if”, substitute “If”.(6) Schedule 1, item 253, page 56 (line 4), omit “(1) or”.18:15:009316Williams, Daryl, MPMr WILLIAMS7V5TangneyLPAttorney-General10—I move:That the amendments be agreed to.There has been considerable activity on the Australian Crime Commission Establishment Bill 2002 over the last few weeks. In the course of debate in the House, reference was made to negotiations with the opposition about further possible amendments to the bill. Those negotiations dealt with the issue of providing for some involvement by the intergovernmental committee of ministers in the decision to authorise the use of the Australian Crime Commission's coercive powers. I want to place on record the government's appreciation for the cooperation of the opposition in engaging in constructive negotiations and, in particular, the positive role played by the member for Banks in his capacity as the shadow justice minister. I am pleased to advise that the negotiations were successful.The compromise reached with the opposition is that the board will be able to authorise the use of coercive powers, but the intergovernmental committee will have the power to revoke that decision. Put another way, the IGC will have the power to veto authorisation decisions of the board. The solution provides for an enhanced role for the IGC but permits the board to authorise the use of coercive powers, with those decisions taking effect immediately. The government introduced amendments in the Senate to give effect to this compromise, and those amendments were supported by Labor. The government also agreed to two further amendments proposed by the Democrats. These amendments will remove limitations on the information that may be requested by the Commonwealth minister to the chair of the ACC board. This will ensure that the minister has access to sufficient information to determine whether sensitive information should be disclosed to the IGC of the ACC and the parliamentary joint committee of the ACC. These amendments in no way detract from the primary purposes of the bill. Passage through this House will ensure that the Australian Crime Commission will be able to commence on 1 January 2003. The ACC will build effective national law enforcement operations in partnerships with state and territory police forces. It will provide a better basis for the coordination of national criminal intelligence and the targeting of organised crime. It will establish national criminal intelligence priorities, undertake criminal intelligence collection and analysis and investigate criminal activity of national significance. It will retain the coercive powers currently available to the National Crime Authority and be able to proactively collect and analyse information about organised crime networks and their key figures. It will have a streamlined reference process to determine priorities and the circumstances in which coercive powers can be used. It will have better linkages with national security intelligence and complement other law enforcement agencies in cooperative national law enforcement arrangements. In short, it will be Australia's premier organised crime fighting body, well equipped to deal with the law enforcement challenges facing Australia in the 21st century. I commend the amendments to the House.18:18:009317Melham, Daryl, MPMr MELHAM4T4BanksALP00—From the very outset of this debate, I highlighted that the model proposed by the government in its Australian CrimeCommission Establishment Bill 2002 raised fundamental points of principle for the Labor Party. Labor is serious about fighting crime, but Labor is also serious about upholding important principles of responsibility and accountability within our parliamentary system of government. That is why we sought amendments to this bill designed to support the principles that informed the establishment and operation of the National Crime Authority in the first place.A defining feature of the NCA is that it holds coercive powers similar to those of a royal commission. These are the powers to obtain documents and other evidence and to summons a person to appear at a hearing to give evidence under oath. As it now stands, these coercive powers can be exercised only in very defined circumstances and with ultimate accountability resting with the intergovernmental committee made up of the various ministers. At the time the NCA was set up, there was extensive debate about the nature of these coercive powers and recognition of the fact that no government would allow them to be solely in the hands of a police force or bureaucrats. That is why the architects of the NCA devised the references system whereby the ministerial-level IGC refers matters to the NCA for investigation. Under the new model proposed for the ACC, the board—and remember it is made up of police commissioners and bureaucrats—will not only determine priorities for the organisation but also have the power to `press the green button' on the use of the coercive powers. The board can also approve the use of the powers for the purpose of intelligence gathering, a move away from the investigative focus of the NCA.Overall, the new model is a major departure from the current regime, where special powers may only be exercised after a matter has been referred to the NCA by the intergovernmental committee. Labor's objective in seeking amendments to this bill was to ensure ministerial accountability under our system of responsible government. The amendments moved by the government during the last sitting week of the Senate go some distance towards achieving that objective. The government's amendments effectively give the ministerial-level intergovernmental committee a power of veto over a decision of the board to authorise the use of the special or coercive powers of the new Australian Crime Commission. It approaches the issue of ministerial accountability via the route of a power of veto rather than via a power of approval. This is certainly a significant improvement on the original model, which would have given the board an unfettered power to approve the use of coercive powers. Indeed, the original model even allowed a subcommittee of the board to authorise the use of the coercive powers—a situation that was reversed by an earlier package of government amendments in this House. The improved model for the new ACC means that the ministerial-level IGC must be given a copy of the board's determination to authorise the use of the coercive powers. The intergovernmental committee may then request further information about the board's determination. Armed with that information, the ministers have 30 days in which to make a decision about whether to overturn the board's determination. Five members of the IGC, plus the Commonwealth Minister for Justice and Customs, are needed to overturn the board's decision. The overall effect of the amendments is to reinstate the principle of ministerial accountability into the process for the authorisation of the special powers that will be held by the new Australian Crime Commission. On the basis that these amendments achieve Labor's stated objective of ensuring an appropriate level of ministerial accountability and responsibility, Labor supports the amended bill. That is the way it should be. With important legislation like this, it is important to have a proper parliamentary process—proper scrutiny by parliamentary committees and dialogue between the government, the opposition and the minor parties in the Senate—and, where possible, to reach consensus. That is what has happened here. We have an amended bill that now has, I think it is fair to say, the support of the whole of the parliament. I am pleased that the government also took on board non-contentious proposals that were put forward by the Democrats. (Extension of time granted) We do not want a situation where there is seen to be a government and opposition conspiracy, to the exclusion of other players in the Senate. It is important that other players, like the Democrats, are able to contribute, as they have here, and I am pleased that the government has picked up those amendments.In the middle of this week there is going to be some contentious legislation debated in the Senate. I urge the government to continue the dialogue with all parties in the Senate and to look closely at the Senate committee report on that matter, which I understand will come out tomorrow. Again, where there is amended legislation to go through this parliament in terms of ASIO's powers, it is in the national interest that the legislation has the broad support of both sides of parliament. It would be unwise for battlelines to be drawn, but the government needs to appreciate that there are certain fundamental principles that we on this side of the House will continue to fight for. That is why I am pleased that, in relation to the ministerial accountability question, we did come up with a model that, whilst it is not my preferred model and it is a departure from what is currently in existence, is acceptable. We as a parliament should take our role seriously in relation to these special powers. That is why it is important, in relation to the bill which is yet to be debated in the other place, that the dialogue continues with all the major players.I want to commend this Attorney-General. During the time that he has been in the parliament he has seen the value of parliamentary committees and, when he was in opposition, he saw the value of continuing dialogue. He knows that the kinds of processes that have been undertaken with this bill and with the ASIO bill can actually improve the outcome. The process is that you get experts from the community who contribute, through the parliamentary committees, their expertise; and we as a parliament would be very foolish not to take on board their suggestions. That is what has happened. I have had the opportunity of reading the transcripts of the Senate committee on the ASIO bill, and I was able to be present during the Sydney hearings last week. I was very impressed, and I was also impressed with ASIO's response and acceptance of some aspects that were put to them by the committee. I do commend this process to the House. It has worked, and I commend it to the whole of the parliament. I think it sends the right signal. What I would not have liked to have seen in terms of the new ACC is either side of the House digging in, so that the new body could not go forward confident that the government and the alternative government support its existence. With respect to the ASIO bill, whatever amendments might come through the Senate, I think it is very important in the current climate that both sides of the House are supportive of the end product that comes out of the Senate. If there are certain people who think it might be good politics to try to wedge the Labor Party on the issue and to hold a particular line, then I do not believe that is in the national interest. The Labor Party have shown with this bill, with all security bills and with all terrorism bills that have come before the House—indeed, we have shown with the intelligence services bill pre-September 11—that we are ready, willing and able to support legislation in the national interest, but there are certain fundamental principles that we are not prepared to go beyond. I am pleased to be able to stand in the House this evening to support this bill. I think the process has provided an amended bill that we can all support. Hopefully, when the review that has been factored into the bill comes up in a couple of years time, there is not much that will have to be rejigged.Question agreed to.Committees93199319931910000Adams, Dick (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Hon. D.G.H. Adams)—Mr Speaker has received advice from the Chief Opposition Whip that she has nominated Ms O'Byrne to be a member of the Standing Committee on Transport and Regional Services in place of Ms Livermore.Mrs GALLUS (Hindmarsh—Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Foreign Affairs) (6.28 p.m.)—by leave—I move:That Ms Livermore be discharged from the Standing Committee on Transport and Regional Services and that, in her place, Ms O'Byrne be appointed a member of the committee.Question agreed to.Sitting suspended from 6.29 p.m. to 8.00 p.m.Bills9319R16859319Debate resumed from 13 November, on motion by Mr Andrews:That this bill be now read a second time.20:00:009319Smith, Stephen, MPMr STEPHEN SMITH5V5PerthALP00—The opposition opposes the National Health Amendment (Pharmaceutical Benefits—Budget Measures) Bill 2002 [No. 2]. It is bad policy. It is bad health policy and it is bad economics. The second reading amendment that I am happy to have circulated in my name reflects the basis of the opposition's opposition to the measure. It states that the House should reject this bill for the following reasons. Firstly, it will increase the cost of essential medicines by nearly 30 per cent, hitting the sickest and poorest in our society. Secondly, Australian pensioners and concession cardholders will go without almost five million prescriptions, and Australian families will also go without almost half a million prescriptions, as a result of the proposed increase. Thirdly, by depriving sick and elderly Australians of the medicines they need, there will be an increased need for greater medical intervention in public hospitals and nursing homes, at even greater cost to taxpayers. Fourthly, there are other more effective means by which the long-term sustainability of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme could be assured—means which would put appropriate responsibility on the pharmaceutical industry and the medical profession rather than on those least able to bear the burden, and means on which the government has been silent since the Leader of the Opposition's budget reply. Fifthly, the true rationale for the bill is to restore the budget bottom line and it has nothing to do with the long-term sustainability of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme or with genuine health outcomes for Australians. At the conclusion of my remarks, I will formally move this amendment, and I look forward to my colleague the member for Rankin seconding it. The measure, as members would be aware, is a government budget measure which has previously been rejected by the parliament. To remind members and the community of the effect of the measure, the effect would be to increase the copayment, insofar as pensioners and concession cardholders are concerned, for the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme from $3.60 to $4.60. For families under financial pressure, it would increase from $22.40 to $28.60—an increase of almost 30 per cent. When the measure was introduced the day after budget day, the Treasurer said that people should not be concerned because it was just a dollar. What we have shown since that point in the cycle is that, while the Treasurer might think it is just a dollar, we know that over a million pensioners and concession cardholders will reach the safety net, and for them it will be an increase of $52 per year. We know that 300,000 Australian families will also meet the maximum and go to the safety net, and for them it will be an extra $190 per year. So the sickest and the poorest and the families under financial pressure are the ones who will be hit. We have also shown—during Senate estimates and through the course of question time—that, on the day the government reintroduced this measure and presented it to the House, I released and put to the Treasurer at question time the government's own calculations, which show that essentially after four years this measure would have no effect—so much for this being a long-term sustain-ability measure. But more importantly, on the government's own calculations, based on the advice of the Department of Health and Ageing, the effect of this measure would be that five million pensioner and concession cardholder scripts would not be taken up over a four-year period and half a million scripts from families, particularly families under financial pressure, would not be taken up over a four-year period. There is only one consequence of that. It might take five days, five weeks, five months or five years, but the pensioners and the families under financial pressure not taking up those scripts would find themselves at some point in the cycle in our public hospital systems, presumably in emergency departments, seeking medical attention and requiring a far greater medical intervention at a far greater cost.This measure has never been about health. It has never been about trying to secure a better health outcome for the nation or a better health outcome for Australians and their families; it has always simply been about the Treasurer's and the Prime Minister's budget bottom line. Everyone will remember how in the run-up to the last election the government splurged its budget surplus—anywhere up to $14 billion was splurged—in a desperate bid to get itself re-elected. When it came to this budget, facing a deficit, the government had to find some easy money, and there is no easier money to find than by whacking the sickest and poorest in our community. When you look at the government's justification in part for this measure, the government said that in the financial year 2000-01, in the run-up to the last election, there was a 20 per cent increase in the cost of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. The average annual increase for the cost of the scheme over the last decade and a half has been in the order of 11, 12 or 13 per cent. The most recent calculations and figures that we gleaned from the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook, from the final budget outlook and from industry figures show that the growth in the cost to the taxpayer of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme over the financial year 2001-02 has been in that traditional order—in the order of 10, 11 or 12 per cent. When you look at what caused the exponential increase in the run-up to last year's election—the 20 per cent increase in the cost of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme—the truth is that it was all the government's own work. The government listed Celebrex, the anti-arthritis drug. The government listed Zyban, the antitobacco drug. The government changed, as a consequence of the introduction of the GST, the wholesale sales tax collection arrangements and, as we have already shown in the course of Senate estimates, that has cost the government over a four-year period, on the government's own admission, anywhere in the order of $225 million. The government also increased the array of people for whom a Commonwealth health concession card would become available. So in the run-up— 2K6Brough, Mal, MPMr Brough—Are you suggesting that shouldn't happen?5V5Smith, Stephen, MPMr STEPHEN SMITH—I am suggesting that, in the run-up to the last election, the increase in the cost to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme was all the government's own work. The opposition in the run-up to the last election asked the government, `Are you concerned about the cost, for example, of Celebrex?' The government said, through former Minister Wooldridge—well known for house and email fame—`You don't need to worry about the cost of Celebrex, because the fact that it is costing money means consumers are benefiting.' That was the government's argument in the run-up to the last election: `Don't worry about the cost of the PBS because the consumer is benefiting.' That is a classic case of one story before the election and another story after.What did we see after the election? We saw the Treasurer and the Prime Minister fronting up in the budget and saying, `There is a terrible problem with the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. There was a 20 per cent increase last year.' What they will not tell the parliament and what they will not tell the community is that it was all their own work—including Celebrex and Zyban, changing the wholesale sales tax arrangement and increasing the number of concession cardholders. That was all their own work, and they said, `The fact that it is costing money means the consumer is benefiting.' After the election, all the government want to do is thug pensioners and families under financial pressure with a 30 per cent increase in the cost of their essential medicines. We all remember how the government said, `We can't apply the GST to essential medicines, as that would be a 10 per cent increase.' After the election, they have come up with a 30 per cent increase—that is, three times the GST amount—and want to thug pensioners, concession cardholders and families under financial pressure with that increase.On the government's own admission, through the detailed calculations of the Department of Health and Ageing and the basis upon which the government proceeded, it will cost a million concession cardholders and pensioners an extra $52 a year and it will cost 300,000 Australian families an extra $190 a year. Also, five million pensioner and concession cardholder scripts will not be taken out over a four-year period and half a million scripts for Australian families under financial pressure will not be taken out either. The only consequence of that is greater, more expensive medical interventions at greater individual cost, at greater individual loss and at greater expense to the state and Commonwealth taxpayer down the track when people get treatment in the emergency departments of public hospitals.When you look at that average annual increase of the PBS, a legitimate question can be raised. We have had for 50 years a Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme which has served the nation well. Is it sustainable for another 50 years with that average annual increase? For 50 years, we have had a decent Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, which has had three competing but valid public policy objectives: firstly, to provide the latest and best drugs to Australians at affordable prices for them; secondly, to provide those drugs at affordable prices and affordable rates to the taxpayer; and, thirdly, to ensure the ongoing presence of a viable pharmaceutical research and manufacturing industry in Australia. We have had those three for 50 years in a scheme conceived of by Chifley and implemented by Page and Menzies. It has served us well for 50 years. Is it possible to have a sustainable scheme for the next 50 years? The answer is that of course it is. But you do not hit the sickest, the poorest and the elderly with a 30 per cent increase and try to somehow pretend that that is a long-term, sustainable measure. It has nothing to do with a long-term, sustainable measure and everything to do with trying to catch up a budget deficit. This budget measure, in accordance with the budget papers, will save for the government $1.2 billion over a four-year period. The budget also contained a range of other measures which genuinely go to long-term sustainability and, as a consequence, those long-term, sustainable measures have been and are supported by the opposition. Those measures included increasing the use of generic drugs where appropriate, stopping pharmaceutical fraud, improving the listing process for new medicines, providing better information and guidance for prescribing doctors and increasing the focus on evidence based medicines. They are all long-term measures which go to the sustainability and viability of the scheme. They are all measures which, as the second reading amendment says:... put appropriate responsibility on the pharmaceutical industry and the medical profession rather than on those least able to bear the burden ...They go to long-term viability, and that is why they have been supported.In his budget reply on the Thursday night of budget week, the Leader of the Opposition stood at the dispatch box and said, `We support those measures, but what about a few others?' He put out to the parliament—and to the Treasurer and the Prime Minister—further examples of long-term, viable measures which went to sustainability. Firstly, he suggested an increased focus on the cost and prescribing patterns of new drugs in their first year on the PBS. This was deliberately aimed at the Celebrex and, to a lesser extent, Zyban problem we saw, where you had an enormous uptake initially and then a plateauing out. There has never previously been an effort on the part of the guardians of the scheme to look at sharp uptakes in the first instance. That was one further long-term measure which went to sustainability.Secondly, he suggested the inclusion of the full cost of the medicine on the label so that consumers are aware of the cost. Of course it is important that the community—the consumers—understand the contribution they and, more importantly in some respects, the taxpayer are making. Putting the price of the pharmaceutical on the label is one very effective way of effecting that, and other jurisdictions have gone down that road. For example, some of the Canadian provinces do that. Thirdly, he suggested tighter controls on direct to consumer advertising and greater scrutiny of industry marketing. Again, those are two measures which go to the way in which the pharmaceutical industry conducts itself. The Leader of the Opposition in his budget reply on 16 May 2002 challenged the Treasurer and the Prime Minister to cost those measures. The government said their measures in the budget—the ones I referred to earlier, which we do support and which do go to long-term viability and sustainability—have been costed at a saving of $800 million over four years.So far, what has been the response to this? Deafening silence. The government are happy to thug pensioners and Australian families under financial pressure with an increase in cost of three times the amount of the GST—that is, 30 per cent—for their essential medicines but will not apply themselves to genuine measures which go to long-term sustainability. Of course there is a challenge. There is a challenge for the government, there is a challenge for the Commonwealth and there is a challenge for the parliament, but it is a challenge this government will not take up. This government try to pretend that somehow whacking pensioners and struggling families is a long-term sustainability measure, and it is not. It is just an easy way to try to rescue a budget deficit. On the government department's own admission—their own calculations—the effect of this measure will essentially cease after four years.So much for all the cover that the Treasurer tries to get when he stands up in this place and says, `It's terrible. It's shocking. We've got this Intergenerational Report, which we tabled with the budget, which says that by 2017 we're going to have a problem because Commonwealth receipts will be exceeded by Commonwealth expenditure, and by 2042 we might have a structural problem. So do we have a solution for you! Because we might have an expenditure versus revenue crossover in 2017, and because by 2042 we might have a structural problem, we're going to whack pensioners, concession cardholders and struggling families with a 30 per cent increase in the cost of their essential medicines to stop them taking out their scripts, so that we get some respite over a four-year period and rescue our deficit.' No-one should be fooled by this ruse, this trick, this device. The Intergenerational Report told the Treasurer, the Prime Minister and the government no more and no less than what the Commission of Audit told the government in 1996. The government came to office in March 1996, set up the Commission of Audit and the Commission of Audit reported to the government. Part of the commission's report said that we would have a problem with the ageing of our population and that we needed to adjust public policy over a period of time to address that problem. What response did we see from the government? We saw the same response in 1996. It increased the copayment for pensioners, concession cardholders and families under financial pressure. It gave them no compensation for the increase in the copayment. Whenever Labor increased or introduced a copayment, it gave pensioners and concession cardholders more than adequate compensation. When you add the increase in the copayment that the government effected through the 1996 budget to these proposed increases, it is a 70 per cent increase in the cost of essential medicines for pensioners, concession cardholders and fami-lies under financial pressure—and not one cent of compensation.There is nothing new in the Intergene-rational Report. There is nothing in the report that the government did not know about in the financial year 1996-97, courtesy of the Commission of Audit, and nothing that the government did not know from any number of studies, including the OECD report on the ageing of Australia's population. Other than when the government increased the copayment in the 1996 budget—which went through this parliament, from memory, in October-November 1996—when did you ever hear the Treasurer or the Prime Minister talk about the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme? Did you hear them talking about it in the parliament in 1998, 1999, 2000 or 2001? Never. You have never seen them come to the dispatch box and heard them say, `We have a problem with the sustainability of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.' Now we hear the Treasurer and, in the other place, the minister for health, saying, `Last financial year the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme cost us $4.2 billion and it's not sustainable.' Some members might recall that a couple of months ago I stood up and put to the Treasurer a quote from former health minister Wooldridge in 2001 when he said, `The cost of the scheme is $4.2 billion and it is sustainable.'83VEmerson, Craig, MPDr Emerson—That was before the election.5V5Smith, Stephen, MPMr STEPHEN SMITH—Before the election it was sustainable: `Before the election, the fact that we're spending money means that consumers are benefiting; after the election, we'll do anything and say anything to rescue the budget bottom line.'If you look at this issue objectively and if you listen to what people in the health industry are saying, you will find any number of organisations—whether it is the AMA, the divisions of general practice, the Catholic Health Association or the Australian Healthcare Association—saying the same thing across the board. Every association out there that is interested and involved in public or private health and in the health care of the nation is, to a man and a woman, mantra-chanting a chorus to the government: `Don't go down this road.' This is a short-term measure. It might help rescue the budget bottom line. It will not do anything to advance the health outcomes of the nation. It will not do anything to advance the health outcomes of individuals. It will not do anything other than, further down the track, see people ending up in the emergency departments of public hospitals because they have not been taking out their scripts. They will end up with a more difficult health problem requiring greater medical intervention at greater expense to the taxpayer.How do we know this? We know this because, whether it is a Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme copayment or a copayment that a non bulk-billing doctor requires, it is invariably the case that those people who are least able to afford it are also those people most at risk of chronic illness or serious disease. If you are on a fixed income, a low income or if you are pensioner—we know that pensioners might be at greater risk of chronic illness or serious disease than most other classes of Australians because of their age—what does the government do? It imposes a measure affecting those people who are least able to afford it; those people who are most at risk of a chronic illness or a serious disease and who, therefore, are most in need of either the primary care that a GP can give by way of bulk-billing or the preventative care, through pharmaceuticals and advice, that a general practitioner can provide. Commonsense tells you that if you sensibly spend some money on pharmaceuticals now, it might actually save you some money down the track. On one occasion in the other place it was put to the minister for health that an American study had shown that a dollar spent on pharmaceuticals when it was needed saved that American jurisdiction $4 down the track. The minister for health derided that study. When I became the shadow minister for health, I called for the various research and clinical studies which would enable me to mount a scientific, best-evidence argument as to why sensible spending on pharmaceuticals might save money down the track. The truth is that there is a paucity, if not a complete absence, of that material. One of the weaknesses we have in Australia is that we have never done the hard work to enable us to persuade Treasury and Finance officers and Treasurers and ministers for finance that spending money on pharmaceuticals now is not just a spend, it is an investment. We constantly get from the government the cost of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme; we never get from the government the benefit. There is never an attempt to try and ascertain what the benefit might be.For example, the government will tell us what the cost of Lipitor is, but there is no cost-benefit analysis to tell us how many middle-aged, overweight men with cholesterol problems are no longer fronting up to the cardiovascular wards of our public hospitals requiring urgent interventions. What we know anecdotally from a range of cardiovascular wards around the country is that those sorts of incidents seem to be on the decline. So instead of simply looking at the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme in isolation, why can't we take a more enlightened view—a view which is consistent with the idea of preventative health care and the idea that an investment now will give you a better long-term return—and sit down and say, `Wouldn't it be more sensible if we worked out that what we spend on Lipitor now might actually save us money down the track, and what we spend on Tritace now might save us money down the track because fewer people will be having strokes'? This sort of sensible approach does not come into the government's calculations. Why is that? Because the government is not actually interested in the long-term sustainability of the scheme. This measure has nothing to do with long-term sustainability; it has everything to do with simply rescuing the budget bottom line.In the course of the first round of this bill through the parliament, the Treasurer was up here waxing lyrical, saying, `Shocking. Terrible. Terrible Senate. Terrible Labor Party. We simply won't be in a position to list any more drugs until this measure goes through.' But what have we found? We found the Prime Minister jumping up on the Alan Jones show announcing in advance of government consideration that Gleevec would go on the scheme. Funny that. The Prime Minister cops a bit of flack from Alan Jones on his radio show and in the TV editorials about Gleevec and then, despite all the alleged financial problems, Gleevec is listed.In the last couple of weeks, we have seen the government make announcements about a range of other drugs: Singulair, which is a chewable tablet for asthma; Avandia, which is a type 2 diabetes drug; and Spiriva, which treats chronic obstructive pulmonary disease—all of these were listed. They were all listed because they had gone through the process and also because, as we saw in the course of the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook and the final budget outlook papers delivered earlier this year, the exponential increase in the cost of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme in the run-up to the election has now abated from its 20 per cent back to the average annual increase. So far as we are concerned, we are in the marketplace for sitting down and saying, `Let's have a sensible look at the sustainability of the scheme in the long term. Let's make sure that we put in place long-term measures which go to the conduct and activity of the pharmaceutical industry and the medical profession, which go to evidence based medicines and which go to a proper assessment of the cost of the scheme and also the benefits of the scheme.' This is a classic instance of a government telling the Australian people one story before the election and a different story after. It is a classic illustration of a government trying to trick the community into thinking that a crass, grab for cash is somehow a long-term public policy measure when it is nothing of the sort. The truth is that this government is too scared and does not have the public policy wit to embrace long-term sustainable measures which would go to the viability of the scheme in the long term. I formally move the second reading amendment circulated in my name:That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:“the House rejects this bill for the following reasons:(1) it will increase by nearly 30% the cost of essential medicines, hitting the sickest and poorest in our society;(2) Australian pensioners and concession cardholders will go without almost five million prescriptions, and Australian families will also go without almost half a million prescriptions as a result of the proposed increase;(3) by depriving sick and elderly Australians of the medicines they need, there will be an increased need for greater medical interventions in public hospitals and nursing homes at even greater cost to taxpayers;(4) there are other, more effective, means by which the long term sustainability of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme could be assured, means which would put appropriate responsibility on the pharmaceutical industry and the medical profession rather than on those least able to bear the burden, and on which the Government has been silent since the Leader of the Opposition's Budget reply; and(5) the true rationale for the bill is to restore the budget bottom line and has nothing to do with the long term sustainability of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme or with genuine health outcomes for Australians”.As I indicated at the outset, the opposition opposes this legislation and, as on the previous occasion, we will also oppose this measure in the Senate. I hope the Senate, either in the last quarter of this year or in the first quarter of next year, dispatches it to the same place it dispatched the bill on the first occasion.10000Lindsay, Peter (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lindsay)—Is the amendment seconded?83VEmerson, Craig, MPDr Emerson—I second the amendment.20:26:009325Randall, Don, MPMr RANDALLPK6CanningLP10—I am very pleased to be able to speak this evening on the National Health Amendment (Pharmaceutical Benefits—Budget Measures) Bill 2002 [No. 2]. The reason I decided to speak on this bill this evening—because it is not something I would normally speak on—is that I wished to address the cant and hypocrisy of the Australian Labor Party on these measures. It is the most opportunistic behaviour I have seen from an opposition, but it is the hallmark of their leadership, and it is the hallmark of their behaviour under the current leader of the Australian Labor Party, Simon Crean.The member for Perth is generally quite a decent sort of fellow, but for him to talk about hypocrisy and about one thing being said before the election and another thing after the election just shows that the Labor Party has no shame. We only have to mention the border protection measures. Before the election, my opponent in the seat of Canning used to go on the radio with me and say, `We are with the government on border protection measures. There is not a cigarette paper difference between our policy and theirs.' What have we seen since the election? We have seen a total departure from that view. We have the member for Fremantle saying that she is ashamed and she cannot be a part of it. Harry Quick and other members of the Australian Labor Party are walking away from it in droves.The member for Perth said that we told the Australian people one thing before the election and another thing after. But let us have a look at what happened today with the Labor Party's policy shift on the one-third rebate for private health insurance. `We're right with you,' they said before the election. After the election and as late as March this year, the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Jenny Macklin, came out and said, `We're with you on private health insurance. We're with you all the way. We're not going to change.' What have they done today because they are under pressure and are rudderless at a leadership level? They have decided to try to reinvent themselves on a few issues, and one of those issues is the one-third rebate. The people of Australia really want that rebate. Mr Deputy Speaker, you will recall that, before the measure came in, Australians used to come to us and ask, `Why can't we have it like we used to in days gone by, where you could actually have a tax concession on private health insurance?' That is why I joined HBF, for example, in Western Australia. We joined it because we knew that we would get something back. There was an incentive for us. Yet, what are the Australian Labor Party doing? They want to take that away from the Australian people. We know that the pharmaceutical benefits measures from the budget are designed to address the burgeoning blow-out in the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, the PBS. That scheme has blown out from $1.23 billion in 1991-92 to $4.83 billion in 2001-02, an almost fourfold increase. If anybody thinks that is sustainable well into the future, they are living in la-la land. When Hillary Clinton was in Australia with Bill Clinton some years ago, she met with Michael Wooldridge, the then health minister, to find out how we were able to run a dual health system in this country—a system that addresses not only the poor and those who are unable to be part of the private health sector but also those who can afford to pay—and she was mystified. We have a Rolls Royce health system in this country that is the envy of the world, and it is the envy of the world because it is well managed. But what do the opposition want? Rather than see the system continue, they would see it collapse and fall in a screaming heap, to the cost of the people of Australia, enabling them somehow to get a political advantage out of it all. It is a disgrace for which they need to be exposed and, hopefully, that is what the reintroduction of this bill will do. Mr Deputy Speaker Lindsay, I can assure you that the Australian people are not stupid. They know that you cannot sustain a system like this that, in 10 years, has blown out four times its weight.The shadow health spokesman, the member for Perth, talks about this being `just a measure to try and prop up the budget'. Again we are faced with the cant and hypocrisy of the Australian Labor Party, which ran deficits for all those years previously. We came out in the last budget and said that there was going to be a deficit, even though we have not yet had one—and why? Because we are running the Australian economy as one of the great economies of the world. As I have said, the people of Australia are not stupid. They know who runs a decent economy in this country. They know that, if the Labor Party were to get in office again, we would be back in hock the way we were before. The member for Perth has a most unusual approach to this measure: the more you spend, the more you save. That is very good if you are an avid shopper who goes into Woolies and finds there is a big `for sale' sign—a third of the price off, and so on. In they race: `The more we spend, the more we save.' The only trouble is that they run out of money. It is an absolutely bizarre sort of approach to the whole measure.We do know that this concerns only a small copayment and that this small copayment has been designed as a measure to at least help keep running this huge and growing facility—a facility which eventually will cost more than the running of the entire health system. As reported in the Intergenerational Report, eventually the PBS will cost more than the running of the Australian health system. But, no, that does not really matter to the Labor Party. They go off saying, `You are'—to use what I think were the words of the member for Perth—`thugging the sickest and the poorest.'The emotional and emotive language used by the opposition to try and gain some political advantage in this debate is disgraceful. I am sure that the majority of clear-thinking Australians will see right through such language, because the sickest and the poorest are looked after by this government in the best possible way. We know that, after 52 scripts, concession cardholders and pensioners get their medicines free. We know that it is the same with the copayment in connection with the threshold for general patient safety. The fact is that we are asking for a rise from $3.60 to $4.60 for concessional patients and from $22.40 to $28.60 for general patients. At the end of the day, as I have said, if they use up all those scripts to the end of the year, a dollar a week is seen by most clear-minded people as being a reasonable contribution. As we have said, one reason for our needing the copayment is to help keep pace with the huge cost blow-out; but, secondly, there have been abuses of the PBS scheme. Some time ago in my electorate it was recounted to me that, on the death of a family member, an individual went to their pharmacy and said, `Look, we've got a heap of my departed father's left-over medicines; we're a bit worried about them all lying around the house and think they should be handed in.' The pharmacist said, `Look, we'll send the young girl down there with a couple of bags to pick up the left-over medicines and we'll dispose of them in the way we should.' The individual said, `Don't send a couple of bags; you're going to need a ute.' They had been hoarding these medicines. In fact, one reason for some people hoarding them is that, after buying 52, they know they can get them free. So they absolutely stockpile them but, all of a sudden, the doctor changes their medicine and they have to start stockpiling another one. We know that many people on a variety of treatments take a huge number of pills and medicines and, ultimately, they can stockpile a huge amount—and this is one of the abuses.I am not saying that stockpiling is terribly widespread, but fraud is. That is one of the reasons why identification became part of going to a chemist when getting medicines under a concessional arrangement. People were going into any pharmacy and just saying, `Oh, yes, I'm a concessional patient,' without having to show any ID, and were getting these medicines for concessional prices. We were told that, because Australia has such a marvellous antibiotic regime, a lot of these medicines were being sent to families overseas where the same sorts of regimes were not in place. So we are talking about what appeared to be large-scale fraud and malpractice amongst people who were involved with the pharmaceutical benefits scheme, and a copayment does have the effect of slowing this sort of thing down.A lot of people also do not seem to appreciate that over half of the medicines available are under the threshold. For example, I am not a severe asthmatic but I do use a Ventolin inhaler, which costs about $10. Thousands of people around Australia buy thousands of these Ventolin inhalers or other forms of asthmatic drugs on a daily basis. Such an inhaler costs around $10, which is well and truly part of the scheme. None of these people will be hit or touched; in fact, they will not be affected at all. But this will address some of the expensive and high-cost drugs.The opposition spokesman, the member for Perth, also wanted to say that there is no compensation for these measures. Let