Monday, 22 August 1988 COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES SENATE Hansard 1988 FIRST SESSION OF THE THIRTY-FIFTH PARLIAMENT (THIRD PERIOD) The Senate, on 3 June 1988, adjourned to 22 August 1988 unless the President fixed an earlier day of meeting. Pursuant to the Resolution of the Senate passed on 2 June 1988, the Senate met in the new Parliament House on Monday, 22 August 1988, at 4 p.m. The PRESIDENT (Senator the Hon. Kerry Sibraa) took the chair at 4 p.m., and prayers were read. The PRESIDENT —On 16 February 1988 the Senate referred to the Court of Disputed Returns certain questions relating to the place in the Senate representing New South Wales to which William Robert Wood was returned in the 1987 election. On 12 May 1988, in answer to those questions, the Court found that the place in the Senate was vacant. I presented to the Senate on 17 May 1988 the reasons for judgment of the Court in relation to that finding. I now present the judgment and reasons relating to those questions. Since the Senate last met, the Court has made two further orders in relation to the matter referred to it. On 7 June 1988 the Court ordered that the Australian Electoral Officer for New South Wales undertake a further counting and recounting of the ballot papers cast for candidates in the election in that State, for the purpose of determining the candidate entitled to be elected to the vacant place, and that the Australian Electoral Officer for the State report that result to the Court. On 21 July 1988, having received that report, the Court ordered that Irina Patsi Dunn be declared elected as a senator for New South Wales in the vacant place in the Senate. I now present to the Senate the orders of the Court of 7 June and 21 July 1988, together with reasons relating to the first of those orders. Having been declared to be elected, Senator Dunn will now be introduced and will make the oath or affirmation before taking her seat in the Senate, as required by the Constitution. Senator Irina Patsi Dunn made and subscribed the affirmation of allegiance. The PRESIDENT —I inform the Senate that I have received a copy of a message from Her Majesty the Queen, and the address of His Excellency the Governor-General, delivered earlier today in the Great Hall, to mark the inaugural sittings of the two Houses in this building. I table the documents. In order that there may be a full written record of today's events I propose, with the concurrence of honourable senators, to incorporate the document in Hansard. There being no objection, it is so ordered. The document read as follows- ADDRESS BY HIS EXCELLENCY THE RIGHT HONOURABLE SIR NINIAN STEPHEN, GOVERNOR-GENERAL OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA, ON THE OCCASION OF THE FIRST MEETING OF THE PARLIAMENT IN THE NEW PARLIAMENT HOUSE, CANBERRA ON MONDAY, 22 AUGUST 1988 I begin with a message from Her Majesty the Queen, sent on this historic occasion: I am delighted to learn that the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia today begins its work in its new home. I have happy memories of the opening ceremony which, for me, was a highlight of the bicentennial year. I take this opportunity to send to the people of the Commonwealth of Australia my heartfelt wishes for their prosperity and happiness and am confident that the deliberations of the Parliament in this new building will be directed to that end. Elizabeth R. 22 August 1988 Nations, like people, take their shape, their style and character, from their inheritance and from their environment. If today is, for Australia, historic, it is because this occasion, today, in the nation's capital, is the outcome of all that has shaped Australia over the past 200 years. For thousands of years the first inhabitants of this then isolated continent lived their lives free of the need of principles for the governance of a nation in the modern world. But from the first day of that landing of the First Fleet in Sydney Cove 200 years ago, perhaps in all history the most curious of beginnings of any nation, a policy has been evolving: from governor's rule of a penal settlement, through stages of representative and then responsible government, first colonial and then federal and national, to this day; the day when, for the first time, the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia will sit in its own permanent home in the national capital. Today when the members of this Parliament take their seats in the two chambers of this Parliament House they will know that in doing so they mark a momentous milestone in the long history of Australian democracy. That spirit of democracy asserted itself in colonial days and was the sure foundation upon which our federal nation was created. It has been dear to us ever since. This is the third home of the Parliament of the Commonwealth. Our Constitution makes short work of Parliament's place of sitting; almost abruptly it declares, in section 125, that: The Parliament shall sit at Melbourne until it meet at the seat of Government. And sit in Melbourne it did, in borrowed splendour, for a quarter of a century, in that great palace at the top of Bourke Street, Victoria's own Parliament House, while the seat of government was duly determined and a provisional Parliament House build there, in Canberra. It sat in Melbourne from its first day of sitting on the afternoon of 9th May 1901, until late in the afternoon of 24th March 1927. Then, both to the intensely emotional strains of Auld Lang Syne and to the no less intense relief of long dispossessed Victorian legislators, it adjourned; to meet next, in May 1927, in Canberra in that much more modest, white stuccoed brick building down the hill which, to the minds of at least three generations of Australians, has been the symbol of our federal parliamentary democracy. Now, some sixty years on, Federal Parliament moves again but Australia's long traditions of democracy continue unchanged. As the measure of these things goes in the world community of nations, Australia is among the most enduring continuous democracies that the world has known, even if we reckon only from the time of Federation, which incidentally, does scant justice to our own vigorous colonial democracies of the second half of last century. Apart from Britain, from which our free institutions spring, and the two great democracies of North America, no one of the now many nations of Asia, Africa, or the Americas, and only two, I think, of all the nations of Europe can count a similar uninterrupted span of over 87 years of democratic government-years of governments which have come to power by the free vote of the people and which have at all times held themselves effectively accountable to the people. This great new Parliament House is itself a celebration of our democracy, of the success on this continent of what, in the heady days of Britain's reform Bills of the last century, was thought to be a too hazardous experiment: the giving of the vote to all of the people. We inherited from Britain the traditions of parliamentary democracy; we took from the United States its own bold experiment in federalism. Then, bolder still, we combined the two and produced a federal and parliamentary commonwealth of which this building now becomes the symbol. Perhaps we Australians haven't in the past been very strong on symbols; at least away from the sporting field. We like to think we don't place much store by them or by the titles of office. That has always been the style of our democracy. But here on Capital Hill, we now have a symbol we can't ignore, one that will remind the Australian people of the weight of responsibility that rests on those it elects to Parliament, that will affirm to all who are elected to represent the nation in this house of the Parliament that it is upon the quality of their deliberations and the wisdom of their decisions that this nation's future and the welfare of all Australians, now and long into the future, will depend. May the splendour of this building inspire them, and the nation, to high achievement and to noble goals. The PRESIDENT —On behalf of the Senate, I will thank Her Majesty for the message. Senator BUTTON(Victoria-Leader of the Government in the Senate) —Mr President, I seek leave to move a motion of thanks relating to the presentation of gifts to the Commonwealth Parliament and to those people associated with the planning and construction of the new Parliament House. Leave granted. Senator BUTTON —I move: That the following resolutions be agreed to- (1) That the Senate expresses its thanks and appreciation of the Parliaments, Governments and peoples of those countries, States and Territories and to those organisations which have so graciously presented gifts to Australia's new Parliament House and extends a warm welcome to those Presiding Officers and representatives who are present today. (2) That the Senate extends its sincere thanks to the following persons and organisations associated with the planning and construction of the new Parliament House: (a) Mitchell/Giurgola and Thorp Architects who designed it, (b) the Parliament House Construction Authority, Concrete/Holland Joint Venture and all contractors and workers who built it, (c) the artists, craftsmen and craftswomen who advised on and assisted in its furnishing and decoration, and (d) the members of the Joint Select Committee on the New and Permanent Parliament House, all past and present members of the Joint Standing Committee on the New Parliament House, officers of the National Capital Development Commission, parliamentary and other staff, for their endeavours in providing a magnificent permanent building for the Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia. Mr President, on the historic first sitting day in this building, I should like to take the opportunity to express the appreciation of the Parliament, the Government and the people of Australia to the parliaments, governments and peoples of those countries, States and Territories and those organisations which have generously presented gifts to Australia's new Parliament House. It is particularly pleasing that representatives of many of those donors, including the presiding officers of other parliaments, are able to be with us today. The internal spaces of the building now display the embroideries, tapestries, paintings, maps and other gifts, sent here from the four corners of the world and the four corners of Australia. They are already part of this building's own history. Outside there are sculptures, benches and trees presented by our friends to add to the environment of the new building. It is appropriate, Mr President, that I make special mention of the gifts located within this chamber: the vice-regal chair, a gift from the Parliament of the United Kingdom; the distinguished visitors chair, from the New Zealand Parliament; your own chair, Mr President, which is a gift from the Canadian Senate; and the Hansard table, a gift from the Government, Parliament and people of Tasmania. All these gifts will remind us and future generations of parliamentarians of our international ties, our bonds with the Australian States and the responsibility that we owe to the Australian people to cherish and preserve our system of parliamentary democracy. In expressing my thanks to those who join us for this special day and to those who have presented gifts, I believe they share our pride in this great building. Their generosity indicates the respect in which Australia's system of parliamentary democracy is held. Mr President, the care and dedication that have gone into the construction of this building give us a lasting debt of gratitude to all those men and women who have been involved. To the architects, Romaldo Giurgola and Richard Thorp, we say thank you for your vision in designing a building of which all Australians, present and future, can be justly proud. We thank also the Chairman, members and the Chief Executive of the Parliament House Construction Authority and their staff for their hard work and dedication throughout the construction phase of the building. To Concrete Holland Joint Venture, the Construction Manager, and all the other contractors and workers involved in the project who, by the labour of their minds and bodies, have made it the remarkable reality it is, we also express our gratitude. We also recall the work which has been done by the members of the Joint Select Committee on the New and Permanent Parliament House, officers of the National Capital Development Commission, and parliamentary and other staff in the building. The new Parliament House embodies the work of over 10,000 men and women, with contributions from individuals and manufacturers from every State and Territory. It is a national showcase demonstrating the skills and energy of the Australian work force. Mr President, the integration of Australian art and craft into the new Parliament House is a key part of the building's architectural expression. The artists, craftsmen and craftswomen have created significant works now displayed throughout the building. The `meeting place' mosaic designed by Papunya artist Michael Nelson Tjakamarra and fabricated by masons William McIntosh, Aldo Rossi and Franco Colussi stands in the centre of the ceremonial pool at the heart of the forecourt and is appropriately the first work of art visitors see when approaching this building. In the Great Hall the tapestry by 14 weavers of the Victorian Tapestry Workshop dramatically depicts an Australian coastal landscape created from paintings by Arthur Boyd. In the first floor public gallery the embroidery designed by South Australian artist Kay Lawrence and produced by more than 1,000 members of the Embroiderers Guild of Australia narrates the history of Australians' involvement with the land. The marquetry designed by South Australian Tony Bishop and interpreted by Sydney craftsman Michael Retter can be found in the formal entrance foyer and elsewhere in the building. There are many more craftspeople and artists who have contributed to the national character of the new Parliament House. I instance Tasmanian woodworker Kevin Perkins and others who have handcrafted tables and desks for the use in principal suites. Other important works of Australian woodcraft include the King table in the Reception Hall and display cases in the foyer exhibiting constitutional documents. We could continue enumerating at length for, wherever we look, we see work worthy of praise. To all those who worked to give us this home for our Parliament I express my sincere thanks. I hope that many Australians will have the opportunity to share our gratitude-and indeed excitement-when visiting this Parliament House. Senator CHANEY(Western Australia-Leader of the Opposition) —On behalf of the Opposition I support the motion which has been moved by the Leader of the Government in the Senate (Senator Button) and the expression of thanks to the very many people who have contributed to this building. I agree with him and with you, Mr President, that it is very appropriate that representatives of the Parliaments, Governments and people who have made contribution to this place are here today to hear the expressions of thanks and the formal motion which will make them a part of our permanent Senate record. I think that there is some contention about this building, not least among the senators and members who will occupy it. I think it is an indication of the conservative nature of human beings that so many of us are finding it difficult to fit in to our new and very splendid environment. I have absolutely no doubt that those who have contributed the various items that have been referred to by the Leader of the Government hope that those items will inspire us to do our work in a fitting way for Australia. Concern has been expressed about the separation of Ministers from the back bench which is such a strong feature of the design of this building. However, that separation may lead legislators in this place to be more conscious of their role as legislators. I note that already some retired public servants have written about the possible uses of the new committee rooms and the change that that might induce. It may well be that the form of Parliament House will have a significant impact on the way in which this Parliament operates. With respect to all of those who have been thanked, I can say on behalf of the Opposition that we support the sentiments which have been expressed by Senator Button. I do think, however, that it is also fitting to note that, in the construction of this place, the very enormous cost was considerably expanded by the very frequent and absurd restrictive work practices which afflicted the building site. The group which was omitted from the motion of thanks was the Opposition's waste watch committee, the rorts task force, which incurred considerable unpopularity in drawing attention to some of the quite extraordinarily wasteful things which occurred on this site. I remind the Senate, as we pass this motion of thanks, that this very expensive building was rendered far more expensive by some of the extraordinary practices which were carried on in this place, unfortunately in common with other commercial building sites in this country. We found, when examining this matter, that people were reluctant to talk about what was happening because they were frightened of reprisals. I remind the Senate that as this building was being built people were being paid a specific allowance just to show up at work; that nicking off-that practice of arriving at work and not actually staying to do a day's work-was common; that there were endless health and safety strikes which were extremely wasteful; and that a climbing time of two hours was allowed for crane drivers who took about 45 seconds actually to climb the cranes in question. I know that that list could be extended very considerably: I refer to the clothing allowance which was paid no matter how little time was spent on the site, to the excessive site allowances, and to the extraordinary range of strikes which were so damaging to many of the contractors who worked here. Senator Gareth Evans —Always the statesman, Fred; never the partisan politician! Senator CHANEY —I mention that because it was a very strong feature of the erection of this building. I note that the Foreign Affairs Minister designate, who I am sure will be leaving this place very frequently-and for that we are all mercifully relieved-seeks to intervene. In what is a most splendid building, full of the most splendid objects and artefacts, I express that one element of regret: it was made so much more expensive for the people of Australia than otherwise would have been required. In all other respects, I heartily join in the sentiments which have been expressed by Senator Button. Senator HAINES(South Australia-Leader of the Australian Democrats) —I associate the Australian Democrats with the motion of appreciation moved by Senator Button in regard to those countries, States and organisations which presented gifts to the new Parliament House. Senator Button has already referred to many of those gifts. Certainly, the antique maps and aluminium sculptures, the trees and the tapestries, the chairs and Chinese lanterns, the crystal glasses and candelabra, the teak benches, bronze busts, books on young Australians, stone lions and porcelain figures-to say nothing of clocks and wall hangings of every kind-will adorn the new Parliament House and its environs thanks to the generosity of the rest of the world. Many countries of very different political systems and ideologies, as well as Australian States and national organisations, have presented the Parliament with a wonderful array of exotic and beautiful gifts. It is particularly appropriate that we share the chamber today with representatives of many of the countries that have donated those gifts. The President's chair, the Hansard tables, coats of arms, a distinguished visitors chair, paintings, sundials and drinking fountains, the vice-regal chair in the Senate and dinner services and furniture for special rooms will become priceless possessions of those of us who work here and those who will follow us. Essentially, these gifts ensure that we want for nothing as far as decorations, accoutrements and creature comforts are concerned. They combine with the mosaic, the tapestry, the parquetry and so on produced by Australian artisans and artists to make this building truly unique and something that Australians can view and visit with pride. In supporting this motion I echo the Governor-General's inauguration address by wishing us all well in this place of business and expressing the hope that the august and impressive surroundings which make up our permanent Parliament House lead us and our successors to draft and debate legislation in a true spirit of goodwill and concern for the well-being of the nation in the long term rather than our own short term political gains. Question resolved in the affirmative. Senate adjourned at 4.20 p.m. The following answers to questions were circulated: (Question No. 100) Senator Sanders asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, upon notice, on 26 October 1987: (1) Which are the shipping lines responsible for transporting kangaroo products overseas? (2) Which are the export companies responsible for handling exports of kangaroo products? Senator Gareth Evans —Following consultations with the Australian Bureau of Statistics and the Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade has provided the following answers to the honourable senator's question: (1) The confidentiality provisions of the Census and Statistics Act 1905 prevent me from providing the names of those shipping lines responsible for transporting kangaroo products overseas. (2) The Australian National Parks and Wildlife Serviced has provided the attached list of companies which export kangaroo products. address Vacik Distributors 14 Fisher Street Auburn, N.S.W. 2144 Toyo Keito Australia Pty Ltd F.C.A. Building Mezzanine Floor 50 Margaret Street Sydney, N.S.W. 2000 The Australian Whip Company P.O. Box 134 Glenorie, N.S.W. 2157 Taurus Australia P/L 11 Lecha Street Sunnybank Hills, Qld 4109 A. I. Topper & Company 340 Kent Street Sydney, N.S.W. 2000 A. A. and M. E. Taurin 24 Perrins Drive Low