us just remember that 10 years ago, when the Labor Party was running this scheme—with the support of the government, rather than the opportunistic way the opposition is carrying on now—the copayment was 20 per cent. No-one disputes that—it was 20 per cent as part of the scheme. Today it has eroded to 15 per cent. That needs to be repeated. Anyone tuning in needs to know that the Labor Party, when it was in government, was quite happy to charge 20 per cent, with our support. Yet when we ask for the same treatment, those opposite say, `No, you're going to hit the sickest and the poorest.' What happened to the sickest and the poorest when they were charging 20 per cent? It is all relative, isn't it? It is all proportional. The people out there in radio land listening to this have to understand that the cant and hypocrisy of the Labor Party on this measure show no bounds. Ultimately, as I said, it would rather burn the whole system down and try to gain some sort of political benefit out of it failing. I have a caravan I take around to some of the isolated towns in the electorate; we sit down and everyone walks up and has their say. Recently, there was an interesting case where a person with a concession card came up and wanted to talk to me about the drug Caverject, which is a penile injection. He had run out of scripts. Apparently, there is a limit of five scripts unless the doctor sees a very good reason why you should continue to have Caverject. This man was blaming the Prime Minister. He was blaming the Prime Minister because he could not get his penile injections any longer and wanted to know why he could not have Viagra under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. We would all like assistance in different areas every now and again, but can you afford to have widespread distribution of Viagra at $70 a script? As this gentleman pointed out to me, there are only four pills in a Viagra set; they do not go a long way. If you have to pay for it, $70 is a lot of money. At the end of the day, yes, we would all like some of this assistance—well, not all of us! Some of us would like some of this sort of assistance. At the end of the day we are not all entitled to the luxuries that drugs bring us. I could go on and mention other cases. The same gentleman also said, `This rotten Johnny Howard, he's taken away all the cholesterol drugs, you know. I'm going to die early because your Prime Minister has taken away my ability to live a longer life because I can't get hold of these cholesterol drugs.'83VEmerson, Craig, MPDr Emerson—But he's going to die happy, by the sound of it.PK6Randall, Don, MPMr RANDALL—I missed that, but it was obviously funny because the assistant clerk thinks it is good.10000Lindsay, Peter (The DEPUTY SPEAKER)The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Lindsay)—The member for Canning will return to the substance of the debate. PK6Randall, Don, MPMr RANDALL—The substance of the debate. We could probably return to the previous one. Getting back to the cholesterol drugs, he was accusing the Prime Minister because he could not get access to these. I thought this was strange. I am not on top of everything in relation to drugs; I thought I would ring the minister's office and find out whether this is true—whether all these drugs have been knocked off in terms of access on concession. It was not true. There are five cholesterol inhibitor drugs on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme that could apply to that gentleman. He was amazed. He said, `Why didn't my doctor tell me?' I don't know why. He was trying to accuse the doctor of not telling him the truth. There are many myths floating out there about what you are entitled to under the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and what you are not entitled to. It is quite bizarre. At the end of the day, if he could not have used any one of those generic drugs which are on the scheme—the five cholesterol drugs that he could have had access to—his doctor then could prescribe him a drug. If he could not have anything else and all else failed, his doctor would prescribe him a drug which would suit him and help him with his health. This is one of the greatest schemes; this is one of the greatest measures that the Australian public want. They want it to continue, but it will not continue without the support of the Labor Party.I am running out of time. I got a little sidetracked there for a while. In the last six months, the additions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme have cost $148 million. That is because of the new drugs coming on. I seek leave to table the list of new drugs which have come onto the scheme in the last 12 months, just to demonstrate what they are—because I cannot pronounce all their pharmaceutical names or chemical names—and the cost of them.Leave granted.PK6Randall, Don, MPMr RANDALL—I know that you are enjoying it, so I am sure you will enjoy the reading. Thank you. The fact is that the TGA evaluates an enormous number of drugs. As well as the drugs that the TGA has identified, I seek leave to table a list of the drugs that the TGA has recommended for approval but the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee has not yet suggested should be on the list.Leave granted. PK6Randall, Don, MPMr RANDALL—We know that something like 90 drugs a year are put forward by the TGA for approval. I want to let you know the approval rate that this government has taken on over the last number of years. In 1997 the number of drugs included on the PBS was 38; in 1998, 45; in 1999, 37; in 2000, 34; in 2001, 34; and in 2002, 31. In fact, over the last six years there have been 219 new drugs—83VEmerson, Craig, MPDr Emerson—Oh, that's how many boats arrived before the Tampa.PK6Randall, Don, MPMr RANDALL—I heard the interjection of the member and yes, I appreciated every one of those votes. Thank you very much; we were very glad of them. It is very important to understand the blow-out in the cost of some of these measures. Without going through each drug individually, I can say what we know about some of the most expensive drugs on the list today. For something like Lipex for the treatment of high cholesterol, which I talked about previously, the average price is $60. At the moment concession cardholders pay $3.60 or $22, and the cost is increasing by $1 or $6. I could go through the whole list, but I am not going to do that because we are just about out of time.The final thing I want to say on this measure is that this government is responsible in terms of what it is endeavouring to achieve. It does not share the `the more you spend the more you save' mentality of the Labor Party. It is not an opportunistic party that wants to destroy a scheme just to prove a political point in conjunction with a rogue Senate. This government wants to provide the best system to the Australian people. It is a Rolls Royce system that is the envy of the world. There is only one way it can be destroyed. This is a time when we are spending money on the war on terror and when we have a drought in this country. These things mean we need to be financially responsible. We need the help of the Australian Labor Party to see that we are financially responsible, and their reaction is: `No. Because we can get some political gain out of it, we will oppose you all the way.' Bring on the double dissolution.20:46:009329Hall, Jill, MPMs HALL83NShortlandALP00—They are certainly fighting words by the member for Canning. It surprises me that the government is interested in fighting a double dissolution election on increasing the price of essential medicines. Obviously, the member for Canning does not speak to people in his electorate, as I do. The member for Canning presented a couple of pieces of misinformation to the House, and I am sure the House would like me to clear those up for them. I will start with Caverject. Caverject, the penile injection the previous member was discussing, is a very old treatment that is being used by men throughout Australia. It was previously on the PBS. I have a constituent who contracted mumps at a very young age, and he has been using Caverject for 40 years. Caverject has only recently been removed from the PBS, simply because Viagra was listed. So, whilst the member for Canning thought this was a joke, to some people it has a very real impact on their lives.I think the government introduced good legislation when it made it essential for people to present their Medicare card when they received medicine. But it is false to say that people who had concession cards were fraudulently obtaining medicines for people who did not have concession cards and that people were pretending they had concession cards when there was no necessity to prove that they had one. Previously, if a person said that they were entitled to medication at a concession rate, they had to show their concession card. That has always been the way. The change was to make it essential for everybody to have their Medicare card number listed with the pharmacy that provided them with medication. That was very good on a number of grounds: it stopped doctor shopping and it stopped abuse of the system. I think the government is to be commended for that. Unfortunately, the government is not to be commended for this legislation.I find it astonishing that we are back here debating the Howard government's proposal to increase the price of essential medicines for all Australians. This is exactly the same legislation that was introduced into the House of Representatives on 6 June this year and subsequently defeated in the Senate on 20 June. If ever there were an example of a mean-spirited government, the Howard government is it. When the government came to power in 1996, the cost of prescriptions for non-concession cardholders was $16.80. If it is successful in getting this legislation through the Senate—though I feel certain that the senators will hold fast to their resolution not to pass the legislation—the cost of medication will go up to $28.60. That is up $6.20 from its current level. For pensioners there will be a $1 increase for every script they get up to 52 scripts. That means that the cost of scripts will be $4.60. The government says there will be no cost once people reach the safety net. That is not true for all medications. There are some medications for which, even when you meet that safety net mark, you still incur a cost.The difference between what this government has done in the area of increasing the cost of pharmaceuticals and what the Labor Party did when in government is that the Labor Party compensated pensioners and low-income earners. This government does not care about pensioners and low-income earners; this government only cares about its friends at the big end of town. This government does not think twice when it comes to hitting families and it does not think twice when it comes to hitting pensioners who cannot afford it. This government believes that, if you work hard, you have money and therefore you can afford to pay. This government believes that those people who do not have money obviously do not work hard and do not deserve to have the essential medications that are delivered to them under this scheme. This government has gone out of its way to make it harder for families, pensioners and low-income earners.As I have moved around my electorate and spoken to people, I have spoken to many people with young families and they are really frightened about the consequences of this bill getting through the parliament. They are very fearful about whether they will be able to treat their children when they become ill. I know when my children were younger one would get sick and the other two would get sick as well. I would have three children ill at the one time. In those days I did not have a lot of extra money and, if I had had to pay $28.60 every time one of my children became ill, I would not have been able to afford it. I would have had to think which child was the sickest. The consequences could be that your children get sicker and that you juggle the medications. This is what families in my electorate are telling me. Families are telling me that they are very frightened by the prospect of this coming in and of them being unable to afford to buy the essential medication that their sick children need.I have had numerous pensioners come to my office and tell me what this legislation will mean to them. I talked to one pensioner who takes 18 different tablets a day, another who takes nine and another who takes 14. Each of them is worried about the prospect of having to pay more for their medication. I was also talking to a women who takes 15 different types of medication a day. She finds it very difficult to make ends meet as it is. She was so upset about the prospect she asked me if I had a petition I could give her so she could take it with her and get all her friends to sign it. They had been talking about it and they were truly worried about the impact that this would have.This government has really attacked our health care system. It supports a system, I believe, that is two-tiered. One tier is a Rolls Royce system, where if you have money you can get the best of health care, be it the best medications or the best treatment for any illness or disease you may have. This can be seen by the government's failure to support bulk-billing and universal health care within Australia. It is a government that would rather pour money into the health insurance industry than ensure that people within Australia can get the basic health care that they need. It is a government that is prepared to force people to sit for hours in public hospitals and to transfer the cost of basic health care to the states rather than ensuring that everybody in Australia can have good quality health care. It is a government that is asking the Australian people to pay, pay, pay—that is, unless you are the friends of the government; if you are the friends of the government then the treatment is very different. I now turn to the Intergenerational Report. It has been quoted a great deal in this debate. The members on the government side referred to the Intergenerational Report as identifying the increase in the price of pharmaceuticals as the main problem that is going to cause the collapse of the health system in Australia. I read the Intergenerational Report a little differently. I read the Intergenerational Report and I see a lot of other things in it that are leading to increases in the cost of health care.I see that the Intergenerational Report identifies that the ageing of our population is one of the costs, the fact that we are living a lot longer. But when you look at the breakdown in health costs, one of the things that has had the most substantial impact on the cost of health care is the changes in technology and the cost of delivering health care services. It is not the cost of medication but it is those technological changes that have had such an enormous impact on the cost of health care. These are cutting edge changes, changes that have saved the lives of many people—just as having access to medication has.I turn to the impact this can have on people's lives. If people are unable to afford to pay for medication, it will lead to a problem with compliance. A person goes along to a doctor and the doctor develops a health care plan for them. These days doctors are even compensated financially for developing special plans for people who suffer from diabetes and numerous other diseases. These plans are drawn up in consultation with their patients, and the government pays doctors a fee for doing this and monitoring the progress of their patients.If a person is faced with the choice of not being able to afford their daily living expenses or going without their medication—maybe for a week; maybe for a month—because they have a big electricity bill, the gas bill has come in or the telephone bill has come in, maybe they will stop taking their medication. You do not always notice when you stop taking medication the impact that it is having on your health. It is only when you get further down the track that you are able to feel the impact of that. It will lead to people self medicating; it will lead to people taking one medication one month, another medication the next. This in itself can lead to an increase in the cost of health care in this country.The positive aspects of medication are that, for every $1 spent on medication, $4 is saved later. Taking medication—as opposed to people not taking medication and later becoming seriously ill—reduces the cost to society and to the government. I spent some time looking at the cost of surgery that people end up needing if they do not take medication to lower their cholesterol or control their blood pressure. The basic cost for operations such as a coronary artery bypass is $1,619.60. Put that together with hospitalisation, other associated costs and the ongoing treatment for people who have had coronary artery bypasses and there is a whole series of different costings up to $2,000 for different operations. People have different types of bypasses. Taking medication is saving our community a lot of primary health care costs. The other area is people who have suffered strokes because they had high blood pressure and choose not to take medication. Once again, there are enormous costs associated with rehabilitation and that person possibly requiring ongoing care in a low or high care facility. My husband comes from a family with a history of very high cholesterol and quite an ordinary record when it comes to coronary illness. He was detected early as having problems with cholesterol and high blood pressure. He is a very healthy and active man and has been on medication. Both his blood pressure and cholesterol are at the level they should be—as with thousands of Australians.The success of the PBS scheme in Australia has been phenomenal. It has had the support of governments of all persuasions. It is only this government which is seeking to destroy and distort it. When we are talking about the PBS and some of the ways that the government has sought to change it, we only need to look at the actions of the previous health minister. He moved to change the composition of the pharmaceutical board and appointed Pat Clear, the director of FuCell Pty Ltd, who had a long history in the pharmaceutical industry. The same minister intervened with the recommendation of the previous board to have Celebrex and Zyban listed—drugs that have blown the budget. Also, this government extended the health care card to many thousands of people in the community, including self-funded retirees and people who earn up to $50,000 a year. This has also had a significant impact on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and increased the costs of providing essential medicines to people in the community. To say it is essential to increase the price of medicine is not telling the Australian people the truth. This government has extended the scheme. It has interfered with the operation of the pharmaceutical board. It has placed its friends on the board. It has sought to distort the whole process. The minister stands up in this place and says, `Unless we increase the price of medication for ordinary Australian people, the system is going to collapse.' Not only that, but it has been blackmailing people suffering from illnesses, saying, `Unless the opposition agrees to pass our legislation, we won't be listing other new medicines.' This has been shown to be blackmail because the government has already listed a couple of the medications they said they would not list such as the new treatment for diabetes.I turn to a survey of some 2,500 which I conducted in my electorate. The survey looked at a number of health care needs and issues that were important to the people of the Shortland electorate. One of the questions I asked was whether the people of Shortland felt that the price of pharmaceuticals should be increased. Overwhelmingly, the people gave me the message: no, they should not. My message to the government is: you have to listen to the people of Australia. You take them with you. You listen to what they have to say. On this piece of legislation, they are not saying, `Bring on the double dissolution,' as the previous speaker said; they are saying, `We want the cost of our basic essential pharmaceuticals contained. We want to be able to get medicines when we need them.' (Time expired)21:06:009332Southcott, Dr Andrew, MPDr SOUTHCOTTTK6BoothbyLP10—The National Health Amendment (Pharmaceutical Benefits—Budget Measures) Bill 2002 [No. 2] provides for the budget measures which relate to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. It provides for the copayment for concessional cardholders to be increased from $3.60 to $4.60. Extra prescriptions for concessional cardholders will be free after 52 scripts. For general patients and their families, the copayment will rise from $22.40 to $28.60 and the safety net will apply after 31 scripts. After the safety net is reached, families and general patients will pay the concessional rate of $4.60 for additional scripts. This is the same legislation that was introduced as part of the budget. It was debated in the House in June and was subsequently defeated in the Senate.Part of the government's health policy in 1996 was to retain Medicare. This was reiterated in 1998 and 2001. The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme is one of the three pillars of Medicare. We on this side encourage the opposition to take a long-term view. The Intergenerational Report in this year's budget was part of that. In order to take a long-term view of what we expect from the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme it is worth having a look to see where the PBS came from. The PBS began life on 1 June 1948. It was originally designed to provide lifesaving and disease preventing drugs from the British Pharmacopoeia to pensioners and others. Today it is a much broader scheme which subsidises medications at an affordable price for all Australians. In 1949, 139 lifesaving and disease preventing drugs were provided free of charge to the whole community. Today, there is something like 593 drugs available in 1,461 forms and strengths and marketed as 2,500 brands. There are restrictions on 785 items and 286 items require an authority. They are May 2002 figures. In 1953 the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee was established. This committee plays the important role of deciding which medications will go onto the PBS. In 1960, a patient contribution of five shillings was introduced to provide some control on volumes and expenditure. I have heard some of the opposition debate, but I am not sure what they are talking about. There has been a copayment associated with the PBS since 1960—originally five shillings. At that time, the scheme was a $43 million scheme. By 1969 it had grown to $100 million. By 1975 it had grown to $211 million. In the early 1990s, it was $1.2 billion and now it is over $4 billion. The patient contribution, or copayment, for pensioners of $2.50 was introduced in 1990 by Brian Howe. Today, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme is a very good scheme. It provides pharmaceuticals at a very reasonable price. Prices are much higher in the United States—162 per cent higher—and they are 48 per cent to 51 per cent higher in other English speaking countries like the UK and Canada. They are also higher in Sweden. We have similar prices to countries like France, Spain and New Zealand. We spend eight to nine per cent of our health expenditure on pharmaceuticals, and this is more than comparable countries like Canada, Denmark, Switzerland and the United States.The PBS is the fastest growing area of health expenditure in Australia. Over the last decade it has grown on average by 14 per cent. In 1991-92 the PBS cost $1.16 billion. By 2001-02 it is estimated to cost $4.197 billion. The Intergenerational Report estimates that it will increase fivefold as a percentage of GDP over the next 40 years—that was using a conservative estimate of growth; more conservative than the growth we have had—and it will cost $59 billion in today's money. The projection is for the PBS to grow from 0.6 per cent of GDP to 3.4 per cent of GDP. The IGR also predicted that Commonwealth expenditure on health would rise from four per cent to eight per cent of GDP over the next 40 years. This of course includes the Medicare Benefits Schedule, the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, the funding that we provide for the state government run public hospitals—we provided at least 40 per cent of the funding of those hospitals—the 30 per cent rebate for private health insurance and other areas such as medical research and public health.The Intergenerational Report analysis of Commonwealth health spending shows that most of the recent growth in health spending has been due to non-demographic growth—that is, real, per person, age adjusted compound growth. From 1984-85 to 2000-01, 2.1 per cent of the 3.8 per cent per annum growth was due to non-demographic growth. From 1989-90 to 2000-01, 3.2 per cent of the 4.9 per cent growth was due to non-demographic growth. That means that we have seen growth speeding up over the last decade, and it is real growth. A large portion of that is due to technological change. Over the past decade Commonwealth health spending has increased faster than total national spending. The Commonwealth's share of health spending grew from 42 per cent in 1989-90 to 48 per cent in 1999-2000, whereas the state share over the same period fell from 26 per cent to 23 per cent and the private sector share fell from 31 per cent to 28 per cent. Real non-demographic growth in Commonwealth spending on public hospitals has grown at about 1.6 per cent. The Medicare Benefits Schedule has been growing at two per cent per annum, but the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme has been growing at an average of 6.1 per cent per annum for 20 years.Drivers of the growth in the PBS include the ageing of the population, but this plays only a limited role. This factor is much smaller than the cost of new technologies, the increasing use of services and increasing consumer demand and expectations. Another cost driver in the PBS is the addition of newer generation pharmaceuticals to the scheme. For example, Zyban costs on average $249 to the PBS. Since its listing in February 2001 to the end of 2001, it cost the Commonwealth government $82 million. Celebrex, from its listing in August 2000 to December 2001, cost $217 million. Since 1996, the Howard government has added new items to the PBS on the recommendations of the PBAC, and these have had a gross cost of more than $1½ billion.Other cost drivers include the growth of preventative medicines; for example, statins, which now cost $580 million. Many of the top 10 drugs in cost on the PBS are statins. In 2001 there was a budget measure to educate general practitioners about the better prescribing of statins, because it is important to look at serum cholesterol, lipid profiles, family histories, the existence of risk factors such as hypertension and diabetes and whether someone has actually had a heart attack before prescribing cholesterol lowering agents. There are algorithms that take into account all of these risk factors and are able to tell you at what serum cholesterol level it is appropriate to prescribe a statin. Statins are not going to be beneficial for everyone. Another driver is the improved detection of illnesses, such as depression, high blood pressure and high cholesterol and asthma and increased community awareness of newer and more effective drugs. There has also been cost-shifting by the states onto the Commonwealth; for example, through limited drugs on discharge, privatisation of outpatients and so on. There has also been an increase in the number of people in the concessional category. They are the most prolific users of the PBS and receive about 80 per cent of the benefit from the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Another cost driver is the prescription of inappropriate drugs for conditions; for example, antibiotics. It is estimated that $100 million a year is spent on conditions for which antibiotics are not effective. The opposition oppose the rise in the copayment. They would seek other measures which would help sustainability of the PBS. That is rubbish, because cost containment measures already exist: obviously, patient copayments are already there; there is a brand premium policy; there is the therapeutic group premium policy; there are price-volume agreements; there are quality incentives for prescribing pharmaceuticals; there is a national prescribing service; there is improved monitoring of entitlements to the PBS, excluding, for example, temporary residence; and there is also a simple price control measure through the Pharmaceutical Benefits Pricing Authority.Clearly, in order to provide timely access to newer generation pharmaceuticals, the PBS will need reform. The Commonwealth parliament needs to take decisions now to ensure the sustainability of the PBS in the future. Government contributions to the PBS have been increasing at a higher rate—13½ per cent—than the patient copayment—12.4 per cent. As a result, whereas in 1991-92 when Brian Howe was the minister for health the patient copayment was around 20 per cent, it had declined to around 15 per cent in 2000-01. These budget measures, which are opposed by Labor, the Greens and the Democrats, will increase the copayment to approximately 20 per cent. That is fair. That means that overall, as a group, patients will be covering 20 per cent of the cost of these medications and the Commonwealth government will be paying the remaining 80 per cent. It is still a very generous scheme.The Democrats in a press release have argued that the changes in the copayment will shift costs onto the state governments. This assumes that essential medicines will not be prescribed as a result of this measure. I regard this assumption as false. This assumption also ignores the cost-shifting which has been occurring from the state governments to the Commonwealth government through decreased prescribing for outpatients in hospital pharmacies. Many of the suggestions which the Democrats have made, sensible suggestions such as price-volume agreements and prescribing practices, are already part of the cost control measures of the PBS.The impact of this legislation needs to be considered for different groups and different medications. Firstly, for a concessional cardholder, the copayment will increase from $3.60 to $4.60. As I said before, 80 per cent of the contribution to the PBS is spent on concession cardholders. These concession cardholders will be able to access the new generation of cholesterol lowering drugs—or statins—which cost around $60, for $4.60; they will be able to access the new generation of antiarthritics, such as Celebrex and Vioxx, which cost between $36 and $45, for just $4.60; and they will be able to access newer blood pressure lowering agents, which cost $25 to $30, for just $4.60. The average concessional cardholder fills just 19 scripts per year. This legislation will result in an extra $19 for the concessional cardholder over the year, or about $1.50 a month.For high use patients, the safety net will be there after 52 scripts a year, after which all medications are free. Concession card patients also receive a pharmaceutical allowance of $2.90 per week or $150.80 per year, which covers the first 32 scripts. So a high use person will be paying for another 20 scripts. The average person on 19 scripts will be more than covered by the pharmaceutical allowance. For general patients, the copayment will increase from $22.60 to $28.40. However, many mediations already cost less than $22.60, so there will be no change in the price for this category of patient. Many common medications which families are going to use, such as Ventolin for asthma, Rantidine or Zantac for peptic ulcer, Noten or Tenormin for high blood pressure and antibiotics such as Amoxycillin, Cephalexin and Diaformin or Diabex for diabetes, have an average price of less than $20, so there will no impact from this legislation—that is, there will be no price change for general patients and families who are not concessional cardholders. Twenty per cent of medications, including many commonly prescribed ones such as those I have just listed, are priced below the current general copayment. General patients will be able to receive the cholesterol lowering drugs, which cost about $60, and Omeprazole or Losec for peptic ulcer, which have an average price $64, at a subsidised rate of $28.60. After 31 scripts, the general patient will be caught by the safety net and will then pay the concessional copayment of $4.60.It is also important to look at the place of expensive medications on the PBS. The average price of Olanzapine or Zyprexa for schizophrenia is $219 on the PBS; bupropion—better known as Zyban—for nicotine addiction is $249; human insulin for diabetes is $189. These are all available to concessional cardholders for $4.60 and to the general patient for $28.60. These medications are heavily subsidised by the government, and that is a good thing, but we do need to have some fairness so that this scheme can continue in the future, and I think 20 per cent is a reasonable contribution for patients to make. Zoladex, which is used in treatment of prostate cancer and breast cancer, has an average price to the government of $726 yet will be available to concessional cardholders for $4.60 and to general patients for $28.60 if this legislation is passed. This legislation is expected to save the government $1.1 billion over the next four years. It is expected that there will be some reduction in the rate of growth of prescription volumes. Without some sort of price signal to control demand, the PBS will continue to grow exponentially. In the future, as we map the human genome, we will have the ability to target medicines at a genetic level as opposed to a molecular level, and it is important that we take steps now so that the PBS will be sustainable well into the future. 21:24:009335Crosio, Janice, MPMrs CROSIO7T4ProspectALP00—I rise to speak wholeheartedly against this very poor piece of public policy, the National Health Amendment (Pharmaceutical Benefits—Budget Measures) Bill 2002 [No. 2]. Once again, we see this government, as it has done time and time again, attempting to patch up leakages in revenue by grabbing money back from those who are least able to afford it. The fact is that the impact of this bill will be greatest on the least well-off in the community: the ill, the disabled, the elderly and the frail—the people I represent. I ask the members sitting on the government side: does this government really care? I can answer for them. This legislation says, `Of course not.'The proposed amendments to the National Health Act 1953 would see the general patient copayment increase from $22.40 to $28.60 and the concessional patient copayment increase from $3.60 to $4.60. In percentage terms, this is an increase in the general copayment of 27.7 per cent and in the concessional copayment of 27.8 per cent. Considering that the government claims that expenditure on the PBS has increased by 14 per cent annually over the last decade, this increase is double that. And do not think that this government is going to have only a one-off increase. If this legislation is implemented, I believe it will attempt—year in and year out—to increase the co-payments.The government estimates that, based on 2001-02 figures, these changes will result in savings of $1.1 billion dollars, or about 6.2 per cent, over the next four years. This may sound wonderful for the bottom line, but the social impact could be devastating. The Department of Health and Ageing claims that, in the first 12 months of these increases, 2.8 per cent of pensioner and concession scripts and 1.4 per cent of general scripts will not be filled, because people will not be able to afford them. This would see a reduction of approximately 5.5 million prescriptions. This is a dreadful situation. We will see people having to choose between essential medicines—effectively having to decide between taking blood pressure medication or heart tablets. That is a preposterous situation in a society that is supposed to be caring for its less fortunate members in the 21st century. Pensioners and concession cardholders would be out of pocket an additional $52 per year; for 300,000 families who reach the safety net, this would see an extra $190 per year in medical expenses taken from their already stretched and limited incomes. Financially, this is an immense burden on those people, but I do not believe this government cares. It sees itself prattling on to its mates in the financial markets: `Aren't we wonderful! We've cut a billion dollars in expenditure.' Its sycophants will claim how financially responsible they are and will say that maintaining a tight fiscal policy should be the prime goal. I could go on all day with all the jargon that the economic professionals go on with. But they are too smart by half. This measure will cost in many ways in the long run. It will mean the government will have to increase expenditure in other parts of the health portfolio. It will mean an increased strain on our already overstretched public hospital systems around the country. If the government—and the Treasurer in particular—had an ounce of humanity, it would reconsider the implications of this decision.I am sure all members have received a letter from the Cancer Council New South Wales expressing their deep reservations about this legislation. Added to this letter was a joint statement from health and consumer groups which provides some insightful suggestions on improving the PBS. I suggest the government takes the time to consider this statement and engage with the professionals who know how the system works and would undoubtedly be quite willing to assist government in drafting a policy that is socially conscious but also cost effective. That is the difference between Labor and the government. We can actually formulate policies that encapsulate our goal of creating a fair and equitable society without sending the country broke. We did that for 13 years, despite the rubbish and misinformation that you hear from the other side of the House. The Leader of the Opposition stated in his speech replying to the budget that Labor will support measures that attempt to prevent the misuse of the PBS through controlling instances of fraud, tightening administrative measures which focus on the cost and prescribing patterns of new drugs in their first year on the PBS, tightening controls on consumer advertising and providing greater scrutiny of industry marketing. These are the areas that the government should be focusing on; it should not be focusing on imposing costs on the consumers who have the least capacity to cope. But that is how this government works. Smokescreens are put up all over the place by the government to hide their increasingly shoddy treatment of the less well-off. As we on this side of the House have said, the PBS can be reformed, but that would mean putting pressure on the providers and the prescribers to mend their ways. It would appear that it is from this end that changes have to be made. But the government are fearful of offending the pharmaceutical companies. As is typical, this government will quite willingly provide `welfare' to the big end of town whilst imposing tougher conditions on the less well-off in the community. In their joint statement regarding access to prescription medicines and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, the Cancer Council of New South Wales and their co-signatories—the Arthritis Foundation of Australia, the Australian Council of Social Service, or ACOSS, the Australian Consumers Association, the Breast Cancer Action Group NSW, Cancer Voices NSW, Carers NSW, Chronic Illness Alliance NSW, Chronic Illness Alliance Victoria, Council of Social Service of NSW, Cystic Fibrosis Australia, the Epilepsy Association, Epilepsy Australia Ltd, the Hepatitis C Council of NSW, the National Association of People Living with AIDS, the NSW Palliative Care Association and the People with Disabilities (NSW) Inc.—have suggested similar reforms to those that we on this side of the House have continued to propose. These are groups representing a vast spectrum of the medical community and their patients. The Cancer Council states that the government should focus not on increasing costs for consumers but on other reforms, which include: ... better monitoring of prescribing patterns of general practitioners, the introduction of standard processes in relation to surveillance of drugs after listing on the PBS, a greater level of research on drug utilisation, amendments to the Act to allow greater transparency of, and stakeholder participation in, the process of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee and the development of mechanisms to enable broader and more active consumer input into the processes and decisions of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee.The government does not have the intellectual ability to be able to grasp the concept that, if there are problems with the PBS, a range of solutions must be found. Increasing copayments and raising the safety net are only pieces of the patchwork. The concerns expressed by the Cancer Council will still be there. However, with the penny pinchers in this government, you can rest assured that their solution will always contain raising revenue from the battlers. This is the history of this government. It has cut billions of dollars from vital government services since 1996. After more than six years in office, this government has already cut emergency dental programs for poor and elderly Australians, introduced up-front fees for nursing homes, put extra fees on HACC and has previously raised the cost of pharmaceuticals. So, as I said earlier, the history is there. It will raise the co-payments every time it thinks it needs to raise more taxes. The PBS has been a part of social policy in this country for 50 years. Governments of both persuasions in the past have accepted that it is essential to provide all Australians with the medication they require. If these medicines are available then this will provide cost savings in other health related areas, particularly, as I stated earlier, in lower levels of hospitalisation. I am not denying that the costs of running the PBS are high. A program that spends over $4 billion annually is a costly scheme but, unlike the doom and gloom of the Treasurer's Intergenerational Report, the PBS is sustainable if the government tackles the most costly areas.The Cancer Council of New South Wales has suggested that prescribing patterns should have better monitoring. It seems the practice at the moment is for practitioners to prescribe newer and more expensive drugs. For example, two of the most common drugs in recent years have been Celebrex, which has been prescribed to arthritis sufferers and costs on average $46.92 per script, and Zyban, the antismoking drug that costs $249.51 per script. Both have been vigorously promoted by their respective pharmaceutical companies. Celebrex, in particular, has been a favourite of practitioners. The estimated cost of listing Celebrex on the PBS was originally thought to be $40 million for its first year. However, the actual cost was four times that amount. It cost $160 million in the first year it was prescribed. Celebrex has also been prescribed for non-arthritic conditions, which has assisted in escalating its cost. I would imagine that there are a number of other drugs that have been used in the same way. It is these patterns of prescribing that groups like the Cancer Council believe should be reformed. For it appears, just in the case of Celebrex, that the prescribing practices of practitioners and the vigorous marketing by the pharmaceutical company have substantially increased the costs to the taxpayer.I would like to illustrate my strong support for the ongoing sustainability of the PBS by mentioning the story of a constituent of mine who I have known for nearly 40 years and whose name I will not mention so as to maintain her confidentiality, but the ministers know of her. About six years ago my constituent was diagnosed with chronic myeloid leukaemia. After nearly four years of treatment, which saw the medication used becoming less and less effective, she was referred to another doctor who was conducting trials of a new drug called STI571, commonly known as Glivac. After being accepted for the trial, her condition improved significantly. The problem was that, once the trial was finished, further purchases of the drug were going to cost her and her husband around $50,000 per year—$50,000 to keep her alive. This person is a pensioner and has absolutely no chance of funding the cost of her own accord. After representations, I received a reply from the government that Glivac had been recommended for subsidy for the treatment of some forms of chronic myeloid leukaemia, but that the PBAC had not recommended treatment in the chronic phase. The minister at the time believed that my constituent was too old to receive this treatment. I found it an absolute outrage that Dr Wooldridge considered a woman who had not yet reached 70 to be too old for this treatment. We persisted in our efforts to get the government to reconsider its decision, and I am now pleased to announce that recently she has entered into remission—that is, two years later she is still alive and has now gone into remission. This fine woman would have been beaten by the ravages of this horrible condition if it were not for the scheme. She now, hopefully, can live a happy and fulfilling life and contribute, as she has done for many years, to the community and her family. She is but one example of a person who has worked—but is not wealthy—and for whom the government and the community should be willing and able to assist her by making life as comfortable as possible when hard times hit through illness.However, the Howard government, as in a number of other public policy areas, are willing to subsidise the big end of town and the affluent in our society. They consistently provide their spin on how life is so difficult for those in the upper middle classes but show what I believe is an utter contempt for those at the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum, the people I have proudly represented in over 30 years of public life. We on this side of the House will continue to oppose this inequitable and nasty piece of public policy. You would think a sense of shame or common decency would restrain this government in their plan to introduce higher charges for medicine, but we know the history of the government. For as long as they can get away with it, they will continue to attack the battlers. This is not a good piece of legislation and I am sure that, if members on the government side gave due consideration to the long-term ramifications of what it means to their communities and to the people they represent, they too would agree it should not be allowed to pass in this House.21:38:009338Lindsay, Peter, MPMr LINDSAYHK6HerbertLP10—I address my comments to those in the parliament building and to all those around the country who are listening to this debate on the National Health Amendment (Pharmaceutical Benefits—Budget Measures) Bill 2002 [No. 2], and I ask those who are listening to listen a little more carefully to what I have to say. I start from the point that the Howard government established a reputation for doing the hard things that are necessary for our country, for standing up for good public policy, for not just doing the easy things but for addressing the difficult issues and coming through. There are people who do not like the government for that, but they respect the government because we have a go. This