Head, Tas. 7252 Van Ommeren International Trading Aust. Pty Ltd 4th Floor 52 Flinders Street Adelaide, S.A. 5000 Van Ommeren International 291 George Street Sydney, N.S.W. 2000 Beta Fur Products 20 Railway Parade Welshpool, W.A. 6106 Best and Butler P/L 2 Daniel Street Botany, N.S.W. 2019 Bell Trading (Aust.) Rural Exports 13-17 Longland Street Fortitude Valley, Qld 4006 Northern Australia Meat Inc. G.P.O. Box 78 Brisbane, Qld 4001 Barwon Traders 51 Fox Street Walgett, N.S.W. 2832 Australian Koala Bear Manufacturing Company P.O. Box 25 Coogee, N.S.W. 2034 Bonsella P/L P.O. Box 161 Botany, N.S.W. 2019 Blue Shield Marketing Pty Ltd Factory 1 4 Dyer Crescent West Gosford, N.S.W. 2250 Furedy & Hay P/L P.O. Box 167 5-7 Byrnes Street Botany, N.S.W. 2019 Dewez Export Co. (Qld) Pty Ltd P.O. Box 91 Nundah, Qld 4012 De Moeller Trading Company 3/4 Pritchard Street O'Connor, W.A. 6163 Crompton & Sons P/L 64 East Avenue Beverley, S.A. 5009 C. W. & J. Packer Pty Ltd Boundary Road Narangba, Qld 4504 Hamag Bridge Inn Road Wollert, Vic. F. Whitbread & Company 71-79 Randolph Street Rocklea, Qld 4106 Kangaroo Leather Supplies P/L P.O. Box 497 Ipswich, Qld 4305 Kangaroo Fur & Sheepskin Products 122 Brisbane Road Labrador, Qld 4215 J. Harris P/L 702 Botany Road Mascot, N.S.W. 2020 Neal Edwards Pty Ltd G.P.O. Box 1240 Hobart, Tas. 7001 Midwest Tanning (Aust.) P/L P.O. Box 3222 Clayfield, Qld 4011 Michaelis Bayley Leather Lord Street P.O., Box 21 Botany, N.S.W. 2019 M. E. Humfress & Company 26 Market Street Brisbane, Qld 4000 Prota Pet Meat Company 3 Dobbins Road Wanneroo, W.A. 6065 Lycel Pty Ltd 65 Myana Road Dover Heights, N.S.W. 2030 Country Road Clothing 80 Trenerry Crescent Collingwood, Vic. 3066 Davmor Products Pty Ltd 12 Nanson Place Florey, A.C.T. 2615 Mr W. H. McDonald 13 Premier Street Gymea, N.S.W. 2227 Pride Leather Products 42 Chandos Street Crows Nest, N.S.W. 2065 H. K. Hawkins and Company 24 Marine Parade Cottesloe, W.A. 6011 Tanbest Pty Ltd 131 Clarence Street Sydney, N.S.W. 2001 Australian Quality Toys P/L P.O. Box 164 Caulfield East, Vic. 3145 Hide and Skin Trade Pty Ltd 177 Deepwater Road Castle Cove, N.S.W. 2069 A. B. Mills Pty Ltd 180 Marion Street Leichhardt, N.S.W. 2040 Tasman Sheepskin Tannery Boundary Road Narangba, Qld 4504 Kra-Mar Pet Supplies 141 Trafalgar Street Annandale, N.S.W. 2038 I. D. Burt Suite 15, 2nd Floor 428 George Street Sydney, N.S.W. 2000 Pierre Chevalier Pty Ltd 29 Reiby Place Sydney, N.S.W. 2000 Tusker Australia Pty Ltd 128 Fison Avenue Eagle Farm, Qld 4007 K.H. International Pty Ltd 494 Pacific Highway Lindfield, N.S.W. 2070 (Question No. 177) Senator Newman asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence Science and Personnel, upon notice, on 16 February 1988: With respect to the 14 May 1985 announcement by the Treasurer that persons joining the Defence Force after that date would not qualify for benefits under the Defence Service Homes loan scheme, but would be eligible for home ownership assistance under a scheme to be developed, can the Minister advise (a) when that new scheme will be announced, (b) why no announcement has been made for 2 1/2 years, and (c) why it was not announced in conjunction with the new arrangements for Defence Service Homes loans announced recently. Senator Robert Ray —The Minister for Defence Science and Personnel has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (a), (b) and (c) The Defence Service Homes loan is available to members of the Defence Force who complete more than six years service, and consequently no-one has been disadvantaged by the lack of announcement of the form of housing assistance to apply to those who have joined the Defence Force since May 1985. These members have access to the same in-Service housing assistance programs as have members of longer standing. Although no announcement on the new form of assistance has been made, the issue is receiving my close personal attention and I will be announcing the Government's decision well before the period of entitling service has been completed. (Question No. 185) Senator Messner asked the Minister for Transport and Communications, upon notice, on 16 February 1988: (1) Does Telecom keep sales check figures that indicate the accuracy of its service charges; if so, what percentage of Telecom customers are incorrectly charged, and of this number, what percentage are overcharged. (2) What steps are being taken to improve the accuracy of service charging. (3) Is Telecom discontinuing regular sales checks for business customers; if so, what are the reasons for discontinuing this service. Senator Gareth Evans —The answer to the honourable senator's question, based on the advice of Telecom Australia, is as follows: (1) Telecom does keep sales check figures but not on a national basis. Sales check activities are the responsibility of decentralised Telecom district administrations and are not reported above this level. It is not possible to obtain these figures without diverting significant resources to a special investigation and this could not be justified. (2) Major activities aimed at improving the accuracy of Telecom's rental charges include: the introduction of automated systems which will reduce transcription errors and verify the accuracy of existing records on conversion from manual to automated systems; revision of the Customer Services staff selection and accreditation processes; the introduction of new training programs to better equip and recruit staff for Customer Services work; and the introduction of automated text retrieval systems to facilitate more timely pricing advice to Customer Services staff. (3) Telecom proposes to discontinue routine sales checks for business customers. In the past, Telecom's billing system could not provide a breakdown of rental for equipment installed on telephone services. However, Telecom did physically inspect equipment at business customers' premises from time to time. The new billing system being introduced nationally provides information on screen to enable prompt responses to business customers enquiring about charges for their equipment. Customers can also receive details of their equipment charges in regular or ad-hoc statements. Inspections will still be performed where such action is warranted and is sought by the customer, and where normal billing procedures indicate some discrepancy. (Question No. 189) Senator McGauran asked the Minister for Transport and Communications, upon notice, on 16 February 1988: (1) Is the Minister aware that a series on Australia's bicentenary has appeared on British Television, produced and hosted by Mr John Pilger. (2) Has any Federal Government department or statutory authority such as the ABC or Australia's Bicentennial Authority provided funds for the production of this series. (3) Are Australian diplomatic representatives in London aware of whether the series is critical of the Hawke Government in particular, or of Australia in general. (4) If press reports concerning Mr Pilger's television series are accurate, and his bicentennial programs are critical of Australia in general, what measures will the Australian Embassy in London take to seek to address these highly biased programs. Senator Gareth Evans —The answer to the honourable senator's question, based on information provided by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, is as follows: (1) Yes. (2) No. The ABC entered into an agreement to purchase the John Pilger series, ``The Last Dream'', on completion with no payments due until delivery of prints. John Pilger did use an ABC office for a period but no ABC film crews or equipment were made available. Archival footage was made available and charged at market rates. (3) The Department of Foreign Affairs has not sought assessments of the program, which would necessarily be personal and subjective by officers at the Australian High Commission in London. (4) The Australian High Commission in London disseminates throughout the United Kingdom, as part of an ongoing program, factual and positive information on Australia. (Question No. 198) Senator Reid asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Arts and Territories, upon notice, on 16 February 1988: (1) What is the expected saving in expenditure to be made from the abolition of the A.C.T. Schools Authority Council. (2) Who or what will now carry out the functions formerly performed by the A.C.T. Schools Authority Council. (3) What mechanism will be set up to allow parents and teachers to continue to have an involvement with the development of schools policy in the A.C.T. (4) Have there been any moves to replace the A.C.T. Schools Authority Council representative, who formerly formed part of the selection committees for school principals; if so, who now fulfils this role. Senator Richardson —The Minister for the Arts and Territories has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) The cost of supporting the Schools Authority Council was $240,000 and no resources are now employed for this purpose. Some of the resources saved have been used to support new community and advisory functions. Net savings are estimated at $108,000. (2) The Government has established an A.C.T. Education and Training Council to provide advice in respect of the agencies and institutions providing education and training services in the A.C.T. This Council has representation from employers, unions and the Community. In addition, it has been announced that a statutory advisory committee with 7 members will be established to provide advice to the Chief Education Officer on school matters and to report to the Minister on such matters where appropriate. This committee will include 2 representatives each from School Boards, 1 representative each from the Parents and Citizens Association, A.C.T. Teachers Federation and Canberra Pre-School Society, an independent chairperson appointed by the Minister and 1 other Ministerial nominee. (3) The statutory advisory committee will allow parents and teachers to continue to be involved in the development of schools policy in the A.C.T. (4) School boards continue to have a role in the selection of school principals through their nominee on the advisory selection panels. At no stage have A.C.T. Schools Authority Council members, in that role, been members of advisory selection panels for school principal positions. (Question No. 199) Senator Reid asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, upon notice, on 16 February 1988: (1) Can the Minister provide the names of those countries, other than Australia, which contribute to the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), and indicate how much each of these countries will contribute in the present financial year. (2) Has the Minister been made aware of any recent reports recognising the efficiency or effectiveness of IFAD which would persuade the Australian Government to reverse its decision not to participate in future IFAD replenishments. (3) If the Government does not reverse its decision, will funds which would otherwise have gone to IFAD be made available to other relief organisations operating in Africa; if so, which agencies will receive assistance. (4) What percentage of Australia's bilateral aid budget goes to Africa, and how does this compare with the percentages of the aid budget received by other regions of the world. Senator Gareth Evans —The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) IFAD expects to receive the following contributions from member countries other than Australia in the present financial year: Country...Amount Algeria...$US2,975,780 Austria...AS14,239,050 Brazil...$US1,146,000 Canada...$C8,022,000 Denmark...Dkr11,460,000 Finland...Fmk4,584,000 France...FF43,823,040 Germany, R.F....DM22,312,620 India...$US775,938 Iraq...$US5,939,910 Japan...Yen2,427,673,222 Kuwait...$US10,703,832 Netherlands...FL18,761,930 Qatar...$US2,670,180 Sweden...Skr28,321,480 Switzerland...SWF5,432,040 United Arab Emirates...$US4,904,880 United Kingdom...LST2,464,116 United States...$US34,380,000 Venezuela...$US7,351,400 Opec Fund...$US3,820,000 (2) No. (3) Any savings from IFAD will go into the global aid vote. The honourable senator will be aware that a recent decision was made to increase assistance to the nine member countries of the Southern Africa Development Co-operation Conference (SADCC) from $A55 million to $A100 million over a three year period. This program represents the largest percentage increase in funds for any region in the Australian aid program. The broad focus of the program is the promotion of food security in the region and a reduction of the SADCC states' dependence on South Africa. (4) In 1986-87, the proportions of bilateral aid spent in each region were as follows: Africa (including Egypt but not including Indian Ocean islands) ... 6.1% Papua New Guinea ... 45.5% Other Pacific countries ... 11.1% South East Asia (excluding Korea, China and Hong Kong) ... 26.7% Other Asia (excluding Indian Ocean Islands and Middle East) ... 8.6% Other (including Indian Ocean islands and Middle East) ... 2.0% It is expected that regional shares of bilateral aid in 1987-88 will be broadly similar to those quoted above. The honourable senator would have noted the strong criticisms of the Government's increased level of aid to Africa by official spokesmen from within her own Parliamentary Party who allege that that region is too remote from Australia to justify those increases. (Question No. 214) Senator Archer asked the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 19 February 1988: (1) What are the budget allocations for the different sub-programs in the recently published three-year plan, entitled `Access and Equity Initiatives', for the Department of Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs. (2) What performance indicators will be used to assess performance within each of the initiatives listed. Senator Reynolds —The Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) The initiatives outlined in the three year Access and Equity Plan (1987-1990) are expected to be achieved within the ongoing sub-program allocations for the Department. There are a number of projects being undertaken which impact significantly on the access and equity strategies. However, these do not have specific allocations. The projects are aimed at improving client services and decision-making through the development of decision support systems, improving communication of policy and multiskilling of staff; and improving client access to services. Current budget allocations by sub-program for the Department are published in the Department's Portfolio Explanatory Notes, pages 79-80. The adoption of certain initiatives contained in the Language Services Policy published in conjunction with the Access and Equity Plan will lead to additional costs as detailed below: 1987-88-.32 ASL $48,600. (This includes $35,000 for the printing of translation versions of information leaflets). 1988-89-1.84 ASL $570,200. (Assumes on-going initiatives for 1987-88 plus additional items such as inclusion of $72,000 for extension of contract arrangements for on-site interpreters, $150,000 for a consultancy to revise a package of information materials and $250,000 for significantly increased stocks of forms and information materials.) 1989-90-1.34 ASL $420,600. (This constitutes a number of initiatives carried over from the previous two years). (2) Performance indicators specific to access and equity have not been developed. However, the recently published Corporate Plan for 1987-88 identifies the Department's goals, strategies and outcomes, some of which relate to access and equity. While the statements in the Corporate Plan are at a high general level, more specific goals, strategies and outcomes have been developed for inclusion in regional work plans. These will be used to further refine the general performance indicators which have already been developed for sub-programs administered by the Portfolio. Details of these indicators, together with program statements are to be included in the 1988-89 Departmental Explanatory Notes. (Question No. 220) Senator Reid asked the Minister for the Arts, Sport, the Environment, Tourism and Territories, upon notice, on 22 February 1988: (1) How many apprentices has the Department employed since 1 January 1988. (2) How many apprentices have been employed by Statutory Authorities for which the Minister is responsible since 1 January 1988. (3) Can the Minister provide a breakdown of the numbers of these apprentices in their respective trades. (4) Can the Minister also provide a further breakdown showing in which State or Territory the apprentices have been employed. Senator Richardson —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: (1) The total number of apprentices employed by the Department since 1 January 1988 is 29. (2) For the same period 21 apprentices have been employed by Statutory Authorities in my portfolio. (3) Breakdown of apprentices by trade: Bridge and wharf carpentry...1 *Cabinet makers...2 Carpentry and joinery...2 *Cooking...2 *Electrical mechanics...14 Fitting and machining...1 *Gardener...1 Greenkeeping...1 *Horticulture...8 Mechanic (diesel and heavy earth moving equipment)...3 Motor mechanic...6 Painting and Decorating...2 Panel beating...2 Plastering...1 Plumbing...2 Welding...2 TOTAL...50 * Employed by Statutory Authorities (NB includes only 2 from Horticulture) (4) All apprentices have been employed in the ACT. (Question No. 230) Senator Reid asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 22 February 1988: (1) How many apprentices has the Department employed since 1 January 1988. (2) How many apprentices have been employed by Statutory Authorities for which the Minister is responsible since 1 January 1988. (3) Can the Minister provide a breakdown of the numbers of these apprentices in their respective trades. (4) Can the Minister also provide a further breakdown showing in which State or Territory the apprentices have been employed. Senator Walsh —The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) Nil. The Treasury does not have any apprentice positions. (2) 4 at Royal Australian Mint; 2 at Reserve Bank of Australia. (3) 1 electrical trades; 1 electrical/mechanical; 4 fitting and turning. (4) 4 apprentices employed in the Australian Capital Territory; 2 apprentices employed in Victoria. (Question No. 231) Senator Reid asked the Minister for Transport and Communications, upon notice, on 22 February 1988: (1) How many apprentices has the Department employed since 1 January 1988. (2) How many apprentices have been employed by Statutory Authorities for which the Minister is responsible since 1 January 1988. (3) Can the Minister provide a breakdown of the numbers of these apprentices in their respective trades. (4) Can the Minister also provide a further breakdown showing in which State or Territory the apprentices have been employed. Senator Gareth Evans —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: All information is as at 30 April 1988. (1) Nil. (2) 424. (3)- Telecom Electrical Fitter and Mechanic ... 2 Engineering Services and Telepower ... 4 Motor Mechanic ... 1 Apprentice Technician (Telecommunications) ... 66 Australia Apprentice Technician (Postal) ... 5 Post Fitter and Machinist ... 1 Painter and Decorator ... 1 Motor Mechanic ... 3 OTC Trainee Technical Officer ... 40 Apprentice Telecommunications Tradesmen ... 4 ABC Setmaker/setfinisher ... 1 QANTAS Printing ... 1 Plumbing ... 1 Maintenance Fitting ... 5 Electrical Fitting ... 4 Fitting & Turning ... 6 Electronics ... 34 Aircraft Engineering ... 84 Sheetmetal ... 20 Cook ... 12 ANAC Aircraft Mechanic-Engine ... 9 Aircraft Mechanic-Air frame ... 8 Aircraft Mechanic-Electrical ... 6 Aircraft Instrument Maker and/or Repairer ... 6 Aircraft Electrical Fitter ... 4 Aircraft Sheetmetal Worker ... 15 Aircraft Fitter and Turner ... 2 Aircraft Mechanical Fitter ... 10 Electroplater-1st Class ... 1 Cook ... 7 AN Fitter ... 12 Electrical Fitter ... 22 Fitter/Machinist ... 8 Boilermaker/Welder ... 8 Motor Mechanic (HD Diesel) ... 4 Carpenter ... 2 Plumber ... 1 Plasterer ... 1 Radio Tradesman ... 1 Refrigeration Mechanic ... 2 (4)- NSW Vic Qld SA WA Tas NT/ACT Telecom ... 4 62 1 . . . . 6 . . Australia Post ... 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . OTC ... 44 . . . . . . . . . . . . ABC ... 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . QANTAS ... 166 . . . . . . 1 . . . . ANAC ... 1 64 2 1 . . . . . . AN ... . . . . . . 56 . . 5 . . TOTAL ... 