debate has degenerated into speeches on what is good public policy from one side as opposed to speeches articulated by the opposition that use the words `the big end of town', `class distinction' and `thugging pensioners'. You hear that sort of debate. Those who are listening have to understand that there is a clear distinction between the government's position and the opposition's position.It is easy, if you want to, to simplistically say, `The cost of medicine shouldn't go up,' or to ask, `How are pensioners going to afford the increase that is proposed?' It is a little more difficult to think through the issue and to understand why the government is making some hard decisions and asking the people of Australia to understand why these things are necessary. I would like to address those particular issues. I ask people to filter out the opportunistic rhetoric of the Australian Labor Party and to listen to the facts and the logic of the debate. I would like to start with the amendments that have been moved by the opposition. The preamble to the amendments before the House reads: ... the House rejects this bill for the following reasons:The first reason is:... it will increase by nearly 30% the cost of essential medicines, hitting the sickest and poorest in our society ...I ask you to listen to that again:... it will increase by nearly 30% the cost of essential medicines, hitting the sickest and poorest in our society ...If you were a pensioner and you heard just that without hearing any explanation, you would be scared witless. That is what the opposition are doing. The fact is that it is absolutely and plainly wrong. Where do they get the 30 per cent from? They get it from our asking pensioners to pay about an extra dollar per script, with a maximum of $52 extra a year. What they do not look at is the average number of medicines prescribed for a pensioner. When you work out all of that, the actual increase is only about one per cent on average; it is next to nothing. That plain fact shows you that you cannot believe what the opposition say.I saw a constituent—and everybody in this place talks about their constituents—a couple of weeks ago at the RSL war veterans home. She was angry that the government had the temerity to suggest that we put up her prescription by $1. She did not understand that it was capped at $52, nor did she understand that the medicine she was getting was worth about $150,000 a year to the taxpayers of Australia. She did not understand that. Once I explained that to her, she said, `I'm sorry for being angry when you came to see me. I now understand what the position is.' The second point the opposition puts forward is:... Australian pensioners and concession cardholders will go without almost five million prescriptions, and Australian families will also go without almost half a million prescriptions as a result of the proposed increase ...They will go without nothing. It is a disgrace that the Labor Party should put that forward. Why would they go without anything? For pensioners, this government introduced the automatic indexation of pensions—which has been highly successful and highly appreciated by the less well-off in our community—and here we are asking them to pay a maximum of $52 a year for up to $150,000 worth of medicines. If a pensioner cannot pay an extra $1 a prescription, there is something wrong. Indeed, my mum is a pensioner and she saves money on the pension. She does very well; she certainly has no qualms about it. I believe it is entirely reasonable, for the reasons I am going to come up with shortly, to ask pensioners to pay an additional $1.The third point in the opposition's amendment says:by depriving sick and elderly Australians of the medicines they need, there will be an increased need for greater medical interventions ...Let me tell you who is going to deprive pensioners of the medicines they need: the Australian Labor Party by voting down this legislation. Why is that? The answer is of course that, if the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme is unsustainable, the government cannot afford to put new medicines on the scheme—new medicines that pensioners need—and they will become unavailable. It is the Australian Labor Party that will deprive sick and elderly Australians of medicines they should be entitled to. I say to the Australian Labor Party: pass this legislation. Give the government and the country the ability to fund the provision of the new, modern medicines that every day become available.There is a sting in the tail here: if the Labor Party do not pass this legislation—they have indicated that they do not intend to, and they seem pretty gleeful about that—the big end of town to which they refer will be able to afford to buy these new medicines and pay full price; they will have access to them. But what about the sick and the elderly in our community? The Australian Labor Party will deny them access to the latest medicines available. I think that is disgraceful.The fourth point the opposition put forward is:there are other, more effective, means by which the long term sustainability of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme could be assured, ... I have heard the Labor Party suggestions in this regard. They are tinkering at the edges; they are not addressing the particular fiscal issues we need to address. With the increase in the PBS running at around $700 million a year, year on year, you cannot tinker at the edges. A hallmark of the Howard government has been financial responsibility, and it is financially irresponsible of the Australian Labor Party to suggest that the country can afford a PBS that goes on increasing $700 million a year, year on year.Previous speakers from the Labor Party in this debate have said this is all about the budget bottom line. Of course it is. That is what the Labor Party do not seem to understand and they certainly did not in the last five years they were in government. Why is it about the budget bottom line? The single most important thing that any government in any country in the world can do is run a healthy economy and a surplus budget, because that is the single most important thing that helps low-income earners, the elderly and the sick. It is the ability of the government to provide for people who cannot provide for themselves. Without running a strong fiscal program and without running a budget bottom line that runs in surplus, you cannot continue. The Labor Party think you can just by racking up debt, but that will come back to haunt you at some stage in the future. As everyone who owns a home knows, the quicker you pay off your home the better off you are. The Labor Party have the opposite view: the more you borrow the better off you are. That can only last for a few years and then it will all implode.The government do not resile from wanting to make sure that the budget bottom line is important. We are careful about what we do. We are fiscally responsible. We do do the hard things. I think that if you talk to the sick and the elderly in the country you will find they would prefer that the government operate that way. I hear arguments along the lines, `If you've got money, you can get a Rolls Royce health care scheme.' I think the member for Shortland said that. Again there is this class distinction business. It is sickening to hear that as an excuse for a logical debate in the Australian parliament. The member for Shortland does not understand that a considerable number of pensioners have private health insurance. The Australian Labor Party do not seem to understand how those pensioners will react if the Australian Labor Party try to take the 30 per cent health rebate off them. You do not have to be operating at the top end of town to enjoy private health insurance. I speak to many pensioners who jealously guard their ability to stay in private health insurance. The member for Shortland also mentioned a pensioner to whom she has spoken who is taking 18 pills a day and who is frightened. The member for Shortland, if she were a responsible member of this parliament, would have pointed out that the government's measure is capped, that the pensioner need pay no more than $52 in a whole year and after that all of the medicines are free. If this pensioner is taking 18 pills a day, just imagine what that is costing the Commonwealth of Australia and how many scripts will be dispensed over a year. It is very good value to make sure that that particular pensioner can continue to receive the very best of the PBS by just paying an extra dollar a script.The member for Prospect also spoke in this debate—again, there was this class distinction bit—and she said, `The government is off to its mates in the financial sector and ain't we wonderful.' I say to the member for Prospect that the Howard government is very proud that it runs the best performing economy in the OECD. It has underpinned the success of this country over the last several years; it has underpinned the success of the state governments, which is a bizarre result but the parliament knows what I am talking about.2V5Swan, Wayne, MPMr Swan—I see. You're claiming credit for the Victorian result.HK6Lindsay, Peter, MPMr LINDSAY—I am, and very proudly so. People understand how the costs of health and medicines are rising. People understand that, and they are not going to be fooled by the scare campaign of the Australian Labor Party. They know that somebody has to pay and it is the taxpayer. At the end of the day, the taxpayer pays. They understand that money does not grow on trees and that, if you run yourself into debt, you do not do well for the country. You have to be a bit responsible about these things when you are in government. John Howard and the government, as I have said earlier, have had the guts to take the hard decisions and go to the Australian people and say, `We know you mightn't like it, but it's got to be done in the interests of our country and in the interests of our kids. We want this to continue to be a great country, not a country that is burdened down by crippling debt.' Yet the Labor Party calls this a mean-spirited government. Here we are, looking after the nation, and in the Labor Party's terminology that is mean-spirited. I plead guilty to being mean-spirited. I want to make sure the nation is looked after first and foremost. But this measure is also about looking after the sick and the elderly in this country—and what better objective to have than that—and it is about the budget bottom line. A number of pensioners struggle. Labor complains about $52. I understand that can be difficult. It is difficult for pensioners who do not own their own home. There is a moral in the story there, I guess, for those who are coming through the system. The Labor Party complains about $52 extra for a pensioner who might be getting $150,000 worth of medicine, but how will the pensioner feel if the Labor Party takes their private health insurance rebate off them and whacks them with a bill of $600? How does the pensioner feel about this claim that somehow or other the public hospital system will suffer greater cost if this measure goes through? If the Labor Party's measure to knock off the private health insurance rebate goes through, I can tell you that the public hospital system is going to have an even greater cost. I just do not understand that philosophy.The member for Perth amazingly said that one of the causes of the problem is that the government listed Celebrex and Zyban on the PBS. He was kind of arguing that we should not have listed them. So I ask all the arthritis sufferers out there: how do you feel about the fact that the Labor Party thinks Celebrex should not have been listed? How about the people who have successfully used Zyban to give up smoking and have potentially saved the health system money? The member for Perth said that this was a problem and we should not have listed them. Then of course he went on with his famous line—which you would expect from the Australian Labor Party—that the government wants to thug pensioners. We can have a debate where the Australian Labor Party uses emotive terms like `thugging pensioners', `the top end of town', `the sick and the elderly', `the poorest in our society' and whatever else, or we can have an intelligent debate based on the merits of the particular bill before the parliament. I am confident that those who listen to the logic and the merits of the argument that the government is putting will understand that this bill is in the interests of our country. This bill is in the interests of the sickest and the poorest in our community. It is in the interests of the pensioners of Australia because, without it, they are going to be denied the very medicines that might be needed to keep them alive in years to come. I certainly support the bill.21:57:009341Swan, Wayne, MPMr SWAN2V5LilleyALP00—The National Health Amendment (Pharmaceutical Benefits—Budget Measures) Bill 2002 [No. 2] says so much about the character of the Howard government, and indeed the speech from the member for Herbert says so much about him—that is, this government has not got a clue what a dollar is worth to someone on a low income. It has not got a clue how it is vandalising Medicare to the point where there are whole groups of people in the community who can no longer afford to go to the doctor and who in fact are delaying doing so, and where whole groups of people in the community are paying so much more for their health care that it is having a very substantial impact on their living standards. The fact is that the higher prices for essential medicines contained in this bill are part and parcel of a wider financial pressure that this government is imposing on low-and middle-income Australians.The member for Herbert really was arguing against himself. We heard what a brilliant economy we had. We heard how well things were going. We know we have the highest tax take in our history. We know the GST is producing rivers of gold. But the only people who are going to suffer from this bill are people on low and middle incomes who have to pay more for their essential medicines, who have to delay going to the doctor, who have out-of-pocket health care costs which are savaging their living standards and costing their capacity to buy the essentials of life, like food and education for their children. So what we have here is that the highest taxing government in our history—which assured us there would be plenty of money for the essentials of public services, health and education—has suddenly turned around and decided to impose very significant additional costs on people for their essential medicines. This says so much about the character of the Howard government and so much about the member for Herbert as well. They cannot appreciate how much $1, $4 or $5 may mean in the budget of someone on a low or middle income. What we get from this government is higher prices, higher taxes and more expensive services. This is particularly the case when it comes to health services, hurting many hundreds of thousands of Australians. The government by its contribution tonight has highlighted once again that it does not walk in the same shopping aisles as average Australians; indeed, it certainly does not visit the same surgeries. The government simply does not have a clue about what is happening at the supermarket or the surgery, nor does it care that its assault on affordable health care is eroding the Australian ethos of a fair go. Essential to the Australian ethos of a fair go is affordable health care, because it brings real security to individuals and the nation—just as much as security armies or fighter planes do.This bill is an attack on families and an assault on older Australians. It seeks to increase the general patient copayment from $22.40 to $28.60. It seeks to increase the concessional copayment from $3.60 to $4.60. It will also increase the general patient safety net threshold by nearly $200 and the concessional patient safety net threshold by more than $50. The Treasurer, Peter Costello, wants average families and older Australians struggling on low fixed incomes to pay more for essential health care. Essentially, the government wants to turn Medicare inside out. It wants Medicare to cease being a universal health system and become a user-pays system. It wants to refashion the health care system in Australia along American lines. In America, families are under financial pressure and the elderly miss out.I have been getting this feedback continuously from my electorate and from areas in north Brisbane. I will quote from one letter I have received recently from Denise in Kedron. She states:While my husband can pay for our visits to a doctor, I have friends who cannot afford visits. For 9 months last year my husband was out of work and we just did not go to the doctor, even for the flu etc. Just too expensive.Under the proposals in this bill, the government's savings are based on the sorts of savings being produced by people not attending to their health care. The Department of Health and Ageing has estimated that, if Peter Costello's price hikes for prescriptions in this bill are passed by this parliament, there will be 5½ million fewer prescriptions filled each year—5½ million prescriptions unfilled because Australians cannot afford the cost. Families and older Australians will go and, indeed, are going without essential medicines. Labor will not support this kind of cost cutting.Of course, this is not the first time the Howard government has tried to slug pensioners and families more over the chemist counter. The 1996-97 budget also increased PBS copayments. Pensioners, in particular, felt the pinch with the price of each script filled jumping almost 20 per cent, from $2.70 to $3.20. The hike also broke the nexus that existed between the PBS copayment and the pharmaceutical allowance, which previously saw the copayment fully compensated for by the government. For pensioners this was the same as a pension cut. And there was more. The GST increased the price of many over-the-counter medicines by 10 per cent. Also, with the introduction of the GST, the pharmaceutical allowance was subject to the same clawback that occurred with the pension. So the four per cent pharmaceutical allowance increase was cut by two per cent. To add insult to injury, and despite a pledge from the government that the GST would not impact on prescription medicines, the copayment increased by six per cent in January 2001, due to its link to the CPI. So pensioners wore a 10 per cent hike in over-the-counter medicines, and a six per cent hike in prescription medicines, with only a two per cent increase in the pharmaceutical allowance. What do these cumulative hikes add up to? Since 1996, the price of prescription medicines for pensioners has increased at a rate of 4½ times—I will say that again: 4½ times—that of the pharmaceutical allowance designed to compensate those people. And there is more. Since 1996, over 60 medicines have been de-listed from the PBS. Among those medicines were treatments for skin conditions, anti-inflammatory medicines and nasal sprays. Pensioners and families now meet the full cost of those medicines. Combined with the copayment hikes, the typical pensioner is now paying over $140 a year more for essential medicines. All that is before the hikes contained in this bill we are debating now come into force, if we are unfortunate enough for them to be passed. On top of this, we have the decline in bulk-billing. Even before pensioners and families get to the pharmacy, they have to see their doctor. As the Howard government tightens the screws, pensioners and families are copping it coming and going.The truth is that the Howard government is determined to destroy our world-class health system—a system that is underpinned by the PBS and Medicare. The bulk-billing crisis in the waiting rooms of doctors' surgeries nationwide is hitting Australians hard. Just as young families are particularly reliant on Medicare, so are older Australians. Having worked hard and paid taxes all their lives, they know that, even with a lower retirement income, good quality health care is not beyond their means—well, not until it is got to by Peter Costello and John Howard, who are trying to change all that. You have to look no further than the decline in bulk-billing. In my electorate of Lilley, the rate of bulk-billing has dropped eight per cent in two years. This equates to approximately 2,000 doctor visits per week where patients are now being hit with up-front payments. Nearly one in three visits to the doctor in my electorate is no longer bulk-billed and the patient is hit with up-front fees.One of my constituents who has diabetes and is from Taigum wrote to me the other day saying:... my biggest concern is for my family who are unable to go to our doctor because we don't have the cash on hand to pay for the visit.Another constituent from the same suburb told me that, as a result of the drop in bulk-billing:Both my husband and myself have delayed a visit to the Doctors because of the cost involved.This decline in bulk-billing sees many older Australians seeking treatment in public and emergency hospital departments. Recently a constituent from Zillmere wrote to me saying:It's unfair that people have to line up in the hospital for hours & given ... service by overtired staff because going to the doctors is too expensive. Good medical care is a right, not a luxury. That's the way it should be. We are not a Third World country.Unfortunately, through measures like this, we are rapidly heading in that direction.During the time the Howard government has been in office, bulk-billing by GPs has declined by 10 per cent, while the average cost of seeing a doctor who does not bulk-bill has increased by more than 50 per cent to $12.57 per visit. Bulk-billing is a central part of Medicare and it continues to enjoy the overwhelming support of individual Australians and their families. The problem is that the decline in bulk-billing threatens the very principle of Medicare itself. Right now some Australians are still able to access bulk-billing by shopping around—although that is getting harder—but only if they are prepared for the inconvenience of travelling to a bulk-billing practice beyond their immediate local area.Many others are affected by not having access to local Medicare offices. Recently I was on Bribie Island, a retirement area north of Brisbane, where I received a petition from over 1,000 locals, led by Alice and Ron Donovan, asking for a local Medicare office. The hardworking locals who put this petition together made these points. They said to me that, because there is no Medicare office, if they are unlucky enough not to have a bulk-billing doctor—which is increasingly the experience—they have to go to the local pharmacy and apply for their rebate. It then takes four days for the rebate to be deposited into their account. If they want to get their rebate from a Medicare office, they have to travel via public transport for over half a day to receive it. Many of them are in the unfortunate position of not being able to go to a doctor because they simply cannot afford the out-of-pocket expenses involved. Even if they can afford those expenses on the day, they are not in a position to immediately retrieve their rebate because of the distance to the nearest Medicare office, and that therefore deters them from making visits to a doctor. The truth is that there are many Australians now who have to choose between their health and their bank balance, if they have one. Many of these people are now putting their health in danger because they cannot access bulk-billing. Or, because there is no Medicare office, they cannot access a rebate and therefore are not able to go to the doctor. And in many cases—in many of these areas—that is before you get to the problem where doctors are simply closing their books and refusing to admit new patients. Unless the trend in bulk-billing is turned around, many of these people will simply be locked out of the medical system. A constituent of mine from Nundah sums it up best when she says, `Keeping good health is getting to be totally unaffordable.' These are her circumstances. She wrote:As a sole parent with a young son, even though I am working full time, we are still on a fixed limited income. Private health takes a big lump out and I have just recently had x rays done on my son's foot and the gap was about $35. Keeping good health is getting to be totally unaffordable.That is from someone with private health insurance. These are the pressures from the health system on low- and middle-income Australians.As I have already said, older Australians have worked hard and paid taxes all their lives. They deserve respect and support in their old age. For many, retirement was a reward, but increasingly, with many of these pressures, for some it is getting more difficult. During its time in office, the Howard government has been steadily trying to strip from older Australians the basics they need for a modest but comfortable retirement. The introduction of the GST directly undercut the buying power of the aged pension. For starters, the March 2001 government decision to claw back half the pension increase it gave to pensioners when it introduced the GST was a devastating blow. That amounted to $7.90 per fortnight for a single or $13.20 for a couple. That is just one example of the fine print conditions that apply: `You'll all be compensated for the GST; don't read the conditions.' Suddenly, a few months later, it is all whipped away. That is before you get to the promise that was made about the $1,000 bonus, which was supposed to have been paid to the whole lot of them; four in 10 over 60 received nothing. These are the people who have paid more for gas and electricity and have had their living standards eroded, because the impact of the GST and other price rises on the basics on which they spend money has been proportionally higher than the average increase in the CPI. These are the people who have been caught in a vicious cost squeeze.My own local Pricewatch survey has revealed how the cost of even basic items has risen far in excess of the general increase in the price of goods and services. My Pricewatch team has analysed milk and bread price trends, and the results show that the price of staples are increasing at double the CPI. The survey examines the cost of a litre of full cream milk and two national brands of plain white sliced bread. Over the period of the Pricewatch survey, full cream milk rose from an average of $1.17 a litre in January 1999 to $1.49 in September 2002, an increase of 27 per cent—one we can thank the National Party for. A 650-gram loaf of Tiptop Sunblest bread rose 25 per cent from $2.12 in January 1999 to $2.65 in September this year. A 700-gram loaf of sliced Buttercup Wonder White bread rose 26 per cent from $2.33 in February 2000 to $2.94 in the September Pricewatch survey. Since that time, it has risen another 8c a loaf at Coles and Woolworths. Bread and milk have gone through the roof. Their increases are far in excess of those of the CPI and far in excess of any of the sorts of increases that have been offered and that have supposedly been put there to protect low-income people in our community. It is easy to see why older Australians on fixed incomes are feeling as though they are going backwards—let alone families on fixed incomes with a couple of children or incomes made modest by the cost of bringing up their children. When bread, milk and other staples in life are rising at that rate, the changes have a savage impact on the living standards of Australians. The CPI is used in part to determine how much wages and pensions should increase. But if the price of staples like bread and milk are increasing at a faster rate than the CPI, many of these people are falling behind.The same applies to low-income self-funded retirees. Low interest rates might be good for those purchasing a home, but they can reduce the income of retirees. Brian Rowell of Mount Gravatt in my home city of Brisbane wrote to me two weeks ago, and I want to repeat some of what he had to say. He said:As self-funded retirees, we hear with dismay that interest rates are unlikely to rise before the year 2004. Interest on (dwindling) capital and a plummeting stock market now are the only streams of income left to us.This modest income is further eroded by insidious price increases at the local supermarket that appear to bear no relationship to that fiction called the Consumer Price Index.Age, not to say weariness, leaves us optionless. Self motivation must have got us where we are today but now we can no longer `stiffen the sinews', already plagued with arthritis, nor can we summon up the blood to go prospecting for work or work harder, as mindlessly recommended by our well-heeled, cynical leadership with their fatuous exhortations—such as we get from the Minister for Ageing, who is at the table. Brian Rowell continues:Now we are in `No Man's Land' and defenceless against the few national corporate marauders dominating the market place and plundering our pockets with their open licence ... or so it seems. There is something of the `Alice in Wonderland' attitude about the current indifference meted out today by authority who look benignly down upon the jungle playground where tooth and claw tactics are allowed to rule the day. Look at Banks, Supermarkets, et al. If it has been said that a civilisation is judged by the care it takes of its poor, then ours is sorely indicted.Mr Rowell has been monitoring the price of household grocery items in his suburb and claims the average cost of each of the items in his supermarket trolley has increased by an average of 26 per cent since January 2000.Recently I met with the Combined Pensioners and Superannuants Association of New South Wales, who presented me with a petition which I shall present to this House next Monday. They are rightly concerned about the inability of the age pension to keep pace with the cost of living. They want the rate of the age pension to reflect the true cost of living. Next week I will be presenting to the parliament their petition for a rethink of the pension formula. It calls for an increase in the rate of the age pension to meet the costs of essentials like bread, milk and electricity, but does not take into account the savage assault the Minister for Ageing is mounting through the withdrawal of bulk-billing and the increase in the cost of essential medicines. I believe we need to go back to basics, rethink the way we measure the cost of living and see how this is impacting on many low-income Australians.It is clear from the spending patterns of older Australians, and those of many single Australians and families as well, that the overall inflation rate does not show just how hard life is for them. They are consuming more basic goods, which are rising faster than the average. This is not reflected in the official figures. Through its attack on Medicare, its attempt to ratchet up the cost of medicines and its taxing away the modest incomes of older Australians the Howard government is undercutting their livelihood. What is so mean about this government is the fact that, after years of backbreaking toil, Australians who expect to be treated with respect and dignity in their retirement are simply copping it in the neck through these increases in essential medicines, at the supermarket through the increase in the price of so many of those basics and generally through the fact that they now bear a much larger proportion of the tax burden in this community than they did before the introduction of the GST. The Howard government mouths rhetoric about being in touch with ordinary people, but the truth when you look at it is that this government does not defend the battlers, it simply creates them. 22:16:009346Hartsuyker, Luke, MPMr HARTSUYKER00AMMCowperNP10—I rise in the House tonight to speak on the National Health Amendment (Pharmaceutical Benefits—Budget Measures) Bill 2002 [No. 2]. This is a very important bill and needs to be addressed as a matter of urgency. As I go around my electorate I talk to many people. I have asked them what sort of pharmaceutical benefits scheme they want. Do they want a scheme that is going to meet their needs well into the future? Do they want a scheme that is going to be sustainable? Do they want a scheme that is going to make the latest drugs available? Or do they want a scheme that is going to collapse? People invariably say that they want a sustainable scheme that is going to deliver the latest in drugs. They want a scheme that is going to meet their needs. This bill aims to ensure the sustainability of our Pharmaceut-ical Benefits Scheme, a great scheme that is the envy of many countries around the world.Why do we need the scheme to be sustainable? The reasons are obvious to us on the government side, but perhaps members opposite have some difficulty with fiscal responsibility. It is easy to provide services with no reference to cost. If you can spend like there is no tomorrow, you can do just about anything. But the results are obvious. We have seen them in government before; we have seen them with high inflation and high interest rates. Who is most affected when interest rates are rushing away and inflation is high? Certainly the most needy members of our community are the ones most affected, not the top end of town that members opposite are so keen to knock. They are not the ones who are affected greatly; it is the people who are most needy in our community. That is why this government wants to preserve our Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and have a scheme that is sustainable, but we have to do it with responsible government and within cost parameters that ensure we can continue to provide the sorts of services people want.When you look at the figures you see why it is so important that the scheme be reformed. If you look at the cost of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme—some $4.8 billion in 2001-02—you see that it is a very large item of government expenditure, and one that needs to be considered very carefully. You have to consider not only the gross amount of that figure but also the fact that that $4.8 billion represented a 13.6 per cent increase on the previous year—and the problem is not just this year. Over the past decade the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme has increased by an average of about 14 per cent per annum. Anyone with any knowledge of maths would know that with a compounding rate of 14 per cent it will not take long before the scheme is running wildly out of control. That is why this government has taken the difficult but measured decision to implement measures that are going to reform the scheme and preserve its ability to provide those pharmaceuticals into the future.The Intergenerational Report showed that by 2042 the number of people over the age of 65 will have doubled and the number of people over the age of 85 will have quadrupled. I see the Minister for Ageing sitting at the table and I am pleased to say that senior members of our community know that their interests are in good hands with the Minister for Ageing: he is very caring and very compassionate about our aged people. By 2042 the cost of health care is set to double. These are pretty staggering figures. How much is the PBS going to cost in 2040? It is going to cost around $60 billion, so it is time we put measures in place to ensure we have the sustainability we are looking for. I am sure members opposite are happy to go along in some sort of airy-fairy land, let the costs run out of control and let the budget run into deficit. They will be selling off more assets and still be running a deficit. They have form in those areas, but we are after responsible reform that ensures we can meet community needs. We want to make sure we get quality new drugs—those expensive drugs—when they are available so that people have the very best in medical care. Under the current scheme, concession cardholders pay $3.60 per script and general patients pay $22.60 per script. That is in spite of the huge cost of medications. Glivec costs over $6,000 per script; Taxol, a cancer drug, costs $2,350 a script; Betaferon for multiple sclerosis costs $1,175 a script; and Zoladex for prostate cancer costs $1,150 per script. These vast costs are met by our very fine scheme; yet how much do we ask of the concession cardholder who may need Glivec at over $6,000 a script? We ask for $3.60. I have to say that, if the taxpayers of this country are willing to pay over $6,000 to improve an individual's quality of life, I think it only fair and reasonable that we ask that individual for an additional $1 to assist the taxpayer in meeting their needs and providing them with a better quality of life. I think it is a totally reasonable proposition and I think most reasonable people on the street would agree.As I go around my electorate and tell people about the subsidy that the government is providing to people out there—the costs of drugs that are being provided at very modest cost—people say, `Why hasn't this been pointed out to me before?' It is because the members opposite want to hide the huge subsidies that this government, through the PBS, is giving. People are unaware of the vast cost of these drugs. When you explain to them that the government is paying $2,350 for Taxol, for instance, and patients are being required to pay $3.60 now and one more dollar under our scheme, they agree; they think that is totally reasonable. The member for Herbert quite rightly pointed that out earlier. It is a totally reasonable measure and one that this House should support. I am disappointed that the members opposite have not joined with us in ensuring the sustainability of this scheme.What is going to happen under the scheme? We are asking for an additional $1 per script from concession cardholders and an additional $6.20 per script from general patients, increasing the amount they have to pay to $28.60. You would have to agree that even $28.60 for a drug that costs taxpayers in excess of $6,000 is totally reasonable.Another thing that is not mentioned is that, under our changes to the scheme, many drugs do not increase in price. Members opposite only make a big deal about the ones that do, but the fact is that the price of a great many drugs under our scheme does not change. Under the proposed changes, the price of those drugs will remain the same. For example, the price of Ventolin before the changes to the PBS is $13. How much will it be after the changes to the PBS? Not $18, not $15, but $13. It is completely unchanged. Feldene currently costs $14. How much will it cost after the changes? Still $14; no change. But members opposite do not want to let anyone know that. They just want to continue this scare campaign, scaring the elderly and scaring the sick into thinking that they will not be able to afford quality pharmaceuticals under the scheme.We are not abandoning the sick; we are not abandoning the poor. We have included a safety net, a very reasonable safety net. Once concession cardholders have had 52 prescriptions per year they do not have to pay any more for their pharmaceuticals. Once general patients have had 31 scripts, further prescriptions are available at the concessional rate of $4.60. These measures are very well thought out. They aim to balance the needs of the community with the sustainability of the scheme. It makes economic sense.Let us look at a range of other drugs. The average cost of a prescription of Lipex is about $60.86. How much is that costing the government every year? Some $251 million. Lipex is a drug for high cholesterol. Lipitor costs $59.71 for a prescription. The cost to the government was around $250 million in the year ending 31 December 2001. There are many of these drugs and the costs are staggering. This government has taken the responsible position of putting in measures that bring this scheme under control. Celebrex is a popular arthritis drug. It costs $46.92 per script; the cost to the government is $142 million. Zyban, the anti-smoking drug for nicotine addiction, costs $249.51 a script. How much does a concession cardholder have to pay for this drug under our revised changes? Only $4.60. What is that costing the taxpayer per year? Around $82 million. These figures are quite staggering. These measures are absolutely vital. I am totally committed to these proposed changes. The government is committed to these changes. It is just unfortunate that members opposite, instead of joining with us in ensuring sustainability, are engaging in some cheap point scoring. We have had a lecture by the member for Lilley on the price of bread and the price of full cream milk. While he felt he was enlightening us, the real issues are ensuring the sustainability of the scheme and ensuring that people have access to the very latest in medicines.I will list a couple more. Zoloft, an antidepressant drug, costs $38.88 a script and costs the taxpayer $64 million. Human insulin for the treatment of diabetes costs $189.19 a script and costs the taxpayer $75 million. I think most Australians would agree that it is totally reasonable that the government assist people in meeting their needs with these drugs. But the government firmly believes that, while it is prepared to do that, it has to slightly increase the contribution by those people in receipt of those drugs.In conclusion, this is a very important bill. It is important when you look at it in terms of the Intergenerational Report. The growth in our aged population means that the demand for medical services is likely to increase. We have to begin now to take the steps to ensure that the cost of the PBS does not blow out to $60 billion, as the Intergenerational Report said it will if no measures are taken. We do not want to bury our heads in the sand like members opposite and just ignore things. I noticed the member for Prospect had a range of issues but there was no actual quantification of the savings that they might make. We cannot have a number of airy-fairy notions; we need to look very carefully at what needs to be done from a cost perspective to keep this scheme affordable and to keep the drugs flowing to the people who very dearly need them.I totally support the bill. It is one that shows that we are a responsible government. We are fiscally responsible; we are also very caring for those who are most needy in the community, the sick and the poor. We are making sure that they have the very best care. We do not want to see the system collapse. We do not want to see the budget blow out, as members opposite would do. They might be able to provide a PBS but it would be at the cost of high inflation and high interest rates. They would see the budget deficit running out of control and, as I think the Treasurer said some time back, they would be selling off the house and still increasing the mortgage.This is a very important bill and it is totally responsible. I think the government should be commended on it. I know that the Minister for Ageing totally supports the bill. With his very fine grasp of the portfolio of ageing he is aware of the need for these drugs to be provided at reasonable cost throughout the community. Members opposite are foolish in that they cannot see the need for this reform while the government can. I commend this bill to the House and am looking forward to members opposite supporting the passage of this bill so that we can ensure that the delivery of quality medications to the people who most need them is maintained.Debate interrupted.Adjournment934810000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Order! It being 10.30 p.m., I propose the question:That the House do now adjourn.934822:30:009348Vamvakinou, Maria, MPMs VAMVAKINOU00AMTCalwellALP00—This evening, I would like to speak about an important event which is unfolding in my electorate of Calwell. A few weeks ago I wrote to the mayor of the city of Hume, which falls within my electorate of Calwell, proposing that we bid for the acquisition of Melbourne's Centenary of Federation Arch. A subsequent Hume City Council meeting approved a motion by Councillor Gary Jungwirth proposing that Hume indeed bid for the federation arch, which is looking for a permanent home as its temporary position on Melbourne's St Kilda Road is about to come to an end. It has now become a bit of a contentious issue amongst residents with many expressing disapproval for the council's bid on the basis that they are deeply concerned about the costs associated with removing and reassembling the structure if Hume were to become its permanent new home. The council has estimated that it may cost up to $200,000. Naturally, residents are right to feel concerned. I support the council's bid for the federation arch but only on the basis that ratepayers' money is not used to foot the bill. I also believe that the council has a similar view and they will attempt to raise the money from other sources, such as corporate sponsorship and donations.HK5Andrews, Kevin, MPMr Andrews—They will tempt West Heidelberg!00AMTVamvakinou, Maria, MPMs VAMVAKINOU—Indeed, there is quite a bit of competition for a $200,000 bill. For those who have not seen the Centenary of Federation Arch, it is a visually stunning piece of art, innovative in design, which has straddled Melbourne's Princes Bridge—right in the heart of our arts precinct—as a commemoration of our Federation and continues a fine tradition of arches in this country. Centenary of Federation arches were constructed across the country to help celebrate the Federation of the Australian Commonwealth. The idea that arches were to be the symbol of our federation is based on the fact that arches were a popular form of architecture at the beginning of the 20th century, which was of course around the time of the birth of our nation.Melbourne City Council is seeking proposals from towns or organisations interested in inheriting the 30-tonne structure. It is a controversial structure, akin to another controversial Melbourne icon, colloquially known as the `Yellow Peril'. Given the city of Melbourne wants to relocate the arch, it must also bear some responsibility towards the costs of moving and reconstructing it. It is a bit cute for the city of Melbourne to take an economic rationalist view of the future of the arch by calling for competitive tendering when in fact the arch was donated to Melbourne City Council in the first place. The council has had the benefit of the arch and should now, together with its corporate partners, bear the cost of relocating it. It may have to give this proposal some serious thinking because the estimated costs of removal will serve as a deterrent for those councils who are interested in offering it a new home.Tattersall, who described the arch as `a gift to the people of Australia', donated the $500,000 for Melbourne's Centenary of Federation Arch. Its design was based on images of 1901 arches and reflects the diversity of cultures working together in our first century. It featured lighting that ran from dusk to dawn to highlight the construction of coloured metal rods with semitransparent cloth covering it. This arch is probably the most innovative arch the world has ever seen, even though some people describe it as a gargantuan game of pick up sticks. It is affectionately known as `pick up sticks' in Melbourne. The city of Hume is big and appropriate enough for the Centenary of Federation Arch. I am pleased that the idea has received support from a majority of our councillors. I would like to reassure our ratepayers that not one cent of their money will be used for the relocation costs if Hume is successful in its bid.As the member for the area, I come into regular contact with local residents who are committed to preserving and enhancing our area's historical sites and values. The acquisition of the Centenary of Federation Arch would enhance the history of the area. The area bordered by the city of Hume is an important part of the nation's pre and post Federation history, ranging from the Kulin nation of Aboriginal people's history in the area, the exploration of European explorers Hume and Hovell, and John Fawkner's development of the region to the use of local land, known as the Maygar Barracks, for military purposes in World Wars I and II.There are numerous open spaces in the municipality which would be suitable for the structure. Naturally, there will be people who will find the idea peculiar or even shocking, but I am sure that in due time they will warm to the proposal. Bold structures such as the arch will give the city of Hume a much needed boost of constructive controversy, but more importantly will put Broadmeadows on the map as a city that can be a serious part of Melbourne's cultural and artistic life. We are, after all, the gateway to the city of Melbourne. Tullamarine airport is at the centre of our city and we are a perfect home for this extraordinary piece of art and history. 935022:35:009350King, Peter, MPMr KING00AMQWentworthLP10—Last week on 28 November, I attended what I understand to be the last of the funerals for the victims of the Bali bombings in the eastern suburbs of Sydney at St Andrew's church in Malabar. At that funeral, I met a man who had attended no less than nine funerals of friends and relatives who were victims of that terrible disaster. He asked me the question, apart from the impact upon his family: what did it mean to Australia? I have had the opportunity to make my own observations about these matters because I have attended a number of funerals in the eastern suburbs, including shortly after October 12, a gathering of some 7,000 people on Coogee Oval. Following that simple ceremony, many people wrote on small pieces of paper and placed them in a large bin. They were then written up into a book made available to the public. Over the last few weeks, at the various public, and independent—including systemic and Jewish—schools in my community, there has been a planting of wattles by the young people to commemorate those victims. Yesterday at Bondi Beach, the Hanukkah festival held by the orthodox Jewish community met in solidarity with the Bali bombing victims. I had the honour of lighting one of the menorah lamps with a young man named Trent Thompson, whose brother Clint was killed in the Sari nightclub disaster. Next Saturday night at Darling Harbour, more than 1,800 people will be gathered in an event to raise funds for the families of the victims. I think that that will probably see closure for the people in my part of Sydney.But there were not only those events but also the funerals themselves. Adam Howard, a constituent, was buried at St Mark's, Darling Point, on 4 November. A few days later at St Anne's Catholic Church in North Bondi, Chloe Byron was buried. Then, just last week, Cathy Selin—whose son Matthew played rugby with my son Hamish for the South Coogee side—and her relatives, Steve and Gerry Buchan, who were also killed in the disaster, were buried at the same funeral. Steve Buchan was on the staff of Woollahra Council, where I was once the mayor and where my wife is currently a councillor. So there are a number of linkages.The extraordinary thing about these events insofar as our community is concerned has been not only the outpouring of grief, which was so obvious at the ceremony just last week where there were three victims buried at St Andrews Church, Malabar, but also the community support for the families, relatives and friends—most obvious perhaps at St Anne's Church in North Bondi where more than 1,000 people gathered and then walked down to Bondi Beach. They walked out onto the rock ledge at the edge of the beach with David Byron—the father of Chloe—who surfs there every day—along with girls of Brigidine Convent, and they cast Chloe's ashes into the sea. I also note the central role of the churches in these critical events, as mentioned by Canon Boak Jobbins in his fine oration at St Mark's, Darling Point.What led me to make some remarks tonight was not only the closure of grief for the families and friends, the community support and the role of the churches but also the broader question that was asked of me just last week. I am convinced that our country has not been made weaker by the events of Bali, as was the hope of those fanatics, the terrorists, who perpetrated these heinous, wicked acts. Our country has been made stronger. The remarks of Trent Thompson, whom I mentioned a little earlier, still ring in my ears. He said, `I don't want our country to change. I don't want to respond negatively to these people. Hatred and contempt is not our response to the hatred and contempt of the fanatics who perpetrated these evil acts.' In a way, that is how our country has become stronger. It has also revealed an inner strength. Those who would attack our country and underestimate our strengths should never do so. (Time expired)935122:40:009351O'Connor, Gavan, MPMr GAVAN O'CONNORWU5CorioALP00—In the limited time I have available in this adjournment debate, I wish to raise an issue of deep concern to several of my constituents. This issue relates to the proposed extension to the Glenburn nursing home in Glenleith Avenue, Drumcondra in the Corio electorate. I acknowledge the presence in the House of the Minister for Ageing, who was briefly apprised of this matter during a recent visit to Geelong.It has never been my practice as a federal member to interfere in planning processes that are rightly the province of local and state governments. This matter, however, also involves the allocation of an additional 30 beds to this nursing home funded by the Commonwealth at a time when the then Department of Health and Family Services was embroiled in legal action against the owner of Glenburn in Tasmania for failing to meet appropriate standards of fire safety, dementia and continence care and pain management. The residents immediately affected by this development are quite justified in asking how this development was ever approved by the City of Greater Geelong in the first place and how the company owners of Glenburn, given the Tasmanian experience, were ever allocated additional beds by the then minister and department.For the benefit of the House, I will briefly outline the circumstances of the case. Glenburn nursing home is located in Glenleith Avenue, Drumcondra, Geelong, in a residential area which is also listed as a heritage precinct under the City of Greater Geelong's planning scheme. The current nursing home is a single storey, 30-bed construction located on one residential block. The owner's proposals involve an expansion of the facility to 60 beds, covering three residential blocks, including a two-storey construction and an underground car park. Regrettably, the five-minute limit in this debate will not allow me to pursue in detail every objection by residents to this development; however, I have given residents a commitment to pursue this matter in the context of appropriate legislation over the final weeks of the sittings, and I will do that.There are serious questions that need to be answered by both the City of Greater Geelong, whose officers initially approved this development, and the Department of Health, whose officers approved the extra 30 beds. Given that the current facility is located in a residential area, subject to heritage overlay provisions and near the base of a railway overpass on an extremely busy thoroughfare, handling thousands of vehicular movements per day, how was council officer approval given for an expanded nursing home involving the demolition of residential properties and the construction of a two-storey commercial operation in this residential heritage area? Given that the minister's department in 1998 was actively engaged in litigation against a company owned by the Glenburn proprietor, Mr Jeffrey Alexander, in Tasmania for failure to implement appropriate standards of care in a nursing home there, how was Mr Alexander's company allocated an extra 30 beds to expand the Glenburn nursing home in Geelong? These are two central questions which spawn a myriad of ancillary questions relating to council approval processes, planning considerations, VCAT deliberations, care and safety of the aged at Glenburn, residents' rights and appropriate nursing home developments in the whole Geelong region. I will detail these issues more fully on the floor of this House at an appropriate opportunity.It is now a matter for the public record that a panel of City of Greater Geelong councillors considered this an inappropriate development for the site and offered the owner council assistance in identifying a more appropriate alternative site for the development. I understand that, to date, that offer has been ignored. I have arranged to meet Minister Andrews during the remaining weeks of the sittings to put before him the serious concerns of residents affected by this development. The minister enjoys considerable respect on this side of the House for his reasonable and considered assessment of these contentious matters—far more than his predecessor. I am confident that he will listen to sound argument from honest and concerned Drumcondra residents who are appalled that this development was ever granted approval. I acknowledge the presence in the House tonight of the honourable member for Corangamite, who has been apprised of this particular development and who has indicated to me—and, I believe, the minister—his own serious concerns about this development. 935222:45:009352Ciobo, Steven, MPMr CIOBO00AN0MoncrieffLP10—I rise this evening after having had my attention brought to an article that was published in the Gold Coast Bulletin by state political correspondent Sue Lappeman. In the article, Sue Lappeman made reference to the fact that Queensland Premier Peter Beattie had chided me for taking credit for the allocation of additional police to the Gold Coast. Recently the Queensland state government made the decision to allocate an additional 70-odd police to the Gold Coast. The Premier was ostensibly bemused that I should say that one of my key achievements in my first 12 months was that I had managed to secure additional police for the Gold Coast. Sue Lappeman made the comment that perhaps if I had referred to the role that the Gold Coast Bulletin had played, my taking the credit would have been more valid.I seek in the chamber this evening to highlight one crucial factor: I did not take credit for the allocation of additional police for the Gold Coast in my own right; I did so on behalf of many hundreds of people that make up the Gold Coast community, for they are the people that came out in force to support and to circulate a petition that I launched during the last federal campaign calling for additional police. I recognise that policing is traditionally a state issue. However, there are no Liberal representatives in my electorate, and I take my role of putting forward the Liberal Party position very seriously. One thing that was very clear to me over a long period was that the Queensland state government was blatantly ignoring the needs of the Gold Coast. I am not one to talk down the Gold Coast; quite the contrary, I believe in talking up the Gold Coast. I believe that, as Australia's sixth largest and fastest growing city, we have a lot of blue sky ahead of us. Having said that, the Gold Coast also has, unfortunately, one of the highest crime rates in the state, and the reason it is like that is that the Queensland state government has, for far too long, ignored the need for additional police.During the last campaign, I circulated a petition encouraging the support of people in my electorate. As a result, we successfully applied pressure on the state government and received additional police. Instead of acknowledging this fact, the Queensland Premier commented that I was the `king of kudos'—as if in some way I was trying to take advantage of the situation. In fact, he said that the real credit belonged to the seven state Labor members of parliament—I call them the `silent seven'. Most intriguing, though, is the fact that in saying that the credit really belonged to the seven state Labor MPs, the Premier overlooked one important fact—and I will speak principally about one of the state Labor members, Robert Poole. Mr Poole, who is the state member for Gaven in my electorate, actually went head to head with me on the police issue. He said in the Gold Coast Sun:Why is Mr Ciobo focusing on the police issue when there is obviously not a shortage of police. He has just jumped on the bandwagon.I find it incredible that the Queensland Premier would say that I am the `king of kudos' when he tries to attribute credit not to the community who deserve it but rather to the state Labor member who in fact campaigned against me on the basis of saying that the Gold Coast did not need additional police. So, the state Labor member said that we did not need additional police, I said we did, the state government granted the Gold Coast additional police and somehow it wasn't me or the people in my community that launched the petition but the state Labor member who campaigned against it! It is all very intriguing.Also intriguing was the recent comment the state Labor member made with respect to a company called Overseas Game Meat Exports. The state Labor member said that this company had closed its doors because of AQIS and that there would be 450 people unemployed by Christmas. In fact, the company is doing very well. The Commonwealth government recently gave this company $1.35 million for exports, and their future is absolutely booming. I am astounded that the state Labor member for Gaven can be so inaccurate, can be so wrong and yet the Labor Premier, Peter Beattie, continues to stand by him when quite clearly this gentleman does not have a clue. 935322:50:009353Murphy, John, MPMr MURPHY83DLoweALP00—The ongoing drought is now the worst since records have been kept—a period covering over 140 years. Yet, despite all the evidence, the government refuses to consider the possibility that greenhouse-gas-induced climate change has had any role in the disaster. The worldwide catalogue of climatic catastrophe is now so extensive and the connection between rising temperatures and greenhouse gas emissions so compelling that urgent measures need to be taken to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.It is well understood that the so-called El Nino effect has a profound influence on Australia's weather and is responsible for the present drought. It may be less well known that El Nino is part of a worldwide weather system that links droughts in Australia and southern Africa with floods in South America and California. The political situation in Zimbabwe is in part a consequence of the severe drought that is also affecting that part of the world. Indonesia is also blighted by the El Nino effect, and I would suggest that some of the political turmoil in that country is also a product of climatic disasters. As Bob Marley said, `a hungry man is an angry man'.The El Nino effect is explained by climatologists in terms of the flow of heat through the atmosphere and oceans. As global warming heats the planet, the intensity of the El Nino effect seems to be growing. The most disastrous possibility is that we may end up stuck in a permanent El Nino, with an unrelenting drought turning the whole of Australia into a desert. Even the environment minister has conceded that emissions have to be reduced by 60 per cent if we are not to see a worsening climate. Despite this pragmatic statement, the minister is determined to sabotage, frustrate and block any attempt by other governments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.I recently received a number of answers to questions that I put to the minister, in particular question No. 931 regarding Kyoto and related matters. The minister adamantly states, against all prevailing evidence, that the country cannot afford the cost of reducing carbon dioxide emissions. He admits that the economic models that he relies upon produce unreliable results because `we face costs that are inherently difficult to predict'. I say to the minister: what about the $6 billion cost of the present drought? The minister further justifies his position by stating, `We don't yet know the nature of international climate change action post-2012.' Does the minister expect that the problem of climate change will suddenly disappear or that the rest of the world will abandon measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions? No other government is that stupid. The minister stated that the government intends to produce a climate change agenda that `will be developed over the coming months, working with all levels of government, business and the community'. What has been achieved to date? What needs to be done? I would suggest that a good start would be for the government to take its head out of the sand and sign the Kyoto protocol. Following that decision, it could take up at least some of the proposals that have been put forward by the scientists and engineers who have been working on viable, cost-effective solar-powered electricity generators. Around half of our carbon dioxide emissions come from coal-fired power stations, so any measures that can reduce emissions from this source would have an immediate and significant effect. Another suggestion I put forward tonight is to provide adequate funding for freight railways, in particular for electrification. Emissions from the transport sector have grown by nearly 20 per cent since 1990, mainly due to growth in road freight. Carrying most long-distance freight on electric railways, which are eight times more energy efficient, would also significantly reduce emissions. We are approaching the seventh lean year of the Howard government in respect of concerns relating to the environment. In those years, we have seen fear used as a potent political force to divide the community and to ensure the survival of a government with an inadequate policy response to Australia's serious environmental problems. Will this terrible disaster be seen as a portent of the possible consequences of the government's continuing indolence on climate change? I say that Australians deserve and expect a far more responsible approach to countering climate change than we have seen from this government, which is preoccupied with gaining political mileage from Australia's current insecurity.935422:55:009354Billson, Bruce, MPMr BILLSON1K6DunkleyLP10—I encourage the member for Lowe to catch up on what is going on with climate change. He would then realise that, under the current Kyoto architecture, with all the countries with a commitment under Kyoto you would see a reduction of less than half a per cent in carbon dioxide emissions in those countries. All the scientists say that you would need about a 40 per cent reduction to start to have any impact whatsoever on the climate. That underlines the need to get the architecture right for whatever international framework is used to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I would have expected the member for Lowe to be across at least the most basic of facts about climate change. I would have expected him to be across issues of the renewable energy target, the photovoltaic cell incentive program and the alternative fuel incentive program. But never mind; the member for Lowe has a habit in this regard.The really big news tonight is the much awaited announcement of the student who has won the prize to adorn the front of my community information card, which comes out in the new season and the new year. Ainslie Rust, of year 3 at the Peninsula School, has drawn a magnificent picture of Santa visiting her home and a Christmas tree sparkling and bright. It is full of the joy and merriment normally associated with the Mornington Peninsula—not with the moments of mourning after the electoral outcome over the weekend. That was a more melancholy occasion. Ainslie Rust and the whole year 3 class at the Peninsula School attacked the task of creating a bright, bouncy, effervescent Christmas-New Year image to adorn the household information card. They have done a fantastic job, and my congratulations go to Ainslie Rust. She has received a book gift voucher to celebrate her achievement, and the school has also received one for participating. Congratulations to Ainslie. She is very talented and she did a fantastic job. I am sure her family will want about 200 of those cards to share around their closest friends.I also rise tonight to celebrate another announcement. Many people may have missed the announcement to the Stock Exchange on Friday by Telstra. Telstra has moved to reorganise itself in a way that will enhance its viability and boost customer service and convenient access to some of the technologies that Telstra provides. It is no coincidence that this has happened. In this House back on 16 September I was arguing that some of the successes that Telstra CountryWide has delivered for rural and regional customers—by having a dedicated corporation-wide team that could sift through the available telecommunications technologies and deliver responsive, affordable and well suited solutions to telephone and broadband users in the country—provided a real-life model of what should be done in outer metropolitan suburbs. The great news is that Telstra has embraced that idea as part of the announcements that were made to the Stock Exchange on Friday. I was very pleased to receive a call from Doug Campbell, who is the Group Managing Director of Telstra CountryWide. He said, `You have badgered enough. We agree that there is some merit in extending Telstra CountryWide sales and service to outer metropolitan areas.' This applies not only in the Mornington Peninsula and the greater Frankston area, where I am seeking to ensure that there is a retail presence for Telstra CountryWide in the community that I represent, but elsewhere around Victoria in outer metropolitan areas including Werribee, Geelong, outer northern Melbourne, Cranbourne and Pakenham, which experience many of the challenges faced by rural and regional areas in telecommunications. They will now be embraced within the expanded region of Telstra CountryWide. I know that the electorate of my friend the Chief Government Whip on the Central Coast of New South Wales will also be included. Newcastle, Penrith, Nepean, the Hawkesbury Valley, Wollongong and Canberra will be included. In Queensland, the Sunshine Coast, Redcliffe, Ipswich, Logan and Gold Coast will be included. I again commend Doug Campbell and the team at Telstra CountryWide. My view, and the argument I put to Telstra, is that Telstra CountryWide has proved to be not only responsive in delivering improved telecommunications services to rural and regional Australia; it has actually been profitable. My argument is that there is the business case, there is a proven model and there is an organisational arrangement that has been road tested to deliver benefits to rural and regional Australia. We need that sort of outcome in outer metropolitan Australia so that we can find our way through the fog of technology that is emerging in outer metropolitan areas. That has been achieved and it is a terrific outcome. Congratulations again to Telstra and thank you to the minister for highlighting these issues. It is a good outcome for the outer metropolitan community. 10000SPEAKER, TheThe SPEAKER—Order! It being 11 p.m., the debate is interrupted.23:00:009355House adjourned at 11.00 p.m.Notices9355The following notices were given:00AMXJohnson, Michael, MPMr Johnson to move:That this House:(1) recognises and celebrates 30 years of diplomatic relations between Australia and the People's Republic of China;(2) acknowledges the critical importance and value of the Australia-China relationship in the broad Asia-Pacific region; and(3) confirms Australia's support of the “One-China” policy.83QSchultz, Alby, MPMr Schultz to move:That, this year being the 50th anniversary of an historic event which led to the early development of the giant Pilbara iron ore discovery in Western Australia, this House:(1) calls on the Government to recognise the memorable flight on 22 November 1952, when Lang Hancock observed vast iron ore deposits in The Pilbara whilst flying in adverse weather accompanied by his wife Hope;(2) acknowledges the significant personal contribution Lang Hancock made in difficult circumstances in developing the mineral potential of this incredibly rich province - The Pilbara; and(3) pays tribute to this great Australian pioneer, who against all odds proved that if you have the vision you can achieve the impossible against seemingly insurmountable odds.84SO'Byrne, Michelle, MPMs O'Byrne to move:That this House:(1) notes the pivotal role undertaken by the Australian Maritime College in providing maritime education and research;(2) further notes the high standard of training the College provides overseas students; and(3) calls upon the Government to act immediately to honour its election commitment regarding university status for the College.84SO'Byrne, Michelle, MPMs O'Byrne to move:That this House:(1) notes with concern the increase in the rise of piracy in the maritime industry; and(2) calls upon the Government to ensure that the current discussions on maritime security are also seen as an opportunity for finding solutions to the piracy problem.84SO'Byrne, Michelle, MPMs O'Byrne to move:That this House:(1) recognises the role of the merchant fleet in national defence strategy; and(2) calls upon the Government to ensure a policy framework that allows a sustainable environment for the Australian merchant shipping industry in order to maintain the “fourth arm of defence”.84SO'Byrne, Michelle, MPMs O'Byrne to move: That this House:(1) notes the increased risk of illegal entry into Australia from foreign crewed vessels that are now able to spend extended periods on the Australian coast;(2) calls upon the Government to act immediately to review the current security arrangements in relation to foreign seafarers; and(3) further notes the threats posed to our coastal environment by flag of convenience vessels.Answers to Questions in Writing9357The following answers to questions were circulated:9357(Question No. 41)419357Murphy, John, MPMr Murphy83DLoweALP00 asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 13 February 2002:(1) Does subsection 262A(4) of the Income Tax Assessment Act require each person who is liable to pay income tax to retain their taxation records for a period of five years from the latter of the date on which the records were originally prepared or obtained, or the date on which the transactions or acts to which those records relate were completed.(2) Does section 70 of the Taxation Administration Act prescribe the keeping of records of indirect tax transactions for at least five years after the completing of the transactions or acts to which they relate, including the goods and services tax (GST).(3) Is he aware that, in light of the Government's amendments to the taxation law and in particular the introduction of the goods and services tax, the volume of records required to be kept under the provisions of these Acts will increase significantly by imposing a substantial storage cost on individual taxpayers by virtue of the Acts' record retention provisions.(4) In light of the increased personal financial burden of document storage costs on individual taxpayers through the introduction of the GST, will he amend the retention provisions of both Acts to reduce the retention periods from five years to three years; if not, why not.9357Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Subsection 262A(4) of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 requires a person carrying on business to keep records relevant to their tax affairs. The retention period is whichever is the later of the end of five years after:the records were prepared or obtained;the completion of the transactions or acts to which the records relate; orif the assessment period has been extended, the end of that period.(2) Section 70 of the Taxation Administration Act 1953 requires a business to retain records of indirect tax transactions and other acts relating to indirect taxes (such as importations) for at least 5 years after the completion of the transactions or acts to which they relate. Indirect taxes include the GST, wine tax and luxury car tax. These requirements are consistent with those for income tax.(3) It is expected that many of the records required to be kept for the purposes of the indirect tax laws, including the GST, will be records that are also relevant to the income tax affairs of the business. The Australian Taxation Office has provided an extensive assistance program to businesses in explaining the new tax system. This has included thousands of personal visits to small businesses to assist them in establishing proper records keeping systems. One of the benefits has been that many businesses now have better information available to them from proper record keeping systems that they are able to utilise to make better decisions in running their businesses.(4) The Government does not intend to amend the income tax or indirect tax laws to reduce the period for which records are required to be retained, as it would impair the ability of taxpayers and the Commissioner to provide evidence of overpayments or underpayments of tax if an assessment is revised.Both the income tax and indirect tax laws allow the Commissioner of Taxation a period of 4 years to increase liability in the case of avoidance of tax or to decrease liability when tax has been overpaid.9357(Question No. 46)469357Murphy, John, MPMr Murphy83DLoweALP00 asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 13 February 2002:(1) Will he provide details of the parent controlling interest of Airport Motorways Limited.(2) Will he provide details of the majority shareholders of Infrastructure Trust Australia (ITA).(3) Is Macquarie Bank one of the bidders for Sydney Airport.(4) Can the possibility that cross-industry of infrastructure associated with Sydney Airport, including road access to that airport, constitute monopolistic-like control of infrastructure to Sydney Airport. 9358Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Airport Motorway Limited is part of the Airport Motorway Group. The Airport Motorway Group (“AMG”) consists of the following entities: Airport Motorway Trust (“the Trust”); and, the Airport Motorway Holdings Group (“AMH Group”), comprising Airport Motorway Holdings Pty Limited and its wholly owned subsidiary, Airport Motorway Limited (“AML” or “the Company”).(2) Details of the major shareholders of Infrastructure Trust Australia are publicly available from the Australian Securities and Investments Commission.(3) On 30 June 2002, the Deputy Prime Minister and the Minister for Finance and Administration announced the sale of Sydney Airports Corporation Limited (SACL) to the Southern Cross Airports Corporation. (4) No.9358(Question No. 93)939358Thomson, Kelvin, MPMr Kelvin ThomsonUK6WillsALP00 asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 13 February 2002:(1) Does the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) still have an Information Technology department; if so, (a) what is the cost of that department, (b) how many staff does it employ and (c) what is its function.(2) What is the total of the financial penalties levied upon EDS for non-achievement of service credits to date and over the first year of the contract.(3) Has the ATO hired a company to ascertain whether or not the ATO has achieved savings by outsourcing its IT department to EDS; if so, (a) what is the name of the company, (b) what is its brief, (c) what is the cost to the ATO of the review and (d) did the company have to win a tender to carry out this work.9358Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The Minister for Revenue and Assistant Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) Although the ATO outsourced the provision, maintenance and support of its information technology and telecommunications infrastructure, some components were excluded from the scope of the outsourcing initiative. Those components primarily remain under the management of the ATO's ATO Technology Line.(a) The ATO Technology Line cost for the period 1 July 2001 to 31 January 2002 has been approximately $67 million. (b) At 31 January 2002, the ATO Technology Line employed full time equivalent staff numbering 305.28. Full time equivalent staff numbering 464.83 have moved to the ATO Production Line with the transfer of applications development functions.(c) The functions performed by the ATO Technology Line include contract management, capacity planning, new IT investigation, building new IT infrastructure capabilities, components of data capture such as imaging, IT Security and IT Training.(2) In general, EDS is meeting the Service Level requirements specified in the Services Agreement for IT&T Services and Industry Development. That comment notwithstanding, the ATO maintains a strong position regarding the documentation that EDS must submit to verify that services have been delivered to the contracted Service Levels. Where EDS is working towards satisfying verification requirements, the ATO and EDS have agreed that the associated Service Credits will remain interim until the required verification documentation has been signed off. The monetary value of interim Service Credits applied upto 30 June 2000 was $1.89 million. However, for the period from 24 June 1999 to 31 January 2002, the ATO has applied actual Service Credits of $1.954 million while interim Service Credits now total approximately $606,000.(3) Yes.(a) Deloitte Consulting.(b) The engagement required Deloitte to review the original cost model and to identify, document and assess the impact of all financial, scoping and volume variations made since the original costing exercise and to determine the impact that those changes had on the original cost baseline projections and the anticipated savings. (c) $249,000. (d) Deloitte Consulting was selected on a single supplier basis as the company had previously worked with the ATO in developing the original cost baseline and had been part of the RFT financial evaluation team for the ATO's IT&T outsourcing initiative. Furthermore, Deloitte Consulting had been the successful tenderer at the completion of the competitive process conducted to engage a supplier to assist in developing the original cost baseline. It was, therefore, expedient to utilise the company's established and detailed ATO knowledge base for the savings realisation assessment rather than to conduct another competitive process with its associated costs and with which there was a potential for additional costs to be incurred in relation to an acquisition of knowledge period.9359(Question No. 115)1159359Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 13 February 2002:(1) Did the former Minister for Financial Services and Regulation direct that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), when assessing aeronautical charges at Sydney Airport, not take account of revenues generated by the airport operator for services other than aeronautical services; if so, (a) when did the Government make the decision to issue the direction to the ACCC and (b) on what date was the direction given to the ACCC.(2) When did the ACCC commence the process of assessing aeronautical charges at Sydney Airport and what was the date of final submissions.(3) During the course of the ACCC's consultations relating to the Sydney Airports Corporation Ltd pricing proposal, did he issue any other direction or change any parameter for the review; if so, what was the nature of that direction or change and on which date was it issued or made.(4) Given that the Productivity Commission is considering arrangements for price regulation of airport services at all airports, should the direction given to the ACCC, in relation to Sydney Airport to not take account of revenues generated by the airport operators for services other than aeronautical services, also apply to the Productivity Commission review of aeronautical charges at all airports; if not, why not.9359Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Yes. Direction No. 22 was provided to the ACCC pursuant to s.20 of the Prices Surveillance Act 1983 on 19 April 2001.(2) Sydney Airport Corporation Limited lodged its revised draft aeronautical pricing proposal with the ACCC on 3 October 2000. The deadline for submissions in response to the ACCC's draft decision was 5 March 2001. However following the release of Direction No. 22 the ACCC allowed several weeks for the receipt of further submissions.(3) No.(4) In undertaking its review of prices regulation at Australian airports, the Productivity Commission was able to consider many matters, including the issue of pricing and the respective merits of dual till and single till approaches.9359(Question No. 333)3339359Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 14 May 2002:(1) During the operation of Airservices Australia's contingency plan for continuing air traffic control and aviation technical operations during recent industrial action by Airservices Australia staff, was there a near miss between two regular public transport jets allegedly caused by failure to adhere to, or lack of knowledge of, the contingency procedures.(2) Did two jet aircraft enter controlled airspace from the Temporary Restricted Area (TRA) on converging courses, both on different radio frequencies, each apparently not aware of the other aircraft, and which were detected in time to prevent an accident. (3) Were there instances where there was not timely notification of procedures to adjacent air traffic control units to enable controllers to become familiar with the temporary procedures.(4) Where there instances of confusion of local time zones and universal coordinated time by the National Airways Contingency Coordinating Committee in position reports to air traffic control units adjacent to the TRA.(5) Were there instances of confusion as to what aircraft were in the TRA, particularly in non-radar areas and where aircraft were on routes that were not published in the contingency plans.(6) Were there situations where aircraft were operating on routes different to those advised to the adjacent air traffic control units.(7) Were there other incidents; if so, what are the details.(8) Was a safety case conducted into the contingency plan before it was implemented; if not, why not; if so, will he provide a copy.(9) Has he ordered an investigation into these incidents; if not, why not; if so, (a) when will it report and (b) who is undertaking the investigation.9360Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPMinister for Transport and Regional Services10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:Airservices Australia (Airservices) has advised the following:(1) No.(2) Yes. A Qantas aircraft with approval to operate in the Temporary Restricted Area (TRA) and a corporate jet operating without approval in the TRA, inbound to Adelaide, were identified. Any potential conflict was resolved before separation standards were breached.(3) Two in-house confidential and anonymous reports were received alleging that inadequate notice of temporary procedures was provided to controllers. Airservices is satisfied that the notice was adequate for the purpose.(4) The National Airways Contingency Coordinating Committee (NACCC) has received no direct report about this issue.(5) No such confusion was brought to the notice of the NACCC.(6) The NACCC is aware of one situation where an approved flight was operating on other than the authorised route.(7) The following air safety incidents were reported:(i) VH-LMZ (General Aviation operation). This aircraft appeared in the TRA south of Maroochydore without prior approval.(ii) THA993 (Thai International) Bangkok - Sydney. This operation was not included in the list of aircraft notified in the hand over back to normal operations. The aircraft passed into Australian airspace about two minutes before normal operations were resumed.(iii) QFA93 (Qantas) Melbourne - Los Angeles. This aircraft claimed that, while holding in Melbourne airspace awaiting slot time into the TRA, it received an onwards clearance that differed with the issued clearance. The aircraft was originally cleared to proceed via (overflying) Sydney but claimed to have received clearance to go directly to the next waypoint. The situation was resolved. (iv) VH-TJP inbound to Adelaide via the usual inbound route for traffic from Brisbane to Adelaide. Another aircraft (VH-HVM) enroute from Bankstown to Adelaide did not have approval to operate in the TRA. The two routes being flown were convergent, however two way communications were established with both aircraft approximately 70 nautical miles from Adelaide and Air Traffic Control issued traffic information and clearances that provided vertical separation.(8) While no formal safety case was required to be provided for Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) consideration, the contingency plan included safety analysis of risks and prescription of mitigators to be applied by Airservices and airline operators. The plan was vetted and oversighted by Airservices' Directorate of Safety and Environment Assurance, and external review was undertaken by CASA. (9) The incidents have been the subject of investigation by Airservices Australia and the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB), with the following outcomes:Incident (i) was a violation of controlled airspace, and is being dealt with in the same manner as other violations.Incident (ii) was found to be a procedural error by the NACCC. The pilot is entitled to assume that an airways clearance includes approval to operate in contiguous restricted airspace. NACCC procedures have been changed to address this error.Incident (iii): Airservices' internal investigation found that no authorised source issued the `amended' clearance. The unauthorised clearance may have been the result of pilot confusion with a company message regarding possible flight planning amendments to assist in regaining the fuel lost during its delay in obtaining a clearance. However this has not been definitely established. Incident (iv) is subject to an ongoing ATSB investigation.9361(Question No. 334)3349361Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 14 May 2002:(1) During the recent industrial action at Airservices Australia, did management redesignate the airspace surrounding Australia's busiest general aviation airports, Archerfield, Moorabbin, and Bankstown to Class G airspace, with mandatory broadcast zone procedures implemented instead of the mandated air traffic control services; if so, (a) who made the decision to not require air traffic control services in this airspace, (b) when was the decision made and (c) was a safety case conducted before the decision was made; if not, why not; if so, will he provide a copy of the safety case.(2) Did any accidents or incidents occur during this alteration to the normal operating arrangements; if so, (a) how many, (b) where did they occur, (c) what was the nature of those incidents or accidents and (d) are investigations being conducted; if so, (i) by whom and (ii) when will a report be presented.(3) If investigations are under way, will the reports include the impact of the decision to change the normal operating procedures during the industrial action.(4) Is he confident that all due care and attention was given to aviation safety during this period by Airservices Australia's management.9361Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPMinister for Transport and Regional Services10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:Airservices has advised:(1) Yes. (a) The National Airways Contingency Coordinating Committee (NACCC). (b) 72 hours prior to the commencement of the industrial action. (c) A Safety Analysis of risks and the identification and implementation of mitigators was undertaken. This was subject to internal reviews by Airservices Australia's Directorate of Safety and Environment Assurance, and external review by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority. A safety case document was not produced. It should be noted that the operations authorised by the NACCC were based on plans developed, and analysis conducted, over more than 2 years.(2) and (3) No accident or incident reports were submitted in relation to those locations.(4) The Board and Management of Airservices Australia give primacy to safety in every aspect of their operations. 9361(Question No. 388)3889361Danby, Michael, MPMr DanbyWF6Melbourne PortsALP00 asked Minister representing the Minister for the Arts and Sport, upon notice, on 27 May 2002:(1) Can the Minister provide a list of all individual grants, their respective managers, and the amount of funds for each of the 50 projects within the electoral division of Melbourne Ports in the 2000-2001 financial year, granted by the Australia Council and totalling $12,750,605. (2) Can the Minister provide a list of all individual grants, their respective managers, and the amount of funds for each of the 62 projects within the electoral division of Melbourne Ports in the 1999-2000 financial year, granted by the Australia Council and totalling $6,983,724.