226 126 3 57 1 11 . . (Question No. 236) Senator Reid asked the Minister for the Arts, Sport, the Environment, Tourism and Territories, upon notice, on 22 February 1988: Can the Minister provide details of how many employees of the Department are presently listed as unattached (to a substantive position within the Department). Senator Richardson —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: The total number of employees presently listed as unattached to a substantive position within the Department of the Arts, Sport, the Environment, Tourism and Territories is 596. Of this figure: The Department (excluding the ACT Administration) has 29 staff listed as unattached out of a total of 830. The ACT Administration has 567 staff listed as unattached out of a total of 15,655. (Question No. 244) Senator Reid asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, upon notice, on 22 February 1988: Can the Minister provide details of how many employees of the Department are presently listed as unattached (to a substantive position within the Department). Senator Gareth Evans —The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: 357 (Question No. 252) Senator Sanders asked the Minister for the Arts, Sport, the Environment, Tourism and Territories, upon notice, on 24 February 1988: (1) Will the Minister provide the following statistics on the kangaroo slaughter for the calendar years 1986 and 1987, on a State by State basis: (a) commercial kill figures for New South Wales (NSW), Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia and Tasmania; (b) non-commercial kill figures for NSW, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia and Tasmania; (c) estimates of the illegal kill figures for NSW, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia and Tasmania; (d) the number of kangaroo skins originating from NSW, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania and Western Australia used on the domestic market; (e) the number of kangaroo skins originating from all culling States which were processed and utilised in the domestic trade in Victoria; (f) details of the amount of kangaroo meat originating from each State, except Victoria, which is sold within the State where the meat was killed; (g) details of the amount of interstate kangaroo meat imported into Victoria sold on the pet food market, (both canned and raw); and (h) details of the amount of kangaroo meat sold for human consumption in South Australia and Western Australia. (2) Will the Minister provide a summary of present interstate import/export licensing requirements on a State by State basis, including methods of collation and record holding. (3) Will the Minister detail by name how State and Federal Government Departments, statutory and advisory authorities are involved in the management, licensing, inspection and control of the kangaroo industry. (4) Would the Minister advise if there is a central collection point for all of the above statistics. Senator Richardson —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: (1) (a) and (b) See attached Table 1. (c) Any estimate of illegal activity would be speculative. (d) to (h) These are matters of State responsibility and the questions will be referred direct to the States for their attention and, if appropriate, direct reply. (2) As for 1 (d) to (h) above. (3) At the Commonwealth level the Australian National Parks and Wildlife Service (ANPWS) is responsible for administration of the Wildlife Protection (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Act 1982. The Department of Primary Industries and Energy is responsible for inspection of export kangaroo meat and the Australian Customs Service for export verification and barrier enforcement. As far as State departments and authorities are concerned, this aspect will be referred as for (1) (d) to (h) above. (4) ANPWS collects statistics on population trends, harvests and exports for kangaroos exported in accordance with the requirements of the Wildlife Protection (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Act 1982. There is no central collection point for the other statistics requested. Table 1 COMMERCIAL KANGAROO HARVEST STATISTICS AND PERMITTED NON-COMMERCIAL HARVESTS FOR COMMERCIAL EXPORT SPECIES IN 1986 AND 1987* Queensland (a) Commercial Red kangaroo Eastern Grey kangaroo Euro Whiptail wallaby 1986 ... 289,526 957,621 69,919 26,445 1987 ... 365,138 1,231,889 65,441 9,498 (b) Non-commercial 1986 ... 3,486 80,111 3,233 (i) 1987 ... 630 6,286 816 60 New South Wales (a) Commercial Red kangaroo Eastern Grey kangaroo Western Grey kangaroo Euro 1986 ... 263,046 127,024 54,439 . . 1987 ... 270,467 140,061 62,926 . . (b) Non-commercial 1986 (ii) ... . . 17,582 . . 60 1987 ... 2,219 31,676 6,071 2,380 South Australia (a) Commercial Red kangaroo Eastern Grey kangaroo Western Grey kangaroo Euro 1986 ... 112,789 . . 9,987 6,147 1987 ... 100,507 . . 14,849 9,167 (b) Non-commercial 1986 ... 1,393 29 11,679 356 1987 ... 1,128 . . 10,059 175 Western Australia (a) Commercial Red kangaroo Western Grey kangaroo Euro 1986 ... 153,655 37,019 3,955 1987 ... 150,036 39,812 (iii) (b) Non-commercial 1986 ... n.a. 256 n.a. 1987 ... n.a. 106 (iii) Tasmania (a) Commercial Bennett's wallaby Rufous wallaby 1986 ... 33,000 27,000 1987 ... (iii) (iii) (b) Non-commercial 1986 ... 349,000 352,000 1987 ... (iii) (iii) (*) As provided by State wildlife authorities. (i) Species figure not separately available. (ii) Non-commercial permitted take in non-commercial zone only. (iii) No Commonwealth approval for management program under the Wildlife Protection (Regulation of Exports and Imports) Act 1982. (Question No. 255) Senator Jenkins asked the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy, upon notice, on 22 February 1988: (1) Can the Minister provide documentation on the B-Tech program originating from United States (US) authorities which insists that our beef herds must be free of tuberculosis (TB) and brucellosis. (2) What documentation can the Minister provide giving evidence of any deadline set by the US Government for the brucellosis and TB eradication program within Australia. (3) What funds were allocated and spent on the B-Tech program by the Federal Government from 1 January 1980 to 30 December 1987. (4) What funds were received from a beef producer levy to finance the B-Tech program during the same period. Senator Cook —The Minister for Primary Industries and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) No. The United States Authorities have never provided to Australia, documents which insist that our beef herds must be free from tuberculosis and brucellosis. (2) Deadlines for the National Brucellosis and Tuberculosis Eradication Campaign are set by Australia. The United States Government has not attempted to set deadlines for the Australian campaign. (3) The following amounts were allocated and spent by the Commonwealth during the financial years 1979/80 to 1986/87 inclusive, and during the period 1 July 1987 to 31 December 1987 inclusive: Allocation Expenditure $ $ Industry share of operational expenditure payable from the National Cattle Disease Eradication Trust Account ... 194,865,000 190,831,131 Commonwealth share of cost of compensation and additional assistance measures payable from Commonwealth appropriations ... 87,280,000 79,571,290 282,145,000 270,402,421 I would like to advise the honourable Senator that the information is not available for the precise period he requested as Commonwealth records for previous years are only available on a financial year basis. (4) Funds received during the same period from beef producer levies, i.e. livestock slaughter levy and livestock export charge, amounted to $198,142,487 for the purposes of the BTEC program. (Question No. 258) Senator Crichton-Browne asked the Minister for the Arts, Sport, the Environment, Tourism and Territories, upon notice, on 15 March 1988: (1) What constructions have been built or are planned to be built on national parkland in the Australian Capital Territory commencing from the beginning of 1985 (not including constructions valued at less than $5000). (2) Who built these constructions. (3) What is the purpose of these constructions. Senator Richardson —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: I am advised by the National Capital Development Commission that: (1) and (3) Works commenced since 1985 John Knight Memorial Park Development of water play areas and provide lighting to select areas of this important park North Curtin Horse Holding Paddocks Provision of needed agistment paddocks Black Mountain Peninsula Electricity supply to toilets Lake Ginninderra Parklands To meet recreational demands and improve scenic value Canberra Nature Park Erosion and fire control works Tharwa Village Hillside regeneration and erosion control works Uriarra Crossing To provide additional beach and picnic areas Pine Island to Casuarina Sands walking track To provide recreation and scenic experience of the Murrumbidgee River North Cotter (Sherwood Forest) Forward planting of area prior to establishment of camping facilities North Lyneham ridge Forward planting of fuel wood plantation Lake Burley Griffin foreshore development Provide power to the irrigation system Murrumbidgee River To provide a landscape Park setting for recreation and conservation along the river Stromlo Forest Erection of toilet and change rooms to meet increased usage of forest Pine Island reserve To upgrade facilities to cater for increased usage Commonwealth Gardens To upgrade the area including the amphitheatre to cater for increased usage National Capital Open Space System (NCOSS) Upgrading of major tourist facilities at Cotter Reserve, Cotter Pool, Laurel Camp including interpretation signs Riverview Camping area Forward planting prior to establishment of camping facilities Mount Ainslie lookout Upgrading of car parking, paving and signage Woods Reserve Provision of additional picnic and camping facilities Tourist Drives in A.C.T. Provision of laybys and signage of tourist drives Cotter/Casuarina Sands Replacement of toilet block and upgrading of children's playground and maintenance depot Point Hut Picnic area Construction of ponds and upgrading of recreation areas Bulls Head Upgrading of access road car parking and planting Equestrian Trails On-going development of Metropolitan and National trail equestrian system Black Mountain Provision of walking tracks and interpretive signage Murrumbidgee River lookout Provision of walking tracks, lookout and interpretive signage Stromlo Trail Bike area Extension and upgrading of trail bike area Arawang Horse Holding Paddocks Upgrade of needed agistment paddocks Namadgi National Park Provision of signs and parking areas Molonglo River Provision of water ski facilities Commonwealth Park Construction of Stage 88-a Bicentennial Gift to the people of Canberra Orroral Picnic area and camping ground Upgrading of car park, landscaping and toilet facilities Camp Birrogai Construction of General Purpose Hall, House and replacement of dormitory block Yarramundi Reach Construction of Exhibition and office buildings-National Museum of Australia Yarralumla Construction of Water Police Boatshed Lanyon Provision of public toilets and upgrading of area Bowen Park Construction of a jetty from which model boats area launched Mount Pleasant Upgrading of the memorial on Mount Pleasant Works Planned Parliamentary Zone To progressively improve the landscaping in the Parliamentary zone Weston Park Relocation of access road and improved parking Lennox Gardens Further development of Lennox Gardens Pine Island Provision of water supply, irrigation system, toilet block and car parking Pine Island to Point Hut walking track To provide recreation and scenic experience of the Murrumbidgee River Murrumbidgee River forward planting Further revegetation works along the Murrumbidgee River and Lanyon Hill Cotter/Casuarina Sands Upgrading of access road, car parking, drainage and irrigation improvements Stromlo Forest Development of picnic and recreation facilities Cork Oak Plantation Additional tree planting Farrer's Grave Provision of informal parking, walking track and information signs Equestrian Trails Ongoing development of metropolitan equestrian system Bulls Head Development of a picnic area and toilet block Sites of Significance Conservation works on sites of significance Murrumbidgee River-Smiths Road Control of parking, fencing and restoration of eroded areas Mount Ainslie/Majura Development of walking tracks, soil erosion and planting Kambah Pool Sealing of access road and parking area together with soil erosion works (2) The National Capital Development Commission was and will be responsible for the construction of the above projects. (Question No. 269) Senator Archer asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, upon notice, on 18 March 1988: (1) What consultants have been engaged by the Australian International Development Assistance Bureau to carry out consultancy work during the calendar year 1987 under each of the Public Service provisions that enable engagement of outside assistance/advice. (2) For what purpose was each consultant engaged. (3) What was the payment to each consultant. Senator Gareth Evans —The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) During calendar year 1987 the Australian International Development Assistance Bureau engaged 136 contractors to provide services over varying periods, including those of a consultant nature. The following schedule lists all contractors engaged during 1987, together with a brief description of the purpose for which the services were required, and the value of the contract as at 31 March 1988. AIDAB: CONSULTANTS ENGAGED DURING CALENDAR YEAR 1987 Consultant Purpose Financial Limitation ACIAR Multi-Country: Forage Research and Development Program ... 280,000 ACIL Australia Pty Ltd Burma: Mandalay Dairy Development Project: Technical Advisory Committee ... 41,470 Aiken, J. Vanuatu-Finance Services ... 4,030 Airport Consulting & Construction Australia Pty Ltd Tonga: Fua'amoto Airport Design Study ... 270,000 Anutech Pty Ltd National Centre for Development Studies Core Program2,550,000 Arawang Information Bureau Thailand: Lignite Mines Project Review ... 6,500 ASPECT Computing Pty Ltd Computer Programming and Computer Systems Design Services: `Student' Feasibility Study ... 13,000 Australian Customs Service Papua New Guinea: Assistance to PNG Branch of Customs and Excise ... 3,334,500 Australian Government Analytical Laboratories of the Department of Science Quality Assurance and Technical Advisory Services for the Food Aid Program ... 150,000 Australian Groundwater Consultants Pty Ltd Western Samoa: Rural Water Supply Phase 3 ... 20,000 Australian Hydrogeologists International Pty Ltd Kenya: Magarini Settlement Project Review Mission ... 56,000 Australian Mineral Development Laboratories Burma: Mining Assistance Program: Bawdwin Mine Project ... 1,015,525 Australian Mineral Development Laboratories Burma: Mining Industry Assistance Program: DGSE Services: Drilling Services Project ... 27,504 Australian Mineral Development Laboratories Burma: Mining Industry Assistance Program DGSE Services: Laboratory Services Project ... 76,482 Australian Wool Corporation China: Australia-China Wool Storehouse ... 1,288,000 Brash, E. Review of Assistance to the University of the South Pacific ... 6,500 Bridge Consulting Office Services at Pacific Region Team ... 9,000 Cameron McNamara Pty Ltd Vanuatu: Review Study of the Public Works Department ... 105,000 Canberra College of Advanced Education PNG: Community Teachers College Lecturers Training Program ... 360,000 Cardno & Davies Australia Pty Ltd Papua New Guinea: Hagen-Bayer-Ruti Road Feasibility Study ... 348,000 Cardno & Davies Australia Pty Ltd Western Samoa: Technical Assistance for the design and documentation of the Le Mata Pass Road Project ... 43,000 Centre for Development Studies Flinders University of South Australia Western Samoa: ADAC in Orientation and Study Skills9,999 Chan, E. Distance Education-South Pacific ... 10,000 W. Chaffer & Sons Pty Ltd China: Leather Processing Technology Project ... 17,000 CSIRO China: Lanzhou Water Desalination Project ... 950,000 Computer People Pty Ltd Computer Programming and Computer Design Services: ADP Standards Documentation ... 32,950 Computer Power Pty Ltd Computer Programming and Computer Systems Design Services ... 61,540 Computer Power Pty Ltd `Moneyman' Feasibility Study ... 20,135 Connell, S. M. Vanuatu: Evaluation of the Rural Water Supply Program ... 11,200 Coopers & Lybrand W. D. Scott PNG: Waterboard Appraisal ... 10,000 CSIRO China: Poultry Project ... 4,115,000 Dawe, L. School Curricula-Maths, Western Samoa ... 6,400 Department of Defence and Department of Transport Solomon Islands: 1987 Hydrographic Survey Project ... 1,830,000 Department of Employment, Education and Training China: Education Initiatives Project ... 1,700,000 Department of Science ASEAN-Australia Microelectronics Design Project ... 800,000 Econsult Management Consultants China: Tianjin Blood Project Review Mission ... 22,500 English, R. Solomon Islands-Academic Master Plan for S.I. College of Higher Education ... 4,000 Fisk, E. Economic advice relating to Pacific Island countries ... 20,000 Gazzard Sheldon and Rosenberg Pty Ltd Solomon Islands: Architectural Services for Secondary Schools Program ... 1,300,000 GEO Instruments Pty Ltd Thailand: Sirotem Instrument Training ... 22,000 Gillies, D. I. Burma: Mandalay Dairy Development Project: Technical Advisory Committee ... 33,320 Haberkorn, G. Documentation Phase of an Aid Donor Sector Study ... 26,000 Hassall & Associates Pty Ltd PNG: Coffee Rust and Rehabilitation Appraisal ... 22,500 Hepworth, A. School Curricula-Social Science, Western Samoa ... 6,400 Hastings, J. D. Assessment of NGO Project reports ... 11,250 Hammond, J. Solomon Islands-English Review ... 2,800 Hancock, G. Review of Assistance to the University of the South Pacific ... 6,800 Hancock, G. Solomon Islands-Academic Master Plan for S.I. College of Higher Education ... 9,000 Iles, D. & Riley, P. Review of English in South Pacific countries ... 3,100 J.J.P. Geotechnical Engineering Pty Ltd Thailand: Appraisal of Phase 2 of the Lignite Mines Development Project ... 16,000 Judell Platt, Thomas & Associates Tonga-Waste Treatment and Disposal, Desiccated Coconut Factory ... 25,539 Katlib Services Library Cataloguing Services ... 15,000 Kemp, J. Distance Education-South Pacific ... 1,000 Knight, J. Review of Assistance to the University of the South Pacific ... 3,030 Knight, J. English Language Review ... 28,200 W. Lawrence & Associates Office Services at Pacific Regional Team ... 10,800 W. Lawrence & Associates Office Services at Pacific Regional Team ... 3,500 Liveware Computing Services Computer Programming and Computer Systems Design Services ... 40,000 Lloyd, I. Vanuatu-Matevulu High School, Terms of Reference 14,400 Lloyd, I. Tuvalu-Motufoua High School & Western Samoa-Broadcasting Department ... 9,000 Lobban, T. Distance education-South Pacific ... 1,000 Luminis Pty Ltd Philippines: Agriculture Sector Study ... 20,000 Mapstone, A. South Pacific-English Literature Review ... 600 Matthews, H. Burma: Mandalay Dairy Development Project: Technical Advisory Committee ... 38,207 Martin, C. M. China: Lingling Citrus Development Phase II ... 23,500 Maunsell & Partners Pty Ltd China: Beijing-Tianjin-Tanggu Expressway Project ... 830 MacDonald Wagner Pty Ltd Burma: Grain Cleaning Equipment Study ... 17,500 McGowan International Pty Ltd Project Preparation and Monitoring Documentation ... 31,000 McGowan International Pty Ltd PNG: Corrective Institutions Services ... 106,000 McGowan International Pty Ltd Fiji: Yalavou Rural Development Project ... 700,000 McGowan International Pty Ltd Western Samoa-Beef Study ... 19,500 McInnis, P. Solomon Islands-Livestock Development ... 19,000 Merz & McLellan Cook Islands: Aitutaki Village Electricity Network Study29,000 Michael Elliot & Associates Solomon Islands-Cyclone Reconstruction ... 15,000 MPW Rural Development Pty Ltd Philippines: Agricultural Marketing and Extension Course309,000 MPW Rural Development Pty Ltd Philippines: Planning Mission for the Northern Samar Integrated Rural Development Project ... 17,500 MPW Australia Livestock Sector Review Multi-Country ... 15,000 R. J. Nairn & Partners Pty Ltd China: Transport Sector Study ... 29,000 Neilson Associates Pty Ltd China: Liaoning Urban Studies Project ... 313,000 Nguyen, T. PNG: Economic Briefs ... 12,600 Overseas Projects Corporation of Victoria Limited Thailand: Provincial Towns Water Supply Project Prefeasibility Study ... 13,000 Overseas Projects Corporation of Victoria Ltd Indonesia: Short Australian Development Assistance Course in Sewerage and Sanitation ... 62,000 Overseas Projects Corporation of Victoria PNG: Land Data Verification Project ... 865,000 Pak Poy Kneebone Pty Ltd Tonga: Public Works Study ... 58,497 Peat Marwick Solomon Islands-Tourism Marketing ... 20,000 Peggie, Mr I. ASEAN-Food Handling Project Review ... 30,000 F. Piquemal's Office Services Office Services at Pacific Regional Team ... 13,800 Pagecraft Publishing Pty Ltd Editing of Reports on the China: Dongmen State Forest Farm Eucalypt Afforestation Project Review, and Burma Village Water Supply Project Evaluation ... 10,000 Pitt Wittenoom and Associates Indonesia Review of the Balitvet Project ... 24,750 Price Waterhouse Urwick Solomon Islands-Tourism Training ... 20,000 Quinlan, B. Western Samoa Technical Institute-Technical assistance ... 1,500 Ralph, D. Review of Assistance to the University of the South Pacific ... 5,500 Rawlinson, R. Review of Assistance to the University of the South Pacific ... 7,200 Redecon Australia Pty Ltd Burma: Thazi Grain Silo Complex Study ... 110,150 Riedel & Byrne Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd Tonga: Development of Nafanua Harbour ... 250,000 Riedel & Byrne Fiji-Levuka Project, Ports Engineer ... 20,672 Robertson Research Australia Indonesia: Geological Mapping Project ... 21,000 Robinson, T. School Curricula-English, Western Samoa ... 5,400 Ruzicka, L. T. Bangladesh: Third Population and Family Health Project ... 30,000 Rynevela, S. Media/Journalism Services ... 15,343 Sagric International Pty Ltd Vanuatu-Computer Based Land Data System ... 13,000 W. D. Scott International Development Consultants Solomon Islands: Teacher Education Project ... 3,500,000 W. D Scott International Development Consultants Botswana: In-Country Management Course ... 40,000 SCP Fisheries Australia Pty Ltd Fiji-Proposed improvement to Levuka Project, Project Economist ... 20,000 SCP Fisheries Australia Pty Ltd Fiji-Levuka Project, Financial Analyst ... 20,000 SCP Fisheries Consultants Australia Pty Ltd Tuvalu-Fisheries Project ... 20,169 Scriven, B. Distance Education-South Pacific ... 1,000 Seifert, G. W. Philippines: Adviser to Philippines Department of Agriculture ... 49,000 Shedden Pacific Pty Ltd PNG: Land Evaluation and Demarcation Project ... 722,500 Sinclair Knight and Partners Nuie-Port consultancy ... 9,235 Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation Laos: Heavy Plant Maintenance Project-Phase II Extension ... 2,396,000 Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation Laos: Lao-Australian Irrigation Project ... 1,117,000 Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation PNG: Lae Flood Mitigation Study ... 40,000 Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation Fiji-Cyclone Rehabilitation ... 24,000 Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation Western Samoa-Public Works Department ... 22,469 Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation Engineering advice-Roger Dickson ... 12,500 Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation Kiribati-Housing Improvement ... 15,200 Snowy Mountains Engineering Corporation Western Samoa-Appraisal Broadcasting Transmitter13,500 Soil Conservation Service of N.S.W. China: Study Tour by Chinese Soil Conservation Officials ... 31,000 Technical Writing Services Editing of Reports on Indonesia-Australia Concrete and Steel Bridges Review, and Indonesia-Australia Geological Project Review ... 