(3) Can the Minister provide a list of all individual projects, their respective managers, and the amount of funds for each of the 81 projects within the electoral division of Melbourne Ports in the 1998-1999 financial year, granted by the Australia Council and totalling $7,216,512.9362McGauran, Peter, MPMr McGauranXH4GippslandNPMinister for Science10—The Minister for the Arts and Sport has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) Yes: ProjectManager (Applicant)Amount ($)Fiction Alexander Miller 50,000 Assistance for a jazz workshop for young women on 2 December 2001 and rehearsal fees for the Melbourne Women's Jazz Festival Septet. The Festival takes place in December 2001 with performances at Bennetts LaneAlliance of Melbourne Women Improvising Musicians 2,500 Tokyo Studio ResidencyAndrea Barker 10,000 Signal Website Coproduction Extension - agreementAustralian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) 20,706 Create/exhibit mixed media works exploring melodramatic narratives reworked from newspaper articlesBrett and Sarah Jones 20,000 The Three Interiors of Lola Strong - creative developmentCaroline Lee 14,353 `Biopsy' is a (non-live) dance installation which investigates the possibility of micro-choreographyChunky Move Ltd 34,650 Increase Component of Base Grant for 2001Circus Australia Limited (Circus Oz)209,132 Base Grant 2001 - As Part of 2001-2003 Triennial AgreementCircus Australia Limited (Circus Oz)401,384 Purchase New Performance TentCircus Australia Limited (Circus Oz)700,000 Indigenous workshop for weavingCity of Port Phillip 13,930 We Iri We Homeborn 2001 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Arts FestivalCity of Port Phillip 25,151 Round the Waterhole Donna Brown 12,250 Doctoral study of 20th century vocal performance at the University of California, San DiegoFiona Chatwin 2,136 Solo CDGlen (Kutcha) Edwards 15,000 Venice Biennale - Project Management Global Art Projects Pty Ltd (GAP)324,920 BAM Next Wave Festival - Paul Grabowsky to attend New York launch 18 April 2001Grabsound Pty Ltd 6,241 `Strike3' exploration of context, action and internal dialogue Development stage onlyHelen Herbertson 8,546 Six-month residency at the B R Whiting Library, Rome, 2001Hugh Tolhurst 14,000 Cross disciplinary collaboration between two visual artists & a writer to create new work & a publicationJ Davila/ C Zikos/ N Papastergiadis 20,000 Non-fiction Janine Burke50,000 2001 activitiesKeene Taylor Theatre Project125,000Stage 3 - final development of `Pervert' culminating in a presentation at the Hi Fi Bar and BallroomLouise Taube 50,000 The grant is to compose score, develop software, and produce pre-recorded materials for the music and sound component of the Magic Bike Project —a mobile, fully self-contained, pedal-powered sound sculpture designed to energise public domains.”Magic Bike Group 5,000 ProjectManager (Applicant)Amount ($)Magic Bike - creative developmentMagic Bike Group 24,256 Pianist Andrea Lam to work with Markus Stenz and perform with the MSOMelbourne Symphony Orchestra 10,000 Increase Component of Base Grant for 2001Melbourne Symphony Orchestra4,831,481Base Grant 2001 - As Part of Triennial Agreement 2001-2003Melbourne Theatre Company293,553 The Melbourne Youth Music Council Inc received $10,000 as a contribution to professional fees for 2001 activities, to include a series of six concerts.Melbourne Youth Music Council Inc 10,000 Poetry Michael Farrell 15,000 The grant is for the recording of a mastertape of contemporary solo works for the recorder, performed by Natasha Anderson. The material will consist of the first recording of a number of Australian works and a commissioned work from Europe. All works are considered seminal 20th recorder worksNatasha Anderson 4,000 Triennial Grant 2001 - 2003 National Exhibitions Touring Support (VIC)183,000 A visual artist, a theatre writer/director, a musician and a digital artist will work with foster care children in regional and metropolitan Victoria through workshops leading to multi arts performances and exhibitions in June 2002Oz Child Children Australia Inc 49,000 Playbox Theatre Company Seed Funding for Development StaffPlaybox Theatre Company Limited109,000 Increase Component of Base Grant for 2001Playbox Theatre Company Limited237,666 Base Grant 2001 - As Part of Triennial Agreement 2001-2003Playbox Theatre Company Limited410,326 Three new solo works - Final stage development and productionRoslyn Warby 30,930 Create/exhibit series of paintings & objects. Gallery 360 degrees, Tokyo, JapanRosslynd Piggott 20,000 SBS Centenary of Federation Art Award 2001 Federation SquareSBS Melbourne 10,000 A two-year Fellowship from June 2001 to create new works and arrangements; collaborate with composers, Nigel Westlake and William Lovelady; and workshop, perform and record new works. Raised in Australia, the classical guitarist has performed in concerts and festivals across EuropeSlava Grigoryan 80,000 Development of best practice models for the professional development emerging artists from within the company and the community that it serves. Continuation of the work the company does in prisons and in the broader community including the establishment of an arm of the company in Albury/WodongaSomebody's Daughter Theatre Inc285,000 Annual Program of activitiesSonglines Music Aboriginal Corporation 48,000 Increase Component of Base Grant for 2001The Australian Ballet395,284 Base Grant 2001 - As Part of 2001-2003 Triennial AgreementThe Australian Ballet3,431,690 `Designer Child' will explore the issues surrounding genetic engineering & people with disabilities. The project will include people with disabilities who might not have been born if selective abortion and genetic engineering had been widely practised 20-40 years agoTheatreworks Ltd 13,500 Multi-arts project for the Timorese AssociationTimorese Association of Victoria 24,490 A critique of the community cultural processes and outcomes of `Such Fertile Ground', a performance project involving regional and rural communities in VictoriaVictorian Arts Council 29,500 A multiarts project involving four regional communities, RAV and Victorian Young Farmers IncVictorian Arts Council 30,000 A commission for Julian Yu to compose an 18 minute sonata for violin and piano for performance by Miwako AbeVictorian College of the Arts (String Dept) 6,030 Operating costs and national conference fees for Youth Performing Arts AustraliaYouth Performing Arts Australia ASSITEJ International Inc 34,000 10,615,706(2) Yes: ProjectManager (Applicant)Amount ($)Fares, fees and expenses for Australian writers featuring in national TV series, `The Last Word'ABC TV (Sunday Afternoon) 24,376 Present paper at an International Symposium at the George R. Gardiner Museum of Ceramic Art, TorontoAlexandra Copeland 2,300 `A Feast of Stories' - children's art projectAnn James 16,560 Regional Arts Fund 1999/2000 & 2000/2001 Arts VictoriaArts Victoria750,000 International Pathways - Australian Art OrchestraAustralian Art Orchestra 10,000 APAM touring: Australian Art Orchestra to Singapore, London & Europe, July 2000Australian Art Orchestra 30,000 Blue Bottle - Production Management of Australian dance artists in New Moves (new territories) 2000Blue Bottle 3 Pty Ltd 14,460 `The Enormous club' performance at Theatreworks, Melbourne, VICBorn in a Taxi 20,000 Presentation of solo exhibition at the Tommy Lund Gallery, Copenhagen Denmark in March/April 2000Callum James Morton 15,000 Series of photographically morphed video projections presented in shop windowsCarla Gottgens & Sam Slicer 10,000 A contribution towards musical costs including musicians' fees for the performance of a new workChunky Move Ltd 8,000 Chunky Move tour to Europe Nov/Dec 1999 - UK, Belgium, FranceChunky Move Ltd 30,000 New Audiences 99/00 - Chunky MoveChunky Move Ltd 31,450 Strategic Initiative Globalisation ConferenceCircus Australia Limited (Circus Oz) 10,475 Major Organisations Touring - Circus Oz tour to the UK, March/April 2000Circus Australia Limited (Circus Oz) 50,450 Annual Funding - 2000 - as part of a triennial agreementCircus Australia Limited (Circus Oz)401,384 Two curated exhibitions, `Inscriptions' & `opp.shop.art' within the 2000 exhibition programCity of Port Phillip 12,000 Virtual reality environments for dance - systems linking Australia, USA and online users globallyCompany in Space Incorporated53,000Company in Space's participation in the Education Program in New Moves (new territories) 2000Company In Space Incorporated 10,180 Architecture of Biography “multi- form collaboration for site-specific installation”Company In Space Incorporated 90,000 Greene Street, New York Studio ResidencyConstanze Zikos 10,000 desoxy Theatre European Tour 2000desoxy Theatre Incorporated 6,820 `98.4% DNA Being Human' - tour to UK, Belgium & Spaindesoxy Theatre Incorporated 39,000 Barcelona Studio Residency Elizabeth Gower 10,000 `Orbital' media arts exhibition of five Australian artists in July 2000 in Australia Week, LondonExperimenta Media Arts Inc. 37,409 The development of electronic real- time composition techniques, 3Dspaces controlled by human movementGarth Paine 20,000 Writing for performance - a libretto based on the novel `The Obsessed' by Chinese writer Liu Heng, for an opera by Chinese-Australian composer Julian YuGlenn Perry 10,000 Self organised residency in Topolo Italy in 2000Gregory Pryor 10,000 Annual funding (one-year continuation of triennial grant) Handspan Visual Theatre Ltd100,000 Create exhibition and catalogue to celebrate Health & Safety Week as part of Fringe FestivalHazchem 8,000 Helen Herbertson & Dancers to participate in New Moves (new territories) 2000Helen Herbertson 25,695 2000 - 2002 FellowshipJenny Kemp 80,000 Season 13 - production Keene Taylor Theatre Project 58,802 Season 11 - production Keene Taylor Theatre Project 59,664 Creative development stage of `Melancholy: a study of gravity'Louise Taube 35,000 Artist Residency Paris Studio 2000 Maria Filippow 10,000 Partnership with “Not Yet it's Difficult”Melbourne Theatre Company 20,000 Annual Funding - 2000 - as part of a triennial agreementMelbourne Theatre Company527,553 Fares, fees & expenses for Australian writers participating in MWF, 25/8-3/9/00Melbourne Writers' Festival Inc 35,000 A contribution to professional artists' fees for the 2000 programMelbourne Youth Music Council Inc 10,000 A contribution towards a series of performances by a diverse range of artists in various musical stylesMusicians Club of Victoria Ltd 10,000 Fiction Natasha Cho 15,000 Greene Street, New York Studio ResidencyPeter Cooley 10,000 Partnership with Vietnamese Arts Cultural Exchange Project for The Meat Party for Melbourne FestivalPlaybox Theatre Company Limited 30,000 Annual Funding - 2000 - as part of a triennial agreementPlaybox Theatre Company Limited 410,326 London Studio Residency Robert Bridgewater 10,000 Creative development of a work integrating contemporary dance, song and character workSally Smith 19,800 A contribution towards study of lute and theorbo with Paul Beier at the Civica Scuola di Musica, MilanSamantha Cohen 9,000 `Song for a Siren' - promotional and marketing strategySantha Press 8,875 Development of a new Australian workSomebody's Daughter Theatre Inc 23,198 A theatre piece & exhibition exploring issues surrounding addiction & institutionalisationSomebody's Daughter Theatre Inc 50,000 To bring Nancy Stark Smith to Australia to facilitate workshops in contact improvisationState of Flux of VIC 22,863 Milan Studio Residency Su Baker 10,000 Annual Funding - 2000 - as part of a triennial agreementThe Australian Ballet3,431,690Literature International Market Development 00-01The Drummond Agency 3,000 Intermedia installation which explores shifts in perceptionTroy Innocent 31,250 Non-fiction Victoria Hammond 15,000 Regional Audience Development Specialist Scheme- Regional Arts VicVictorian Arts Council 85,000 `Innate' - rehearsal and performance as part of Next Wave Festival, 2000Viviana Sacchero 15,144 A contribution towards a season of short multi-media performance works by Warren Burt and Robert RandallWarren Burt 8,000 A contribution towards the Director of Music's fees for the 2000/2001 programYoung Voices of Melbourne Inc 8,000 YPAA operating costs at $31,000 and Regional Youth Theatre Initiative - $24,000Youth Performing Arts Australia ASSITEJ International Inc 55,000 6,983,724(3) Yes: ProjectManager (Applicant)Amount ($)Rome Studio Residency Andrew Wright-Smith 10,000 Research and produce a series of sculpturesAnnette Douglass 15,000 Arts Access Seminars - Marketing the Arts to Audiences with a DisabilityArts Access Society Inc 5,740 Verve! - a two day national symposium on arts & disability incArts Access Society Inc 10,000 Annual funding (part of triennial grant)Arts Access Society Inc 150,000 AusGlass 11th Biennial Conference - Business & Marketing Skills WorkshopAusglass (Australian Glass Artists Association) LTD 1,750 1999-2001 performance & development activities and assistance for core costsAustralian Art Orchestra 255,000 Bambuco at Theater der Welt Berlin, 19 June - 4 July 1999Bambuco 10,000 A four week collaborative process by Byron Perry & Luke Smiles to take place in MelbourneBlufunk 14,000 Tess McKenna to attend the South West Music Festival & conference in Austin Texas USABuxton Walker P/L 4,000 `The Black Cargo Cantata' - creation, rehearsal & presentation by Canto Coro & Irene VelaCanto Coro Inc. 26,800 `Landscape/Country' - produce large scale photography, sculpture and catalogueChris Barry 18,000 Angharad Wynne-Jones, Executive Producer of Chunky Move, to attend 1998 Tokyo Performing Arts MarketChunky Move Ltd 2,000 Chunky Move to perform at CINARS 98 Montreal 3 & 5 December 1998Chunky Move Ltd 30,000 Triennial grant for 1999 - 2001 Chunky Move Ltd 300,000 Major Organisations Special Purpose Allocations - EmergingCircus Australia Limited (Circus Oz) 10,000 Major Organisations Touring - Circus Oz tour to Munich, Germany February/March 1999Circus Australia Limited (Circus Oz) 26,575 Annual Grant 1999 - as part of a triennial funding agreementCircus Australia Limited (Circus Oz) 401,384 Cultural Diversity and the Arts Cutting a New Edge Conference: Melbourne FestivalCity of Port Phillip 7,000 The Southern Cross project - a physical theatre piece based on stories from the atrocities of warCommon Ground Inc 19,685 Company In Space, Deakin University RMIT to produce as yet `Untitled' to be presented in MelbourneCompany In Space Incorporated 16,000 Contribution to commission five new works for site- specific performance program `Recent Ruins'Contemporary Music Events Company Inc 15,000 Travel costs for eight ceramic artists to attend `Ceramic Millennium 99' Amsterdam, HollandDavid Ray 15,000 Residency with `Company Teatron Hanefesh' - Tel Aviv, IsraelDeborah Leiser 4,800 Non-fiction, to NZ, SAfrica, USA, UK & FranceEden Liddelow 5,000 International Studio Program Geoffrey Lowe 12,000 New works for solo guitar by Elena Kats - Chernin, Bozidar Kos, Damien Ricketson & Matthew ShlomowitzGeoffrey Morris 6,980 Venice Biennale, 1999 - preparation & planning of briefing materialGlobal Art Projects Pty Ltd (GAP) 2,000 Venice Biennale 1999 Exhibition Management - Global Art ProjectsGlobal Art Projects Pty Ltd (GAP) 300,000 A commission for Darrin Verhagen and The Necks to create a score for `Dolores in the Department Store'Handspan Visual Theatre Ltd 21,000 Final year of triennial grant Handspan Visual Theatre Ltd 132,500 `Delirium' - creative development & presentation at the National Theatre, MelbourneHelen Herbertson 55,830 CMED Marketing Advances, 1998-99 Ideal Management for Mr Brown in USIdeal Management 31,448 Tokyo Studio Residency Jacinta Schreuder 10,000 Los Angeles Studio Residency Jane Trengove 12,000 Create photography Jane Lee Burns 7,000 Writing for performance Jenny Kemp 15,000 `Still Angela' - creative developmentJenny Kemp 47,773 A contribution to a European tour by the Joe Chindamo TrioJoe Chindamo Trio 19,000 Develop venue-specific painting & drawing installationsJohn Neeson 13,500 To produce a body of new installation work that is comprised of small panelsJon Cattapan 17,000 `Art, Work, Life' - a project relating to the working lives of four contemporary artistsKate Daw 17,500 Remount seven plays at the Athenaeum Theatre, MelbourneKeene Taylor Theatre Project 27,899 `Beneath Heaven' - production Keene Taylor Theatre Project 59,179 Fiction Letizia Mondello 5,000 `Pervert' - first stage development collaboration between Paul Hosking and Louise TaubeLouise Taube 11,008 Margaret Trail & David Chesworth attempt to solve some technical/methodological problemsMargaret Trail 12,120 To create a site specific installation investigating perceptual distortionsMark Galea 16,800 Multicultural Audience Development Officer Placement Program - MSOMelbourne Symphony Orchestra 130,000 Partnership: Hothouse Theatre and Melbourne Theatre CompanyMelbourne Theatre Company 35,556 Annual Grant 1999 - as part of a triennial funding agreementMelbourne Theatre Company 527,553 Fares, fees, expenses for Australian writers participating in Melbourne Writers' Festival, 20-29 Aug 1999Melbourne Writers' Festival Inc 32,000 The professional fee for the conductor of the Melbourne Youth OrchestraMelbourne Youth Music Council Inc 10,000 `Footprints on Water' - production Neonheart Theatre Inc. 40,000 Residency with Company In Space Olive Tau Davis 6,510 Emerging Artists Initiative: Program Support for Artist-Run InitiativesPlatform Artists Group Incorporated 4,000 Annual Grant 1999 - as part of a triennial funding agreementPlaybox Theatre Company Limited 410,326 Mary Rose, Director of Programming, New Victory Theatre, New York, April 1999Primate Productions 2,500 Professional Development in Germany Raimondo F Cortese 2,000 Taiwan Studio Residency Rod Bruce McLeish 10,000 Research into improvisation, choreographic and performance practiceRoslyn Warby 9,670 A contribution towards Ruby Fruit Jungle's tour of Ireland, United Kingdom and Europe in 1999Ruby Fruit Jungle 5,000 Contribution to advanced study in lute & theorbo at Early Music international summer schoolsSamantha Cohen 4,000 “Auditory Hallucinations” - A soundscape created by people with psychiatric disabilitiesSANE Australia 28,700 Re-mount of “Tell Her That I Love Her” with workshops and discussion groupsSomebody's Daughter Theatre Inc 35,000 Songlines Cultural Exchange Development Project.Songlines Music Aboriginal Corporation 20,596 Commission for Handspan Visual Theatre to develop and present `The Cycle'Southgate Arts and Leisure Precinct 30,000 `Queen Kat Carmel & St Jude Get A Life' - Chilean and Spanish communities theatre productionSt Martins Youth Arts Centre 12,100 Create ceramics for exhibition at George Gallery, MelbourneStephen Beric Benwell 20,000 Major Organisations Special Purpose Allocations - EmergingThe Australian Ballet 10,000 Major Organisations Touring Australian Ballet tour to the USA Oct/Nov 1999The Australian Ballet 50,000 Annual Grant 1999 - as part of a triennial funding agreementThe Australian Ballet3,431,690Marketing Strategies for Arts Organisations, Western Sydney Workshop - presenterTimexchange Online 3,000 Marketing Strategies for Arts Organisations Workbook - creation of 2nd editionTimexchange Online 6,000 Performances and workshops with East Timorese refugees in regional VictoriaTimorese Association of Victoria 21,610 Produce series of paintings/murals at Delfina studio residencyTony Clark 18,000 `Such Fertile Ground' project on cultural identity of communities and their evolution over 100 yearsVictorian Arts Council 30,000 Commissions by Mark Pollard and Paul Sarcich for the `Old Telegraph Exchange' projectVictorian College of the Arts Art Collection 4,600 The professional artist fees of the annual programYoung Voices of Melbourne Inc 7,500 Annual program funding for 1999 Youth Performing Arts Australia ASSITEJ International Inc 25,000 `The Stones' - tour to ASSITEJ World Congress, NorwayZeal Theatre 8,330 7,216,5129368(Question No. 635)6359368Melham, Daryl, MPMr Melham4T4BanksALP00 asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 19 August 2002:(1) Did the Australian Government have any discussions, exchanges or other contact with Pakistan Government agencies concerning Mr Mamdouh Habib prior to his arrest in Pakistan in early October 2001; if so, what was the nature of such contact and when did it take place.(2) When and how did the Australian Government first learn that Mr Habib had been arrested and detained in Pakistan.(3) When and where was Mr Habib arrested in Pakistan.(4) Where was Mr Habib detained in Pakistan.(5) What Pakistan Government department or agency was responsible for Mr Habibs detention and on what legal basis was he detained in Pakistan.(6) Did his departmental officials seek consular access to Mr Habib while he was detained in Pakistan; if so, what representations were made to Pakistani authorities.(7) When and where was any consular access to Mr Habib allowed by the Pakistani authorities.(8) Did any Australian intelligence or law enforcement officers obtain access to Mr Habib while he was detained in Pakistan; if so, (a) what was the purpose of such access, (b) when did such access take place and (c) what Departments or agencies were involved.(9) Is the Australian Government aware of any access to Mr Habib by officials of other countries, apart from Australian or Pakistani officials, while he was detained in Pakistan; if so, what country or countries were involved and what was the nature of the access.(10) Was Mr Habib treated humanely while in the custody of the Pakistan authorities.(11) While in custody in Pakistan, did Mr Habib at any time express a desire to Australian officials to be returned to Australia.(12) Did Australian officials discuss with the Pakistan Government the possible movement of Mr Habib to Egypt or any other country.(13) Did Australian officials make any representations to the Pakistan Government seeking Mr Habibs return to Australia.(14) When and by what means did Mr Habib travel from Pakistan to Egypt.(15) When did the Australian Government first learn that Mr Habib would be, or had been, moved from Pakistan to Egypt.(16) On what legal basis was Mr Habib detained by the Egyptian authorities.(17) What Egyptian Government department or agency was responsible for Mr Habibs detention.(18) Where was Mr Habib detained in Egypt.(19) Did the Australian Government make representations to Egyptian authorities concerning consular access to Mr Habib; if so, (a) what representations, (b) when were those representations made and (c) what was the Egyptian Governments response.(20) Did Australian officials obtain consular or any other form of access to Mr Habib while he was detained in Egypt; if so, what was the nature of the access provided.(21) Did a spokeswoman for his Department state on 8 March 2002 that Mr Habibs detention in Egypt was confirmed by Egyptian authorities to an Australian intelligence officer; if so, when did this contact and confirmation take place.(22) Was Mr Habib treated humanely while in the custody of the Egyptian authorities.(23) Is the Australian Government aware of any access to Mr Habib by officials of other countries, apart from Australian or Egyptian officials, while he was detained in Egypt; if so, what country or countries were involved and what was the nature of the access.(24) Did Australian officials make any representations to the Egyptian Government seeking Mr Habibs return to Australia.(25) Did the Australian Government have any discussions, exchanges or other contact with US authorities concerning Mr Habib during his detention in Pakistan or Egypt and prior to his arrival in Afghanistan; if so, what were the details and when did they take place.(26) Did the Egyptian or US authorities advise the Australian Government that it was intended to move Mr Habib from Egypt and place him in the custody of the US military in Afghanistan.(27) When and by what means did Mr Habib travel from Egypt to Afghanistan.(28) When and how did the Australian Government first learn that Mr Habib would be, or had been, moved from Egypt to Afghanistan.(29) Is the Australian Government aware of any reports or allegations that Mr Habib was subjected to inhumane treatment while in the custody of Pakistani or Egyptian authorities; if so, what steps has the Government taken to investigate the reports or allegations.(30) On what legal basis is Mr Habib presently detained by US authorities at Guantanamo Bay.(31) Does the Australian Government consider Mr Habib to have been captured in a situation of conflict in a manner similar to Mr David Hicks; if so, on what basis has the Government made such a judgment; if not, how does Mr Habibs status differ from that of Mr Hicks.(32) Does the Australian Government consider that Mr Habib is entitled to consular access by Australian officials.(33) What representations has the Government made to US authorities to allow Mr Habib access to legal advisers.(34) Has any assessment been made by US authorities of Mr Habibs physical and mental health; if so, has the Australian Government sought or obtained any such health assessment.(35) Has the Government sought any independent assessment of Mr Habibs physical and mental health.(36) Has the Government made any representations to US authorities seeking Mr Habibs return to Australia; if so, what representations have been made. 9370Downer, Alexander, MPMr Downer4G4MayoLPMinister for Foreign Affairs10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:The Department first became aware of the possible detention of Mr Habib by Pakistani authorities in early October 2001. At that time, representations were made on a number of occasions to Pakistani officials in Islamabad, seeking confirmation of Mr Habib's detention and consular access to him. Consular access was denied by Pakistan. In November 2001 the Department became aware that Mr Habib was no longer in Pakistan and that he may have been transferred to Egypt. Between November 2001 and April 2002 numerous representations were made by the Australian Embassy in Cairo to the Egyptian government, including at Prime Ministerial level, seeking confirmation of Mr Habib's detention in Egypt and consular access to him. Egyptian authorities consistently refused to confirm Mr Habib's detention or to grant access to him. The Australian Embassy in Islamabad continued to make representations to Pakistani officials seeking information on Mr Habib until mid-January 2002. The Department is aware of media reports that Mr Habib has written to his wife making certain allegations about his treatment in Egypt. Egyptian authorities have refused to confirm that Mr Habib was ever in their custody.In April 2002 the Department became aware that Mr Habib was in the custody of coalition forces in Afghanistan. Representations were made by our Embassy in Washington to the government of the United States of America seeking confirmation of Mr Habib's detention and status and seeking access to him for law enforcement, intelligence and welfare purposes. On 23 April 2002, our Embassy in Washington conveyed a request made by Mr Habib's lawyer for access to him and reiterated earlier requests for confirmation of Mr Habib's status and access to him. On 6 May 2002 the Department was advised that Mr Habib had been transferred to the US military facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.An officer from the Embassy in Washington accompanied Australian law enforcement and intelligence officials on a visit to Guantanamo Bay from 13-17 May 2002, where the officer was able to meet Mr Habib and assess his welfare. The Government is aware that Mr Habib has received medical treatment for a pre-existing condition while in US detention. Detainees at Guantanamo Bay have access to medical examinations and treatment, and Australian officials have requested that camp authorities continue to monitor Mr Habib's health closely.Australian officials have been in regular contact with United States officials on the case of Mr Habib, both in Washington and Canberra. Disclosure of more detailed information regarding these contacts could conflict with national security requirements.Issues relating to the activities of law enforcement and intelligence authorities with regard to Mr Habib fall within the portfolio responsibility of the Attorney-General.9370(Question No. 687)6879370Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 19 August 2002:(1) Further to the answer to question No. 105 (Hansard, 24 June 2002, page 3599), what financial contribution has the Australian Bicycle Council (ABC) and the Commonwealth provided to the Cycling Promotion Fund and in what form is the support.(2) In which ways is the ABC supporting the Bicycling Trade Show and does this involve financial support.9370Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPMinister for Transport and Regional Services10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) The Australian Bicycling Council (the Council) does not make financial contributions to the Cycling Promotion Fund (CPF) although it has, where appropriate, indicated its support for the activities carried out by the CPF. In particular the Council has invited Rosemary Spiedel, the President of the CPF to attend two of its meetings which has enabled both organisations to exchange information on cycling issues and identify areas of common concern.(2) The Council membership includes representatives from the Bicycle Industries Australia and Retail Cycle Traders Australia who regularly participate in supporting the Bicycling Australia Show. The issue of the Bicycling Australia Show has also been discussed at the Council meetings in the past. The Council has funded the production of a display to be used at the Bicycling Australia Show to promote Australia Cycling, the National Strategy and the benefits of cycling to the community. 9371(Question No. 741)7419371Burke, Anna, MPMs Burke83SChisholmALP00 asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, upon notice, on 19 August 2002:(1) Does the minister administer any Commonwealth funded programs for which community organisations or businesses can apply for funding.(2) If so, what are these programs.(3) Does the Minister's Department advertise these funding opportunities.(4) In the electoral divisions of (a)Chisholm, (b)Aston, (c)Deakin, (d)Latrobe and (e)Casey in (i)1996-97, (ii)1997-98, (iii)1998-99, (iv)1999-2000, (v)2000-2001 and (vi)2001-2002, for each of the programs listed in part (2), (A)what was the name and postal address of each organisation that sought funding from the Commonwealth, (B)what was the purpose of the funding sought in each case and (C)for successful applications, what was the level of funding provided.9371Ruddock, Philip, MPMr Ruddock0J4BerowraLPMinister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Reconciliation10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC)(1) ATSIC receives Commonwealth funding to improve the social and economic well-being of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Community organisations and businesses can apply to ATSIC for grant funding.(2) ATSIC's funding initiatives are grouped as follows:(w) Housing and Infrastructure.(x) Heritage, Sport and Culture.(y) Legal and Prevention Services.(z) Land and Development.(aa) Education, Employment and Participation.Details of the outputs produced by these initiatives can be found in the 2002-2003 Portfolio Budget Statements and the ATSIC Annual Report.(3) ATSIC advertises its funding opportunities widely. The ATSIC website contains substantial information, including the processes for accessing funding.Additionally, as part of the annual funding cycle, each ATSIC Program area and ATSIC Regional Council determines the best means of providing information on funds available in accordance with local priorities. This is usually done by providing submission kits to all organisations on ATSIC Regional Council mailing lists and, where appropriate, placement of advertisements in relevant newspapers and the use of other media outlets.(4) I am not prepared to authorise the expenditure of resources and effort that would be involved in breaking down the information sought into the electoral divisions requested.The Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS)(1) Businesses and Community organisations may apply for research grants administered by AIATSIS. Applications are reviewed by the AIATSIS Research Ethics Committee. Each application is then assessed by the AIATSIS Research Advisory Committee, which makes recommendations to the AIATSIS Council. The Council makes the final decisions concerning all applications.(2) AIATSIS is a major national funding body for research in Australian Indigenous studies. The Research Grants Program supports research in a wide range of areas such as history (including family and community history), politics, law, public policy, health (social, cultural and environmental aspects), biological sciences, education, linguistics, social anthropology, archaeology and the arts.(3) The AIATSIS Research Grants are advertised around October each year. Distribution of the advertisement includes:Press:The Koori Mail The Higher Education Supplement in The Australian and The Weekend Australian Organisations:ATSIC, especially the Office of Torres Strait Islander AffairsThe Torres Strait Islander Advisory BoardNorthern Land CouncilCentral Land CouncilRegional Aboriginal Local Land CouncilsIndigenous community organisationsIndigenous health organisationsTertiary Institutions:Research and Grants sections in UniversitiesAboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations in UniversitiesHumanities and social sciences research centres in Universities(4) I am not prepared to authorise the expenditure of resources and effort that would be involved in breaking down the information sought into the electoral divisions requested.The Indigenous Land Corporation (ILC)(1) The Minister does not administer any programs through the ILC for which Community organisations or businesses can apply for funding.(2) Not applicable.(3) Not applicable.(4) Not applicable.Indigenous Business Australia (IBA)(1) The Minister does not administer any programs through IBA for which Community organisations or businesses can apply for funding. (2) Not applicable. (3) Not applicable.(4) Not applicable.Aboriginal Hostels Limited (AHL)(1) Yes - AHL is funded by the Commonwealth to provide hostel accommodation for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Community organisations and businesses can apply for funding to operate hostels.(2) Community Hostel Grants - this program provides grants to Indigenous community organisations to operate hostels within the specifications of the AHL's Community Hostel Grants guidelines.(3) Yes - Central Office and Regional Office staff liaise with communities about the availability of grant funds for community operated hostels. AHL also publishes notices in Hostel News, a quarterly publication (five thousand copies of which are distributed nationally).(4) I am not prepared to authorise the expenditure of resources and effort that would be involved in breaking down the information sought into the electoral divisions requested.Torres Strait Regional Authority (TSRA)(1) The TSRA receives funding from the Commonwealth to implement initiatives specifically designed to redress Indigenous disadvantage in the Torres Strait region. Community organisations and businesses regularly apply for funding under these initiatives.(2) The following initiatives are provided by the TSRA on behalf of the Commonwealth:Economic DevelopmentBusiness Funding Scheme Community Economic Initiative SchemeHome OwnershipEmployment & TrainingCommunity Development Employment ProjectsWagesOperationsCommunity Training Native TitleNative TitleHousing & Environmental Health InfrastructureInfrastructureCommunity HousingSocial & Cultural DevelopmentMunicipal SupportBroadcastingSocial JusticeHeritage, Culture & EnvironmentSportsSocial Support(3) The TSRA advertise these funding opportunities by brochure, website, public forums, newsletters and other public relations opportunities.(4) No, not relevant to the Torres Strait.9373(Question No. 752)7529373Burke, Anna, MPMs Burke83SChisholmALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Arts and Sport, upon notice, on 19 August 2002:(1) Does the Minister administer any Commonwealth funded programs for which community organisations or businesses can apply for funding.(2) If so, what are these programs.(3) Does the Minister's Department advertise these funding arrangements.(4) In the electoral division of (a) Chisholm, (b) Aston, (c) Deakin, (d) Latrobe and (e) Casey in (i) 1996-97, (ii) 1997-98, (iii) 1998-99, (iv) 1999-2000, (v) 2000-2001 and (vi) 2001-2002, for each of the programs listed in part (2), (A) what was the name and postal address of each organisation that sought funding from the Commonwealth, (B) what was the purpose of the funding sought in each case and (C) for successful applications, what was the level of funding provided.9373McGauran, Peter, MPMr McGauranXH4GippslandNPMinister for Science10—The Minister for the Arts and Sport has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) Yes.(2) There are numerous funding programs administered within the Communications, Information Technology and the Arts portfolio. Details and linkages to portfolio agencies are available on the Department's website: www.dcita.gov.au.(3) Yes.(4) I am not prepared to authorise the expenditure of resources and effort that would be involved in breaking down the information sought into the electoral divisions requested.9373(Question No. 784)7849374Murphy, John, MPMr Murphy83DLoweALP00 asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 20 August 2002: How much of the total revenue presently derived from personal income tax would be lost by the Commonwealth were the Government to legislate to allow all married or de facto couples to share, equally, for the purposes of the Australian Taxation Office assessing their liability to pay personal income tax to the Commonwealth, their combined total income.9374Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:This information is not available.9374(Question No. 789)7899374Albanese, Anthony, MPMr AlbaneseR36GrayndlerALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 20 August 2002:(1) What is the composition of the Sydney Airport Community Forum (SACF).(2) Are members of the SACF representatives of organisations; if so, which organisations do they represent; if not; what is the basis of their appointment.(3) What are the dates of SACF meetings held between 1996 and 1 August 2002.9374Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPMinister for Transport and Regional Services10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) The Forum is comprised of 20 Members from Federal, State and Local Governments, the community and industry.(2) Members of SACF comprise Federal and State Members of Parliament, Local Council Mayors and representatives from particular local communities, the Sydney Airports Corporation Limited and Qantas. Attached is a list of current members of the Forum with the dates that their respective electorates, councils and community and industry groups first began attending meetings. List of Members of the Sydney Airport Community Forum Senator Marise PayneSenator for New South WalesChairCommenced July 2002 Cr Vince BadalatiMr Robert McClelland MPMayor of HurstvilleFederal Member for BartonRepresented since August 1996Represented since July 1996The Hon Bruce Baird MPMr Michael MegnaFederal Member for CookRepresented since July 1996representing Inner West CommunityRepresented since July 1996Cr Mark BonannoMr John Murphy MPMayor of AshfieldRepresented since September 1997Federal Member for LoweRepresented since July 1996Mrs Kerry Chikarovski MLAMs Sandra Nori MLAState Member for Lane CoveRepresented since July 1996State Member for Port JacksonRepresented since July 1996Mr John ClarkeMs Maria Patrinosrepresenting Upper North Shore CommunityRepresented since July 1996Canterbury Residents Against Aircraft NoiseRepresented since November 1996Mr Kevin HillCr Anthony Robertsrepresenting Kurnell CommunityRepresented since July 1996Mayor of Lane CoveRepresented since July 1996Cr Steve HolroydCr Fiona Sinclair KingRockdale CouncilRepresented since September 1997Representing Wentworth CommunityRepresented since November 1997The Hon Joe Hockey MPCr Tracie SondaFederal Member for North SydneyRepresented since July 1996Mayor of Sutherland ShireRepresented since July 1996Cr Sue HoopmannMs Lisa Smith Representing Bennelong CommunityRepresented since July 1996Sydney Airports Corporation LimitedRepresented since July 2002 Mr Trevor JensenQantasRepresented since July 2002 (3) The dates of SACF meetings were 22 July 1996; 26 August 1996; 23 September 1996; 11 November 1996; 22 November 1996; 17 February 1997; 11 March 1997; 22 April 1997; 30 May 1997; 20 June 1997; 31 July 1997; 29 August 1997; 19 September 1997; 28 November 1997; 22 December 1997; 19 March 1998; 22 May 1998; 27 July 1998; 28 August 1998; 3 December 1998; 26 February 1999; 9 April 1999; 26 May 1999; 28 May 1999; 16 July 1999; 20 August 1999; 14 September 1999; 15 October 1999; 26 October 1999; 3 December 1999; 4 February 2000; 7 April 2000; 7 July 2000; 16 October 2000; 15 November 2000; 16 May 2001; 15 June 2001; 14 August 2001; 12 July 2002; 20 September 2002.9375(Question No. 793)7939375Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 20 August 2002:(1) What sum was spent on (a) the Countrylink call centre operation, (b) the production and distribution of the Rural Book, including costs incurred by other Commonwealth Government agencies, (c) maintenance of the Countrylink information database and (d) 350 community information stands in (i) 2001-2002 and (ii) 2002-2003.(2) For 2002-2003, what sum has been budgeted for (a) the Commonwealth Regional Information Service call centre operation, (b) the production and distribution of the Rural Book, including costs incurred by other Commonwealth Government agencies, (c) maintenance of the regional entry point Internet portal, (d) community information stands, (e) the printing and distribution of the Commonwealth Regional Information Directory, (f) the travelling shopfront for regional shows and field days and (g) the print and electronic media advertising campaign to support the service.(3) Who is contracted to provide the advertising campaign.(4) What selection process was undertaken to determine who would provide the advertising campaign.(5) How many organisations submitted a tender for this campaign.9376Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPMinister for Transport and Regional Services10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) (a) In 2001-2002, $420,168 was spent on the Commonwealth Regional Information Service call centre operation (formerly Countrylink) and to date in 2002-2003, $119,247 has been spent. (b) $88,956 was expended on production and distribution of the Commonwealth Regional Information Directory (formerly known as The Rural Book) in 2001-2002. Other Commonwealth Government agencies are not charged to submit entries into the Directory. (c) No costs were incurred for 2001-2002 for maintenance of the Commonwealth Regional Information Service database (formerly Countrylink). Staff costs are absorbed by the Department. The 2002-2003 expenditure to date has been $2,375 for some additional infrastructure costs. (d) In 2001-2002, $13,175 was spent on the Community Information Stands and $1,025 has been spent to date in 2002-2003.(2) (a) For 2002-2003, $750,000 has been budgeted for the operation of the Commonwealth Regional Information Service call centre. (b) To date the production costs of the Commonwealth Regional Information Directory (formerly called The Rural Book) are approximately $100,000. Distribution costs are ongoing so a final figure is not yet known. Other Commonwealth Government agencies are not charged to submit entries to the Directory. (c) Staff costs for maintenance of the regional entry point Internet portal are absorbed by the Department. (d) The budgeted cost for Community Information Stands is $15,120. (e) The Rural Book is now known as the Commonwealth Regional Information Directory and costs are provided in the answer to 2(b). (f) The travelling shopfront (show circuit) has a planned budget of $208,455. In the 2002 calendar year the shopfront will attend 70 events. (g) The print and electronic media advertising campaign was budgeted at $10.2 million over four years to 2004-2005. Costs for 2002-2003 are not yet available as some supplier costs are currently being finalised.(3) Singleton Ogilvy and Mather is contracted to provide the advertising campaign.(4) A standard Ministerial Committee on Government Communications (MCGC) process was undertaken. This involved the Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS) developing a brief, and the Government Communications Unit (GCU) and DOTARS identifying five advertising agencies that could respond to the brief. The brief and list of agencies were approved by the then Minister for Regional Services, Territories and Local Government and the MCGC. A panel from DOTARS and the GCU evaluated responses to the brief. The MCGC selected the successful agency.(5) Five organisations submitted a tender for this campaign.9376(Question No. 855)8559376Murphy, John, MPMr Murphy83DLoweALP00 asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 26 August 2002:(1) Is question No. 39 which appeared on 13 February 2002 on the first Notice Paper of the 40th Parliament the same question No. 2698 which first appeared on the Notice Paper of 19 June 2001 during the 39th Parliament.(2) Did he receive a letter from the Speaker following my request to the Speaker on 29 August 2001 to write to him seeking an early reply to question No. 2698 under standing order 150.(3) Did he receive a further letter from the Speaker following my request to the Speaker on 14 May 2002 to again write to him seeking an answer to question No. 39 under standing order 150.(4) Did he receive yet another letter from the Speaker following yet another request by me to the Speaker on 19 August 2002 to write to him seeking an answer to question No. 39 under standing order 150.(5) When will he answer question No. 39.9376Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:Please see answer to Question 39 as appears in Hansard of 16 September 2002.9376(Question No. 864)8649377McClelland, Robert, MPMr McClellandJK6BartonALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 28 August 2002:(1) Is he aware of a resolution passed by the Sydney Airport Community Forum directing that, if noise sharing is in operation at Sydney airport, residents should not be subjected to aircraft noise late in the evening and again the following morning, allowing the opportunity for a reasonable nights sleep; if so, does he support the objective of this resolution.(2) On how many days so far in 2002 at Sydney Airport have there been either take-offs to, or landings from, the west after 10 p.m. followed by take-offs to, or landings from, the west before 7 a.m.9377Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPMinister for Transport and Regional Services10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) If the Honourable Member is referring to his own motion of 22 May 1998 as a then member of the Sydney Airport Community Forum (SACF), I am advised that the resolution was conveyed to SACF's Implementation and Monitoring Committee (IMC) for appropriate action. I understand that the IMC considered the resolution and determined it could not be implemented.(2) For the year 2002, up until 31 August 2002 there have been 86 occasions of take-offs to, or landings from, the west after 10:00pm followed by take-offs to or landings from the west before 7:00a.m.9377(Question No. 890)8909377Melham, Daryl, MPMr Melham4T4BanksALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Justice and Customs, upon notice, on 29 August 2002:(1) For each financial year from 1996-1997 to 2001-2002, how many times has the Minister responsible for the Australian Federal Police (AFP) been notified in accordance with the relevant National Guidelines of the referral of a politically sensitive matter to the AFP.(2) Which Commonwealth Ministers, Departments or agencies referred politically sensitive matters to the AFP.(3) How many referrals of politically sensitive matters to the AFP were (a) accepted or (b) declined.(4) What was the cost to the AFP of investigations of politically sensitive matters.(5) How many AFP investigations of politically sensitive matters related to possible offences under section 79 of the Crimes Act.(6) How many persons were (a) prosecuted and (b) convicted of a Commonwealth offence as a consequence of referral of a politically sensitive matter to the AFP.(7) How many persons were (a) prosecuted and (b) convicted of an offence under section 79 of the Crimes Act as a consequence of referral of a politically sensitive matter to the AFP.9377Williams, Daryl, MPMr Williams7V5TangneyLPAttorney-General10—The Minister for Justice and Customs has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) Australian Federal Police (AFP) records for this type of information can only be provided from the financial year 1997-1998 to 2001-2002 due to changes in AFP's Information Management systems. Since 1 July 1997, the Minister for Justice and Customs has forwarded 19 matters considered to be politically sensitive to the AFP. Financial Year1997-98 - 61998-99 - 21999-2000 - 22000-2001 - 32001-2002 - 6(2) During the period 1 July 1997 to 30 June 2002, matters considered politically sensitive in accordance with the Guidelines were received from the Minister for Justice and Customs from the following departments:Department of Finance (One)Department of Defence (Two) Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet (Six)Department of Industrial Relations (One)Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Three)The then Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (One)Department of Employment, Workplace Relations and Small Business (One)Department of Transport and Regional Services (One)Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts (One)Department of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (One)Centrelink (One)(3) Of the 19 matters received from the Minister for Justice and Customs, 18 were accepted for investigation. There was one matter referred under the guidelines that had an initial assessment conducted. At the completion of this assessment, it was decided that due to circumstances surrounding the occurrence it was extremely unlikely that a suspect could be identified. The Minister for Justice and Customs was advised accordingly. (4) The AFP commenced recording activity using an outcome based reporting system from 1 July 2000. Only limited data is available for individual activities for the financial years 1998-99 and 1999-2000. The costs for these investigations is:Financial Year 1998-99 $11,846 (Limited information only)Financial Year 1999-00 $189,418 (Limited information only)Financial Year 2000-01 $225,029Financial Year 2001-02 $122,108Costs include both discretionary and non-discretionary costs such as salaries, operational costs (eg. travel, vehicles, interpreters), accruals and corporate overheads. (5) There were no investigations under Section 79 of the Crimes Act that were considered politically sensitive in accordance with the Guidelines. (6) None of those matters forwarded have resulted in prosecutions or convictions. (7) From the period 1 July 1997 to 30 June 2002, there have been no investigations conducted by the AFP into offences against Section 79 of the Crimes Act 1914 that have been referred in accordance with the guidelines. During the period 1 July 1997 to 30 June 2002, there have been a number of other investigations referred to the AFP that have been identified as politically sensitive during the course of the investigation. Such investigations were not referred in accordance with the AFP Practical Guide on Politically Sensitive Matters.9378(Question No. 891)8919378Melham, Daryl, MPMr Melham4T4BanksALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Justice and Customs, upon notice, on 29 August 2002:(1) For each financial year from 1996-1997 to 2001-2002, how many investigations were undertaken by the Australian Federal Police (AFP) into possible offences under section 79 of the Crimes Act.(2) What was the cost to the AFP of investigations of possible offences under section 79 of the Crimes Act.(3) How many persons were (a) prosecuted and (b) convicted of an offence under section 79 of the Crimes Act.9378Williams, Daryl, MPMr Williams7V5TangneyLPAttorney-General10—The Minister for Justice and Customs has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) Australian Federal Police (AFP) records for this type information can only be provided from the financial year 1997-1998 to 2001-2002 due to changes in AFP's information management systems. Since 1 July 1997, the AFP has only conducted one investigation into possible offences under Section 79 of the Crimes Act 1914. This investigation commenced in July 2000. (2) The cost of this investigation to the AFP was as follows:Financial Year Direct Costs2000-2001 $45,6352001-2002 $18,545(3) In relation to this single investigation into possible offences against Section 79 of the Crimes Act 1914, there has been one person charged with Section 79. This matter is currently before the courts. 9379(Question No. 894)8949379Melham, Daryl, MPMr Melham4T4BanksALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Justice and Customs, upon notice, on 29 August 2002:(1) For each financial year from 1996-1997 to 2000-2001, how many cases of alleged fraud against the Commonwealth, as defined in the Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines, were investigated by the Australian Federal Police (AFP).(2) What was the cost to the AFP of these investigations each year.9379Williams, Daryl, MPMr Williams7V5TangneyLPAttorney-General10—The Minister for Justice and Customs has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) Australian Federal Police (AFP) records for this type information can only be provided from the financial year 1997-1998 to 2001-2002 due to changes in AFP's information management systems. Since 1 July 1997, the AFP has conducted the following referrals of Fraud from agencies as defined in the Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines:1997-1998 3021998-1999 2721999-2000 3032000-2001 2302001-2002 144(2) The AFP commenced recording activity using an outcome based reporting system from 1 July 2000. Only limited data is available for individual activities for the financial years 1998-99 and 1999-2000.In the broad categories defined under the Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines, AFP costs for these investigations is:Financial Year 1998-99 $ 761,445 (Limited information only)Financial Year 1999-00 $4,367,025 (Limited information only) Financial Year 2000-01 $5,718,026Financial Year 2001-02 $5,967,794.9379(Question No. 909)9099379Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 16 September 2002:(1) How many seafarers have been killed or seriously injured in Australian waters and ports in each of the last five years.(2) What was the name, flag state of the vessel and the date of each death or serious injury.(3) What deaths or serious injuries have been investigated by (a) the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, (b) State investigation authority or (c) coroner.(4) Did any safety actions arise from any of these investigations; if so, what are they and have they been acted upon. 9380Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPMinister for Transport and Regional Services10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows: (1) Seafarer deaths and serious injuries reported to the ATSB under the Navigation Act are as follows:Year DeathsSerious injuries1998NilEleven1999NilOne2000OneTwo2001EightFour2002TwoOne(2) Vessel NameFlagDateDeath/Serious injuryMaersk PomorBahamas03 January 1998Serious injuryCity of BurnieIsle of Man15 March 19988 Serious injuriesNedlloyd BrisbaneNetherlands14 December 19982 Serious injuriesWaddensAntigua & Barbuda14 February 1999Serious injuryGulf ArrowBahamas7 March 2000Serious injuryBrilliant RiverPanama28 March 2000Serious injuryStar Sea Bridge/f.v Sue MPanama/Australia21 June 20001 DeathMermaid RaiderAustralia16 June 2001Serious injuryCape KestrelPanama12 October 20013 Serious injuriesNego KimHong Kong18 November 20018 DeathsCSL PacificBahamas18 February 2002Serious injuryWestern MusePanama19 June 20021 DeathTahroa ExpressPanama11 July 20021 Death(3) (a) Vessel NameMaersk PomorCity of BurnieWaddensStar Sea Bridge in collision with fishing vessel Sue MCape KestrelNego KimCSL PacificWestern MuseTahroa Express(3) (b) and (c) The ATSB and AMSA do not keep records about investigations carried out by State investigation authorities or coroners into such incidents.(4) Yes; The safety actions and follow-up actions arising from the ATSB investigations are as follows:· The Maersk Pomor, City of Burnie, Waddens and Cape Kestrel investigation reports were referred to flag States;· In light of the incidents involving City of Burnie, Waddens and Cape Kestrel, a paper on lifeboat safety was submitted to the IMO, and an ATSB Safety Bulletin on lifeboat safety was distributed to the maritime industry; and· Following the incident involving the collision between Star Sea Bridge and Sue M in June 2000, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) and the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) pursued several initiatives with the Australian Seafood Industry Council (ASIC) aimed at improving fishing vessel safety: - ATSB distributed two safety bulletins, targeting the fishing industry and masters and watchkeepers on trading ships, highlighting the risks to fishing vessels from ships, limitations of radar detection, and the requirements of the international collision regulations; and - AMSA reissued a Marine Notice, Safety of Fishing Vessels, in August 2000 updating advice on good seamanship, the international collision regulations and the need to officially report incidents at sea, and conducted a focussed ship inspection campaign on merchant ships between December 2000 and March 2001 targeting bridge visibility, radar and navigation lights functionality.· With regard to the Nego Kim investigation, the company changed its procedures to take account of issues raised in the ATSB's draft report, and the recently released final report makes the following recommendations: - International Safety Management manuals should include clear instructions for all operations in enclosed spaces, including the hazards of any operations and instructions regarding the wearing of appropriate clothing and protective equipment. - International Safety Management manuals should provide guidance on the conditions under which work in enclosed spaces should be undertaken. - The Port of Dampier draft Emergency Response Plan should be reviewed to remove ambiguities and to ensure a consistent and appropriate approach to emergency situations within the port, including clear communications. · ATSB investigations are still ongoing with respect to Star Sea Bridge/Sue M, CSL Pacific, Western Muse and Tahroa Express and some may result in additional safety actions.9381(Question No. 916)9169381Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 17 September 2002:(1) Has the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) issued a Notice of Proposed Rule Making stating its intention for safety reasons to maintain the crew to passenger ratio under Safety Regulation 121A concerning the number and composition of cabin crew. (2) If so, why does CASA not require foreign airlines flying into Australia to comply with the Australian standard when it has the legal authority to require them to do so. (3) Will he permit a New Zealand airline operating in the Australian domestic market to operate with less than the CASA crew to passenger safety ratio from December 2003 when mutual recognition of respective safety rules takes effect. 9381Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPMinister for Transport and Regional Services10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Yes. In April 2002, CASA released Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) Number 0211OS, in which rule 121A.990 details the number and composition of cabin crew. The NPRM invited comments from industry on the proposals. The time period for comments closed on 31 August 2002. CASA is currently evaluating the comments received. (2) Australia regulates aviation consistent with international agreements to which it is a party. States party to the Convention on International Civil Aviation (`Chicago Convention'), including Australia, are responsible for regulating most matters pertaining to operators of their nationality including the number of cabin crew.Paragraph 12.1 of Part I of Annex 6 to the Chicago Convention states:`An operator shall establish, to the satisfaction of the State of the Operator, the minimum number of cabin crew required for each type of aeroplane... in order to effect a safe and expeditious evacuation of the aeroplane...'Australia reinforces the obligation of foreign operators to comply with the Chicago Convention under regulation 135 of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988, which provides, inter alia, that:`...an aircraft, which possesses the nationality of a Contracting State, shall not fly within, or depart from, Australian territory unless it complies with... the requirements of the Convention in respect of: (c) the number and description of, and the holding of licences and ratings by, the operating crew;....' Accordingly, under current Australian law, the minimum number of cabin crew required on an aircraft is the minimum number required by the State of the Operator. CASA regulates the minimum number and composition of cabin crew on Australian aircraft under Civil Aviation Order (CAO) 20.16.3.(3) A Memorandum of Understanding on `Open Skies', signed by the Australian and New Zealand Transport Ministers in November 2000, provides for mutual recognition of aviation related certification to be achieved by December 2003. Officials of both countries are currently working together to review the respective safety rules and procedures to ensure that, under mutual recognition, an equivalent level of safety is achieved in both Australia and New Zealand.9382(Question No. 925)9259382Roxon, Nicola, MPMs Roxon83KGellibrandALP00 asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, upon notice, on 17 September 2002:(1) What are the details of the estimated unmet demand for Outside School Hours Care and Family Day Care places in each Federal electoral division.(2) Is he able to provide information about estimated unmet demand by local government area, region or State.(3) Is he also able to provide similar information on unmet demand in the Long Day Care centres.9382Anthony, Larry, MPMr AnthonyXJ6RichmondNPMinister for Children and Youth Affairs10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Data on unmet demand is not held in the format requested. (2) Currently estimated demand for additional Outside School Hours Care (OSHC) and Family Day Care (FDC) places in each state and territory is set out below. State/TerritoryOSHCFDCNew South Wales9490932Victoria52630Queensland70091293South Australia1598316Western Australia803210Tasmania47390Northern Territory00Australian Capital Territory7370(3) As there is no limit on the number of long day care centre places funded by the Commonwealth this information is not collected. 9382(Question No. 926)9269382Roxon, Nicola, MPMs Roxon83KGellibrandALP00 asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, upon notice, on 17 September 2002:(1) Will he list all the Commonwealth funded child care services within the local government areas of the (a) City of Greater Geelong and (b) Borough of Queenscliffe.(2) How many (a) Outside School Hours Care (OSHC) and (b) Family Day Care (FDC) places are there in this region(3) What is the estimated unmet demand for (a) OSHC, (b) FDC and (c) Long Day Care in this region.9382Anthony, Larry, MPMr AnthonyXJ6RichmondNPMinister for Children and Youth Affairs10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) (a) The following approved Commonwealth funded child care services were operating in the City of Greater Geelong in June 2001: ABC Developmental Learning Centre - NewtownAberdeen Early Learning CentreBarwon Heads Primary After School ProgramBay City Early Learning CentreBellaire Primary After School ProgramBelmont School Holiday ProgramChilwell Primary After School ProgramChilwell Primary Before School ProgramCity Central Early Learning CentreCity Learning & Care BelmontCity Learning And Care - AristonCity Learning And Care - The LinkCity Learning And Care - Trudy MoritzCity Learning And Care CorioCity Learning And Care DrysdaleCity Of Greater Geelong Family Day Care SchemeCity Of Learning & Care - Ocean GroveClairvaux After School Care ProgramClifton Springs Primary SchoolClifton Springs Primary School After School ProgramCorio South Primary Asc ProgramCorio West Primary SchoolDeakin Child Care CentreDeakin University Vacation CareDrysdale Primary After School ProgramDrysdale Primary Before School ProgramEarly Days Childcare And Learning CentreFyans Park Primary School After School ProgramFyans Park Primary School Before School ProgramGeelong & District Children's CentreGeelong & District Ymca Youth ServicesGeelong West - Ashby Primary School After School Activities ProgramGordon One World Children's CentreGrovedale Childrens ServicesGrovedale West Primary School After School ProgramGrovedale West Primary School_Before School ProgramHighton Child Care & Development CentreKada Childrens CentreKardinia International College Asc ProgramKids Club After School Care ProgramKids Club Vacation Care ProgramLara Children's CentreLara Community Centre Vacation CareLara Primary SchoolLeopold Primary After School Care ProgramLeopold Primary Before School Care ProgramManifold Heights Primary After School ProgramManifold Heights Primary Before School ProgramManifold Heights Primary Vacation ProgramMelaluka Childcare And Kindergarten CentreMontpellier Primary School After School ProgramMontpellier Primary School Before School ProgramMt Duneed Regional After School Care ProgramNewtown Holiday ClubNewtown Osh Club (After School Care)Ocean Grove Neigbourhood Centre IncOcean Grove Primary School After School ProgramOcean Grove School Holiday ProgramRosewall Primary SchoolRosewall Primary SchoolRosewall Primary Vacation CareSurfside Centre After School Care ProgramTate Street Primary School After School ProgramTown And Country Childrens CentreWoodlands House Child CareYMCA of Geelong Inc.YMCA of Geelong Inc. (b) The following approved Commonwealth funded child care services were operating in the Borough of Queenscliffe in June 2001:Lonsdale Children's CentreQueenscliff Primary School After School Program(2) (a) In June 2001 there were 519 approved Family Day Care places and 1779 approved Outside School Hours places in the City of Greater Geelong. (b) In June 2001 there were 0 approved Family Day Care places and 45 approved Outside School Hours places in the Borough of Queenscliffe.(3) (a) The estimated demand for Outside School Hours Care places in the City of Greater Geelong based on expressions of interest is:30 Before School Care32 After School Care40 Vacation Care The estimated demand for Outside School Hours Care in Borough of Queenscliffe based on expressions of interest is nil. (b) The estimated demand for Family Day Care places in the City of Greater Geelong based on waiting list information is:10 full time133 part timeThe estimated demand for Family Day Care in Borough of Queenscliffe is nil. (c) The estimated demand for Long Day Care in the City of Greater Geelong based on information obtained from surveys undertaken in March 2002 is 80 additional places. The estimated demand for Long Day Care in Borough of Queenscliffe is nil.9384(Question No. 927)9279384Roxon, Nicola, MPMs Roxon83KGellibrandALP00 asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, upon notice, on 17 September 2002:(1) What are the details of the funding arrangements for child care services in Tasmania with particular focus on those services on the neighbourhood model basis for occasional care.(2) How many services or sites operate on this model.(3) Where are these services located.(4) What sum is allocated to these services and on what basis is it allocated.(5) Are there any other services in the country which receive funding on this basis.(6) How does the existing funding model work in relation to the Child Care Benefit (CCB) program, including whether parents can claim CCB.(7) Has consideration been given to moving these services to a CCB funding model.9384Anthony, Larry, MPMr AnthonyXJ6RichmondNPMinister for Children and Youth Affairs10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Neighbourhood Model services are funded jointly by the Commonwealth and state governments. Commonwealth funding is through recurrent block grants that are administered by the state governments. In Tasmania, the Commonwealth's recurrent block grant is currently $213 325 per annum and is indexed annually. The Tasmanian State Government's contribution matches the Commonwealth contribution. (2) Thirteen services are currently operating on this model of funding in Tasmania.(3) Services are located in the following towns: Bagdad, Dodges Ferry, Dover, Flinders Island, Geeveston, Queenstown, Launceston, Richmond, St Mary's, Triabunna, Taranna, Oatlands, and Burnie.(4) Current funding levels* for services are noted below. Grants have been determined based upon the hours of operation per day, the number of days operational per week, the number of children using the service and number of weeks each service is open. Bagdad $18 035Richmond$29 453Dodges Ferry$21 642Taranna$43 667Dover$13 883St Mary's$13 883Flinders Island$15 959Tasman$38 794Geeveston $31 607Oatlands$34 642Queenstown$33 820Burnie$80 208Launceston$22 283TOTAL$419 027* Note: these figures include both Commonwealth and State contributions.(5) The Commonwealth funding for neighbourhood model occasional care is determined on this basis for all centres in Australia, through a recurrent block grant to the relevant state or territory government. However, each state or territory government is responsible for administering those funds and for determining how much they will contribute. The particular funding arrangements for occasional care services may therefore differ across Australia.(6) Neighbourhood occasional care services may be eligible to become registered carers. Parents who use a registered carer are eligible to claim the minimum rate of CCB for work-related reasons. (7) No specific consideration has been given to extending full CCB to all neighbourhood model occasional care services because they are funded by state and local governments. The way child care is funded is continually monitored to determine the best way to support services.9385(Question No. 928)9289385Roxon, Nicola, MPMs Roxon83KGellibrandALP00 asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, upon notice, on 17 September 2002:(1) What are the details of where child care funding has been spent, by electoral division, through the Disadvantaged Area Subsidy program since the inception of the program and on a financial year basis.(2) How many applications for such funding have been refused each financial year.(3) On what basis is funding approved or allocated and what model of equity funding, if any, is applied.9385Anthony, Larry, MPMr AnthonyXJ6RichmondNPMinister for Children and Youth Affairs10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) The information provided is for the 2000-2001 and 2001-2002 financial years. The detailed information required to answer the honourable member's question from the inception of the Disadvantaged Area Subsidy is not readily available. I do not consider appropriate the additional expenditure of resources and effort that would be involved in collecting and assembling information for the sole purpose of answering questions of this nature. South AustraliaElectorate2000/20012001/2002Adelaide$35,763$36,510Barker$452,770$433,441Bonython$7,875$5,137Grey$462,395$491,212Kingston$62,063$69,548Mayo$179,916$274,640Wakefield$248,431$289,322Western AustraliaElectorate2000/20012001/2002Forrest$177,629$182,729Kalgoorlie$420,145$430,472O'Connor$101,524$102,280Pearce$47,386$53,512Canning$15,261$15,715QueenslandElectorate2000/20012001/2002Blair$193,667$211,405Bowman$11,655$11,723Brisbane$35,821$36,566Capricornia$309,112$331,861Dawson$100,932$115,499Dickson$22,603$27,614Fadden$7,666$7,706Fairfax$65,777$73,758Fisher$54,669$63,092Forde$18,616$34,429Griffith$11,397$10,792Groom$80,334$96,590Herbert - $5,137Hinkler$187,122$218,699Kennedy$219,740$274,433Leichhardt$244,843$301,097Longman$14,699$14,646Maranoa$333,770$382,604McPherson$17,854$25,705Moncreiff$9,071$12,451Ryan$38,601$53,283Wide Bay$81,340$97,473Australian Capital TerritoryElectorate2000/20012001/2002Fraser$4,168$13,978TasmaniaElectorate2000/20012001/2002Bass$35,020$21,294Braddon$183,589$170,272Franklin$53,521$52,371Lyons$134,336$111,210Flinders$11,918$8,501New South WalesElectorate2000/20012001/2002Berowra$41,294$34,682Calare$169,493$186,790Charlton$11,347$12,845Chifley$28,977$29,592Cook$12,792$12,845Cowper$50,286$64,705Cunningham$72,694$24,876Dobell$21,015$19,738Eden-Monaro$151,104$202,977Farrer$145,773$189,148Gilmore$106,425$118,522Gwydir$223,018$172,562Hughes$9,780$12,845Hume$182,187$200,360Hunter$118,593$134,095Lyne$158,330$168,524Macarthur$14,503$15,885Mackellar$16,879$19,738Macquarie$117,893$136,107Mitchell$9,573$12,945New England$78,532$126,447Newcastle$10,563$21,430Page$52,511$57,882Parkes$119,097$105,153Paterson$10,561$14,598Richmond$49,440$56,041Riverina$191,493$249,774Shortland$51,933$54,888Sydney$43,117$21,992Throsby$52,714-Werriwa$15,539$17,341VictoriaElectorate2000/20012001/2002Ballarat$118,153$142,454Bendigo$221,141$262,253Burke$83,464$92,123Corangamite$219,754$234,312Corio$114,162$125,466Flinders$96,961$115,240Gippsland$268,702$287,556Indi$212,182$253,681Isaacs$21,982$22,576La Trobe$122,179$119,702McEwen$287,558$302,769McMillan$70,615$107,190Mallee$133,725$169,931Murray$213,987$453,316Scullin$9,861$7,706Wannon$96,781$113,552Northern TerritoryElectorate2000/20012001/2002Lingiari$215,833$327,052(2) All applications received that satisfied the eligibility criteria were successful in obtaining funding.(3) To apply for Long Day Care (LDC) Disadvantaged Area Subsidy (DAS) funding, community based centres must be operated and managed by a community-based organisation incorporated under the relevant state or territory legislation. To be eligible for LDC DAS funding, a community-based centre must meet the following main criteria:· the centre is located in a town in a rural or remote statistical local area; and· the centre must be the sole provider of centre based care in that town.LDC DAS is paid on total approved places as follows:· $25.95 per place per week (from 1 July 2002) for approved child care places for children 0 to 36 months; and· $17.40 per place per week (from 1 July 2002) for approved child care places for children over 36 months.All services located in rural and remote Australia and some services located on the fringe of an urban area are eligible to receive Outside School Hours Care (OSHC) DAS funding. Funding provides a two tiered level of funding for before school, after school and vacation care services that have an average of 30 children or less in care. Services with more than 30 children in care are ineligible for DAS funding. The following table outlines the total funding available (from 1 July 2002) based on utilised places for each outside school hour care component: Before SchoolAfter SchoolVacation Care1 to 20 children$5322$7985$713821 to 30 children$2660$3992$3569Over 30 children$0$0$09389(Question No. 929)9299389Roxon, Nicola, MPMs Roxon83KGellibrandALP00 asked the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, upon notice, on 17 September 2002:(1) Has he received numerous representations from parents and advocacy groups about the unfairness of the allowable absences policy within the child care program; if so, why is there no flexibility within the policy for parents, particularly teachers, who have more than 30 days of annual leave each year.(2) How is the allowable absences policy monitored and enforced by Government to ensure parents are not charged for holidays and sick days. 9389Anthony, Larry, MPMr AnthonyXJ6RichmondNPMinister for Children and Youth Affairs10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Charging for days when children are booked to attend care but do not attend care is a commercial decision made by child care services. The Government does not determine the fee charging practices of child care services.However, the Government recognises that there are occasions when a child is unable to attend a service for which he or she has been booked. The absence provisions were introduced as part of this Government's commitment to assist families with these costs. Child Care Benefit is payable providing the requirements are met for either an allowable absence day or an approved absence day. These provisions are generous and flexible and support the needs of most families.Child Care Benefit is payable for up to 30 allowable absence days for each child per financial year. These absences can be taken for any reason, including school holidays. Child Care Benefit is not payable for any allowable absences in excess of 30 days. The number of allowable absence days is limited to 30 as a reasonable balance to provide an incentive to families to use the child care services they have booked for. In addition to the payment of Child Care Benefit for 30 allowable absence days, Child Care Benefit is payable for an unlimited number of approved absence days. Approved absence days can be taken for specific reasons such as illness with a medical certificate, public holidays, court ordered contact arrangements and for parents who work rotating shifts or who have rostered days off.The definition of what constitutes a rotating shift is specific and services have this information available to them in their handbooks. Parents are encouraged to talk to services about charging arrangements in cases where they know in advance that their child will be absent from care, especially for extended periods, such as during school holidays. This would be particularly the case with teachers. Many services are able to hold a place and resell it temporarily to another family thus reducing the time that a family needs to pay for care which is not being provided. (2) How is the allowable absences policy monitored and enforced by Government to ensure parents are not charged for holidays and sick days.Child care services determine whether to charge parents when a child is absent from care. The absence provisions do not control the charging practices of services and the Government has no role in this area.Families can access information about the absence provisions through Child Care Benefit information products such as the brochure `Things You Need to Know About Child Care Benefit'. The Family Assistance Office can also provide information on the absence provisions. The Department of Family and Community Services provide comprehensive handbooks to child care services that give guidance on how absence provisions operate and the obligations of services. Services are also encouraged to contact their Family Assistance Office payment teams or the Department of Family and Community Services to help with any further questions that they may have.As part of outreach to services, the Department recently published an article in its publication Child Care News about absence provisions and reminding services where they can find out further information if they need it.9390(Question No. 936)9369390Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, upon notice, on 18 September 2002:(1) Has the design of the proposed Australian War Memorial in London been scrapped.(2) What has been the cost of design work to date, by whom was the design work undertaken and how was the designer selected.(3) What instructions were given to the designer by the Government and did those instructions conflict with the design that was scrapped.(4) What was the cost of selecting the original designer and what is the expected cost of calling tenders for a new design and a new design team.(5) When was work for the memorial originally intended for completion and what is the expected date of completion now.(6) Was there any conflict between the designs to date and the views of the Public Arts Advisory Panel of Westminster City Council.(7) Does the Office of War Graves face legal action relating to the work of the original design team; if so, what is the nature of the legal claims and what expenditure has been incurred on legal advice relating to those claims.9390Vale, Danna, MPMrs ValeVK6HughesLPMinister for Veterans' Affairs and Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) In re-tendering for the design of the memorial, I can confirm that the original design can not be re-used.(2) Total payments already made to design team members to June 2002 total $260,380 (GST inclusive). The design team members consisted of Robert Woodward from Sydney, selected as a fountain design specialist and a Melbourne team consisting of Les Kossatz, sculptor and architects Robert Sinclair and Robert Watson. Mr Woodward was invited to participate as a design team member because of his record as a fountain designer and the Melbourne members were chosen from a limited-entry design competition. (3) A detailed and comprehensive design brief was developed in consultation with London authorities which, along with the division of responsibilities between design team members, constituted the instructions issued by the Office of Australian War Graves on behalf of the Commonwealth. As the project developed, amendments were made to the design, to meet the requirements of London authorities. In consequence, the instructions given to the design team changed to take account of those amendments. The design that was approved by London authorities was consistent with those instructions.(4) The cost of selecting the original design team members was $15,000. Each of the four design teams currently competing for the Australian War Memorial in London will be paid $50,000 provided they each meet the comprehensive terms and conditions of the design competition. These figures can not be compared directly because the original design evolved over a twelve-month period at a substantially greater cost, whereas the design of the winning competitor will be in a format ready to submit to London authorities. (5) The memorial was originally scheduled for completion prior to Anzac Day 2003. It will now be completed prior to Remembrance Day 2003, the 85th Anniversary of the Armistice.(6) There has been no conflict over design with the Public Arts Advisory Panel of Westminster City Council.(7) No legal action has been commenced in the courts in relation to the decision not to proceed with the original design team. The legal costs incurred to date for legal advice from the Australian Government Solicitor on resolving claims from the original design team are $29,510.57.9391(Question No. 958)9589391Hoare, Kelly, MPMs Hoare83YCharltonALP00 asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 26 September 2002:(1) Do nominations for the positions of Prosecutor and deputy prosecutors and judges to the International Criminal Court (ICC) close on 30 November 2002; if so, is he considering Australia's nominations.(2) Must each country vote for at least six women and men and must there be at least nine women nominated.(3) Is he able to say whether, out of the ten countries who have already submitted nominations, only Switzerland has nominated a woman.(4) Is he considering nominating outstanding Australian women for the positions of Prosecutor and deputy prosecutors and judges to the ICC; if not, why not.9391Downer, Alexander, MPMr Downer4G4MayoLPMinister for Foreign Affairs10—The answer to the honourable member's questions is as follows:(1) Nominations for the positions of Judges and the Prosecutor close on 30 November 2002. It is possible that the nomination period for Judges could be extended to 8 December 2002 (see answer to question no. 2).The elections for these positions will be held at the Assembly of States Parties meeting in February 2003. The Prosecutor, once elected, will nominate candidates for Deputy Prosecutor positions, to be elected at a subsequent meeting of the Assembly.The question of whether Australia might nominate a candidate is under consideration by the Government.(2) For the election of Judges, each country must vote for at least six women and at least six men on the first ballot. However, if the number of candidates from one gender is ten or less, the minimum voting requirements would be in accordance with paragraph 3(c) of the “Resolution on the procedure for the election of the judges for the International Criminal Court”, which was adopted at the First Meeting of the Assembly of States Parties in September 2002.If, as at 30 November 2002, there are less than 10 candidates from each gender for the Judges' positions, then the nomination period is extended until 8 December 2002. The intention is for there to be at least ten women nominated for the Judges' positions. However, the number of women nominated for Judges' positions will be the number so nominated at the end of the nomination period.(3) As at 9 October 2002, six nominations for the Judges' positions had been received and processed. Of these, only the candidate nominated by Switzerland is a woman.(4) As noted in the answer to question no. 1, the question of whether Australia might nominate a candidate is under consideration by the Government.9391(Question No. 962)9629391Vamvakinou, Maria, MPMs Vamvakinou00AMTCalwellALP00 asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 14 October 2002:(1) What will be the strategic objective of any military action against the current Iraqi regime.(2) In terms of discussions he has had with US and UN officials, is the potential military action against Iraq just targeting weapons producing installations or is it about a regime change through ground forces.(3) Has he sought any legal advice on the legality under international and humanitarian law of the proposed military action against the current Iraqi regime; if so, what advice has he received on the legality of the proposed action. (4) Has he held any discussions with US or UN officials on possible unilateral or multilateral alliances on the follow-up to a change of regime in Iraq following a military strike; if so, what are the proposed actions in terms of occupation.(5) Has he held any discussions with US or UN officials regarding potential military action against Iran and North Korea; if so, what was the substance and conclusions of the discussion.9392Downer, Alexander, MPMr Downer4G4MayoLPMinister for Foreign Affairs10—The following is the answer to the honourable member's question:(1), (2) and (3) It is premature to discuss the response to any non-compliance by Iraq including the possible use of force. United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 contains a process by which Iraq can be disarmed of weapons of mass destruction peacefully. Australia fully supports this process. The onus is on Iraq to comply fully and unconditionally.(4) No.(5) No.9392(Question No. 968)9689392Gibbons, Steve, MPMr Gibbons83XBendigoALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Arts and Sport, upon notice, on 14 October 2002:(1) Which art galleries in which States and Territories did the Federal Government undertake to assist to upgrade in 1998.(2) What sums were committed in each case at the time by the (a) Federal Government, (b) State or Territory Governments and (c) any other funding source and what sums have been paid to date in each case.(3) Where the Federal Government has not paid the full sum committed, what sum in each case is outstanding.(4) Which redevelopment programs (a) have and (b) have not been completed.(5) What are the reasons in those instances where redevelopment projects have not been completed, or where the full sums promised by the Federal Government have not been expended.9392McGauran, Peter, MPMr McGauranXH4GippslandNPMinister for Science10—The Minister for the Arts and Sport has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) to (4) 1 Art Gallery State/Territory2(a) Federal Government2(b) State/Territory2(c) other funding source3 Funds paid to date4 Redevelopment programsComplete or not completeVictorian Regional Galleries Ararat Art Gallery$120,000NilNilPaid in fullProject completeBallarat Fine Art Gallery$2m$1m$2.3mPaid in fullProject completeBenalla Art Gallery$500,000Nil$300,000Paid in fullProject completeBendigo Art GalleryNilNilNilNilProject not completeCastlemaine Art Gallery and Historical Museum$2mNilNilPaid in fullProject completeGeelong Art Gallery $2mNilNilPaid in fullProject completeGippsland Art Gallery$180,000Nil$68,000Paid in fullProject completeHamilton Art Gallery$100,000NilNilPaid in fullProject completeHorsham Regional Art Gallery$100,000Nil$13,520Paid in fullProject completeLa Trobe Regional Art Gallery$550,000$2.39m$1.15mPaid in fullProject completeMcClelland Gallery$500,000Nil$10,655Paid in fullProject completeMildura Arts Centre$350,000NilNil$300,000Project not completeMornington Peninsula Regional Gallery$500,000NilNilPaid in fullProject completeShepparton Art Gallery$1m$3m$3mPaid in fullProject completeSwan Hill Regional Gallery$50,000$50,000$34,000Paid in fullProject completeWarrnambool Art Gallery$50,000NilNilPaid in full$6,227.60 unspent and returned Project completeNational Gallery of Victoria$25m$96m$27m$12.89mProject not completeQueensland Heritage Trails NetworkMetro Arts$1.02mNilNilPaid in fullProject completeGlobal Arts Link$1m$500,000$1.5mPaid in fullProject completeArtspace Mackay$3.2mNil$700,000$1.174mProject not completeAraluen Gallery Alice Springs$2.3m$277,435NilPaid in fullProject completeHazelhurst - Regional Gallery and Arts Centre$1mNilNilPaid in fullProject completeHeide - Museum of Modern Art$2.5m$3m$2.15m$1.92mProject not completeThe Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery$1mNil$1.5m$1mProject complete(5) (a) The Mildura Arts Centre - delays are due to difficulties with the newly installed climate control system.It is expected to be completed by the end of November 2002 and the final payment of $50,000 released. (b) The Bendigo Art Gallery - this project was virtually complete when the Federation Fund grant was announced. A decision was taken by the former Minister for the Arts and the Centenary of Federation, the Hon Peter McGauran MP, to reallocate the Federation Fund grant to the redevelopment of the Bendigo Performing Arts Centre. The project is expected to be completed in 2003-04.(c) Heide IV - the Deed of Grant expires 31 August 2003. Heide I is complete. Heide IV, Federation Way, is not yet complete due to delays with planning approvals. Due for completion in August 2003. (d) National Gallery of Victoria - this project is part of broader redevelopment works. The project has experienced various delays caused by a range of factors including some industrial issues and delays with planning approvals. Construction is estimated to be completed by June 2003. (e) Artspace Mackay - a Queensland Heritage Trails Network (QHTN) project, is soon to be completed. A soft opening has been arranged for 13 December 2002.9393(Question No. 981)9819393Murphy, John, MPMr Murphy83DLoweALP00 asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs, upon notice, on 14 October 2002:(1) What percentage of gas and oil royalties will the Republic of East Timor receive from the Timor Sea Treaty with Australia.(2) Will he supply a map or other descriptor of the positions of the lateral boundaries of the joint oil and gas field area which are the subject of the royalties.(3) Is the Greater Sunrise Oil and Gas Field included in the Timor Sea Treaty which will be included in the revenue sharing arrangement.(4) Is a Joint Standing Committee reviewing the Timor Sea Treaty and Timor Sea Agreement; if so, what is the Government position with respect to ensuring that the widely reported 90% of revenues being promised to the Republic of East Timor will be honoured.9394Downer, Alexander, MPMr Downer4G4MayoLPMinister for Foreign Affairs10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) The Timor Sea Treaty provides for Australia to have title to 10% of the petroleum resources in the Joint Petroleum Development Area established in the Timor Sea Treaty and for East Timor to have title to 90% of those resources. Under this scheme East Timor will obtain 90% of the revenue from both First Tranche Petroleum (equivalent to an ad valorem royalty) and Profit Petroleum (analogous to a resources tax). (2) A map of the JPDA is attached. A description of its boundaries is included in Annex A of the Timor Sea Treaty which was tabled in the House on 25 June 2002.(3) Yes. Under Annex E of the Timor Sea Treaty Australia and East Timor have agreed to unitise the Greater Sunrise field on the basis that 20.1% of the resource lies within the JPDA. Production of the resource will be distributed on the basis that 20.1% is attributed to the JPDA - and thus subject to the revenue provisions of the Treaty - and 79.9% is attributed to Australia. (4) Yes. The Joint Standing Committee on Treaties has held hearings into the Timor Sea Treaty and a related Exchange of Notes of treaty status. East Timor's share of the total revenues from petroleum activities in the JPDA will not, however, necessarily be exactly 90%. This is principally because, in addition to the royalties described under (1), each country will also apply its own income tax regime to its share of profits from petroleum activities. As a result, their actual shares of income tax will depend on their respective tax rates. If East Timor's rate is higher than Australia's, as is currently the case, its share of income taxes will be higher than 90%; if lower, it will be less than 90%, with a corresponding effect on their overall revenues.TIMOR SEA TREATYJOINT PETROLEUM DEVELOPMENT AREA9395(Question No. 982)9829395Murphy, John, MPMr Murphy83DLoweALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, upon notice, on 14 October 2002:(1) Further to the answer to parts (2) and (3) of question No. 881 (Hansard, 23 September 2002, page 6816), to whom does (a) ABC Programming and (b) ABC Audience and Consumer Affairs reports in terms of governance of the ABC Board of Directors.(2) Who has ultimate power over the management of the decision making of ABC Programming and ABC Audience and Consumer Affairs.(3) Is the corporate governance of both ABC Programming and ABC Audience and Consumer Affairs in effect the same Board of Directors of the ABC; if not, why not.(4) Is it correct that the independence of the ABC Audience and Consumer Affairs from ABC Programming is compromised because the corporate heart and mind in terms of the governance of the ABC Board of Directors is one-and-the-same corporate personality; if not, why not.(5) Is the self-regulation of audience and programming standards by the ABC an anathema to true political accountability.(6) Are censorship and broadcasting standards now being directly administered by the ABC itself and demonstrates a classic conflict of interest against the public interest, denying the community any effective input into the standards of what is displayed on the ABC; if not, why not.9395McGauran, Peter, MPMr McGauranXH4GippslandNPMinister for Science10—The Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) to-(2) ABC programming areas, as well as Audience and Consumer Affairs, are accountable through the Managing Director to the ABC Board. It is the role of the Board to ensure the Corporation develops codes of practice relating to programming matters, to formulate policies and to monitor compliance with those policies and standards. It is the role of the Managing Director to act in accordance with Board policies in managing the activities of the Corporation.(3) Yes, as stated above, the ABC Programming areas and the Audience and Consumer Affairs unit are part of the Corporation and, like all parts of the Corporation, are accountable through the Managing Director to the ABC Board.(4) No, it is not correct to claim that the independence of the Audience andConsumer Affairs is compromised. The complaints handling process of the ABC includes aspects that are both internal and external to the Corporation. The ABC Audience and Consumer Affairs unit forms one part of the Corporation's overall framework of quality review, complaints management and independent complaints review. A priority for the ABC has been to improve the rigour and timeliness of its handling of complaints. Audience and Consumer Affairs provide a Corporation-wide perspective on complaints, internally independent of ABC programming areas. Complainants who are not satisfied may still refer matters to the ABC's Independent Complaints Review Panel and/or the government regulator, the Australian Broadcasting Authority. Both these forms of review are external and entirely independent of the ABC. (5) The Australian Broadcasting Corporation Act 1983 provides for the editorial and administrative independence of the Corporation, thereby investing the ABC Board with particular responsibilities in relation to programming standards. Moreover the ABC is subject to close and ongoing scrutiny by the Parliament and through processes established by the Parliament. These processes require from the ABC a full, transparent account of performance, particularly in relation to the functions, powers, duties, privileges and resources approved by Parliament. Amongst other things, this requires disclosure to Parliament of the way in which the ABC exercises its independence and the initiatives that it takes to maintain the independence and integrity of the Corporation, and fulfil its Charter and other obligations. (6) There has been no recent change in the way the ABC administers censorship and broadcasting standards. The ABC Board has a Code of Practice that outlines a range of program standards against which the ABC can be judged publicly. The Code of Practice has been provided formally to the Australian Broadcasting Authority, which is able to investigate complaints that the ABC has not complied with the Code. ABC staff are also bound by comprehensive Editorial Policies in relation to programming standards, in accordance with the requirements set out in the ABC Act and ABC Charter. Insofar as censorship is concerned, the ABC's Code of Practice applies the system of television program classification set out in the Guidelines for the Classification of Film and Video Tapes, which are issued by the Office of Film & Literature Classification.9396(Question No. 983)9839396Murphy, John, MPMr Murphy83DLoweALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, upon notice, on 14 October 2002:(1) Further to the answer to part (2) of question No. 833 (Hansard, 23 September 2002, page 6808), what will be the impact of media ownership in Australia in regional centres like Adelaide and Hobart on freedom of speech and democracy in a situation of monopolistic control of any two or more media outlets.