8,000 G. C. Thompson Associates Philippines: Appraisal of the Natural Resources Management Development Project ... 3,010 D. E. & E. M. Tribe Consultants Represent AIDAB at USP University Grants Committee ... 38,000 Trippett Allan & Associates Pty Ltd Maldives: Gan Airport Rehabilitation Project ... 41,500 Tropical Resource Management Pty Ltd Philippines: Agriculture Sector Study ... 14,000 Uniquest Limited University of Queensland China: Yunnan Livestock and Pastures Project Review/Evaluation ... 17,000 Unisearch Limited (University of New South Wales) China: Beijing Secondary School English Language Teacher Training Centre Project, Stage 1 ... 445,000 Unisearch (University of New South Wales) China: Beijing Secondary School English Language Teacher Training Centre ... 2,537,141 University of New South Wales Mauritius: Primary Health Care ... 40,000 University of New South Wales Mauritius: Health Services Development Project ... 825,000 University of New South Wales 1987 Chemistry Research Techniques Course ... 72,000 University of Sydney Thailand: English Language Intensive Course for Overseas Students (ELICOS) 1987 ... 259,000 University of Queensland Thailand: Prince of Songkla University Project: Phase II ... 520,000 White, V. Distance Education-South Pacific ... 1,000 Wings Secretarial Service Office Services at Pacific Regional Team ... 15,700 Withers & Associates Laos: Design/Appraisal of Phase II Lao-Australian Irrigation Project ... 26,400 Zubrzycki, J. Media/Journalism Services ... 17,050 (Question No. 275) Senator Macklin asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, upon notice, on 22 March 1988: (a) Can the Minister supply the names of Ministers who have visited the United States (US) since 25 February 1987 and the dates of those visits. (b) What cities or parts of the US in the case of each visit, did the Ministers visit? (c) What were the names of Administration officials and members of Congress whom the Ministers contacted and what was the purpose of the meetings. Senator Gareth Evans —The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (NB. The information provided below excludes meetings with non-Administration officials or Members of Congress e.g. State Governors. It also excludes meetings with Administration officials and Members of Congress contacted in the course of receptions, dinners and so on.) (1) (a) Senator Ryan, Minister for Education, 5-12 March 1987 (b) New York, Boston, Washington D.C. (c) Representative James Jeffords, ranking minority member of the House Education subcommittee Senator Barbara Mikulski, Member of Senate Education subcommittee Rep Augustus F. Hawkins, Chairman, House Education and Labor Committee Dr Mark Blitz, Associate Director, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs Mr Herwald Morton, Director, Office of East Asian and Pacific Affairs Senator Robert T. Stafford, ranking minority member of the Senate Education subcommittee Hon. William J. Bennett, Secretary of Education Senator Richard Shelby Rep Patricia Shroeder Rep Claudine Schneider Hon. Alan Keyes, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Organisation Affairs, Department of State Mrs Shannon Sorzano, Aide to the Secretary of Education Purpose of meetings: to exchange information and views regarding education policies and priorities and to discuss the role of women in democratic decision making and other leadership issues. (2) (a) Hon. Lionel Bowen, Deputy Prime Minister and Attorney-General, 4-10 April 1987 (b) Washington D.C. (c) Hon. Edwin Meese III, Attorney-General Mr Arnold I. Burns, Deputy Attorney-General Mr Stephen S. Trott, Associate Attorney-General Judge William H. Webster, Director, FBI Mr William F. Weld, Assistant Attorney-General (Criminal Division) Mr Craig Coy, Senior Assistant to Mr Meese Mr Oliver B. Revell, Executive Assistant Director Investigations, FBI Mr Gerald Hilsher, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Law Enforcement, Dept of Treasury Mr Jonathan Rusch, Acting Director, Office of Financial Enforcement, Dept of Treasury U.S. State and Justice Officials on Extradition Congressman William J. Hughes, Chairman, House Subcommittee on Crime Mr Paul Stevens, Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs Congressman Robert W. Kastermeier, Chairman, House Subcommittee, Courts, Civil Liberties and Administration of Justice Mr Charles Fried, Solicitor-General Mr John C. Lawn, Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration Mr Ronald L. Gainer, Deputy Associate Attorney-General Purpose of meetings: to discuss law enforcement matters and the National Crime Authority and to reinforce at a senior level Australia's position on current major issues. (3) (a) John Dawkins, Minister for Trade, 18 May-3 June 1987 (b) San Francisco, Boston, Nashville, New York, Washington D.C. (c) Secretary of Commerce, Baldridge United States Trade Representative, Clayton Yeutter U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, R. Lyng Congressman Bill Frenzel, House Ways and Means Committee Frank Carlucci, Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs Dan Crippin, Deputy Assistant to the President Senator Bob Packwood, Ranking Minority Member Senate House Committee Senator Claiborne Pell, Chairman, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Congressman Rostenkowski, Chairman, House Ways and Means Committee Senator Tom Harkin, Member Senate Agriculture and Senate Appropriations Committees Secretary of State George Shultz Treasury Secretary James Baker III Senator Jay Rockefeller, Senate Finance Committee Member Senator Lugar, Ranking Minority Member of Senate Agriculture Committee Senator Spark Matsunaga, Member, Senate Finance Committee Senator Lloyd Bensten, Chairman, Senate Finance Committee Purpose of Meetings: To convey Australian concerns at the direction of U.S. Trade and Agriculture policies. Specific issues raised were U.S. Agricultural subsidies, EEP, the Trade Bill, GATT and Uruguay Round negotiations, Cairns Group Meetings, the OECD Ministerial Meetings, Australia's large Trade deficit with the U.S. and bilateral foreign relations matters. (4) (a) Hon. Michael Duffy, Minister for Trade Negotiations, 11-18 September 1987. (b) San Francisco, Washington D.C. (c) Congressman Ed Jenkins, Member, Committees on Ways and Means and Budget Congressman Thomas Downey, Member, House Committee on Ways and Means Congressman John Duncan, Ranking Minority Member House Committee on Ways and Means Congressman Sam Gibbons, Chairman House Subcommittee on Trade Senator William Roth, Member, Senate Finance Committee and Ranking Member Joint Economic Committee U.S. Trade Representative, Clayton Yeutter Congressman E. De La Garza, Chairman House Committee on Agriculture Congressman Don Bonker, Chairman House Subcommittee on International Economic Policy and Trade A/g Commerce Secretary Bruce Smart Senator John Chafee Congressman Don Pease Congressman Tom Foley, House Majority Leader and Member House Budget Committee Congressman Bill Frenzel, Member House Committee on Ways and Means Agriculture Secretary, Richard Lyng Deputy Secretary of State, John Whitehead Hon Allen Wallis, Under Secretary for Economic Affairs, State Department Hon Peter Myers, Deputy Secretary, Dept of Agriculture Mr William Piez, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, Dept of State Purpose of Meetings: To convey Australia's concerns on US Trade Legislation, to discuss the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade negotiations and other Bilateral Trade and Agriculture issues. (5) (a) Honourable Paul Keating, Treasurer, 30 September-4 October 1987. (b) New York (c) None. Purely a private sector visit. (6) (a) Honourable Robert Hawke, Prime Minister, 9-11 October 1987 (b) San Diego, San Francisco (c) Admiral Davis, Commander, Surface Force, Pacific Secretary of State, George Shultz Purpose of Meetings: To discuss a number of bilateral and international issues including Trade, Disarmament, South Pacific Developments and other areas of mutual interest. (7) (a) Senator Button, Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce, 10-21 October 1987. (b) San Francisco, New York, Washington DC. (c) Dr Michael Czinkota, U.S. Department of Commerce Mr Bruce Smart, Acting Secretary of Department of Commerce Mr Verity, Secretary, Department of Commerce Congresswoman Claudine Schneider, Co-chairperson, Congressional Caucus on Competitiveness Senator Jeff Bingaman, Chairman, Senate Democratic Working Group on Economic Competitiveness Dr John Gibbons, Director, Office of Technology Assessment Dr William Graham, Science Adviser to the President Purposes of Meetings: To discuss U.S. Industry Competitiveness and to present Australia's views on the Trade Bill Debate and other Science and Technology policy matters. (8) (a) Senator Ryan, Special Minister of State, 6-19 November 1987 (b) New York, Washington DC (c) Dr Thomas Kelly, Deputy Administrator, Drug Enforcement Administration Dr James Hoobler, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of International Narcotics matters, Department of State Dr Mark Cannon, and Dr Ron Trowbridge, Director (International Division) Commission on the Bicentennial of the U.S. Constitution Dr Fred Colgan, Senior Staff Member (Drug Abuse Policy), Office of Policy Development Mr Richard Bissell, Assistant Administrator, and Mr Joseph Esposito, Senior Policy Adviser on Narcotics, Bureau of Program and Policy Coordination Representative Patricia Schroeder Purpose of Meetings: To discuss Drug Abuse, Bio-Ethics, the Handling of the Bicentenary of the U.S. Constitution and Womens issues. (9) (a) Honourable Bill Hayden, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, 15-20 December 1987 (b) Honolulu (c) Admiral Hays-C-IN-C US Pacific Command and Senior CINPAC Staff Rear Admiral Vasey Rear Admiral Reynolds, Commander Submarine Force, U.S. Pacific Fleet. Purpose of Meetings: Discuss the full range of political and security issues in the Pacific region and maintaining freedom of navigation in the Persian Gulf. (10) (a) Honourable Brian Howe, Minister for Social Security, 2-15 January 1988 (b) Chicago, Madison, Wisconsin, Boston, New York, Princeton, Treton, Washington DC (c) Honourable Ann Dore McLaughlin, Secretary of Labor Ms Dolores Battle, Administrator of the Job Training Programs, Department of Labor Ms Carolyn M. Gadding, Director, Unemployment Insurance Services, Department of Labor Larry Thompson, Government Accounting Office John Hambor, Social Security Administration Honourable Jose S. Sorzano, Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Latin America, National Security Council Mrs Shannon Sorzano, Special Assistant to the Secretary of Education Dr Robert Helms, Assistant Secretary, Planning and Evaluation, Department of Health and Human Services Mr Chris Hankin, Acting Deputy Under Secretary for International Relations, Department of Labor Purpose of Meetings: To examine U.S. initiatives to find employment for Social Security beneficiaries and to exchange information regarding Social Security and family support programs. (11) (a) Senator Evans, Minister for Transport and Communications, 21-24 January 1988 (b) Washington DC (c) Honourable James H. Burnley IV, Secretary for Transportation Honourable Diana Lady Dougan, U.S. Coordinator and Director, Bureau of International Communications and Information Policy, Department of State Senator Thad Cochran Representative Lee H. Hamilton Honourable Michael H. Armacost, Under Secretary for Political Affairs, State Department Purpose of Meetings: To discuss Bilateral Aviation matters (12) (a) Honourable Lionel Bowen, Deputy Prime Minister and Attorney-General (b) Houston (c) None. Attended Houston International Festival honouring Australia's bicentenary and addressed a business and investment seminar on Australia. (13) (a) Honourable Peter Morris, Minister for Transport and Communications Support and Minister Assisting the Treasurer (b) Washington DC (c) None. The Minister led the Australian delegation to the IMF/IBRD interim and development Committee meetings. (Question No. 278) Senator Macklin asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, upon notice, on 22 March 1988: What is the annual cost to the Federal Government of maintaining the Congressional Liaison Unit, based at Australia's Washington Embassy in terms of (a) salaries; (b) residential accommodation; and (c) any other costs associated with the Unit which the Government considers relevant. Senator Gareth Evans —The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (a) Salaries and Allowances For the Minister (Congressional Liaison) Salary ... $60,688 Overseas Living Allow- ance ... $22,854 Representation Allow- ance ... $12,940 $96,482 For Locally Engaged Staff Salaries ... $90,539 $90,539 Total ... $187,021 (b) Residential Accommodation Rent ... $56,757 Upkeep Allowance ... $17,881 $74,638 (c) Other Costs ... $43,400 Indicative costing for other overheads, including air fares, removal of effects, utilities, other entitlements, based on global averages Total ... $305,059 Certain costs are initially expressed in $US before conversion to $A at the applicable exchange rate on 30 March, 1988 and are subject to exchange rate Fluctuations. Given the close inter-relationship between the work of the Minister (Congressional Liaison) and the overall Public Affairs work of our missions in the United States, the Minister (Congressional Liaison) has assumed responsibility for coordinating public affairs activities. The locally engaged staff of the Congressional Liaison Unit contribute to these tasks just as other members of the embassy work with the Congressional Liaison Unit in dealing with the Congress. (Question No. 279) Senator Macklin asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, upon notice, on 22 March 1988: Has the Australian Government considered permitting representatives of the Australian Government to testify before United States Congressional Committees which are considering legislation which would affect Australia's commercial and foreign interests; if not, why not. Senator Gareth Evans —The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: The Government has considered permitting its representatives to testify before United States Congressional Committees but has concluded that there is no reason to depart from its present practice of dealing directly with individual members of committees and their staffs. The rules of the House of Representatives and the Senate of the United States Congress do not preclude representatives of foreign governments testifying before a committee of the Congress. The issue of testimony by foreigners is decided by individual committee chairpersons and the practice varies between committees. On the whole, however, testimony by foreigners is unusual. Apart from the doubtful utility of giving testimony, given the accessibility of committee members and their staffs to oral and written representations, an important contributing factor is whether Australian ministers or officials should place themselves under the jurisdiction of a foreign parliamentary body. I understand that this question also makes members of the Congress reluctant to ask for or agree to testimony by foreigners. (Question No. 280) Senator Jenkins asked the Minister for the Arts, Sport, the Environment, Tourism and Territories, upon notice, on 23 March 1988: (1) With respect to the `important ministerial undertakings' and `ministerial undertakings the implementation of which is overdue' as outlined in the statement by the Chairman of the Senate Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances (Hansard, 17 December 1987), is it a fact that 6 of 14 overdue matters, including the only 2 matters still outstanding from 1985, and 2 matters from 1986, relate to Australian Capital Territory (ACT) legislation. (2) Is the Minister concerned that 7 out of the 19 more recent matters dealt with by the Committee also relate to the ACT. (3) Will the Minister review the legislative drafting resources made available for ACT matters, to ensure that matters: (a) already called to attention by the Senate Committee; and (b) awaiting drafting attention and, therefore, not yet before the Committee, are dealt with expeditiously. (4) Will the Minister ensure that the serious and long-standing backlog in ACT legislation is rectified prior to self-government; if not, why not. Senator Richardson —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: (1) The figures quoted were given as at 17 December 1987. Three of the amendments have now been made. My colleague Mr Punch has written to the Committee regarding all of the undertakings. (2) The Senate Standing Committee frequently writes to the Minister responsible for the ACT about Ordinances recently tabled. ACT Ordinances are numerous and cover a wide range of community activities, essentially the same as those regulated by Acts, Regulations and By-laws in the States. This type of legislation frequently deals with matters which relate to the Committee's interests or concerns. Accordingly, the number of recent ministerial undertakings to the Committee relating to ACT matters is not, of itself alone, a particular cause for concern. I have, however, directed my Department to ensure that, once an undertaking of general application is given, it will be applied in the making of relevant legislation in the future. (3) Mr Punch has recently written to the Committee concerning arrangements for implementing ministerial undertakings given to the Committee. I do not wish to pre-empt the Committee's consideration of that letter. In respect of the projects awaiting drafting, see answer (4). (4) My Department has recently increased the resources devoted to ACT legislation and this is already producing results. I believe that current resource levels strike an appropriate balance between other resource needs and the urgency of legislative projects. However, as Ordinances vary from simple and straightforward amendments to complex new initiatives, a simple count of Ordinances made is of little value in assessing progress. (Question No. 287) Senator Puplick asked the Minister for the Arts, Sport, the Environment, Tourism and Territories, upon notice, on 12 April 1988: What steps has the Minister taken to safeguard the banks of the Gordon River in Tasmania from damage caused by high speed pleasure craft which ply that river. Senator Richardson —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: A report by consultants employed by the Tasmanian Government in 1986 confirmed that erosion of the banks of the Gordon River was caused by the excessive wake generated by tourist boats. Limitations on the tourist operations were suggested to counter the problem. The Tasmanian Government acted quickly to rationalise tourist operations. There is now one tour operator, running half the number of boats while still carrying 80% of the number of passengers. Engine speeds on the boats are recorded to ensure that new, low, speed limits are complied with. The Commonwealth Government recently engaged consultants to monitor the erosion of the banks and develop rehabilitation methods, and to design and test boat hull designs that will minimise the height of waves caused by boats. The Tasmanian World Heritage Area Ministerial Council, involving Commonwealth and State Ministers, will be able to use the findings of the consultancies in taking further management decisions to protect the river banks. (Question No. 298) Senator Puplick asked the Minister representing the Attorney-General, upon notice, on 26 April 1988: (1) Is it intended that Australia will become party to the Rome (Neighbouring Rights) Convention 1961; if so, when. (2) Is the Federal Government considering accession to any other International Conventions dealing with the protection of the rights of performing artists. Senator Tate —The Attorney-General has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) Yes, it is intended that Australia accede to the International Convention for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organisations 1961 (`Rome Convention'). Australia already meets the Convention's requirements for phonograms (ie records and tapes). Following the Copyright Law Review Committee's report on performers' protection, the Government has approved amendments to the Copyright Act 1968 providing performers with rights and remedies in relation to their performances. The amendments will meet the requirements of the Rome Convention for performers' protection. Amendments are also proposed to be made to the Copyright (International Protection) Regulations that will meet the Rome Convention criteria for foreign broadcasts. When these amendments have been brought into operation the Government will therefore be able to accede to the Rome Convention. (2) The Rome Convention is the only Convention of which my Department is aware that deals specifically with the rights of performing artists in respect of their performances. (Question No. 308) Senator Archer asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 10 May 1988. (1) Since 11 July 1987, how many Senior Executive Service (SES) officers have become unattached within the Minister's area of portfolio responsibility, including statutory authorities, and of these: (a) how many were placed in substantive positions at their own level; (b) how many were placed in substantive positions below their substantive level; (c) how many were offered early retirement packages; (d) what was the mean value of the packages; (e) what was the age structure of these officers. (2) Since July 1987 how many administrative support and other scientific and technical officers became unattached, and of these: (a) how many were placed in substantive positions at their own level; (b) how many were placed in substantive positions below their substantive level; (c) how many were offered early retirement packages; (d) what was the mean value of the packages; and (e) what was the age structure of these officers. (3) What programs of retraining and redeployment are in place to usefully employ those permanent officers still on the unattached, supernumerary and redundancy list. (4) What has been the net saving in SES and other positions in each portfolio/statutory authority since 11 July 1987. Senator Walsh —The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: There were no officers within the Treasurer's portfolio that became unattached as a result of the Machinery of Government changes on 11 July 1987. (Question No. 315) Senator Archer asked the Minister representing the Minister for Social Security, upon notice, on 10 May 1988: (1) Since 11 July 1987, how many Senior Executive Service (SES) officers have become unattached within the Minister's area of portfolio responsibility, including statutory authorities, and of these: (a) how many were placed in substantive positions at their own level; (b) how many were placed in substantive positions below their substantive level; (c) how many were offered early retirement packages; (d) what was the mean value of the packages; (e) what was the age structure of these officers. (2) Since July 1987 how many administrative support and other scientific and technical officers became unattached, and of these: (a) how many were placed in substantive positions at their own level; (b) how many were placed in substantive positions below their substantive level; (c) how many were offered early retirement packages; (d) what was the mean value of the packages; and (e) what was the age structure of these officers. (3) What programs of retraining and redeployment are in place to usefully employ those permanent officers still on the unattached, supernumerary and redundancy list. (4) What has been the net saving in SES and other positions in each portfolio/statutory authority since 11 July 1987. Senator Bolkus —The Minister for Social Security has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) Since 11 July 1987, two SES officers in the portfolio have been unattached; one from the Department of Social Security and one from the Office of the Commissioner for Employees' Compensation. These unattachments were unrelated to the Machinery of Government changes announced on 11 July 1987. (2) Since the 1987 Budget, 103 officers have been unattached (for a variety of reasons, mainly leave in excess of 12 weeks). These were unrelated to the Machinery of Government changes. (3) The Department ensures the efficient use of staff by providing on-the-job training supplemented by attendance at Departmental and external training courses. Unattached staff temporarily perform the duties of other positions or are employed on productive duties. (4) There has been a net reduction of 4 SES positions since 11 July 1987. This variation results from a review of the Departmental SES structure and other changes in connection with the Child Support Scheme and the introduction of COMCARE. Net changes to the Department's allocation for other staff total +97.4 ASL, since the introduction of new programs such as the Family Allowance Supplement and the Child Support Scheme. These variations were not connected with the Machinery of Government changes announced on 11 July 1987. (Question No. 319) Senator Archer asked the Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 10 May 1988: (1) Since 11 July 1987, how many Senior Executive Service (SES) officers have become unattached within the Minister's area of portfolio responsibility, including statutory authorities, and of these: (a) how many were placed in substantive positions at their own level; (b) how many were placed in substantive positions below their substantive level; (c) how many were offered early retirement packages; (d) what was the mean value of the packages; (e) what was the age structure of these officers. (2) Since July 1987 how many administrative support and other scientific and technical officers became unattached, and of these: (a) how many were placed in substantive positions at their own level; (b) how many were placed in substantive positions below their substantive level; (c) how many were offered early retirement packages; (d) what was the mean value of the packages; and (e) what was the age structure of these officers. (3) What programs of retraining and redeployment are in place to usefully employ those permanent officers still on the unattached, supernumerary and redundancy list. (4) What has been the net saving in SES and other positions in each portfolio/statutory authority since 11 July 1987. Senator Reynolds —The Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) As at 1 June 1988, no Senior Executive Service (SES) officers have become unattached within the Minister's area of portfolio responsibility. (2) No support staff have become unattached as a result of changed SES officer arrangements. Since July 1987, 78 administrative support staff have become unattached in the Department as a whole. Of these, (a) none have been placed in substantive positions at their own level in the Department because they are on long term leave, working with other agencies or awaiting completion of establishment action or transfer of other staff; (b) none were placed in substantive positions below their substantive level; (c) none were offered early retirement packages; (d) not applicable; and (e) not applicable. (3) It has not been necessary to consider programs of retraining and redeployment, as all officers have been usefully employed, or were not available for placement. (4) As at 1 June 1988, there have been no net savings in SES positions since 11 July 1987. However, a restructure of the Department's SES, recently approved by the Department of Finance, will reduce the SES average staffing level (ASL) by two in a full year. There have been no net savings for other positions in the Department since 1 July 1987. (Question No. 322) Senator Archer asked the Minister representing the Treasurer, upon notice, on 17 May 1988: (1) Are recent press reports that the Reserve Bank proposes to increase the bank's asset backing or gearing ratios from about 6 per cent to 8 per cent through an increase in share holder funds accurate. (2) What is the estimate of the increase in overall cost to the banks of holding home loans under the proposal which is apparently based on a risk assessment that gives only a 50 per cent risk weight to mortgage loans. (3) What effect has this proposal had on the proposed sale of the Defence Service Home Loans portfolio. Senator Walsh —The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) The Reserve Bank currently measures the capital adequacy of banks using the simple ``capital-to-total assets'' ratio. Banks generally operate with capital ratios above 6 per cent measured on that basis. In the light of changes in the character of banking, in Australia and overseas countries, the Reserve Bank has been developing a new approach to the measurement of capital adequacy to take better account of the risk profile of a bank's business, including off-balance sheet activities. The Bank outlined its proposed risk ratio approach to the measurement of capital adequacy in a discussion paper circulated to banks in January 1988. At this stage no decision has been made about specific capital ratio standards under the proposed risk ratio framework. However, the Bank has given its endorsement to a proposal by the Basle Supervisors' Committee, based in the Bank for International Settlements, suggesting the adoption of a minimum standard ratio of ``Capital to weighted risk assets'' of 8 per cent as a basis for international convergence of capital standards. (2) Under the proposed new capital adequacy framework, bank loans to private sector clients will generally be measured at their gross values and receive a 100 per cent weight. The proposed 50 per cent weight for owner-occupied housing fully secured against mortgages should work towards lower capital costs to banks in providing housing loans. (3) There have been some press reports that this proposal has adversely affected the sale of the portfolio. However, I understand that it has not been considered to be a problem by the majority of interested parties. (Question No. 327) Senator Archer asked the Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce, upon notice, on 17 May 1988: (1) Is the Export Market Development Grant Scheme currently in deficit. (2) Were payments under the scheme suspended until 1 July 1988. (3) Have the Bureau of Industry Economics and Price Waterhouse submitted their report on the scheme. (4) Will the Minister release the report to the public. Senator Button —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: (1) As of 31 May 1988 the Australian Trade Commission has on hand claims under the Export Market Development Grants Scheme, which will result in a payout of $30 million and of this amount $16 million will be paid by 30 June 1988, leaving only necessary work in progress on hand with an approximate value of $14 million. (2) On 20 March 1988 the Government announced supplementary funding for the EMDG Scheme of $64 million. Payments under the Scheme were only suspended for a period of approximately three weeks. (3) Yes. (4) The report of the Bureau of Industry Economics will be published shortly. The Price Waterhouse report was commissioned by AUSTRADE for its own use and questions about access to the report should be directed to AUSTRADE. (Question No. 334) Senator Archer asked the Minister representing the Minister for Science, Customs and Small Business, upon notice, on 19 May 1988: (1) What is the present status of research into, and implementation of, controls of the plant, Echium (Paterson's curse). (2) Has there been any release of biological control agents; if so, where and when. Senator Button —The Minister for Science, Customs and Small Business has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) Research into control of Echium (Paterson's curse) has identified eight potential control agents, and the next stage of the program would be field releases in Australia to test the efficacy of these agents. Successful agents would establish themselves in the field and be self-sustaining. Prospects for a substantial degree of control appear to be good. CSIRO cannot proceed to this next stage of the program because it continues to be restrained from doing so by a court order. (2) Field placements of biological control agents against Echium were made at Braidwood, Jugiong and Blighty (all in NSW) in June 1980. These placements were caged when the court action began, and they were subsequently aborted. No other releases have been made. (Question No. 349) Senator Archer asked the Minister representing the Minister for Community Services and Health, upon notice, on 23 May 1988: What expenditures, by quarter, on computer hardware and software have been made by the Minister's Department over the last 3 years to March 1988. Senator Cook —The Minister for Community Services and Health has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: The following table indicates the expenditure by quarter by each of the former Departments of Community Services (DCS) and Health (DOH) until their amalgamation in July 1987, and expenditure by the new Department since that date. Quarter ended Former DCS Hardware Software Former DOH Hardware Software Total Hardware Software March 1985 ... Nil Nil 883,516 1,044,399 883,516 1,044,399 June 1985 ... 59,992 Nil 2,664,406 1,166,293 2,724,398 1,166,293 September 1985 ... Nil 255 97,285 412,438 97,285 412,693 December 1985 ... 5,190 35 420,846 1,038,976 426,036 1,039,011 March 1986 ... 47,010 6,895 484,997 998,521 532,007 1,005,416 June 1986 ... 2,429,991 308,235 2,391,185 1,518,070 4,821,176 1,826,305 September 1986 ... 10,833 84,625 32,587 494,096 43,420 578,721 December 1986 ... 65,432 42,150 2,520,763 1,002,563 2,586,195 1,044,713 March 1987 ... 180,363 106,040 527,804 1,221,723 708,167 1,327,763 June 1987 ... 434,009 25,519 1,711,799 2,755,172 2,145,808 2,780,691 September 1987 ... 151,497 10,106 December 1987 ... 789,956 761,681 March 1988 ... 5,955,678 458,289 (Question No. 358) Senator Archer asked the Minister representing the Minister for Science, Customs and Small Business, upon notice, on 24 May 1988: (1) What is the Government doing in view of the January/February 1988 edition of Search concerning the ageing of the research work force, particularly within the CSIRO, in Australian (sic) to ensure long term provision of high quality research and development in Australia (sic) through: (a) continuous recruitment of younger scientists, including those from abroad; (b) improving job prospects for younger scientists once engaged; (c) encouraging school leavers to embark upon academic training courses leading to a career in research; and (d) halting the brain drain from Australia of graduates with superior qualifications in science and technology. Senator Button —The Minister for Science, Customs and Small Business has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (a) In April this year a high level committee of CSIRO scientists met to examine ways to attract high calibre scientists, especially expatriate scientists, to Australia in general and CSIRO in particular. The committee has not yet concluded its deliberations but there is emerging generally the view that, while the low salaries of scientists in Australia militates against ready recruitment, major factors are related to working conditions and lifestyle. A major requirement for attracting and holding high quality younger scientists in Australia is the provision of `core funding' for research, at a level that enables them to be provided with the resources to undertake substantial longer term research work. The recently implemented restructuring of CSIRO and the accompanying greater autonomy of the research institutes will also allow greater flexibility and the wider use of attractive extra-salary elements such as consultancies, directorships, joint appointments (e.g. with industry, universities). (b) A major consequence of programs of Government departments such as Industry, Technology and Commerce, and Employment, Education and Training is the expansion of current job prospects by the creation of opportunities for scientists and engineers in Australian industry. Programs include the R and D taxation concession, GIRD scheme, teaching companies scheme, national industry extension services scheme, management and investment companies, the offsets program, and the registration of research agencies. There are also more focused schemes such as the national space program, computer hardware and software assistance, and the heavy engineering assistance scheme. (c) Government and non-Government agencies alike are now more active than they used to be in promoting the excitement of science and the rewards of a scientific career. CSIRO has a number of programs aimed at stimulating the interest of young people in science. Some examples are: CSIRO science education centres (in conjunction with States), the Double Helix Club, the women in science program, the Scifile current awareness booklet, laboratory open days and participation in Expo 88 and in the travelling Bicentennial Exhibition. (d) In the March-April 1988 edition of Search (the edition referred to in the question) Dr Glenn Pure of the Science and Technology Policy Branch of DITAC reports `a clear and consistent net influx of scientists and engineers into Australia, essentially in all disciplines, over the past 4 financial years'. Dr Pure refers to the Occupational Share System for Skilled Migration and its uses in areas where shortages do currently exist such as electronic engineering, computing and production engineering. He comments also on the role of the education system in ensuring the provision of people with science and engineering skills. The Government's current review of higher education funding has this as one of its broad objectives. (Question No. 387) Senator Powell asked the Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce, upon notice, on 31 May 1988: Have any plants been patented in Australia; if so, what types of plants have been patented, and how many Australian patents have been issued since 1970. Senator Button —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: Since 1970 the Australian Patent Office has granted 17 patents for plants. The patent number and types of plants for which patents have been granted are as listed below: Patent No. Type of Plant 532235 Cymbidium Orchid 541449 Miniature Rose 544191 Miniature Rose 559120 Kangaroo Paw 561229 Kangaroo Paw 561230 Kangaroo Paw 561231 Kangaroo Paw 562349 Fuchsia 564356 Acalypha Shrub 567071 Hybrid Tea Rose 568384 Chrysanthemum 569226 Peach Tree 569227 Peach Tree 569228 Peach Tree 569229 Peach Tree 569241 Hybrid Tea Rose 572041 Zoysia Grass (Question No. 418) Senator Archer asked the Minister representing the Minister for Community Services and Health, upon notice, on 1 June 1988: How many cases of listeriosis were detected in Australia annually over the last five years and how many, if any, persons died from listeriosis over the same period. Senator Cook —The Minister for Community Services and Health has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: The overall incidence of listeriosis is unknown in Australia. A sporadic outbreak of intrauterine listeriosis was reported in April 1984 by the Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne with six neonatal cases occurring in the preceeding fifteen months against a background incidence of one case per year observed at that hospital. Two of the six infants died; one was stillborn and the other died of overwhelming sepsis. Senator Button —On 19 May 1988 (Hansard, page 2514), Senator Vallentine asked me a question about the transport of spent fuel from the Lucas Heights Research Laboratories to the United States. I now have more information on the contract cost, the destination of the spent fuel and safety measures at that destination. The answers to those parts of the honourable senator's question are as follows: The costs of transporting and reprocessing the spent fuel elements will be about $A3 million. The value of the recovered uranium and of the special transport cask (which is owned by ANSTO and will save leasing fees for future shipments) is about $A2.5 million. The net cost of the operation is therefore expected to be about $A0.5 million. The former Minister for Resources and Energy, Senator Evans, answered similar questions from the honourable senator on 6 May and 26 November 1986 and made it clear that the spent fuel would not be reprocessed at the Hanford nuclear reservation in Washington, contrary to Senator Vallentine's assertions. In accordance with the reprocessing contract with the US Department of Energy, the spent fuel will be delivered to either the Idaho Falls Chemical Reprocessing Plant, Idaho, or to the Savannah River Plant in South Carolina. The final decision on the facility used is at the discretion of the USDOE. All relevant safety guidelines will be observed whichever of the two is chosen. In relation to allegations about safety at Hanford, I am informed that the January-February 1988 edition of `Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists' discusses radioactive contamination during the first 20 years of operation of this establishment, which commenced operations in the 1940s. Much of the reported radioactive contamination arises from those early years when environmental protection standards were less stringent. The US Department of Energy has closed down many of the facilities. I reiterate, the spent fuel from Lucas Heights will be shipped in accordance with all US and Australian safety requirements, will be subject to stringent nuclear safeguards and will remain solely for peaceful use. Senator Button —On 2 June 1988 (Hansard, page 3455), Senator Bishop asked me the following question without notice: On the 16 May 1988 the Chairman of the Industry Research and Development Board, Mr Bill Kricker, issued a Press release announcing 10 discretionary grants for research and development by Australian companies. Is the Minister aware that one such grant of nearly half a million dollars was awarded to Rib Loc (Australia) Pty Ltd of South Australia to design and develop a pipeline renovation system. Is the Minister further aware that another Australian company, Danby Pty Ltd of Queensland, already operates successfully in this field and owns patents which cover the type of renovation envisaged by the half million dollar grant? Can the Minister explain why such duplication has occurred and what mechanism the Industry Research and Development Board uses to review its own decisions, particularly as Danby Pty Ltd received grants from the Board in 1985 and 1986 for the development of its system of pipeline renovation. The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: Decisions on discretionary grants are made by the Industry Research & Development Board. I have been informed by the Board that: (a) The Board was aware of the pipeline renovation system developed by Danby Pty Ltd at the time it made the decision to award the grant to Rib Loc (Australia) Ltd. (b) The system to be developed by Rib Loc is different to the system developed by Danby Pty Ltd. (c) Rib Loc has obtained international patent protection for the proposed process. (d) In assessing grant applications the Board relies on expert referees and its own extensive data base to avoid funding duplicated research and development projects. (Question No. 126) Senator Alston asked the Minister for Transport and Communications, upon notice, on 18 November 1987: (1) Under the relevant legislation, how much money was raised by the Commonwealth Government in relation to the sale of: (a) petrol, and (b) diesel fuel, in each of the financial years ending 30 June 1980 to 30 June 1987 inclusive. (2) In relation to the moneys raised by the Commonwealth Government in each of the respective financial years referred to in (1) above, how much money was applied each year towards: (a) revenue of the Commonwealth, and (b) road funding. Senator Gareth Evans —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: (1) Commonwealth excise duty collected on diesel fuel and petrol for automotive use and crude oil since 1980/81, has been: Diesel fuel and motor spirit pro- duct excise collections (net) Crude oil levy (a) Total $m $m $m 1980-81 877 3,022 3,899 1981-82 908 3,095 4,003 1982-83 1,239 3,430 4,669 1983-84 1,731 3,558 5,289 1984-85 2,033 4,133 6,166 1985-86 2,695 3,937 6,632 1986-87 4,439 2,024 6,463 (a) Although most petrol and automotive diesel consumed in Australia is derived from indigenous crude oil production, it is not possible to determine accurately the proportion of crude oil levy excise that would relate to petrol and automotive diesel. Note: Under the Import Parity Pricing Scheme, the 1986 fall in the international price of crude oil had the potential to severely erode general revenue raised by the crude oil levy excise, the Government decided to increase the excise component in the price of petrol and diesel in order to protect its revenue base. This adjustment was made in such a way as to preserve overall revenue neutrality, but resulted in a significantly higher level of petrol and diesel product excise collections in 1985-86 and 1986-87. (2) Commonwealth road grants to the States and Northern Territory, and expenditure on road and related works in the Australian Capital Territory, since 1980-81, have been as follows: COMMONWEALTH ROADS EXPENDITURE $m 1980-81 ... 