(2) How will the proposed new cross media ownership laws benefit freedom of speech and democratic views being expressed in an environment where most media will be controlled by one media mogul in a particular geographic area.(3) Will the proposed cross media ownership changes result in enhancement of democracy and freedom of speech.9396McGauran, Peter, MPMr McGauranXH4GippslandNPMinister for Science10—The Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) The Bill retains existing safeguards for diversity of services, particularly in regional areas, and introduces new requirements for editorial independence. These safeguards include: - In regional areas, cross-media ownership will be limited to two of the three types of media covered by the laws (that is, television, radio and newspapers) - To be eligible for a cross-media exemption certificate, applicants must satisfy the Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABA) that separate editorial decision-making responsibilities will be maintained for media organisations operating under the exemption certificate - Media organisations subject to the exemption will be required to disclose a cross-media relationship in certain circumstances - Limitations on the control of commercial television and radio broadcasting licence will continue to apply. These restrictions limit the number of licences a person may control in a single licence area (two radio licences; or subject only to subsections 38A and 38B of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 dealing with single and two station markets, one commercial television licence in each licence area). The restrictions also prohibit a person from exercising control of commercial television broadcasting licences whose combined licence area population exceeds 75% of the population of Australia. (2) and (3) See answer to part (1).Approximately 90% of Australians reside in areas able to receive three separately owned commercial television stations, plus the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC). Most people in living in remote Australia are able to receive two commercial television stations (via satellite or terrestrial retransmission) plus the ABC and the Special Broadcasting Service (SBS). Therefore, when taken together with the regulatory restrictions outlined in the response to question one, the provisions of the Bill provide adequate protection for diversity of media throughout Australia.The Government is committed to reforming Australia's cross-media ownership and foreign ownership laws in a manner that will both encourage competition and ensure that a diversity of opinion and information is maintained. Without reform, the current media ownership laws will limit the Australian media sector to an outdated structure with little or no capacity for new players, improved competition, or the ability to respond to a rapidly evolving and converging international environment.9397(Question No. 994)9949397O'Connor, Brendan, MPMr Brendan O'Connor00AN3BurkeALP00 asked the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, upon notice, on 15 October 2002:(1) What Commonwealth grants were provided to environment organisations throughout Australia in (a) 2001-02 and (b) 2002-03.(2) Which environmental organisations received the grants in each year.9397Kemp, Dr David, MPDr KempBT4GoldsteinLPMinister for the Environment and Heritage10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) and (2) Details of grant programs and approvals are provided by organisation and financial year.1 (a) 2001-2002 Financial year Organisation NameProgram TitleAbels Bay CoastcareCoastcareAboriginal Corporation of West Coast Cape York Peninsula Traditional Land OwnersBushcareAboriginal Lands TrustNational WeedsAboriginal Lands Trust (SA)BushcareAboriginal Lands Trust (SA)CoastcareAboriginal Lands Trust of Western AustraliaBushcareActive Community EnvironmentalistsCoastcareAdelaide River and Coomalie Region Landcare GroupWaterwatchAdvance PenshurstBushcareAlbany Eastern Hinterland Inc.BushcareAlbury-Wodonga Environment CentreGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsAlbury-Wodonga Regional Parklands Inc.BushcareAlectown District Landcare GroupBushcareAlstonville Creek Carers Landcare IncBushcareAlternative Technology AssociationGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsAnangu PitantjatjaraEndangered Species Anangu PitjantjatjaraIndigenous Management of Protected AreasAnangu Pitjantjatjara Land Management Inc.BushcareAnderson's Inlet Landcare Group Inc.BushcareANGAIR Inc.CoastcareAngels Beach Dune Care and Reafforestation GroupCoastcareAnglesea Coast ActionCoastcareAnglesea Tourism and Traders IncCoastcareAngourie Point Dune CareCoastcareAPPEA LimitedMarine Protected AreasArding Landcare GroupBushcareArid Lands Environment CentreGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsArid Lands Environment Centre IncWaterwatchArno Bay Progress Association Inc.CoastcareAshburton Land Conservation District CommitteeCoastcareAugust Margaret River/Lower Blackwood LCDCCoastcareAustins Ferry and Claremont AssociationBushcareAustralian Association for Environmental Education Australian Association for Environmental Education Biennial Conference 2002Australian Committee for IUCNGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsAustralian Conservation FoundationGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsAustralian Coral Reef SocietyGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsAustralian Marine Conservation SocietyCoastcareAustralian Marine Conservation SocietyCapacity BuildingAustralian Marine Conservation SocietyGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsAustralian Marine Conservation SocietyMarine Species Protection Australian Platypus ConservancyGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsAustralian Rainforest Conservation SocietyGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsAustralian Seabird Rescue Group Queensland Inc.CoastcareAustralian Seabird Rescue Inc. (ASR)CoastcareAustralian Trust for Conservation VolunteersGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsAvon Working GroupBushcareAvon-Richardson Implementation Committee Inc.BushcareAxe Creek Landcare GroupBushcareBakers Swamp Landcare GroupBushcareBalcombe Estuary Rehabilitation Group Inc.BushcareBalcombe Estuary Rehabilitation Group Inc.CoastcareBalkanu Cape York Development CorporationBushcareBanbai Business Enterprises IncIndigenous Management of Protected AreasBangor Landcare Group Inc.BushcareBanksia Environmental FoundationPrime Minister's Award for Environmentalist of the Year 2002Bannister Point Bushcare GroupCoastcareBarrah CDEPBushcareBarrenjoey BillygoatsCoastcareBarron River Integrated Catchment Management Association Inc.BushcareBarung Landcare Association Inc.BushcareBarwon Heads Association IncCoastcareBawinanga Aboriginal CorporationBushcareBawinanga Aboriginal OrganisationCoastcareBayside Friends of Native WildlifeCoastcareBellarine Landcare GroupBushcareBemm River Progress and Improvements AssociationCoastcareBen Chifley Catchment Steering Committee Inc.National WeedsBennett Brook Catchment Group Inc.WaterwatchBenung Aboriginal Association IncBushcareBergen op Zoom - Ohio Landcare GroupBushcareBerkeley Development Association (auspicing body of the Budjong Creek Landcare GCoastcareBig Scrub Environment CentreGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsBig Scrub Rainforest Landcare GroupBushcareBinningup Community Association IncCoastcareBird Observers Club of AustraliaGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsBird Observers Club of AustraliaNational Wetlands Birds AustraliaEndangered Species Birds AustraliaNational Reserves Birds AustraliaNational Wetlands Birds Australia - Australasian Wader Studies GroupNational WetlandsBirds Australia (WA Group)CoastcareBirds Australia BushcareBirds Australia, WA GroupEndangered Species Black Point Shackowners Association IncBushcareBlack Point Shackowners Association IncCoastcareBlackwood Basin GroupBushcareBlackwood Catchment Co-ordinating GroupBushcareBlackwood Valley Landcare Zone IncNational WeedsBlayney Carcoar Landcare IncBushcareBloomfield Yalanji Catchment Co-ordinating Association Inc.CoastcareBlue Mountains Conservation SocietyGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsBombo Headland Landcare GroupCoastcareBonegilla Community Hall Management CommitteeBushcareBoomey Landcare GroupBushcareBoorhaman and District Landcare GroupBushcareBoorolong LandcareBushcareBorroloola Community Government CouncilCoastcareBouvard Coastcare GroupCoastcareBowen Shire Council on behalf of the Queens Beach Action Group (QBAG)CoastcareBowraville Aboriginal Land CouncilBushcareBredbo Community Landcare GroupBushcareBremer Bay Dive ClubCoastcareBridgewater Bay Coast Action GroupCoastcareBridport CoastcareCoastcareBrisbane Valley - Kilcoy Landcare Group IncWaterwatchBrooklyn Park Bushcare GroupCoastcareBroome Botanical Society IncBushcareBrooms Head Reserve Improvement ComitteeCoastcareBrunswick Catchment Forest Landcare Group IncBushcareBunarong Land Council Aboriginal CorporationCoastcareBundeena-Maianbar Heitage Walk AssociationCoastcareBundi Road Subgroup of the Taroom Shire Landcare Group Inc.BushcareBundundea Aboriginal CorporationBushcareBungendore Park Management CommitteeBushcareBurdekin Canegrowers ExecutiveBushcareBurnett Catchment Care AssociationWaterwatchBurraneer Park Bushcare GroupCoastcareBurrgirrku Land TrustCoastcareBurringbar and Mooball Catchment Landcare GroupBushcareButtlingarra Aboriginal CorporationCoastcareByron Environment CentreGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsByron Shire Dunecare Coordinating CommitteeCoastcareCabin Communities Landcare GroupCoastcareCairns and Far North Environment CentreGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsCairns Urban Landcare Group IncNational Weeds Calingiri - New Norcia Land Conservation District Committee Inc.BushcareCanberra and South East Region Environment CentreGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsCapricorn Conservation CouncilGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsCambridge CoastcareCoastcareCamden Haven Adult and Community EducationCoastcareCamden Haven Protection Society IncCoastcareCape BoardridersCoastcareCape Byron TrustCoastcareCape Paterson Coast Action Group Inc (CPCAG)CoastcareCape Projects Group (CPG)CoastcareCape Woolamai Progress Association Coast Action/Coastcare GroupCoastcareCape York Peninsula Development AssociationBushcareCardinia Environment Coalition Inc.BushcareCardinia Environment Coalition Inc.Coastal Monitoring Caring for Country Unit, Northern Land CouncilBushcareCarmila Sports Reserve AssociationCoastcareCarnarvon Heritage Group IncBushcareCassowary Advisory GroupCoastcareCentral Coast Community Environment NetworkBushcareCentral Coast Community Environment NetworkCoastcareCentral Coast Community Environment NetworkGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsCentral Coast Community Environment NetworkWaterwatchCentral Coastal BoardClean Seas Central Flinders Soil Conservation BoardBushcareCentral Land CouncilIndigenous Management of Protected AreasCentral North Field Naturalists Group IncNational Wetlands Centralian Land Management AssociationNational Feral Animal ControlCentre for Whale Research WA incMarine Species ProtectionCERESGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsChinchilla District Landcare Group Inc.BushcareChristian SurfersCoastcareCitizens Wildlife Corridor ArmidaleBushcareCitizens Wildlife Corridor ArmidaleGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsClarence Environment CentreGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsClarence Land and Coast Care Network Inc.Bushcare'CLEAN' - Cairns Local Environment Awareness NetworkCoastcareClean Air Society of Australia and New ZealandAir Pollution in Major Cities - Promotional ActivitiesClean Up AustraliaGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsClean Up AustraliaPlastic Bag Awareness Clean Up AustraliaWaste Management Awareness Clifton Community Reserve Management CommitteeBushcareClifton Landcare Group Inc.BushcareCoastal Fire Brigade (WA)CoastcareCoastcare - T.E.N. (The Entrance North)CoastcareCoastcare NSWCoastcareCoastcare South AustraliaCoastcareCobargo Landcare Group Inc.BushcareCobargo Tourist and Business AssociationBushcareCockburn Wetlands Education Centre Inc.National Wetlands Coffin Rock Landcare Group IncBushcareCoffs Harbour Regional Landcare Inc.CoastcareCombined Local Action Planning Committees of Renmark to the Border Inc.BushcareComboyne and Byabarra Landcare Group Inc.BushcareCommunity of Lakewood Estate Strata PlanBushcareComnetCoastcareComobella Landcare GroupBushcareCondamine Catchment Management Association Inc.BushcareConservation Council of South AustraliaEndangered Species Conservation Council of South AustraliaGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsConservation Council of the South -East Region and CanberraGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsConservation Council of Western AustraliaGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsConservation Volunteers AustraliaWaterwatchCooee to Camdale CoastcareCoastcareCoolamon Landcare GroupBushcareCooloola CoastcareCoastcareCoolup Land Conservation District Committee Inc.BushcareCoomaditchie United Aboriginal CorporationBushcareCoomooroo Landcare GroupBushcareCooney Creek Landcare Group Inc.BushcareCoorong and Districts Soil Conservation BoardBushcareCoorong District Local Action Plan Committee Inc.BushcareCoorong District Local Action Plan Committee Inc.CoastcareCoorow Land Conservation District CommitteeBushcareCopacabana Landcare GroupCoastcareCorangamite Catchment Management AuthorityBushcareCorangamite Catchment Management AuthorityNational Wetlands Corindi Beach Dunecare GroupCoastcareCorinella Foreshore Reserve INC Committee of ManagementCoastcareCorrigin Land Conservation District Committee Inc.BushcareCowell Lions Club IncCoastcareCuballing Land Conservation District CommitteeBushcareCudal Landcare IncNational Weeds Culburra Beach Progress AssociationCoastcareCunderdin and Tammin Land Conservation District CommitteeBushcareCunjardine River Catchment GroupBushcareDalrymple Landcare Committee Inc.BushcareDarebin Creek Management CommitteeBushcareDawson Catchment Coordinating Association IncBushcareDemed Association IncorporatedBushcareDenmark Environment Centre Inc.BushcareDenmark Environment Centre IncGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsDerriwong-Ootha GroupBushcareDerwent Catchment Waterwatch Group Inc.WaterwatchDesert Uplands Build-Up and Development Strategy Committee Inc.BushcareDhimurru Land Management Aboriginal CorporationIndigenous Management of Protected AreasDiggers Camp Dune Care GroupCoastcareDolphin Research InstituteGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsDookie Land Management Group Inc.National Wetlands Dorset WaterwatchWaterwatchDownside Landcare GroupBushcareDuck Creek Catchment Community GroupBushcareDudauman Frampton Landcare Group Inc.BushcareDudley Electors Association IncCoastcareDundee Enviro Care Inc.CoastcareDusty's Creek Landcare Group Inc.BushcareEarthwatch AustraliaGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsEarthwatch InstituteNational Wetlands East Gippsland Catchment Management AuthorityBushcareEast Gippsland Catchment Management AuthorityNational Weeds East Gippsland Catchment Management AuthorityWaterwatchEast Gippsland Landcare Network Inc.BushcareEast Moorabool Landcare GroupBushcareEast Shelley Beach Coastcare GroupCoastcareEastcoast Regional Development Organisation IncCoastcareEastern Districts Soil Conservation BoardBushcareEastern Hills and Murray Plains Catchment Group Inc.BushcareEastern Tinaroo Catchment Landcare Group IncBushcareEdithburgh Progress Assoc.CoastcareElleker Progress AssociationCoastcareEmu Park Urban Bushcare GroupBushcareEmu Swamp Landcare GroupNational Weeds Environment Centre of Western AustraliaGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsEnvironment Centre N.T.Grants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsEnvironment Victoria IncAir Pollution in Major CitiesEnvironment Victoria IncGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsEnvironment Victoria IncSmogbustersEnvironmental Defenders Office WA (inc)CoastcareEnvironmental Training and Employment (Northern Rivers) Inc (ENVITE)CoastcareEnvironmental Weeds Action Network IncBushcareEnvironmental Weeds Action Network IncGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsEnvirons AustraliaBushcareEnvirons AustraliaGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsEnvirons KimberleyCoastcareEnvirons KimberleyGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsEprapah Creek Catchment Landcare Association IncBushcareEprapah Creek Catchment Landcare Association IncWaterwatchEurimbla Landcare GroupBushcareEurosouth Community GroupCoastcareExmouth Visitors Centre IncCoastcareFairfield Creeks and Wetlands Environment Strategy GroupBushcareFar South Coast Landcare Association Inc.BushcareField Naturalists Club of VictoriaGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsFitzgerald River Catchment GroupBushcareFitzroy Basin AssociationWaterwatchFitzroy Basin Association Inc.BushcareFive Rivers Waterwatch Inc.WaterwatchFladbury Landcare Group - Granite Borders Landcare Committee IncorporatedBushcareFormby Bay Environment Action GroupCoastcareForrest Beach Progress AssociationCoastcareForster Local Aboriginal Land CouncilNational Wetlands Foster FoundationGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsFramlingham Aboriginal TrustCoastcareFramlingham Aboriginal TrustIndigenous Management of Protected AreasFrankland Gordon Catchment Management Group Inc.BushcareFranklin Harbour Community Development Group IncCoastcareFranklin River Landcare GroupCoastcareFrench Island Research on Muttonbirds (FIRM)CoastcareFriends of Altona Coastal ParkCoastcareFriends of Attadale ForeshoreCoastcareFriends of Bass Point.CoastcareFriends of Bicentennial Walkway (FOBW)CoastcareFriends of Bluff Point ForeshoreCoastcareFriends of Booti Booti National ParkCoastcareFriends of Brixton Street WetlandsBushcareFriends of Bungan Inc. (FOB)CoastcareFriends of Cape Gantheaume Conservation ParkCoastcareFriends of Coningham - Oyster Cove - Lower SnugCoastcareFriends of Conningham-Oyster Cove-Lower SnugBushcareFriends of CREEC AssociationGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsFriends of Cunninghame ArmCoastcareFriends of Four Mile CreekBushcareFriends of Greenwich BayCoastcareFriends of Halbury ParklandsEndangered Species Friends of Innes National ParkCoastcareFriends of Knocklofty Bushcare GroupBushcareFriends of Lion IslandCoastcareFriends of Little Swan PointCoastcareFriends of MetungCoastcareFriends of Moggs CreekCoastcareFriends of Mud Island Inc.CoastcareFriends of Newland Head Conservation ParkCoastcareFriends of Nyerimilang IncBushcareFriends of Parks Inc.BushcareFriends of Parks Inc.National Weeds Friends of Port Moorowie IncCoastcareFriends of Southern Eyre Peninsula ParkCoastcareFriends of the Arid Recovery ProjectNational Feral Animal Control Friends of the Arid Recovery Project (Friends of the Roxby Ecosystem Project)BushcareFriends of the Earth AustraliaGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsFriends of the Marine Discovery CentreCoastcareFriends of the River ToodyayWaterwatchFriends of the Talbot Road Reserve IncBushcareFriends of Tom Thumb Lagoon WetlandCoastcareFriends of WalkervilleCoastcareFriends of Wollumbin IncBushcareFriends of YellagongaBushcareFurneaux Enterprise CentreBushcareFurneaux Enterprise CentreWaterwatchFurracabad Landcare GroupBushcareFutureworld: National Centre for Appropriate TechnologyGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsGAB 1000 Coastal Management CommitteeCoastcareGapuwu Mel ngu MalaWaterwatchGascoyne-Murchison StrategyBushcareGeelong Landcare Network IncBushcareGeoCatchBushcareGerroa Environment Protection SocietyBushcareGinninderra Catchment Group Inc.WaterwatchGippsland and East Gippsland Aboriginal Co-operativeBushcareGippsland Coastal BoardBushcareGlamorgan-Spring Bay Landcare Management CommitteeWaterwatchGlenelg Hopkins Catchment Management AuthorityBushcareGlenelg Hopkins Catchment Managment AuthorityWaterwatchGlenthompson Catchment Group IncBushcareGloucester Road / Oorandumby Landcare Group - GROBushcareGoalloma LandcareBushcareGold Coast & Hinterland Environment CouncilGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsGoolarabooloo-Millibinyarri Aboriginal CorporationCoastcareGoulburn Broken Catchment Management AuthorityBushcareGoulburn Valley Environment GroupGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsGould League of VictoriaBushcareGould League of VictoriaGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsGranite Borders Landcare Committee Inc.BushcareGrant Animal and Plant Control BoardCoastcareGreat Lakes Coastal Land Management NetworkCoastcareGreen Point Progress AssociationCoastcareGreen Skills Inc.BushcareGreen Skills Inc.National Wetlands Greening Australia - Queensland IncBushcareGreening Australia - Queensland IncWaterwatchGreening Australia (Northern Territory) Inc.BushcareGreening Australia (Northern Territory) Inc.WaterwatchGreening Australia (WA) Inc.BushcareGreening Australia {Tasmania} Inc.BushcareGreening Australia ACT & SE NSWBushcareGreening Australia LimitedBushcareGreening Australia N.T. Inc.BushcareGreening Australia N.T. Inc.CoastcareGreening Australia NSWBushcareGreening Australia Queensland IncBushcareGreening Australia South West Slopes NSWBushcareGreening Australia Victoria IncBushcareGreening NoosaCoastcareGudgenby Bush Revegetation GroupBushcareGuyra Landcare GroupBushcareGWYMAC Inc.BushcareHarnham Landcare Group IncBushcareHeffernans Creek Catchment Landcare GroupBushcareHerbert Park Landcare GroupBushcareHervey Bay Dugong and Seagrass Monitoring ProgramCoastcareHeytesbury District Landcare NetworkBushcareHindmarsh Island Landcare GroupCoastcareHolbrook Landcare Group Inc.BushcareHoldfast Bay Dune TeamCoastcareHolloways Beach Residents AssociationCoastcareHopkins Moyne Land Management and Farm Trees GroupBushcareHumane Society InternationalGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsHungry Head Beach Reserve Management CommitteeCoastcareHunter Catchment Management TrustBushcareHunter Catchment Management TrustWaterwatchHuntingfield Coffee Creek Landcare GroupBushcareIkuntji Community Council IncBushcareIluka Landcare GroupCoastcareInalinga Sporting & Development AssociationCoastcareIndo-Pacific Sea Turtle Conservation GroupCoastcareInjinoo Land TrustBushcareInnes Park and Coral Cove Residents Association Inc.CoastcareInstitute of Freshwater Anglers (NSW) IncorporatedBushcareInverary Creek Landcare Group Inc.BushcareInverloch Coast Action Umbrella Group Inc.CoastcareJan Juc Coast Action GroupCoastcareJetty Dune CareCoastcareJindalee Landcare GroupBushcareJohnstone Community Revegetation UnitCoastcareJohnstone River Catchment Management Association Inc.BushcareJordan Catchment Land for Wildlife Group Inc.BushcareJoskeleigh South Sea Islander Community Development Association IncBushcareJulalikari Council Aboriginal CorporationBushcareJunee Reefs Landcare incBushcareKalano Community Association IncBushcareKangaroo Island Flora and Fauna Club IncCoastcareKangaroo Island Integrated Catchment Management CommitteeCoastcareKangaroo Island Natural Resources Board (KINRB) Inc.BushcareKangaroo Island Soil Conservation Board Inc.BushcareKeep Australia Beautiful National AssociationGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsKellerberrin Land Conservation District CommitteeBushcareKelly Landcare Group Inc.BushcareKESABWaterwatchKiewa Catchment Landcare GroupBushcareKimberley Regional Fire Management Project Committee Inc.BushcareKing Island Natural Resources Management GroupBushcareKing Island Natural Resources Management GroupWaterwatchKingston Beach CoastcareCoastcareKingston Lions ClubCoastcareKokendin Catchment Group Inc.BushcareKoonung Mullum Forestway CommitteeGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsKowree Farm Tree Group Inc.BushcareKulin Nation Cultural Heritage OrganisationBushcareLabertouche Landcare and Farm Sustainability GroupClean Seas Lagoon Boat Club Inc (Corio)Marine Waste Reception Facilities Lake Cowal FoundationBushcareLake Curalo Estuary Management CommitteeCoastcareLake Eyre Basin Co-ordinating Group Inc.BushcareLake Eyre Basin Co-ordinating Group Inc.National River HealthLake Macquarie and Tuggerah Lake Turtle Watch CommitteeCoastcareLake Tyers Aboriginal TrustBushcareLakes Entrance Rural Pride/Tidy Towns CommitteeBushcareLandcare Illawarra Inc.BushcareLang Lang/ Koo Wee Rup Landcare GroupBushcareLaunceston Environment CentreEndangered Species Launceston Environment CentreGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsLaunceston Environment CentreWaterwatchLaynhapuy Homelands Association IncIndigenous Management of Protected AreasLeigh Catchment GroupBushcareLeigh District Landcare GroupBushcareLemon Tree Passage Parks and Reserves 355B CommitteeCoastcareLeschenault Community NurseryCoastcareLexton Landcare Group IncBushcareLisanote Pty LtdIndigenous Management of Protected AreasLittle Norfolk Bay Coastcare GroupCoastcareLocal Environment Action ForumCoastcareLockhart River Aboriginal CouncilBushcareLoddon and Campaspe Implementation CommitteesBushcareLoddon Implementation Committee, on behalf of; Loddon Land & Water Mgt GroupBushcareLoders Creek Integrated Catchment Management Community AssociationBushcareLord Howe Island Historical SocietyCoastcareLorne Foreshore Committee of Management IncCoastcareLornecareCoastcareLower Apsley River Landcare Group Inc.BushcareLower Eastern Eyre Peninsula Landcare Management Committee Inc.BushcareLower Eyre Coastcare Association IncCoastcareLower Lachlan Landcare GroupNational Weeds Lower Mary River Landcare GroupWaterwatchLoxton to Bookpurnong Local Action Planning Committee Inc.National Feral Animal Control Lucinda Coastcare GroupCoastcareMackay/Whitsunday Regional Strategy Group Inc.BushcareMackay/Whitsunday Regional Strategy Group Inc.WaterwatchMacleay Valley Coastal Working GroupCoastcareMacquarie Marshes Catchment Committee Inc.National Wetlands Macquarie River CareBushcareMacquarie Valley Landcare Group Inc.BushcareMacquarie/South Esk Natural Resources Management Action GroupBushcareMallee Catchment Management AuthorityBushcareMallefowl Preservation GroupGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsMallee Landcare Group Inc.BushcareMalpas Catchment Group- Southern New England Landcare Coordinating Committee IncBushcareMamabulanjin Aboriginal CorporationCoastcareManangatang Landcare GroupBushcareMandurah Coastcare GroupCoastcareManilla Landcare Group IncBushcareManjimup Land Conservation District Committee Inc.CoastcareManning Coastcare GroupCoastcareManning Landcare Co-ordinators' Management Committee Inc.BushcareMarch-Clergate Landcare Group Inc.BushcareMarine and Coastal Community NetworkCoastcareMarine and Coastal Community Network (MCCN) and the Townsville Aboriginal and Torres Strait IslandersCoastcareMarine Discovery Centre, Bondi Beach, Organising GroupCoastcareMarine Education Society of AustralasiaCoastcareMarine Education Society of AustralasiaGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsMarion Bay Coastcare IncCoastcareMarion's Reef Watch Group and Coastal Working PartyCoastcareMaroochy River Catchment Area Network Waterwatch IncWaterwatchMarpuna Community Aboriginal CorporationBushcareMary River Catchment Co-ordinating Committee incGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsMary River Catchment Co-ordinating Committee Inc.National Weeds Mary River Catchment Coordination AssociationWaterwatchMatong and District Landcare Inc.BushcareMcCallums Creek Landcare GroupBushcareMckay Conservation GroupGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsMeelup Regional Park Management CommitteeNational Feral Animal ControlMerimbula Landcare GroupCoastcareMerricks Beach Foreshore CommitteeCoastcareMerrill Landcare Group Inc.BushcareMerri Creek Management CommitteeGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsMethul Rannock Landcare GroupBushcareMid Lachlan Valley Landcare Group Inc.BushcareMid Manning Landcare Group Inc.BushcareMiddle Balgarup Sub Catchment GroupBushcareMilikapiti Community Government CouncilCoastcareMindarie Keys Coastcare Association (MKCCA)CoastcareMineral Policy InstituteGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsMission Beach Coastcare GroupCoastcareMitta Valley Landcare GroupBushcareMoama and District Landcare IncBushcareMoggill Creek Catchment Management Group BushcareMolongle Creek Boat Club Inc.Marine Waste Reception Facilities Mooloolah River Waterwatch Group IncWaterwatchMoolort Landcare GroupBushcareMornington Environment Association Inc.CoastcareMount Rankin Landcare GroupBushcareMt Eliza Association for Environmental Care. Inc. (A0018210M)CoastcareMt Piper Landcare Group Inc. and Mila Landcare Group Inc.BushcareMullewa Land Conservation District Committee Inc.BushcareMundud and Mudjarl Co-operativesCoastcareMungoorbada Aboriginal CorporationBushcareMurchison Land Conservation District CommitteeBushcareMurray Darling AssociationGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsMurrumbateman Landcare Group Inc.BushcareMurwangi Community Aboriginal CorporationBushcareMurwangi Community Aboriginal CorporationNational Weeds Mutitjulu Community IncBushcareMyall Park Botanic Garden LtdBushcareNambucca Heads Local Aboriginal Land CouncilIndigenous Management of Protected AreasNambucca River Estuary and Coastline Management CommitteeCoastcareNapranum Aboriginal CorporationBushcareNaragebup Rockingham Regional Environment CentreGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsNarembeen Land Conservation District Committee Inc.BushcareNarrogin Landcare Conservation District CommitteeBushcareNational Parks Association of NSWGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsNational Parks Association of QueenslandGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsNational Parks Association - Mid North Coast BranchCoastcareNational Trust of Australia (WA)BushcareNatural Resource Management Board {Wet Tropics} Inc.BushcareNatural Resources and Environmental Advisory Committee (NREAC)CoastcareNature Conservation Council of NSWGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsNature Conservation Society of South AustraliaGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsNature Foundation of South AustraliaBushcareNature Foundation of South AustraliaEndangered Species Nature Foundation of South AustraliaGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsNE Boardriders and Friends of Four Mile Creek Bushcare GroupCoastcareNelshaby Aricultural BureauBushcareNelson Progress AssociationCoastcareNever Never Catchment GroupBushcareNew South Wales Bird AtlassersGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsNSW Wildlife Information and Rescue ServiceGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsNew Town Rivulet Catchment Care Group IncWaterwatchNewstead Landcare GroupBushcareNgaanyatjarra Land CouncilBushcareNgaanyatjarra Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara Women's Council Aboriginal Corp.BushcareNgarang Wal Land CouncilIndigenous Management of Protected AreasNingaloo Reef Outback Coast Association Inc.BushcareNingy Ningy Cultural Heritage Association Inc.BushcareNoarlunga Trees for lifeCoastcareNobbys Dunecare GroupCoastcareNoggabri Landcare GroupBushcareNoosa and District Landcare Group Inc.BushcareNoosa District Landcare Group Inc.WaterwatchNoosa Integrated Catchment Association Inc. (NICA)CoastcareNorth Central Catchment Management AuthorityBushcareNorth Coast Environment CouncilGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsNorth Coast Regional Bitou Bush TaskforceCoastcareNorth Coast Weed Advisory CommitteeNational Weeds North East Catchment Management AuthorityBushcareNorth East Coast Landcare GroupBushcareNorth Haven Landcare GroupCoastcareNorth West Region Aboriginal Cultural HeritageBushcareNorth Queensland Conservation CouncilGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsNorthern Areas CouncilEndangered Species Northern Beaches Community Landcare IncNational Weeds Northern Gulf Resources Management Group Inc.BushcareNorthern Land CouncilBushcareNowhere Landcare IncorporatedBushcareNSW Wader Study Group IncNational Wetlands Nubrygyn Landcare GroupBushcareNullawil Landcare Group IncBushcareNursery and Garden Industry of AustralianBushcare: CommonwealthOak Park Catchment GroupBushcareOceanwatch AustraliaMarine Species ProtectionOnkaparinga Catchment Water Managment BoardBushcareOxley Reserve Committee of ManagementBushcareOz Green Grants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsPantharpilenhe CommunityBushcareParklands Albury Wodonga (Parklands)BushcarePeaceful Bay Progress AssociationCoastcarePedestrian Council of AustraliaWalk to Work Day 2001Penguin CoastcareCoastcarePenguin Monitoring GroupCoastcarePenshurst Landcare AssociationBushcarePhillip Island Conservation SocietyCoastcarePhillip Island Landcare Group Inc.National Weeds Phillips Brook Catchment GroupBushcarePine Creek Area Rangecare Group IncNational Feral Animal Control Pioneer Integrated Catchment Management Association BushcarePirlangimpi Community Management BoardCoastcarePittwater Natural Heritage AssociationCoastcarePlatypus LandcareBushcarePlaytpus Habitat and Stream-watch Team (PHAST)BushcarePort Adelaide Historical Society IncCoastcarePort Curtis Catchment Working Group Inc.WaterwatchPort Esperance Coastcare GroupCoastcarePort Phillip and Westernport Catchment and Land Protection BoardBushcarePort Phillip EcoCentreClean Seas Port Stephens Coastal Weeds Action GroupNational WeedsPotters Landcare GroupBushcarePrevelly Wilderness Progress Association IncCoastcareProject JonahGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsProject Platypus Association IncorporatedBushcarePullen Pullen Catchments Group IncBushcarePumicestone Region Catchment Co-ordination Association Inc.CoastcarePurfleet Taree Local Aboriginal Land CouncilBushcarePurfleet Taree Local Aboriginal Land CouncilCoastcareQuairading Land Conservation District Committee Inc.BushcareQuairading Land Conservation District Committee Inc.National WeedsQuarantine Bay Residents Beach Protection AssociationCoastcareQueensland Conservation CouncilGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsQueensland Gould League for Environmental Education IncWaterwatchRamingining Homelands Resource CentreBushcareRand Walbundrie Billabong Creek Landcare Group Inc.BushcareRangelands Soil Board Executive CommitteeBushcareRecfish Australia ACTCapacity BuildingReedy Creek Landcare Group Inc.BushcareReef Beach Bush Regeneration GroupCoastcareReefcareCoastcareRichmond Landcare GroupBushcareRiverina Highlands Regional Vegetation Management Plan Implementation CommitteeBushcareRiverina Rural Lands Protection BoardNational Feral Animal ControlRobe Encounter 2002 CommitteeCoastcareRobe Professional Fisherman's AssociationCoastcareRobinvale Murray River Co-opBushcareRockvale Landcare GroupBushcareRoebourne - Port Hedland Land Conservation District CommitteeCoastcareRoma Bush Gardens Association IncBushcareRoper River Landcare Group Inc.BushcareRoyal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Inc. (RSPCA)BushcareRubibi Land, Heritage and Development CouncilCoastcareRubicon Coast and Landcare Group IncCoastcareSafety Beach Foreshore Landscape Committee IncCoastcareSan Remo Foreshore Committee Inc.Clean SeasSandon Point Surf Life Saving ClubCoastcareSandon River Ratepayers AssociationCoastcareSandy Point Bushcare GroupCoastcareSandy Point Foreshore CommitteeCoastcareSarina Integrated Catchment Management AssociationCoastcareSave Point Gellibrand Action GroupCoastcareSea Lake Landcare Group IncBushcareSerpentine-Jarrahdale Land Conservation District Committee Inc.BushcareSeven Mile Beach Coastcare and Consultancy GroupCoastcareSeven Mile Beach Dunecare GroupCoastcareShellharbour Surf Life Saving Club Inc.CoastcareShortland Environment CentreGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsSnowy Mountains Landcare Group Inc.BushcareSnowy River Interstate Landcare Committee Inc.BushcareSnowy River Interstate Landcare Committee Inc.National Weeds Solomon-Yulgan Catchment GroupBushcareSouth Australian Aboriginal Lands TrustIndigenous Management of Protected AreasSouth Australian Whale CentreCoastcareSouth Coast Management GroupCoastcareSouth Coast Progress AssociationCoastcareSouth Coast Regional Initiative Planning TeamBushcareSouth Cottesloe Coast CareCoastcareSouth East Landcare Group Inc.BushcareSouth East Natural Resource Consultative CommitteeBushcareSouth East Tasmanian Aboriginal CorporationCoastcareSouth Gippsland Conservation Society IncClean Seas South Gippsland Conservation society incGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsSouth Gippsland Landcare Network Inc.BushcareSouth Myall Catchment Landcare Group IncBushcareSouth Peregian Beach Community Association Inc.CoastcareSouth West Environment CentreGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsSouth West Rabbit Control GroupNational Feral Animal ControlSouth West Strategy (SWS)BushcareSouth-East Natural Resource Consultative CommitteeBushcareSouthern Edge ArtsCoastcareSouthern New England Landcare Co-ordinating Committee Inc.BushcareSouthern NSW and ACT Group of Birds AustraliaBushcareSpring Creek Catchment Management Plan Steering Commitee Inc.BushcareSpringbrook Catchment Management Landcare GroupBushcareSt Georges Basin & Environs Community ForumCoastcareState Dune Care Conference Committee Inc NSWCoastcareStanley Peninsula Landcare Group IncBushcareStewarts Bay Coastcare GroupCoastcareStockton Dunecare GroupCoastcareStokes Bay Hall Committee IncCoastcareStony-Big Ben-Snowball Landcare GroupBushcareStudents and Sustainability CollectiveStudents and Sustainability Collective 2002 National ConferenceSunset Beach CoastcareCoastcareSunshine Coast Environment Council Inc.BushcareSunshine Coast Environment Council IncGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsSunshine Reserve Conservation & Fireguard Group IncCoastcareSurfrider FoundationGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsSurfrider Foundation Inc. - Capricorn BranchCoastcareSwan Bay Integrated Catchment Management CommitteeBushcareSwan Bay Integrated Catchment Management CommitteeCoastcareSwanwick Community Association IncCoastcareTamar Region Natural Resource Management Strategy Reference Group Inc.BushcareTangentyere Council Inc.BushcareTantawanglo Landcare Group Inc.BushcareTareela Catchment Landcare GroupBushcareTaribelang Bunda Aboriginal Corporation for LandBushcareTaroona Environment NetworkBushcareTaroona Environment NetworkCoastcareTasmanian Aboriginal Centre IncIndigenous Management of Protected AreasTasmanian Aboriginal Land Council Indigenous Management of Protected AreasTasmanian Conservation TrustCoastcareTasmanian Conservation TrustGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsTasmanian Conservation TrustNational Weeds Tasmanian Environment Centre IncCoastcareTasmanian Environment Centre incGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsTasmanian Environment Centre IncNational Wetlands TentacleCoastcareTerrabile Creek Landcare GroupBushcareThe Australian Dolphin Research Foundation (ADRF)CoastcareThe Cudegong Catchment CommitteeNational Weeds The Eyre Peninsula Natural Resource Management GroupBushcareThe Eyre Peninsula Natural Resource Management GroupNational Weeds The Hut Environmental and Community Association Inc (THECA)BushcareThe Lead Group IncLead AwarenessThe SYP Restoration AssociationCoastcareThe Tamworth/Manilla Landcare AssociationBushcareThompson Beach Ratepayers Association IncCoastcareThreatened Plant Action GroupBushcareThreatened Species Network (SA)BushcareTilligery Habitat Association Inc.CoastcareTimbarra Sub-group of Beechmont District Landcare AssociationBushcareTiwi Land CouncilBushcareTiwi Land CouncilCoastcareTjirilya Aboriginal CorporationIndigenous Management of Protected AreasTooradin Foreshore Committee of ManagementCoastcareToowoomba and Region Environment CouncilGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsTopar Area Rangecare Group Inc.National Feral Animal ControlTorquay Coast ActionCoastcareTorquay Public Reserves CommitteeClean Seas Torquay Public Reserves CommitteeCoastcareTorrens and Patawalonga Catchment Water Management BoardsBushcareTotal Environment CentreGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsTown of Mosman Park IncCoastcareTownsville Bird Observers ClubCoastcareTree Kangaroo and Mammal Group IncBushcareTree Project IncGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsTrees for Life IncBushcareTree for Life IncGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsTrees for the Eveleyn & Atherton Tableland Inc (TREAT)BushcareTrinity Haven Lutheran Camp IncCoastcareTruganina Explosives Reserve Preservation SocietyCoastcareTrust for Nature (Victoria)BushcareTugun Surf Life Saving ClubCoastcareTumbulgum Action Group IncBushcareTumby Bay Coast and Landcare GroupCoastcareTumut-Adelong Region Catchment Management Group Inc.National Weeds Turners Beach Coastcare IncCoastcareTuross Lakes Preservation Group Inc.CoastcareTweed Dunecare Advisory CommitteeNational Weeds Tweed/Brunswick Care Co-ordinating Committee Inc.BushcareTyntynder Landcare Group Inc.BushcareUlam-Raglan Landcare GroupBushcareUltima Landcare Group Inc.BushcareUnderstorey NetworkBushcareUpper Brumbys Landcare GroupBushcareUpper Lachlan Catchment Co-ordinating Committee Inc.BushcareUpper Macleay Landcare Group Inc.BushcareUpper Murrumbidgee Landcare CommitteeBushcareUpper Shoalhaven Landcare Council IncBushcareUpper Snowy Landcare Committee IncorporatedBushcareUpper Talbragar Landcare Group Inc.BushcareUrabrible Landcare GroupBushcareUrana Landcare GroupBushcareUranquinty Landcare GroupBushcareUrban Ecology Australia IncGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsUrban Ecology Australia IncClean Seas Vernon Region Vegetation Management GroupBushcareVictor Harbour CoastcareCoastcareVictoria River District Conservation Association Inc.National WeedsVictorian National Parks Association IncBushcare: CommonwealthVictorian National Parks Association IncGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsVictorian Wader Study GroupCoastcareWA Wildflower SocietyBushcareWaitchie Landcare GroupBushcareWallace Creek Landcare GroupBushcareWambiri Association - Kuranya propertyBushcareWandiligong Preservation Society IncBushcareWarooka Progress Association IncCoastcareWarringine Park Committee of ManagementCoastcareWarrnambool City Landcare GroupCoastcareWarrumbungle Landcare GroupBushcareWatermark IncGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsWaterworks Valley Landcare GroupWaterwatchWee Waa & Lower Namoi Landcare Co-ordinating CommitteeBushcareWellstead Coastforce GroupCoastcareWest Gippsland Catchment Management AuthorityWaterwatchWest Kimberley Land Conservation District CommitteeCoastcareWest River Catchment Group Inc.BushcareWest Trundle Landcare Group Inc.BushcareWestern Australian Parks and Reserves AssociationsGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsWestern Region Environment CentreGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsWestern Subregional Organisation of Councils (WESROC)BushcareWestern Sydney Regional Organisation of CouncilsBushcareWetland Care AustraliaNational WetlandsWetland Management Murray River Environs North Central CMANational Wetlands Wetlands and WildlifeGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsWetlands International Asia PacificNational Wetlands Wetlands International - OceaniaNational WetlandsWickepin Land Conservation District Committee Inc.BushcareWide Bay Burnett Conservation CouncilGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsWilderness SocietyGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsWildflower Society of Western AustraliaGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsWildlife and Habitat Support GroupBushcareWildlife Preservation Society of QueenslandGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsWildlife Preservation Society of Queensland - Bayside BranchCoastcareWildlife Preservation Society of Queensland Glossy Black Cockatoo Branch IncBushcareWilliams and Narrogin Land Conservation District Committees Inc.BushcareWilliams Landcare IncNational Weeds Willunga Hillsface Landcare GroupBushcareWilsons River Landcare Group Incorporated (WRLG)BushcareWilton Well Conservation GroupBushcareWimmera Catchment Authority - Biodiversity Functional CommitteeNational Wetlands Wimmera Catchment Management AuthorityBushcareWimmera Catchment Management AuthorityNational Weeds Winda Mara Aboriginal CorporationIndigenous Management of Protected AreasWindeward Bound TrustCoastcare - CommonwealthWingham Landcare IncorporatedBushcareWinterbourne Landcare GroupBushcareWollondilly Landcare Coordinator CommitteeBushcareWongwibinda Landcare Group SNELCCBushcareWonwondah Landcare Group Inc.BushcareWoolbrook Landcare Group Inc.BushcareWorld Wide Fund for Nature AustraliaBushcareWorld Wide Fund for Nature AustraliaEndangered Species World Wide Fund for Nature AustraliaEnvironmental Reporting and the Australian Business CommunityWorld Wide Fund for Nature AustraliaGrants to Voluntary Environment & Heritage OrganisationsWorld Wide Fund for Nature AustraliaNational Wetlands World Wide Fund for Nature AustraliaFisheries AssessmentWorld Wide Fund for Nature AustraliaWater Quality ProtectionWorn Gundidji Aboriginal Co-OperativeBushcareWreck Rock Turtle Monitoring ProgramCoastcareWynyard Landcare Group Inc.WaterwatchYadgalah Aboriginal CorporationCoastcareYalata Community IncIndigenous Management of Protected AreasYallingup Land Conservation District CommitteeCoastcareYamble Landcare Group Inc.BushcareYarram Yarram Catchments Group Inc.BushcareYass Area Network of Landcare GroupsBushcareYawarra Hillford Aboriginal CorporationBushcareYenyenning Lakes Management GroupNational Wetlands Youngs Siding Progress AssociationCoastcare(1) (b) 2002-2003 Financial Year Organisation NameProgram TitleAustralian Marine Conservation SocietyCapacity BuildingOceanwatch Australia P/LMarine Species ProtectionPedestrian Council of AustraliaWalk to Work Day 2002Tasmanian Conservation TrustCoastcareThe Lead Group IncLead AwarenessWorld Wide Fund for Nature AustraliaEnvironmental Reporting and the Australian Business Community9419(Question No. 997)9979419Vamvakinou, Maria, MPMs Vamvakinou00AMTCalwellALP00 asked the Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 15 October 2002:In relation to the proposed sale of the (a) Maygar Barracks site in Camp Road, Broadmeadows, Vic. and (b) former naval ammunition dump site in Greenvale (Somerton), has the Minister's Department conducted assessments of the site, in particular, (i) contamination tests, (ii) flora and fauna assessments and (iii) heritage and environmental assessments; if so, what were the findings.9419Vale, Danna, MPMrs ValeVK6HughesLPMinister for Veterans' Affairs and Minister Assisting the Minister for Defence10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(a) (i)· Environmental Site Assessment (May 2002) - IT Environmental. · Additional Environmental Investigations and Occupational Health and Safety Audit (August 2002) - IT Environmental. - Lead has been detected in some soil samples. The lead contaminated soil will be removed and disposed of into a licensed landfill through remediation works due to commence shortly. - Some Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon contamination was present in the groundwater. Further groundwater monitoring was recommended.· Hazardous Building Materials Audit (February 2002) - Kilpatrick and Associates Pty Ltd. - Asbestos, synthetic mineral fibres and polychlorinated biphenyl oils were detected. The report recommends that removal of the substances found if demolition or works were conducted.(ii)· Flora and Fauna assessment (December 2001) - Brett Lane & Associates. - The flora found was largely exotic. Seven indigenous vascular plant species were recorded, one of regional significance. No indigenous vegetation communities remain on the site. The report recommends retention of indigenous tree species. A number of trees at the former entrance and driveway to Mornington Park on Camp Road are in the Hume City Council's Heritage Overlay. - Fauna habitats are entirely artificial and support limited native fauna being mostly birds characteristic of farmland and urban areas. (iii) · Built Heritage Appraisal of Selected Buildings (July 2002) - HLA Envirosciences. - The report states that the site meets two criteria for significance - A4 (through associations with the site, rather than by virtue of physical evidence) and H (through association with 1st Australian Imperial Force and in particular, Leslie Maygar VC). As a group, the buildings at Maygar were said to meet criterion D2 by representing the principal characteristics of World War II warehouses and associated buildings. However, it was stated that they are not unique, as there are numerous sites of this nature across Australia. As such the level of significance is assessed at `Regional'. Maygar Barracks is not listed on the Register of National Estate, nor on the Victorian Heritage Inventory. · Cultural Heritage Values (January 2002) - TerraCulture Pty Ltd - The report concludes that areas of the barracks adjacent to the Merlynston Creek are likely to contain Aboriginal archaeological material. With regard to European heritage, there were no archaeological sites or features relating to the former rural use of the land and current military use of the barracks.(b) (i)· Contaminated Land Assessment (May 2002) - Parsons Brinckerhoff.- Investigations have identified surface contamination of expended ammunition. A number of localised waste disposal sites have also been identified on the site. These areas require further assessment and will be remediated prior to any future use of a more sensitive nature.· Hazardous Materials Assessment (March 2002) - Parsons Brinckerhoff.- A large number of the magazine buildings located on the site were constructed using various types of asbestos. Depending on the final end use for the site, these buildings and the asbestos materials should be removed in order to minimise the ongoing liability with respect to the upkeep and maintenance of the buildings.· Explosive Ordinance Report (March 2002) - Enterra Pty Ltd.- Explosive Ordinance burn residue and components from small explosive ordnance has been found on site and will require remediation. Remediation options are presently being investigated.(ii)· Flora and Fauna Survey (January 2002) - Brett Lane & Associates Pty Ltd.- The native flora and fauna of the site are highly degraded due to the history of use at the site and the current vigorous weed invasion. Small populations of common reptiles are likely to exist in the areas of remnant native grassland and rocky granite slopes. The tussock grassland along the Yuroke Creek drainage line, the adjacent escarpment areas and the stone walls are other habitats that may support native fauna and could be considered of at least local significance for flora and fauna.- The remnant native vegetation communities have regionally significant species, and these are recommended for inclusion in the open space and managed for conservation purposes. Nine flora species of regional conservation significance have been identified. It is important to note that all remnant areas occur within the catchment area for the Greenvale Reservoir, which is the more constrained portion of the site for urban development and will be reserved as a non-access area for water catchment. The north-eastern section of the site is free of flora and fauna constraints for urban development.(iii) · Cultural Heritage Assessment (February 2002) Tardis Enterprises.- The report identified the Yuroke Creek Valley and escarpment and an area within the Greenvale Reservoir catchment as being of low to moderate potential for Aboriginal archaeological sites. · Heritage Assessment (January 2002) - Heritage Alliance.- The report concludes that the site, in particular the munitions magazines and explosive stores are of historical importance. The site appears to meet the threshold for listing on the Register of the National Estate.9420(Question No. 1004)10049420McMullan, Bob, MPMr McMullan5I4FraserALP00 asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 16 October 2002:Has the Minister's department made payments to the National or State and Territory branches of the (a) Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, (b) Australian Industry Group, (c) National Farmers' Federation or (d) Business Council of Australia for consultancies, training and other purposes in (i) 1996-97, (ii) 1997-98, (iii) 1998-99, (iv) 1999-2000, (v) 2000-01 (vi) 2001-02 and (vii) 2002-03 to date; if so, what sums and when. 9421Howard, John, MPMr HowardZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:I am advised by my department that the following payments were made during the period specified: (a) Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry; YearAmount(i) 1996-97(ii) 1997-98$125$273No payments were made to the National, State or Territory branches of the (b) Australian Industry Group, (c) National Farmers' Federation or (d) the Business Council of Australia during that period.9421(Question No. 1005)10059421McMullan, Bob, MPMr McMullan5I4FraserALP00 asked the Minister for Transport and Regional Services, upon notice, on 16 October 2002:Has the Ministers Department made payments to the national or State and Territory branches of (a)Australian Chamber of commerce and Industry, (b) Australian Industry Group, (c) National Farmers Federation or (d) Business Council of Australia for consultancies, training and other purposes in (i) 1996-97, (ii) 1997-98, (iii) 1998-99. (iv) 1999-2000, (v) 2000-2001, (vi) 2001-2002 and (vii) 2003-2003 to date; if so, what sums and when.9421Anderson, John, MPMr Anderson4K4GwydirNPMinister for Transport and Regional Services10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:According to the financial records of the Department of Transport and Regional Services, the Department has made the following payments: ORGANISATIONAMOUNTDATE PAID$Australian Chamber of Commerce395 7 October 19996530 November 200049516 November 20013953November 1999TOTAL1,350Australian Industry Group12028 October 199916512 January 200177 9 August 200219,30514 August 200240,48014 June 2002TOTAL60,14718 June 2002National Farmers Federation100 5 May 1999TOTAL100TOTAL ALL PAYMENTS61,597Due to a change in financial management information systems in 1998-99, the Department is unable to automatically access financial records prior to 1 July 1999. Information prior to 1999 is not readily available because it was stored on the Department's previous financial system. It can be extracted by a manual search of paper records but this would be time consuming and entail significant administrative effort. The profile of payments for prior years is unlikely to vary significantly from that for the period 1999 to 2002.9422(Question No. 1007)10079422McMullan, Bob, MPMr McMullan5I4FraserALP00 asked the Minister for Trade, upon notice, on 16 October 2002:Has the Minister's Department made payments to the national or State and Territory branches of the (a) Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, (b) Australian Industry Group, (c) National Farmers Federation or (d) Business Council of Australia for consultancies, training and other purposes in (i) 1996-97, (ii) 1997-98, (iii) 1998-99, (iv) 1999-2000, (v) 2000-2001, (vi) 2001-2002 and (vii) 2002-2003 to date; if so, what sums and when.9422Vaile, Mark, MPMr VaileSU5LyneNPMinister for Trade10—The answer to this question is the same as that given to Question No. 1010 by the Minister for Foreign Affairs on behalf of the Foreign Affairs and Trade portfolio.9422(Question No. 1013)10139422McMullan, Bob, MPMr McMullan5I4FraserALP00 asked the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, upon notice, on 16 October 2002:Has the Minister's Department made payments to the national or State and Territory branches of the (a) Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, (b) Australian Industry Group, (c) National Farmers' Federation or (d) Business Council of Australia for consultancies, training and other purposes in (i) 1996-97, (ii) 1997-98, (iii)1998-99, (iv) 1999-2000, (v) 2000-2001, (vi) 2001-2002, and (vii) 2002-2003 to date; if so what sums and when. 9422Kemp, Dr David, MPDr KempBT4GoldsteinLPMinister for the Environment and Heritage10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:The Department of the Environment and Heritage has made the following payments to:(a) Chamber of Commerce and Industry - ACT(i) Nil(ii) $375.00 paid on 14 August 1997(iii) $395.00 paid on 21 July 1998(iv) $395.00 paid on 23 September 1999 (v) $23,100.00 paid on 21 June 2001(vi) $1,000.00 paid on 23 October 2001 $345.00 paid on 11 November 2001 $495.00 paid on 22 November 2001 $30,800.00 paid on 24 January 2002(vii) Nil Chamber of Commerce and Industry - QLD(i) Nil(ii) Nil(iii) Nil(iv) Nil(v) $605.00 paid on 5 January 2001 $33,000.00 paid on 21 June 2001(vi) $618.60 paid on 20 December 2001 $745.51 paid on 20 June 2002(vii) Nil Chamber of Commerce and Industry - Tasmania(i) Nil(ii) Nil(iii) Nil(iv) Nil (v) $5,445.00 paid on 28 June 2001(vi) $7,260.00 paid 24 April 2002(vii) Nil Chamber of Commerce and Industry - WA(i) Nil(ii) Nil(iii) Nil(iv) Nil(v) $440.00 paid on 2 November 2000 $28,050.00 paid on 21 June 2001(vi) $1,583.10 paid on 21 February 2002 $17,168.80 paid on 30 May 2002(vii) $6,980.00 paid on 19 September 2002(b) Australian Industry Group - Victoria(i) Nil(ii) Nil(iii) $15,000.00 paid on 13 October 1998 $4,750.00 paid on 7 June 1999(iv) Nil(v) Nil(vi) Nil(vii) Nil Australian Industry Group - NSW(i) Nil(ii) Nil(iii) $425.00 paid on 15 October 1998(iv) $40,000.00 paid on December 1999 $30,000.00 paid on 13 June 2000(v) $10,000.00 paid on 26 March 2001 $20,000.00 paid on 21 June 2001(vi) $54,499.50 paid on 25 October 2001 $54,499.50 paid on 4 April 2002(vii) $660.00 paid on 22 July 2002 Australian Industry Group - ACT(i) Nil(ii) Nil(iii) Nil(iv) Nil (v) $20,000.00 paid on 26 April 2001(vi) $30,000.00 paid on 23 May 2002(vii) Nil(c) National Farmers' Federation - ACT(i) $1,300.00 paid on 8 November 96(ii) $3,125.14 paid on 3 September 97(iii) Nil (iv) Nil(v) Nil(vi) Nil(vii) Nil Farmers' Association - NSW(i) Nil(ii) Nil(iii) Nil(iv) $579.40 paid on 13 December 1999 $533.32 paid on 16 December 1999(v) Nil(vi) Nil(vii) Nil National Farmers' Federation - SA(i) Nil(ii) Nil(iii) Nil(iv) $544.00 paid on 9 December 1999(v) Nil(vi) Nil(vii) Nil Farmers' Federation - Victoria(i) Nil(ii) Nil(iii) Nil (iv) $10,000.00 paid on 7 March 2000 $12,500.00 paid on 26 April 2000(v) $27,500.00 paid on 20 March 2001(vi) $16,500.00 paid on 9 October 2001 $13,750.00 paid on 4 December 2001(vii) Nil(d) Business Council of Australia - NSW(i) $2,000.00 paid on 25 June 1997(ii) Nil(iii) Nil(iv) Nil(v) Nil(vi) Nil(vii) Nil Vic Business Council of Australia (i) Nil(ii) $325.00 paid on 22 July 98 $325.00 paid on 26 August 98(iii) $180.00 paid on 24 June 1999(iv) $180.00 paid on 28 July 1999 $600.00 paid on 2 December 1999 $40,000.00 paid on 14 December 1999 $600.00 paid on 16 December 1999 $300.00 paid on 1 June 2000 $30,000.00 paid on 13 June 2000 $300.00 paid on 15 June 2000(v) $10,000.00 paid on 26 June 2001(vi) $1,990.00 paid on 30 August 2001 $695.00 paid on 6 September 2001 $695.00 paid on 22 October 2001(vii) NilBusiness Council - ACT(i) Nil(ii) Nil(iii) Nil(iv) Nil(v) $32.50 paid 21 March 2001(vi) Nil(vii) Nil9425(Question No. 1015)10159425McMullan, Bob, MPMr McMullan5I4FraserALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Finance and Administration, upon notice, on 15 October 2002:Has the Minister's Department made payments to the national or State and Territory branches of the:(a) Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry(b) Australian Industry Group(c) National Farmers' Federation, or(d) Business Council of Australiafor consultancies, training and other purposes in (i) 1996-97, (ii) 1997-98, (iii) 1998-99, (iv) 1999-2000, (v) 2000-01, (vi) 2001-02, and (vii) 2002-03 to date; if so what sums and when.9425Costello, Peter, MPMr CostelloCT4HigginsLPTreasurer10—The Minister for Finance and Administration has supplied the following answer to the honourable member's question:(a) (i) 1996-97 - $50 on 22/10/1996; $130 on 9/4/1997; and $15 on 30/5/1997.(ii) 1997-98 - $750 on 1/9/1997; $120 on 11/2/1998; and $90 26/3/1998. (iii) 1998-99 - Nil(iv) 1999-00 - Nil(v) 2000-01 - Nil(vi) 2001-02 - Nil(vii) 2002-03 - Nil(b) Nil all years(c) Nil all years(d) Nil all years9426(Question No. 1017)10179426McMullan, Bob, MPMr McMullan5I4FraserALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Family and Community Services, upon notice, on 16 October 2002:Has the Minister's Department made payments to the national or State and Territory branches of the (a) Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, (b) Australian Industry Group, (c) National Farmers' Federation or (d) Business Council of Australia for consultancies, training and other purposes in (i) 1996-97, (ii) 1997-98, (iii) 1998-99, (iv) 1999-2000, (v) 2000-2001, (vi) 2001-2002 and (vii) 2002-2003 to date; if so, what sums and when.9426Anthony, Larry, MPMr AnthonyXJ6RichmondNPMinister for Children and Youth Affairs10—The Minister for Family and Community Services has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:The Department of Family and Community Services (FaCS) was established under an Administrative Arrangement Order in October 1998. Information in respect to 1996-97 and 1997-98 financial years is not readily available and it would be a major task to collect and assemble the answer for these two years. I am not prepared to authorise the expenditure of money and effort involved in providing such information for 1996-97 and 1997-98.(a) (i) Not available(ii) Not available(iii) Nil(iv) Nil(v) $338 on 1/8/2000 and $22 on 6/11/2000(vi) $440 on 8/11/2001(vii) Nil(b) (i) (ii) Not available.(iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) Nil(c) (i) (ii) Not available.(iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) Nil(d) (i) Not available(ii) Not available(iii) Nil(iv) $600 on 28/10/1999; $600 on 29/10/1999; $1200 on 9/11/1999; and $600 on 1/12/1999(v) Nil(vi) $1,690 on 30/10/2001(vii) Nil.9426(Question No. 1020)10209426McMullan, Bob, MPMr McMullan5I4FraserALP00 asked the Minister for Industry, Tourism and Resources, upon notice, on 16 October 2002:Has the Minister's Department made payments to the national or State and Territory branches of the (a) Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, (b) Australian Industry Group, (c) National Farmers' Federation or (d) Business Council of Australia for consultancies, training and other purposes in (i) 1996-97, (ii) 1997-98, (iii) 1998-99, (iv) 1999-2000, (v) 2000-2001, (vi) 2001-2002 and (vii) 2002-2003 to date; if so, what sums and when.9426Macfarlane, Ian, MPMr Ian MacfarlaneWN6GroomLPMinister for Industry, Tourism and Resources10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:Yes. The Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources has made payments to these organisations for a range of purposes in the period from 1996-97 to date. A summary of known payments, aggregated by financial year, is provided below.As a point of clarification, while these bodies have amongst their membership organisations that are State- or Territory-based, none have State or Territory branches. The AIG controls an organisation known as the AIG Defence Council. None of the other three organisations is known to control another entity. Payments made to the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI), Australian Industry Group (AIG), National Farmers' Federation (NFF) or Business Council of Australia (BCA): FYACCIAIGNFFBCA1996-97---$28,064.951997-98$67,914.23---1998-99$23,418.00$59,011.00--1999-00$4,590.63$41,108.59-$100,000.002000-01$26,210.10$43,481.64$905.00-2001-02$2,911.43$4,974.00$2,625.00-2002-03 to date-$12.50-$45.00Total$125,044.39$148,587.73$3,530.00$128,109.959427(Question No. 1024)10249427Ferguson, Laurie, MPMr Laurie Ferguson8T4ReidALP00 asked the Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs, upon notice, on 17 October 2002:(1) Further to the answer to question no. 874 (Hansard, 14 October 2002, page 7548), what is the name and organisation affiliation, where applicable, of each member of each State and Territory Settlement Planning Committee.(2) What is the name and institutional affiliation, where applicable, of each member of each State and Territory Funding Advisory Committee.(3) In respect of Community Settlement Services Scheme grants, are the recommendations of the Funding Advisory Committee for each State and Territory conveyed directly to the Minister; if not, to whom are they conveyed.(4) If the Funding Advisory Committees have no role in the provision of funding under the Integrated Humanitarian Settlement Strategy and for Migrant Resource Centres, what consultative mechanisms, if any, exist for ethnic community and State and Territory Government input into these key settlement programs.9427Hardgrave, Gary, MPMr HardgraveCK6MoretonLPMinister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) Membership of Settlement Planning Committees comprises representatives of government agencies as well as relevant non-government organisations. Member agencies may vary for each State and Territory. Individual representatives for member agencies may change and I do not consider it useful or appropriate to provide the details of individuals. The member agencies for each State and Territory Settlement Planning Committee, and the two regional committees, as at September 2002 are as follows:Settlement Planning Committee Member AgenciesThe following information has been compiled from membership lists provided to the Department in September 2002, there may have been minor changes since this time.NSWChaired by Department Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, NSWMember agencies:Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (Commonwealth)Centrelink (Commonwealth)Department of Family and Community Services (Commonwealth)Department of Health and Ageing (Commonwealth)Department of Education, Science and Training (Commonwealth)Community Relations Commission (NSW)Department of Community Services (NSW) Department of Housing (NSW)NSW Department of Education and Training (NSW)NSW Police Service (NSW)Department of Fair Trading (NSW)NSW Health Department (NSW)NSW Health (NSW)Department for Women (NSW)Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care (NSW)Department of Local Government (NSW)Local Government of NSW (NSW)Ethnic Communities Council of NSW IncAnglicare and Ethnic Minority Action GroupVictoriaChaired by Department Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, VictoriaMember agencies:Department of Health and Ageing (Commonwealth)Department of Family and Community Services (Commonwealth)Department of Education, Science and Training (Commonwealth)Centrelink (Commonwealth)Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (Commonwealth)Department of Education and Training (VIC)Equal Opportunity Commission Victoria (VIC)Department of Innovation, Industry and Regional Development (VIC)Department of Human Services (VIC)Adult Migrant English Service (VIC)Victorian Office of Multicultural Affairs (VIC)Victoria Police Centre (VIC)Municipal Association of Victoria The Victorian Foundation for Survivors of Torture IncMigrant Resource Centre Director's NetworkQueenslandChaired by Department Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, QueenslandMember agencies:Centrelink (Commonwealth)Department of Employment and Training (QLD)Department of Families (QLD)Department of Health and Ageing (Commonwealth)Department of Housing (QLD)Department of Education, Science and Training (Commonwealth)Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (Commonwealth)Education Queensland (QLD)Ethnic Communities Council of Queensland (QLD)Department of Family and Community Services (Commonwealth)Local Government Association of QLD (QLD)Multicultural Affairs Queensland (QLD) Multicultural Development AssociationOffice of Rural Communities Queensland Council of Social ServicesQueensland HealthSouth AustraliaChaired by Department Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, South AustraliaMember agencies:Australian Bureau of Statistics (Commonwealth)Australian Refugee AssociationCentrelink (Commonwealth)Department of Education, Training and Employment (Commonwealth)Department of Human Services (SA)Department of Family and Community Services (Commonwealth)Office of Multicultural Affairs (SA)Department of Science and Training (SA)Department of Health and Ageing (Commonwealth)Local Government Association of SA Inc (SA)Attorney General's Department (Commonwealth)South Australian Police (SA)SA Multicultural and Ethnic Affairs Commission (SA)Department of Employment, Further Education, Science and Small Business (SA)Western AustraliaChaired by Department Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, Western AustraliaMember agencies:Education Department of WA (WA)Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (Commonwealth)South Metropolitan Migrant Resource CentreOffice of Multicultural InterestsHomeswestDepartment for Community Development, Family and Children's Services (WA)Centrelink (WA)Northern Suburbs Migrant Resource CentreHealth Department of WA (WA)WA Police Service (WA)Department of Health and Ageing (Commonwealth)Department of Training WA (WA)Department of Education, Science and Training (Commonwealth)Ethnic Communities CouncilWestern Australia Multicultural AssociationDepartment of Family and Community Services (WA)Women's Policy OfficeAssociation for Services to Torture and Trauma SurvivorsTasmaniaChaired by Department Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, TasmaniaMember agencies: Department of Health and Human Services (TAS)Local Government Association of Tasmania (TAS)Centrelink (Commonwealth)Department of Education, Science and Training (Commonwealth)Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (Commonwealth)University of TasmaniaEthnic Communities Council of Northern TasmaniaCentapact Employment Tasmania Police (TAS)Commonwealth Ombudsman (Commonwealth)Council for Multicultural AustraliaHobart Women's Health CentreWomen TasmaniaNorthern Refugee Support CommitteeMigrant Resource Centre (Southern Tasmania)Child Support AgencyMulticultural Tasmania Department of Health and Ageing (Commonwealth)Department of Family and Community Services (Commonwealth)Migrant Resource Centre (Northern Tasmania)Health Insurance Commission (Commonwealth)Department of Education (TAS)Good Neighbourhood Council of TasmaniaDisability Support ServicesAdult Migrant English Service (TAS)Overseas Qualification unitGender Issues GroupTasmania Advisory Council on Multicultural AffairsHousing Tasmania (TAS)Southern Refugee Support CommitteeMulticultural Council of TasmaniaWomen's Health Information ServiceCommunity Options Service (NESB)Tasmanian Chamber of Commerce (TAS)Northern TerritoryChaired by Department Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, Northern TerritoryMember agencies:AnglicareAustralian Electoral Commission (Commonwealth)Australian Taxation Office (Commonwealth)Centrelink (Commonwealth)Darwin City CouncilDarwin Community Legal ServiceDepartment of Family and Community Services (Commonwealth)Department of Housing (NT) Department of Education, Science and Training (Commonwealth)Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (Commonwealth)Centre for Access and English as a Second Language, Northern Territory UniversityMigrant Resource Centre of Central AustraliaMulticultural Council of the Northern TerritoryNT Anti-Discrimination Commission (NT)NT Department of Industries and Business (NT)NT Legal Aid Commission (NT)NT Office of Ethnic Affairs (NT)NT Police (NT)NT Working Women's CentrePalmerston City CouncilDepartment of Health and Community Services (NT)Torture and Trauma Survivors Service of the NTACTChaired by Department Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, ACT Regional OfficeMember agencies:Department Family and Community Services (Commonwealth)Department of Health and Ageing (Commonwealth)National Office of Overseas Skills Recognition (Commonwealth)Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (Commonwealth)Centrelink (Commonwealth)Australian Bureau of Statistics (Commonwealth)Chief Minister's Department (ACT)ACT Health, Housing and Community Care (ACT)ACT Department of Education and Community Services (ACT)Canberra Institute of TechnologyHuman Services Department, Canberra Institute of TechnologyAustralian Federal Police (Commonwealth providing ACT policing)Community Relations Commission of NSW (NSW)Companion House, Survivors of Torture and TraumaMigrant Resource Centre of Canberra and QueanbeyanWoden Community Service IncBelconnen Community Service IncQueanbeyan Multilingual CentreCroatian Community Welfare CentreCentacareMulticultural Women's Advocacy Inc ACTVolunteering ACTSt John the Apostle CSR GroupMulticultural Youth Service - Job Placement, Employment and Training Agency Regional CommitteesRiverina Regional Immigration Settlement Planning Committee Chaired by Department Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, ACT Regional Office Member agencies:Centrelink (Commonwealth)Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (Commonwealth)NSW Department of Community Services (NSW)NSW Department of Education and Training (NSW)NSW Police (NSW)Greater Murray Area Health ServiceIllawarra Health Care Interpreter ServiceWagga Wagga City CouncilCommunity Relations Commission of NSW (NSW)Ethnic Communities Council of Wagga WaggaGriffith Multicultural Community CouncilGriffith Adult Learning AssociationRegional Community Consultative CouncilRiverina Community College (ACE)Adult Migrant English ServiceRiverina Institute of TAFEProductive Diversity ProgramLutheran ParishSan Isodore/West Wagga Wagga Refugee CommitteeWagga Wagga Uniting ChurchRural Migrant ServiceSkill Share and Training CentreAlbury-Wodonga Regional Immigration Settlement Planning CommitteeChaired by Department Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, ACT Regional OfficeMember agencies:Centrelink (Commonwealth)NSW Department of Education and Training (NSW)NSW Department of Community Services (NSW)Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care (NSW)Victorian Department of Human Services (VIC)Albury City Council (NSW)Wodonga City Council (VIC)Greater Murray Health Service Upper Murray Health Service Allied Health DepartmentIllawarra Health Care Interpreter ServiceCentral Health Interpreting ServiceCommunity Relations Commission of NSW (NSW) Victorian Multicultural Commission (VIC)Albury-Wodonga Multicultural Resource CentreProductive Diversity ProgramRiverina Institute of TAFE Wodonga Institute of TAFECharles Sturt University Continuing Education CentreAdult Migrant English ServicePolice Rural Migrant ServiceDisability Advocacy and Information Service(2) The members of Funding Advisory Committees for each State or Territory include representatives from State or Territory Government agencies that have responsibility for settlement and multicultural affairs, as well as other Commonwealth and State or Territory Government departments/agencies responsible for services such as health, housing, employment and social welfare. The composition of each Funding Advisory Committee varies from State to State. Member agencies may change to reflect changing settlement needs and funding priorities. Representatives of member agencies may also change and I do not consider it appropriate or useful to provide the details of individuals. The Funding Advisory Committee member agencies for each State and Territory are as follows:Funding Advisory Committees Member AgenciesNSWDepartment of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, NSW (Commonwealth)Department of Education, Science and Training (Commonwealth)Department of Family and Community Services (Commonwealth)Centrelink (Commonwealth)Department of Health and Ageing (Commonwealth)Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (Commonwealth)Department of Community Services (NSW)Department for Women (NSW)Department of Gaming and Racing (NSW)Planning NSWPremier's Department (NSW)Ageing, Disability and Homecare DepartmentArts Council of NSWDepartment of Juvenile Justice (NSW)Department of Education and Training (NSW)VictoriaDepartment of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, Victoria (Commonwealth)Department of Health and Ageing (Commonwealth)Department of Family and Community Services (Commonwealth)Department of Education, Science and Training (Commonwealth)Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (Commonwealth)Department of Innovation, Employment, Industry and Regional Development (VIC)Department of Human Services (VIC)Department of Premier and Cabinet (VIC)QueenslandDepartment of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, Queensland (Commonwealth)Centrelink (Commonwealth)Department of Family and Community Services (Commonwealth)Department of Education, Science and Training (Commonwealth) Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (Commonwealth)Department of Health and Ageing (Commonwealth)Multicultural Affairs Queensland (QLD)Department of Housing (QLD)Queensland Health (QLD)Education Queensland (QLD)Department of Education and Training (QLD)Department of Families (QLD)Office of Rural Communities - Department of Primary Industries (QLD)South AustraliaDepartment of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, South Australia (Commonwealth)Department of Education, Science and Training (Commonwealth)Department of Health and Ageing (Commonwealth)Department of Family and Community Services (Commonwealth)Office for the Ageing (SA)Office of Multicultural Affairs (SA)Department of Human Services (SA)Department of Education Training and Employment (SA)Western AustraliaDepartment of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, Western Australia (Commonwealth)Department of Family and Community Services (Commonwealth)Department of Health and Ageing (Commonwealth)Department of Education, Science and Training (Commonwealth)Department of Employment and Workplace Relations (Commonwealth)Department of Community Development (WA)Department of Training (WA)Office of Multicultural InterestsWA Police (WA)TasmaniaDepartment of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, Tasmania (Commonwealth)Department of Family and Community Services (Commonwealth)Local Government Association of Tasmania (TAS)Tasmanian Community FoundationMulticultural TasmaniaOffice of Youth Affairs (Department of Education and Youth Affairs) (TAS)Northern TerritoryDepartment of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, NT (Commonwealth)Centrelink (Commonwealth)Department of Health and Ageing (Commonwealth)NT Office of Ethnic Affairs (NT)ACTDepartment of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, ACT Regional Office (Commonwealth)Community Relations Commission of NSW (NSW) Chief Minister's Department - ACT Office of Multicultural & Community Affairs (ACT)Centrelink (Commonwealth)(3) The recommendations are conveyed initially to the Department and the final findings to the Minister. (4) Consultation on settlement planning and service delivery issues relating to the Integrated Humanitarian Settlement Strategy (IHSS) and Migrant Resource Centres (MRCs)/Migrant Service Agencies (MSAs) occurs through Settlement Planning Committees in each State and Territory.9435(Question No. 1033)10339435Murphy, John, MPMr Murphy83DLoweALP00 asked the Minister representing the Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts, upon notice, on 21 October 2002:(1) Further to the Minister's replies to questions No. 673 (Hansard, 23 September 2002, page 7073), No, 674 (Hansard, 23 September 2002, page 7073), No. 675 (Hansard, 23 September 2002, page 7074), No. 676 (Hansard, 23 September 2002, page 7074) and No. 833 (Hansard, 23 September 2002, page 7078) is the Minister aware that the Member for Calare, when speaking in the House on 26 September 2002 on the Broadcasting Services Amendment (Media Ownership) Bill 2002, declared that, when he worked for Channel 9, Mr Kerry Packer exerted a direct and at times hands-on influence on the content of news bulletins, particularly at politically sensitive times which were almost invariably sensitive to conservative political interests.(2) Did the Minister also see where the Member for Calare further declared that he could remember several occasions when Mr Packer exercised a direct influence over editorial policy and that it would be a nonsense to suggest that that sort of influence would not be exerted across a stable of media interests.(3) Did the Minister also see where the Member for Calare further declared that, when he joined Channel 8 Orange, it was only after this station was subsumed into the Prime Network that management interference from head office in Sydney became a common feature in both editorial and the production components.(4) Did the Minister also see where the Member for Calare further declared that, in relation to the envisaged role of the Australian Broadcasting Authority under the Broadcasting Services Amendment (Media Ownership) Bill 2002, there is no way unless there is a forensic license renewal hearing process, that editorial processes which would arise from a relaxation of cross-media ownership in regional towns could be traced.(5) Is the Minister also aware that, when speaking in the House on the Television Broadcasting Services (Digital Conversion) Bill 1998 (Hansard, 3 June 1998, page 4565) the Member for Calare responded to an interjection by the Member for North Sydney concerning his comments about politicians being preoccupied with trying to serve the best interests of powerful media barons.(6) Is the Minister aware that the Member for Calare, through the Chair, advised the Member for North Sydney and the House that he had been rung by Mr Packer during a news broadcast, questioning the line-up of his bulletin and further stating that this still goes on.(7) How does the Broadcasting Services Amendment (Media Ownership) Bill 2002 stop powerful media owners interfering with the news and information broadcasted and published and which affects the way the people of Australia think and vote.(8) Will the Minister abandon the Broadcasting Services Amendment (Media Ownership) Bill 2002; if not, why not.9435McGauran, Peter, MPMr McGauranXH4GippslandNPMinister for Science10—The Minister for Communications, Information Technology and the Arts has provided the following answer to the honourable member's question:(1) to (6) The Minister is aware of the Member for Calare's statements as recorded in Hansard.(7) The Bill empowers the ABA to grant `exemption certificates' to applicants seeking to acquire media organisations that would otherwise represent a breach of the cross-media rules. Exemptions will be subject to applicants continuously meeting requirements to maintain separate editorial decision-making responsibilities. Meeting the objective of editorial separation will also become a condition of licence for media organisations subject to the certificate. The Bill also imposes a general obligation to disclose a cross-media relationship on media outlets subject to the same exemption certificate. Newspapers and commercial television broadcasters subject to a cross-media exemption certificate will be required to disclose a cross-media relationship when reporting on the business affairs of a media organisations covered by the same certificate. Commercial radio broadcasters will also have the option of a regular disclosure model that will require them to adequately bring a cross-media relationship to the attention of the regular prime-time audience.See also reply to part (1) of question No. 983. (8) No. See reply to part (2), question No. 566 (Hansard, 19 August 2002, page 5084).9436(Question No. 1049)10499436Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs, upon notice, on 22 October 2002:(1) With respect to the Minister's Department and each agency for which the Minister is responsible, what is the total number of (a) male and (b) female staff.(2) In the Minister's Department and each agency, how many (a) male and (b) female staff are members of the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme and how many of each gender have elected to pay additional superannuation contributions.(3) In the Minister's Department and each agency, how many (a) male and (b) female staff are members of the Public Sector Superannuation Scheme and how many of each gender have elected to pay (i) additional and (ii) reduced superannuation contributions.(4) In the Minister's Department and each agency, how many (a) male and (b) female staff have any other form of superannuation.9436Ruddock, Philip, MPMr Ruddock0J4BerowraLPMinister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Reconciliation10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:The information provided relates to ongoing and non-ongoing Public Service Act employees and is current at the end of October 2002.(1) Department/AgencyMale StaffFemale StaffDepartment of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs16592341Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission527711Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies4059Aboriginal Hostels Limited190321Indigenous Land Corporation4838Indigenous Business Australia116Torres Strait Regional Authority1720Migration Review Tribunal74120Refugee Review Tribunal107114(2) Department/AgencyMale MaleAdditionalFemaleFemale AdditionalDepartment of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs442107403121Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission93285517Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies5Nil91Aboriginal Hostels Limited513NilIndigenous Land Corporation31NilNilIndigenous Business Australia41NilNilTorres Strait Regional Authority3211Migration Review Tribunal6283Refugee Review Tribunal11274(3) Department/AgencyMale FemaleDepartment of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs11861893Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission383572Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies2832Aboriginal Hostels Limited104162Indigenous Land Corporation3932Indigenous Business Australia76Torres Strait Regional Authority1213Migration Review Tribunal63100Refugee Review Tribunal9194Department/AgencyMale AdditionalFemaleAdditionalMaleReducedFemale ReducedDepartment of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs312389363597Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission9311468138Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies7676Aboriginal Hostels Limited17164577Indigenous Land Corporation721616Indigenous Business Australia2234Torres Strait Regional Authority641NilMigration Review Tribunal15201725Refugee Review Tribunal21271929(4) Department/AgencyMale FemaleDepartment of Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs3145Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission5184Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies718Aboriginal Hostels Limited81156Indigenous Land Corporation66Indigenous Business AustraliaNilNilTorres Strait Regional Authority26Migration Review Tribunal512Refugee Review Tribunal5139437(Question No. 1050)10509437Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, upon notice, on 22 October 2002:(1) With respect to the Minister's Department and each agency for which the Minister is responsible, what is the total number of (a) male and (b) female staff.(2) In the Minister's Department and each agency, how many (a) male and (b) female staff are members of the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme and how many of each gender have elected to pay additional superannuation contributions.(3) In the Minister's Department and each agency, how many (a) male and (b) female staff are members of the Public Sector Superannuation Scheme and how many of each gender have elected to pay (i) additional and (ii) reduced superannuation contributions.(4) In the Minister's Department and each agency, how many (a) male and (b) female staff have any other form of superannuation.9438Kemp, Dr David, MPDr KempBT4GoldsteinLPMinister for the Environment and Heritage10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:(1) (a) and (b) Staffing numbers as at 30 June 2002 Environment Portfolio AgenciesMaleFemaleTotal StaffDepartment of the Environment & Heritage(excluding Australian Antarctic Division) 430526956Australian Antarctic Division25992351Australian Heritage Commission325486Director National Parks286172458Bureau of Meteorology11962491445Australian Greenhouse Office9088178Office of the Renewable Energy Regulator459Sydney Harbour Federation Trust161228National Oceans Office112839Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority7990169(2) (a) and (b) Environment Portfolio AgenciesCSS Members as at 30 June 2002Additional Contributions in excess of 5%MaleFemaleMaleFemaleDepartment of the Environment & Heritage(excluding Australian Antarctic Division)135742721Australian Antarctic Division55232112Australian Heritage Commission7934Director National Parks3711184Bureau of Meteorology5544516220Australian Greenhouse Office191544Office of the Renewable Energy Regulator0000Sydney Harbour Federation Trust1000National Oceans Office1111Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority5401(3) (a) (b) (i) and (ii) Environment Portfolio AgenciesPSS Members as at 30 June 2002Additional Contributions more than 5%Reduced Contributions less than 5%MaleFemaleMaleFemaleMaleFemaleDepartment of the Environment & Heritage(excluding Australian Antarctic Division)264410689159101Australian Antarctic Division128434327174Australian Heritage Commission1839610510Director National Parks1077831141316Bureau of Meteorology6112002226512635Australian Greenhouse Office677213151320Office of the Renewable Energy Regulator452110Sydney Harbour Federation Trust960000National Oceans Office9231412Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority698110143331(4) Environment Portfolio AgenciesOther Superannuation as at 30 June 2002MaleFemaleDepartment of the Environment & Heritage(excluding Australian Antarctic Division)3142Australian Antarctic Division7626Australian Heritage Commission76Director National Parks125100Bureau of Meteorology314Australian Greenhouse Office41Office of the Renewable Energy Regulator00Sydney Harbour Federation Trust66National Oceans Office14Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority55These figures consist of employees for whom the Department and agencies pay Superannuation Guarantee Contributions, and do not include employees who contribute to a private superannuation fund.9439(Question No. 1055)10559439Ferguson, Martin, MPMr Martin FergusonLS4BatmanALP00 asked the Minister for Education, Science and Training, upon notice, on 22 October 2002:(1) With respect to the Minister's Department and each agency for which the Minister is responsible, what is the total number of (a) male and (b) female staff.(2) In the Minister's Department and each agency, how many (a) male and (b) female staff are members of the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme and how many of each gender have elected to pay additional superannuation contributions.(3) In the Minister's Department and each agency, how many (a) male and (b) female staff are members of the Public Sector Superannuation Scheme and how many of each gender have elected to pay (i) additional and (ii) reduced superannuation contributions.(4) In the Minister's Department and each agency, how many (a) male and (b) female staff have any other form of superannuation.9439Nelson, Dr Brendan, MPDr NelsonRW5BradfieldLPMinister for Education, Science and Training10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:All the data provided for the Department of Education, Science and Training and its Agencies is as at 30 June 2002.(1) Male StaffFemale StaffDepartment of Education, Science and Training610912Australian Research Council (ARC)2432Anglo-Australian Observatory (AAO)5613Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS)10255Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO)643208Commonwealth Scientific & Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO)4,0592,330Australian National Training Authority (ANTA):3793QldVictoriaOngoing full-time6714Ongoing part-time 6 2Non-ongoing full-time1920Non-ongoing part-time 2 0Total9436(2) Male CSSMembersFemaleCSSMembersMaleCSS >5%Female CSS >5%Department of Education, Science and Training1861914367Australian Research Council7413Anglo-Australian Observatory5020Australian Institute of Marine Science15440Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation13515589Commonwealth Scientific & Industrial Research Organisation1,15223332483Australian National Training Authority4613(3) Male PSSMembersFemale PSSMembersDepartment of Education, Science and Training394648Australian Research Council1126Anglo-Australian Observatory4113Australiana Institute of Marine Science7842Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation459173Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation2,5641,756Australian National Training Authority26813(i) and (ii) Male PSS >5%FemalePSS >5%MalePSS <5%Female PSS <5%Department of Education, Science and Training118196108157Australian Research Council31046Anglo-Australian Observatory104136Australian Institute of Marine Science3011119Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation1255914461Commonwealth Scientific & Industrial Research Organisation698502550437Australian National Training Authority719838(4) Male - OtherForm ofSuperannuationFemale - OtherForm ofSuperannuationDepartment of Education, Science and Training3073Australian Research Council62Anglo-Australian Observatory:In addition 2 male members of PSS salary sacrifice to retail superannuation schemes102Australian Institute of Marine Science99Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation4922Commonwealth Scientific & Industrial Research Organisation343341Australian National Training Authority9139441(Question No. 1071)10719441Murphy, John, MPMr Murphy83DLoweALP00 asked the Prime Minister, upon notice, on 24 October 2002:What counselling services will the Government provide to the grieving families of the victims of the Bali tragedy on 12 October 2002. 9441Howard, John, MPMr HowardZD4BennelongLPPrime Minister10—The answer to the honourable member's question is as follows:The government is ensuring that comprehensive assistance, including personal support and counselling, is made available to those affected by the Bali bombings. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and Australian Defence Force chaplains offered immediate counselling and support to Bali victims and their families. The Commonwealth is now working closely with state and territory governments, and with non-government agencies such as the Red Cross, to ensure families are provided with the full range of support and counselling they want. Centrelink is providing a direct link to support services, including social workers, for affected families and will be offering each family ongoing contact with a family liaison worker.