647.8 1981-82 ... 700.4 1982-83 ... 870.5 1983-84 ... 1,215.5 1984-85 ... 1,270.2 1985-86 ... 1,280.8 1986-87 ... 1,282.9 Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics; Australian Customs Service; Budget Papers. (Question No. 320) Senator Archer asked the Minister representing the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, upon notice, on 10 May 1988: (1) Since 11 July 1987, how many Senior Executive Service (SES) officers have become unattached within the Minister's area of portfolio responsibility, including statutory authorities, and of these: (a) how many were placed in substantive positions at their own level; (b) how many were placed in substantive positions below their substantive level; (c) how many were offered early retirement packages; (d) what was the mean value of the packages; (e) what was the age structure of these officers. (2) Since July 1987 how many administrative support, other scientific and technical officers became unattached, and of these: (a) how many were placed in substantive positions at their own level; (b) how many were placed in substantive positions below their substantive level; (c) how many were offered early retirement packages; (d) what was the mean value of the packages; and (e) what was the age structure of these officers. (3) What programs of retraining and redeployment are in place to usefully employ those permanent officers still on the unattached, supernumerary and redundancy list. (4) What has been the net saving in SES and other positions in each portfolio/statutory authority since 11 July 1987. Senator Reynolds —The Minister for Veterans' Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) One (a) Nil; (b) Nil; (c) Nil; (d) Not Applicable; (e) 56 years. (2) 60 (a) 3; (b) 1: (c) Nil; (d) Not Applicable; (e) 21-62 years. (3) Officers are redeployed to work areas with backlogs, staff shortages and high volume intakes to alleviate the pressures in those areas and to undertake on the job training. (4) Nil Saving. Note: The above answer deals strictly with those officers of the Department who have become unattached in the technical sense of the term under the Public Service Act. Other SES officers, who were not unattached, have, however, been offered early retirement packages. To 30 June 1988 six (6) officers accepted such packages. The mean value of the packages was $55,412 and the age structure of those officers ranged from 39 to 57. (Question No. 326)) Senator Archer asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, upon notice, on 17 May 1988: (1) Were the recently publicised negotiations with New Zealand concerning the merger of Qantas and Air New Zealand part of Government endeavours to build strong Trans-Tasman companies that can compete in the international markets. (2) What progress has been made towards the development of a common trade practices policy. Senator Gareth Evans —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: (1) The arrangements under the Australia-New Zealand Closer Economic Relations Trade Agreement establish a predictable environment in which industries in both countries can take investment and planning decisions having regard to the wider trans-Tasman market. However, the CER Agreement represents only one aspect of the Australian Government's broader efforts to encourage internationally competitive industries. It is a matter for individual enterprises to pursue opportunities within the Australia-New Zealand market in line with commercial judgment. The recent discussions regarding a possible merger between Qantas, Australian Airlines and Air New Zealand were explanatory only and took place against the background of a rapidly changing world aviation scene, which is putting at risk the viability of national carriers operating in traditionally independent ways, and has forced airlines all around the world to cope with the challenges posed by the mega-carriers and the new competitive realities. There was however no agreement to merge the airlines, as several difficulties, such as the structural imbalance the merger would necessarily involve between Australian and New Zealand interests, were too formidable to justify it being pursued further at this time. Notwithstanding this, the discussions demonstrated that common booking arrangements between Qantas and Air New Zealand, and joint marketing and joint purchasing would benefit both airlines through lower costs and efficiency gains. A close commercial alliance would also give the two airlines much greater bargaining capacity both with other countries and the mega-carriers. The New Zealand Government is currently considering preliminary bids, by a number of interests, including Qantas, following approaches made by that Government inviting non-binding bids for the purchase of equity in Air New Zealand. (2) At the meeting between Australian and New Zealand Ministers on the Review of the Australia- New Zealand Closer Economic Relations Trade Agreement held in Christchurch on 20-21 June 1988 it was agreed that from 1 July 1990 when full free trade between the two countries is achieved, anti-dumping measures would no longer be applied in respect of goods originating in either member state, subject to the necessary amendments in both countries' competition laws. These amendments relate, inter alia, to misuse of market power or dominance where the conduct occurs in the other country and to extend the definition of market to apply to any market, not just the Australian or New Zealand markets. In addition, the Deputy Prime Ministers of both countries signed on 1 July 1988 a Memorandum of Understanding on Harmonisation of Business Law which establishes a program for consideration of harmonisation of Australian and New Zealand legislation in a number of areas including: consumer protection, particularly with respect to post-sale consumer protection, and consumer credit laws; mutual assistance between regulatory agencies in the adminisration and enforcement of business laws; further recognition and reciprocal enforcement of court decisions in each country, including enforcement of injunctions, orders for specific performance and revenue judgments. (Question No. 331) Senator Hill asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 17 May 1988: (1) How many Engineering Change Proposals (ECPs) has the Department of Defence made to the Australian Submarine Corporation (ASC) from 2 June 1987 to date. (2) How many ECPs have resulted in alterations to the (a) design; (b) specifications; or (c) construction methods of the submarines. (3) With respect to ECPs covered by (2) above of this question: (a) what was the nature of the change; (b) when was it (i) proposed, (ii) accepted, (iii) made; and (c) what was the (i) cost increase or (ii) cost reduction involved in making the change. (4) How many ECPs submitted to ASC have resulted in no changes, and of these: (a) what was the proposal in each case; and (b) what were the estimated or anticipated cost implications in each case. (5) What is the total cost in current dollars. (6) What is the total cost as a percentage of (a) the contract cost; and (b) the project cost of (i) ECPs proposed but not proceeded with and (ii) ECPs proceeded with. Senator Robert Ray —The Minister for Defence has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) As at 3 June 1988, none. Since the contract was signed on 3 June 1987 there have been two design development reviews (DDR) involving the Department and ASC. Arising principally from those DDRs, ASC has proposed 121 prospective ECPs for our consideration. Of these, 81 have been rejected and 40 remain under active consideration. (2) As at 3 June 1988: (a) None. (b) None. (c) None. (3) As at 3 June 1988 no ECPs are covered by question 2. The total estimated cost for preparation of the 40 ECPs under active consideration (see question (1)) amounts to $1.5m. (4) None of the 40 ECPs under active consideration had been adopted as at 3 June 1988. (5) As at 3 June 1988, only the preparation costs for the 40 ECPs under active consideration, estimated to be $1.5m, are involved. (6) As at 3 June 1988, no ECPs have been adopted. (Question No. 360) Senator Brownhill asked the Minister for Transport and Communications, upon notice, on 24 May 1988: (1) Has the Government a timetable for the introduction of ABC FM radio throughout Australia; if so, what is it; if not, why not. (2) When can the people of northern NSW expect an ABC FM station, given that such a service has been regarded as a priority by people in that area for some years, and such priority has also been given by the NSW State Advisory Council on the ABC. Senator Gareth Evans —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: (1) Yes. The Government has made the ABC FM stereo service available throughout Australia via the package of ABC services carried on the satellite. The Department of Transport and Communications is implementing a program to extend the terrestrial transmission of the ABC FM Stereo Service to various major population centres across the country. The establishment of transmission facilities for ABC FM stereo radio commenced in 1976; the network has progressively expanded under the first phase of the program to its current total of 39 transmitting stations. As funding and spectrum availability permits, a second phase of the program will introduce in-fill translators to service significant areas of deficient reception within the general coverage areas of existing main transmitters. The establishment of a further six (6) main transmitting stations is planned under the first phase of the program, but installation is being delayed because FM channel availability is being restricted by the presence of television stations using channels 3, 4 and 5 which overlap the frequency spectrum needed for FM radio. Transfer of these television stations to other channels is required before the additional ABC FM stereo stations can be established. In May 1986, my predecessor announced a timetable for the clearance of certain television transmissions from the spectrum required for the FM radio. The program for the installation of the additional ABC FM stereo transmitters is tied to this timetable. (2) Three high powered ABC FM stereo transmitters are planned to provide ABC FM coverage of the northern region of NSW, and they are presently expected to be constructed as follows: Upper Namoi (Mount Dowe)-1989-90 Grafton/Kempsey (Mount Moombil)-1990-91 Richmond/Tweed area-1990-91 Due to the difficult terrain in parts of the region, there will inevitably be areas that will not receive an adequate service from these new transmitters. Armidale is one such area, but it will receive an ABC FM stereo translator at the same time as the Upper Namoi transmitter is constructed. Other similar areas will be addressed as funding permits. (Question No. 393) Senator Colston asked the Minister for Home Affairs, upon notice, on 31 May 1988: In relation to travel undertaken on a Life Gold Pass or by use of severance travel (a) how are ``non-commercial purposes'' defined for the rules governing this type of travel; and (b) are former senators or members appointed to Commonwealth boards, corporations or agencies able to use this type of travel when travelling on duty for their particular organisations. Senator Robert Ray —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: (a) and (b) The Remuneration Tribunal has excluded travel for ``non-commercial purposes'' from its determination on Life Gold Pass and severance travel. Life Gold Pass and severance travel are provided to assist former members of the Parliament to attend functions and perform duties relating to their continued contribution to public life arising from their parliamentary service, and are not intended for use for travel in connection with service to any organisation. Travel costs for persons appointed to Commonwealth boards, corporations or agencies who are required to travel on duty for their particular organisations are met by those organisations. (Question No. 412) Senator Archer asked the Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs, upon notice, on 2 June 1988: (1) Is there any truth in the Melbourne Herald 29 April 1988 report that there is a possibility of immigrants coming into this country with a range of diseases, including tuberculosis, without medical screening because of recent legislation which ``protected their personal privacy''; if so, how did this situation arise? (2) Can the public be assured that no entries of immigrants will be permitted without medical clearance? Senator Reynolds —The Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) Australia's migration processing procedures ensure that all migrants and refugees settling in Australia are medically screened prior to migration. Those found to be suffering from diseases such as tuberculosis are refused admission or, if their compassionate or humanitarian claims upon Australia are very strong, rendered non-infective and granted an entry visa on an undertaking to report to health authorities after arrival for monitoring and follow up treatment. The recent legislation referred to in the Melbourne Herald of 29 April 1988 does not affect the requirement for pre-arrival medical screening of all intending migrants. The article referred to the Victorian health authorities' own discretionary arrangements to re-screen some categories of migrants and refugees after arrival. Arrangements are now in place for State health authorities to access immigrants' arrival details, facilitating re-screening at the authorities' discretion. (2) Yes. Other than citizens of New Zealand travelling on New Zealand passports who require no prior authority to enter Australia under the Trans Tasman travel arrangement, all migrants and refugees will continue to undergo detailed pre-departure medical screening and clearance. (Question No. 436) Senator Archer asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, upon notice, on 2 June 1988: In future negotiations with New Zealand on the Closer Economic Relations Program (a) what meetings are planned; (b) what issues are to be finalised; and (c) what timing has been set or is being considered for these stages. Senator Gareth Evans —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: (a) Australian and New Zealand Prime Ministers are to meet in Canberra in August to finalise arrangements which will open a new chapter in the development of the closer economic relationships between Australia and New Zealand. At a meeting in Christchurch on 20-21 June Australian and New Zealand Ministers agreed a comprehensive package of arrangements, including agreement to accelerate the implementation of full free trade in goods across the Tasman by 1 July 1990 and to extend the CER to trade in services. Ministers also concluded agreements on arrangements to facilitate trade and commerce within the single Australia-New Zealand market through increased harmonisation of business law, customs policies and procedures, technical barriers to trade and quarantine administration. Other agreements concluded covered the termination of anti-dumping measures within the single market from 1 July 1990 as well as the application of aspects of industry assistance policy impacting on trade between the two countries. The Australian delegation was led by Mr Michael Duffy who was accompanied by Mr John Kerin and Mr Barry Jones. The New Zealand side was led by Mr Mike Moore who was accompanied by Mr David Caygill and Mr Colin Moyle. (b) All elements of the package have been agreed between Ministers with the exception of some aspects of the trade in services protocol which are to be finalised before the Prime Ministers' meeting. The arrangement on industry assistance policies was signed by Ministers at the conclusion of the Christ-church meeting. The Memorandum of Understanding on Harmonisation of Business Law was signed by the Australian Deputy Prime Minister and Attorney-General and the New Zealand Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Justice on 1 July 1988. The arrangements relating to trade in services, acceleration, anti-dumping, quarantine, customs policies and procedures, and technical barriers to trade will enter into force on signature. (c) The protocol on acceleration and anti-dumping and the protocol on trade in services are to be signed by Prime Ministers at their meeting in August. Arrangements are being made for all other documents to be signed prior to the Prime Ministers' meeting. Senator Walsh —On 24 February 1988 (Hansard, page 550), Senator Chaney asked me, as Minister representing the Treasurer, the following question without notice: I refer the Minister to a report in today's Australian Financial Review to the effect that the Government's proposals for an upgraded tax file numbering system appear to have been deferred until after the New South Wales election. I ask: Is it true that the Treasurer has had the report on options of the Australian Taxation Office since the beginning of the year? I further ask: Is the system ready to be implemented and, if so, when will new procedures begin? The Treasurer has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: Preliminary papers were provided to me by the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) in December 1987. Substantial further work was subsequently undertaken by the ATO before the matter was ready to be considered by the Government in the context of the May Economic Statement. The Government's decision to implement an upgraded tax file numbering system was announced in that Statement and full details are contained in my Press Release of 25 May 1988. The first of the proposed uses is for employment purposes. Persons commencing employment with an employer from around November 1988 will have to quote their file number on a tax instalment declaration form. From April 1989, all persons in receipt of salary or wages will be required to fill in a new declaration which will include advice of their tax file number. Senator Walsh —On 27 April 1988 (Hansard, page 1965), Senator Calvert asked the Minister for the Arts, Sport, the Environment, Tourism and Territories, Senator Richardson, a question without notice concerning sales tax on film production. Senator Richardson undertook to refer the question to the Treasurer, who has provided the following information in answer to the honourable senator's question: It should be noted at the outset that there is no general sales tax on film production. What the honourable senator is apparently referring to is Sales Tax Ruling 2404 issued recently by the Commissioner of Taxation. I am aware that members of the advertising industry have a number of technical difficulties with the Ruling. These were discussed at a meeting of 27 April between representatives of the industry and officials of both the Taxation Office and the Treasury. The industry was invited by the Commissioner to forward to him by the end of June submissions detailing problems they see with the Ruling, and a number of submissions have now been received. The date of implementation of the ruling has been postponed pending the Commissioner's consideration of these submissions. In these circumstances, it would be premature to speculate just how particular activities may be affected, if at all, by the Ruling as eventually implemented. (Question No. 161) Senator Coates asked the Minister representing the Minister for Defence, upon notice, on 17 December 1987: (1) What is the total number of members of the Defence Force. (2) Why was the stockpile of .303 rifles as large as 100,000. (3) What has now happened to that stockpile. Senator Robert Ray —The Minister for Defence has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) The total number of permanent service personnel (including reserves on full time duty) at 31 May 1988 was 70,374. The number of reserves with training obligations at the same date was 27,621. (2) The rifles are an accumulation of weapons manufactured from 1914 to 1956 and have been stockpiled against a possible requirement for a significant expansion of the Defence Force. (3) The rifles are stored in Army depots throughout Australia awaiting disposal. The method of disposal is currently a matter for discussion between my Department and the Department of Administrative Services, which, under existing administrative arrangements, is responsible for their disposal. If the weapons are sold in Australia, purchasers will be required to comply with the relevant firearms legislation in the State concerned. The Government's guidelines on export of Defence equipment will be applied in the event of overseas sales. (Question No. 173) Senator Vallentine asked the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy, upon notice, on 18 December 1987: (1) What export contracts exist for Australian uranium as at 1 December 1987, and (a) who is the supplier; (b) who is the purchaser; (c) what quantity was involved; (d) what price was involved; and (e) what was the expected or contracted annual export quantity. (2) What are the conditions and restrictions applying to conversion and enrichment of Australian uranium for contracts in force as at 1 December 1987. (3) What contracts include provision for conversion and enrichment. (4) What quantity of Australian uranium is involved. (5) Where will that conversion and enrichment take place. Senator Cook —The Minister for Primary Industries and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) (a) and (b) Whilst all export contracts require the approval of the Government and are commercially confidential, Australian producers have publicly announced the following contracts: Energy Resources of Australia Ltd Belgium Synatom S.A. FR Germany Urangesellschaft RWE Saarberg-Interplan Uran GmbH Republic of Korea Korea Electric Power Corporation Japan Kansai Electric Power Co. Inc. Kyushu Electric Power Co. Inc. Shikoku Electric Power Co. Inc. Sweden OKG U.S.A. Wisconsin Electric Power Co. Virginia Electric Power Co. American Electric Power Service Corporation Pennsylvania Power & Light Co. Florida Power & Light Co. South Carolina Electric Gas Co. Maine Yankee Atomic Power Co. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation Queensland Mines Ltd France Electricite de France Export shipments under this contract have been completed. Finland TVO Japan Kyushu Electric Power Co. Shikoku Electric Power Co. Olympic Dam Marketing Sweden Swedish State Power Board United Kingdom Central Electricity Generating Board Republic of Korea Korea Electric Power Corporation. (c) Details of quantities of U308 supplied under each contract are, in general, commercial-in-confidence information. However, information on certain contract quantities was provided by Senator Walsh in 1984 in response to a similar question on notice (Senate Hansard of 28 February 1984, p97-98). Since that date the following contract quantities have also been made publicly available: Energy Resources of Australia Ltd Belgium Synatom SA Additional 500 tonnes USA American Electric Power Service Corporation 2500st base tonnage Pennsylvania Power & Light Co. Minimum 750st Olympic Dam Marketing Pty Ltd UK Central Electricity Generating Board 2,500 tonnes Republic of Korea Korea Electric Power Corporation Approximately 2,500 tonnes (d) The contract price is commercial-in-confidence information. (e) Individual contract quantities are commercial-in-confidence; however, Australian producers exported 3,795 tonnes of U308 in 1987. (2) The conditions and restriction applying to conversion and enrichment of Australian obligated nuclear material are as set out in Australia's bilateral nuclear safeguards agreements. Mr Hayden, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, described these conditions in answering a 1985 question on notice (No. 884) from Mr Maher. They include binding international treaty obligations that: Australian obligated nuclear material will not be diverted to military or nuclear explosive purposes nor used for research thereon; Australian obligated nuclear material and derived generations of nuclear material will be covered by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards to verify compliance with this; Fall-back safeguards will apply if at any stage NPT or IAEA safeguards ceased to operate; Prior Australian consent is required to the enrichment of Australian obligated nuclear material beyond 20% in the isotope U235, for the reprocessing of spent fuel derived from Australian obligated nuclear material, and for retransfer of Australian obligated nuclear material to another country; Adequate physical security to internationally agreed levels to prevent theft of nuclear material will be applied by importing countries; and Sanctions (enforceable if necessary by compulsory international arbitration) may be invoked by Australia if specified breaches occur. Australia's bilateral safeguards agreements are public documents published as part of the Australian Treaty Series. Copies are held in the Parliamentary Library. (3) Details of contracts are commercial-in- confidence information. (4) Quantities of uranium supplied under particular contracts are commercial-in-confidence information. (5) Subject to conversion and enrichment facilities being acceptable in respect of safeguards obligations attached to Australian obligated nuclear material the choice of facilities for these operations is for the buyer to decide. Conversion and enrichment can take place in any facility which provides these services provided that safeguards conditions set out in the bilateral agreement to which the nuclear material in question is subject are adhered to. (Question No. 216) Senator Sanders asked the Minister for the Arts, Sport, the Environment, Tourism and Territories, upon notice, on 19 February 1988: (1) Were there recent attempts by the International Whaling Commission (IWC) to stop Japan from killing 300 Minke whales in the Antarctic for so-called `scientific purposes'. (2) Has the United States (U.S.) Department of Commerce announced that it intends to sanction Japan by cutting the Japanese fishing quota in U.S. waters by fifty per cent and is considering restrictions on imports of Japanese fish products into the United States; if so, would the Australian Government be prepared to support the United States' efforts to stop Japan's `scientific' whaling, by similarly restricting the access of Japanese fishing vessels to Australian waters, until such time as Japan stops its whaling; if not, why not. Senator Richardson —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: (1) The International Whaling Commission (IWC) agreed in 1982 to a moratorium on all commercial whaling to begin in 1986. However Article VIII of the Convention under which the IWC operates makes provision for countries to take whales under special permit for research purposes. In March 1987, Japan submitted a proposal to the IWC for an annual take of 875 Antarctic whales (i.e. 825 Minke and 50 Sperm) under special research permits for at least the next 12 years. At the Annual Meeting of the IWC in June 1987 a resolution was passed recommending that Japan refrain from issuing such permits until the IWC Scientific Committee was able to resolve serious uncertainties identified in the proposal. Japan then submitted a new proposal for a kill of 300 minke whales in the 1987/88 whaling season. At an extraordinary meeting of the IWC's scientific Committee set up to review Japan's proposal there was strong opposition from the majority of scientists present. Subsequently the U.K. proposed, and Australia and Sweden seconded, a resolution recommending that Japan refrain from taking the whales. It was adopted by a majority of 19 for, 6 against and 2 abstentions (6 countries failed to vote). Despite this resolution Japan ordered its whaling vessels to Antarctica where they took 273 of the planned 300 whales in early 1988. (2) The United States has two legislative provisions for economic sanctions against countries `diminishing the effectiveness of the IWC'. The Packwood-Magnuson Amendment to the Fishery Conservation and Management Act provides for restriction of fishing allocations in the U.S.A. 200 mile fishing zone. The Pelly Amendment to the U.S. Fishermen's Protective Act provides for the prohibition of fisheries imports from offending countries. Certification of a country as `diminishing the effectiveness of the IWC' precedes consideration of sanctions against such countries. At the last session of the IWC (Bournemouth U.K., 1987), Australia worked closely with the U.S.A. to establish specific criteria for the issuance of special permits under Article VIII of the Convention. The successful adoption of these specific criteria by the IWC has now provided the U.S.A. with a clear basis upon which to certify and sanction, under the Packwood-Magnuson and Pelly amendments, nations such as Japan, whose scientific research programs do not meet the criteria set down. The U.S.A. certified Japan on 10 February 1988 and later announced that Japanese access to U.S.A. waters in 1988 (involving catches of 3000 tons of sea snails and 5000 tons of whiting) will be denied. All future Japanese fishing privileges will be denied until the situation is corrected. The U.S.A. decided not to restrict fisheries imports from Japan. Australia has no legislation similar to that used by the United States to impose sanctions on Japan. Australia considers the IWC to be the appropriate body for the international control of all whaling and the appropriate agency through which Australia should pursue international cooperation for the protection and conservation of all whales. Australia is an active member of the IWC and strongly supports the work of Australian scientists in the IWC Scientific Committee. (Question No. 256) Senator Jenkins asked the Minister representing the Minister for the Arts and Territories, upon notice, on 25 February 1988: (1) Does the Minister, through the A.C.T. Schools Authority, intend to proceed with the closure of schools in the A.C.T. (2) Is the Macquarie Primary School listed as being due for closure, if so, what provision does the Minister intend to make for school-age children, resident in Emu Ridge, who attend the Macquarie Primary School. (3) What is the estimated cost per child per annum to parents in the Emu Ridge area of sending their children to schools other than the Macquarie Primary School. (4) How many such parents are there. Senator Richardson —The Minister for the Arts and Territories has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1 to 4) The draft proposals published by the A.C.T. Schools Authority last November were intended for public debate and were subject to change. A number of changes have been made as a result of the consultative process. Eight primary schools proposed for amalgamation under the draft plan to reorganise school provision will remain open. Eight others will amalgamate into four: Pearce and Chifley on the Chifley site Downer and Watson on the Watson site Fisher and Waramanga on the Waramanga site Page and Scullin on the Scullin site. Woden Valley High School will close. Macquarie Primary School was nominated for closure in the draft plan. However, in the final analysis Macquarie Primary School has not been affected by the reorganisation and will not close. (Question No. 274) Senator Archer asked the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy, upon notice, on 22 March 1988: (1) What consultants have been engaged by your Department to carry out consultancy work during the calendar year 1987 under each of the Public Service provisions that enable engagement of outside assistance/advice. (2) For what purpose was each consultant engaged. (3) What was the payment to each consultant. Senator Cook —The Minister for Primary Industries and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) (2) (3) The National Rural Industry Training Committee Conduct rural counselling training course $15,340.00 Rural Development Centre University of New England Conduct Rural Australian Symposium $43,450.00 Coopers and Lybrand WD Scott Conduct review of Rural Adjustment Scheme $249,714.00 McGirr and Associates Pty Ltd Develop computer program $45,000.00 Kinhill Engineers Pty Ltd Review of Bass Strait Mass Balance/Royalty Computer Program $103,742.00 Reak Research Pty Ltd Survey on meat expenditure for meat promotion study $8,000.00 Dr B Griffiths Review final report on `An Evaluation of Wool Promotion in the US' $800.00 Centre for International Economics Research into the intersectoral effects of the EEC's Agricultural Policies and disseminate results internationally $26,970.00 Dr R Tyers Completion of specified solutions of the Grains/Livestock/Sugar Food Trade Model $3,500.00 EKANI Media skills training for NAOC speakers $750.00 Arthur Young Conduct review of office management systems $23,050.00 Allen Fox & Associates Advise of feral animal control techniques $19,800.00 MD Morgan Develop improvements to feral animal survey Techniques $5,750.00 Mr K. Kaney Develop exotic disease legislation $20,000.00 Dr R. Allen Advise on fisheries stock assessments $1,315.00 Australian Convention and Travel Service Pty Ltd Secretariat services for National Water Research Seminar $9,786.00 Mr A. Cummine Project management for publication for `Review 85: Water Resources and Water use' $16,721.00 Mr A. Cummine Prepare reports on water resources and water use $23,700.00 Mr R. Andrews Media consultant for National Soil Conservation Program $6,400.00 Messrs J. R. Quich & H. E. Booth Review of forestry research in Australia $23,135.00 Mr G. Sainty Prepare and publish book on Aquatic Weeds $38,500.00 Eckermann & Associates Feasibility study into computer system development $13,370.00 Stavern Holdings Technical Support Programming Services to Wang $82,000.00 O'Connell, Olds, Smith-Roberts & Wilson Pty Ltd Evaluation of Tender Specs New Equip/Strategic Issues $30,000.00 O'Connell, Olds, Smith-Roberts & Wilson Pty Ltd Consultancy Services for National Residues Database $50,000.00 CSA Programming Services for IFMS $140,000.00 Natural Software Programming work for AQIS $75,000.00 McGirr & Associates Programming Services on Pesticides $50,000.00 Microsolutions Develop Micro-Computer Systems $30,000.00 Stirling Electrical Undertake Computer and Electrical Cabling $70,000.00 Peter Harrison CDC Systems Programming & Configuration $5,000.00 Stephen Artis Computer People Prepare Operations Procedure Manual for CYBER $12,500.00 CSA Office Automation Trial $60,000.00 Better Dynamics NRS Software $1,100.00 Eckermann & Associates AAHQS Project $9,300.00 AMTEK Consulting Group Middle Management Development Program $3,600.00 Control Data Advanced Courses $11,700.00 Precision Communication Managing Meetings $3,304.00 Coopers & Lybrand Negotiation skills $2,300.00 Coopers & Lybrand Managing People $3,065.00 NIS Associates Client Liaison $3,800.00 AMTEK Consulting Group Middle Management Development Program $2,400.00 Precision Communication Managing Meetings $3,354.00 Coopers & Lybrand Negotiating skills $4,498.00 AMTEK Consulting Group Consulting/Management Fundamentals $2,940.00 Henry Price Effective Communication $1,780.00 Leonie Keighley Leadership in Management $6,796.00 Kate Wisdom Facilitator at Challenge Conference $2,400.00 Hawkins & Hudson Negotiation skills $9,414.00 H. Price & D. Bowak Facilitation Skills $2,800.00 Dr R. Banyer Develop Quarantine Training Modules $14,000.00 Image Media Services Senior Officers Media Awareness Training $3,235.00 Kate Wisdom Team Building Sessions $2,800.00 Tim Dalmau Management Development Program $18,007.00 Henry Price Management Conference Recall Day $1,400.00 Bob Poole Facilitate CSCD Management Conference $1,400.00 Bob Poole Facilitate HRB Management Conference $1,400.00 ASPECT Petroleum Exploration and Development Titles Database $4,200.00 ASPECT Minerals Resources and Trade Database $4,600.00 ASPECT Personnel System Enhancements $ 5,200.00 ASPECT Registry System Enhancements $ 4,500.00 Coopers and Lybrand WD Scott in association with Merz and McLellan and Partners Undertake an evaluation of, and prepare a report on, the market opportunities for contract energy management services in Australia $ 60,000.00 Australian Writers' Services Provide Editorial Assistance to the Australia Energy Research Newsletter $ 15,400.00 WW Fisheries Southern Bluefin Tuna Length Monitoring $108,850.00 Dr Radway Allen Participate in South East Trawl Stock Assessment Workshop $ 1,000.00 Dr Helene Marsk Aerial survey to determine distribution and abundance of dugongs in the Torres Strait $ 53,818.00 Professor Lee Anderson Undertake work concerning management options in the South East Trawl $ 8,000.00 K. J. Armstrong Supervision of drilling contract $ 3,426.00 D. J. Belford Cataloguing of Palaeontological collection $ 1,200.00 C. Mock Compilation of data on mineral commodities $ 8,032.00 Geophysical Serv. Inc. Provide specialist training in airgun array maintenance $ 8,250.00 C. L. Chencau Conduct 2-day seminar $ 1,950.00 Dr M. Middleton Attend planning meeting for Canning Basin Survey $ 1,633.55 Prof. C. Ollier Specialist in regolith studies $ 1,140.00 H. Grenfell Compile biostratigraphic chart $ 2,860.15 B. Harrold Provide advice on chemical thermo dynamics software $ 1,900.00 Prof. J. Hayes Provide advice on organic geochemistry techniques $ 3,300.00 Geophysical Serv. Inc. Provide specialist advice in the field of seismic energy source $ 8,402.40 M. J. Doherty & Co. Provide specialist advice on damage stability-RV Rig Seismic $ 350.00 Technician Provide specialist electronic advice on seismic amplifiers $ 2,400.00 Information Electronics Provide specialist electronic advice on seismic amplifiers $ 1,910.13 Teledyne Ind. Internat. Provide expertise in the repair of seismic cable sections $ 19,400.00 M. Munschy Provide advice on Kerguelen Plateau $ 1,050.00 C. J. Jenkins Marine sedimentologist $ 2,550.00 Dr S. E. Ho Characterisation of hydrothermal fluid $ 870.00 Dr Gibbs Present course on structural interpretation of seismic data $ 8,000.00 R. Valenta Specialist to assist with Kakadu Regional Study $ 8,084.35 Dr C. Delor Provide specialist advice on antarctic fieldwork $ 1,161.00 J. Perry Provide editorial expertise $ 8,000.00 Dr W. D. Parkinson Present paper at Australian geomagnetic reference field seminar $ 754.00 Prof. H. L. Barnes Specialist lecturer on fossil fuels $ 400.00 Dr S. Jaireth Review of thermo dynamic data for platinum group elements $ 4,000.00 Dr R. Le Maitre Database specialist $ 170.00 J. C. Roddick Provide geochronology expertise $ 1,400.00 Liveware Computer Serv. Development of geochemical manipulation programs $ 19,200.00 B. Wyatt Update airborne database $ 7,000.00 J. Rees Software engineering $ 25,000.00 C. Ballhouse Mafic/ultramafic rocks $ 30,000.00 K. Branston Write an inspection manual for fresh fruits and vegetables $ 2,000.00 C. R. Eckermann Feasibility study-Charging Policy Branch computing $ 16,847.50 Dr Egerton Review of scientific basis of decision making in formulating Animal Quarantine Decisions $ 17,815.10 Howe and Associates Consultancy to investigate problems concerning goats on Torrens Island Animal Quarantine Station $ 770.00 Materials Handling Bureau Consultancy on packing of fruit $ 17,842.00 Arthur Young Review of effectiveness of security arrangements for control of export meat $ 32,648.20 Coopers and Lybrand Consultancy on Compliance 1987/88 $ 8,068.00 Japan-Aust. Word Services Consultant Training in Japanese $ 960.00 Dr J. A. Brooks Provide advice in relation to the Report on the Special Investigation into Exports $ 4,120.00 Tony Richardson Conduct a three-day workshop on job design $ 1,750.00 Viv Read Conduct a three-day workshop on job design $ 2,600.00 (Question No. 283) Senator Sheil asked the Minister representing the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, upon notice, on 25 March 1988: (1) Has the Minister's attention been drawn to the formation by the Northern Land Council of a commercial arm called the Northern Aboriginal Investment Corporation Pty Ltd which involves unfair trade practices. (2) Has the Northern Land Council (N.L.C.) a statutory authority to process exploration and mining proposals on behalf of the traditional Aboriginal landowners. (3) Is the N.L.C. prohibited from competing with exploration and mining industries but is its new company actively interfering from a favoured position; if so, is this a blatant conflict of interest. (4) Will the Minister take action to remove the Northern Aboriginal Investment Corporation Pty Ltd from this area as instead of allowing the N.L.C. to act as an honest broker it has turned the N.L.C. into an aggressive competitor with unfair access to detailed confidential commercial and geological information without itself lifting a finger. (5) Are the two organisations not at arm's length because they have the same directors and the same address and the Investment Corporation enters into Joint Ventures but refuses to name the companies. Senator Tate —The Minister for Aboriginal Affairs has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) I am aware of the existence of the Northern Aboriginal Investment Corporation (N.A.I.C.). (2) Yes. (3) The N.L.C. may not itself engage in exploration or mining activity but a properly established Aboriginal organisation may do so if it has the consent of the Northern Territory Minister for Mines and Energy to negotiate with the Land Council. I understand that N.A.I.C. has not yet obtained the required consent. The question of conflict of interest is therefore hypothetical. (4) The company may not negotiate with the Land Council for an exploration licence without the consent of the Northern Territory Minister for Mines and Energy. Therefore the matter is one for him to determine. (5) I am informed that the two organisations do not have the same Directors. I am not aware of any Joint Ventures that the company has entered into. If they do exist they may not necessarily relate to mining on Aboriginal land. (Question No. 309) Senator Archer asked the Minister for Finance, upon notice, on 10 May 1988: (1) Since 11 July 1987, how many Senior Executive Service (SES) officers have become unattached within Minister's area of portfolio responsibility, including statutory authorities, and of these: (a) how many were placed in substantive positions at their own level; (b) how many were placed in substantive positions below their substantive level; (c) how many were offered early retirement packages; (d) what was the mean value of the packages; (e) what was the age structure of these officers. (2) Since July 1987 how many administrative support other scientific and technical officers became unattached, and of these: (a) how many were placed in substantive positions at their own level; (b) how many were placed in substantive positions below their substantive level; (c) how many were offered early retirement packages; (d) what was the mean value of the packages; and (e) what was the age structure of these officers. (3) What programs of retraining and redeployment are in place to usefully employ those permanent officers still on the unattached, supernumerary and redundancy list. (4) What has been the net saving in SES and other positions in each portfolio/statutory authority since 11 July 1987. Senator Walsh —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: (1) Department of Finance (DOF) Two officers were unattached during the period. (a) Nil (b) Nil (c) Nil (d) Not applicable (e) 46 and 41 Office of the Superannuation Fund Investment Trust (OSFIT) Nil (a) Not applicable (b) Not applicable (c) Not applicable (d) Not applicable (e) Not applicable Australian Government Retirement Benefits Office (AGRBO) Nil (a) Not applicable (b) Not applicable (c) Not applicable (d) Not applicable (e) Not applicable (2) DOF Twenty-eight (28) officers were unattached during the period (a) Nil (b) Nil (c) Nil (d) Not applicable (e) The ages of the officers at the time of unattachment are as follows age 21-3 age 22-1 age 23-1 age 24-2 age 26-4 age 27-1 age 28-1 age 31-1 age 32-2 age 33-3 age 34-1 age 35-1 age 36-1 age 37-1 age 40-2 age 42-1 age 45-1 age 55-1 OSFIT Nil (a) Not applicable (b) Not applicable (c) Not applicable (d) Not applicable (e) Not applicable AGRBO Eight (8) officers were unattached during the period (a) Nil (b) Nil (c) Nil (d) Not applicable (e) The ages of the officers at the time of unattachment are as follows age 19-1 age 20-1 age 22-2 age 24-2 age 39-1 age 55-1 (3) There is no requirement for retraining or redeployment of these officers because of the reasons leading to their unattachment. The reasons are: maternity leave leave without pay employment with other government organisations, or international organisations study leave (4) There has been no savings in positions in the SES and other positions in the portfolio/statutory authorities since 11 July 1987 for the reasons outlined in (3) above. (Question No. 337) Senator MacGibbon asked the Minister representing the Minister for Employment, Education and Training, upon notice, on 19 May 1988: (1) What is the total number and value of grants made under the Australian Research Grants Scheme, in the years 1987 and 1988 to date. (2) What projects were approved for funding and, in each case, what was the size of the grant. (3) Have any of the individuals or groups who gained a grant in the financial year 1987-88 been in receipt of a grant under this scheme previously; if so, (a) what are their names; (b) for which project did they receive a grant this time, and previously; and (c) what is/was the size of the grant this time, and previously. (4) Are any of the recipients of the grants Social Security pensioners; if so, how many. (5) How many of the recipients who are Social Security pensioners have previously received grants under the Australian Research Grants Scheme. Senator Walsh —The Minister for Employment, Education and Training has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) For 1987, 1,451 grants were awarded totalling $32,370,816. For 1988, 1,448 grants were awarded totalling $32,295,222. (2) Grants for each year are detailed in that year's Australian Research Grants Scheme Report on Grants Approved. (3) (a), (b) and (c) Most research projects take three to six years to complete. Therefore in any one year about two thirds of all projects (i.e. over a thousand) being funded are continuing from previous years. The vast bulk of current Australian Research Grants Scheme grantees have been recipients of grants for most of their research careers. These people are world renowned researchers and are likely to continue to compete successfully for funds as long as their work is of world class standard. The names of grantees, titles of projects and size of grants are comprehensively detailed in annual reports dating back to 1966. Copies of these reports would be available from the Parliamentary Library. (4) and (5) Applicants are asked to supply information relating only to the research they have proposed. This includes their own ability to carry out the research, the availability to them of the appropriate equipment and facilities and the value and source of any other funds that they will be using to support the particular project. No information is sought regarding their personal financial circumstances. Consequently, the data necessary to respond to parts (4) and (5) is not available. Detailed information of grants approved for 1985, 1986, 1987 and 1988 has been provided direct to the honourable senator. (Question No. 338) Senator MacGibbon asked the Minister for the Arts, Sport, the Environment, Tourism and Territories, upon notice, on 19 May 1988: (1) What was the total number of grants made by the Australia Council from July 1987 to date. (2) What was the total value of grants made over this same period. (3) Have any of the recipients of Australia Council grants in 1987 and 1988 been previously awarded grants; if so, which groups or individuals were they. (4) Do any of the individuals or members of the groups who have received a grant also receive any sort of Social Security payment; if so, how many. (5) How many of the individuals or members of groups, who have currently and previously received a grant, are in receipt of any Social Security payment. Senator Richardson —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: (1) 2,222 (2) $42,974,491.71 (3) Yes. In the financial years 1986-87 and 1987-88, 932 clients have received two or more grants from the Australia Council. I do not consider the time and resources required to compile a list of these clients is warranted. I refer the honourable Senator to Council's Annual Reports which list all grant recipients. (4) and (5) The Australia Council does not record whether grant applicants are in receipt of Social Security payments and this information cannot be obtained without a major diversion of resources. (Question No. 343) Senator Macklin asked the Minister for the Arts, Sport, the Environment, Tourism and Territories, upon notice, on 20 May 1988: (1) Is the Minister aware of the proposal of the development consortium, River City 2000, to break up 3 National Trust listed buildings and relocate them at different sites as part of their redevelopment of the south bank of the Brisbane River after the completion of Expo 88; if so, does he support or oppose this proposal and what is his response. (2) Does the Government agree that the historical value of these buildings resides in the relationship they have with their sites, not just in the bricks and mortar which constitute them; if not, why not; if so does the Federal Government have any power to have these buildings preserved on their original sites and will it use this power. (3) Will the Government give an undertaking to assist in funding to protect these historically important buildings on their original sites; if so, how and when will this be done; if not, why not. Senator Richardson —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: (1) I understand from recent press reports that the Queensland Government has decided to call for new tenders for the redevelopment of this site. (2) The National Trust has nominated all three buildings for registration on the Australian Heritage Commission's Register of the National Estate. The Commission intends to proceed with the gazettal of Greyscourt and Plough Inn at the next available opportunity scheduled for October 1988. By that time it is also expected that the Commission will have made a registration decision on the Allgas Building. Registration imposes constraints only on the actions of Commonwealth Ministers and authorities. Registration is not directed at the actions of State or Local Government or private owners and institutions. At this stage it does not appear likely that a Commonwealth Minister or authority will be involved in the future use of the Expo site or these buildings. (3) The Government will not give an undertaking to assist in funding to protect these buildings. I consider this to be primarily a matter for the Queensland Government. However, if the nominations of the buildings to the Register of the National Estate are successful then the Queensland Government will be eligible to apply for assistance under the Commonwealth's National Estate Grants Program for the conservation of these buildings on their existing sites. (Question No. 383) Senator Powell asked the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy, upon notice, on 30 May 1988: (1) Are plants registered under the Plant Variety Rights Act 1987 in Australia also protected overseas; if so, (a) in what countries are these plants protected; (b) when were the agreements with these overseas countries (i) negotiated, and (ii) ratified. (2) Is the protection reciprocal. Senator Cook —The Minister for Primary Industries and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: This is the first of a series of nine questions asked by the honourable senator and I would like to say at the outset that in answer to any further questions of this nature I shall refer the honourable senator directly to the Registrar. Many of the answers are given in the Act which was debated at length by this House and others are of an administrative nature. In answer to the specific issues: PVR granted under the Australian Act applies only in Australia. There are no agreements with overseas countries, although this Government may work towards such an arrangement with New Zealand under the CER agreement. Australia will be seeking membership of the International Union for the Protection of New Plant Varieties (UPOV) but this will not give automatic protection in other member countries. It gives an applicant for PVR in one member country 12 months priority over other applicants for a similar variety in other member countries. Once an application is accepted, the variety must meet the criteria established by each country. (Question No. 384) Senator Powell asked the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy, upon notice, on 30 May 1988: (1) Can plants that have been produced by genetic engineering be registered under the provisions of the Plant Variety Rights Act 1987; if so, what are the criteria for determining whether the new plant is a species or a variety. (2) Is a spontaneous mutant of a plant product by genetic engineering registrable under the Act; if so, who owns the rights to the mutant. Senator Cook —The Minister for Primary Industries and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) New plant varieties developed using genetic engineering are eligible for Plant Variety Rights (PVR) if they are distinct, uniform, stable (DUS criteria) and new. The variety developed this way would easily meet the requirement of being originated by a person. Genes themselves cannot be protected using PVR and the existing industrial patents system should be used. The International Code of Botanical Nomenclature and the International Code for the Nomenclature of Cultivated Plants are used for categorising and naming species and varieties. A system of peer assessment is used to ensure applicants have correctly identified and named their plants. Varieties will not be accepted for PVR unless they belong to a described species. (2) If a person carries out activities in relation to particular plants (regardless of the fact that the plants contain genetically engineered genes) in the hope that a new variety will emerge by natural processes (eg mutation) and a new variety does emerge, the new variety is eligible (subject to meeting the DUS and newness criteria) for PVR and the person mentioned above is the owner of the variety. (Question No. 385) Senator Powell asked the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy, upon notice, on 30 May 1988: For the purposes of the Plant Variety Rights Act 1987, how are the following grouped: (a) bacteria; (b) yeasts; (c) moulds; (d) fungi; (e) algae; (f) kelps; and (g) viruses. Senator Cook —The Minister for Primary Industries and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: The above groups are not eligible for PVR and are specifically excluded (with the exception of viruses) from the definition of ``plant'' under the Act. Viruses are not considered to be plants and are excluded by definition. (Question No. 386) Senator Powell asked the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy, upon notice, on 30 May 1988: For the purposes of the Plant Variety Rights Act 1987, what is the definition of (a) genus; (b) species; (c) strain; (d) variety. Senator Cook —The Minister for Primary Industries and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: The International Code of Botanical Nomenclature and the International Code for the Nomenclature of Cultivated Plants are used as the basis for categorising plants. Only varieties belonging to a described species will be accepted for PVR. (Question No. 388) Senator Powell asked the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy, upon notice, on 30 May 1988: Will the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy publish the recommendations he receives from the Plant Variety Rights Advisory Committee; if not, why not. Senator Cook —The Minister for Primary Industries and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: Reasons for Advisory Committee recommendations and my decisions on PVR matters of general interest will be published in the Plant Varieties Journal. Reasons for recommendations and decisions on specific applications will be given to the applicant and anyone lodging a formal objection. Further details on specific matters can be obtained from the Registrar. (Question No. 389) Senator Powell asked the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy, upon notice, on 30 May 1988: What precautions exist to ensure that a spontaneous mutant of a plant discovered in the wild is not claimed as a new variety under the Plant Variety Rights Act 1987. Senator Cook —The Minister for Primary Industries and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: A spontaneous mutant from a plant discovered in the wild would be eligible for PVR if a person carried out activities in relation to particular plants in the hope that a new variety derived from those plants would originate by natural process (subsection 3 (5) of the Act). The new variety would also have to be grown through four generations or propagation cycles in cultivation to establish it as a cultivar and it must be distinct from all other known varieties, uniform and stable. (Question No. 390) Senator Powell asked the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy, upon notice, on 30 May 1988: (1) Can plants that are propagated solely by way of cuttings be registered as new varieties under the Plant Variety Rights Act 1987. (2) Are plants grown from cuttings clones of the original plant. (3) What criteria exist to ensure that cloned material will breed true. Senator Cook —The Minister for Primary Industries and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) A plant variety propagated by way of cuttings is eligible for PVR if it is new, distinct from all other known varieties, uniform and stable. (2) Plants grown from cuttings are clones of the original plant and a new variety would only occur if there was a mutation. (3) Vegetative propagation is the most stable form of reproduction of plants and it is generally accepted that cloned plants breed true. Variation will only occur if there is a mutation. Applicants for PVR must demonstrate that the variety is stable through a least one propagation cycle. If, after PVR has been granted, there is evidence that the variety is not stable, the rights can be revoked. (Question No. 391) Senator Powell asked the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy, upon notice, on 30 May 1988: (1) Did the Press advertisements for submissions, which closed on 12 January 1988, for new varieties of plants under the Plant Variety Rights Act 1987 ask for public comment on Rape (Brassica Napus). (2) Does The Plant Varieties Journal, volume 1 no. 1, state that it is proposed to include ``Brassica SP.'' (oilseeds, rape, Mustard etc.) under the Act from March 1988. (3) What is meant by ``Brassica Sp.'', and what plants are covered. (4) What is meant by ``etc.'', and what plants are covered. (5) Why was the public not given the opportunity to comment on the inclusion of mustard, and other plants in the genus Brassica. (6) Will the Minister again refer the whole matter of ``Brassica SP.'' to the Advisory Committee to allow for public comment; if not, why not. Senator Cook —The Minister for Primary Industries and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) Yes (2) The ``Plant Varieties Journal'' states that it is proposed to include ``Brassica sp (oilseeds) (rape, mustard etc)''. (3) & (4) The above proposal includes the species of brassica which are classed as oilseeds. The main species are Brassica napus (rape), Brassica juncea (mustard) and Brassica campestris, although any other Brassica species used for oilseed would also be included. (5) Comments submitted on the proposed inclusion of Brassica napus indicated that there was no reason to separate the time for inclusion of the oilseed species. As this is a small, specialised group of plants it was appropriate to treat them in the same way. However, the majority of brassica belong to the species Brassica oleracea which is proposed for inclusion in January 1989 and all other Brassica species in 1990. This provides ample time for comment. (6) The inclusion of Brassica sp will not be referred to the Advisory Committee as there has been ample opportunity for comment. The original inclusion of the specialised group of oilseed species in March 1987 was based on public comment. The majority of brassica belong to other species which are proposed for inclusion as specified in point (5) above, giving adequate time for response. (Question No. 392) Senator Powell asked the Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy, upon notice, on 30 May 1988: Can varieties of plants, which were developed before the Plant Variety Rights Act 1987 came into force, be registered as new varieties of plants under that Act; if so, is there any date before which a plant cannot be claimed as a new variety. Senator Cook —The Minister for Primary Industries and Energy has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question: A variety is ineligible for PVR if it has, with the breeder's consent, been sold at all in Australia or sold overseas for more than six years. It is therefore possible for someone to have developed a new variety prior to the introduction of the Act and still be eligible for PVR if the variety has not been sold as stated above. Under the Act ``new'' does not denote a time period but refers to commercial availability. (Question No. 401) Senator Archer asked the Minister representing the Minister for Administrative Services, upon notice, on 2 June 1988: (1) What is the total figure that has been expended, for the 1987-88 financial year to date, for the refurbishment of offices of Departmental Secretaries and Senior Executive Service Officers. (2) How much has been spent, for the 1987-88 financial year to date, by Department, on the refurbishment of offices of Departmental Secretaries and Deputy Secretaries. (3) What are the comparable figures for: (A) 1986/87; and (B) 1982/83. Senator Robert Ray —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: It is not possible to provide answers to the questions raised by the honourable Senator. When offices are refurbished, construction or project management contracts are let for whole areas encompassing many offices and associated service areas. Work is committed progressively in trade packages, i.e. for floors, partitions, electrical, mechanical, ceilings, fire protection, etc. The costs associated with particular areas such as Departmental Secretaries or Senior Executive Service offices cannot be identified from these figures. (Question No. 405) Senator Coates asked the Minister for Transport and Communications, upon notice, on 2 June 1988: (1) Is the Managing Director of Telecom Australia a member of the Business Council of Australia; if so, why. (2) Does membership of such a private sector lobby group involve an unacceptable conflict of interest for a person responsible for a public sector authority, and indicate a lack of commitment to the public sector. (3) Will the Minister ask the Managing Director to reconsider his membership. Senator Gareth Evans —The answer to the honourable senator's question, based on advice from Telecom Australia, is as follows: (1) Yes. Telecom, through its Managing Directors, has been a member of the Business Council of Australia (BCA) since its inception in 1983. (2) The BCA brings together the chief executives of Australia's major companies with a view to contributing to the discussion of major public policy and industrial question affecting business. It is therefore advantageous for Telecom to be involved in these discussions. (2) Not necessarily; in any body engaged in major policy discussions, there may be the possibility of conflict of interest. However, I am content to rely on the judgment and good sense of the Managing Director of Telecom to resolve that type of issue, should it arise. (3) No. (Question No. 419) Senator Tambling asked the Minister for Transport and Communications, upon notice, on 2 June 1988: (1) When and where will the first practical trial of the Air Space Reservation Facilitation System take place. (2) What actions are being taken to ensure a trial takes place if no time and place is fixed. (3) What airspace will be reserved for use by the defence forces during the combined defence force exercises to be held over northern Australia in 1988 and 1989. (4) What forward consultation and planning is proposed with civil aviation interests and will adequate lead times for full consideration be given. Senator Gareth Evans —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: (1)-(2) The first practical trial of the Airspace Reservation Facilitation system, in Perth or Adelaide, will be discussed at the August 1988 meeting of the joint Air Co-ordinating Committee of the Civil Aviation Authority and the Department of Defence. (3)-(4) Comprehensive Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs), specifying airspace dimensions, restrictions and associated special procedures to apply during the combined defence force exercises over northern Australia in 1988 and 1989, will be issued by the Civil Aviation Authority. A general advice of areas and times affected will be issued at least three months in advance of the planned activity, followed closer to the event by more detailed notification and formal activation of airspace. (Question No. 424) Senator Lewis asked the Minister for Finance, upon notice, on 2 June 1988: When will the Government present its response to Report No. 270 of the Joint Committee of Public Accounts entitled ``Implementation of the Offsets Program'', tabled 30 April 1987, to the Parliament. Senator Walsh —The answer to the honourable senator's question is as follows: As the Minister for Finance, I am responsible for the preparation of a formal response, known as the Department of Finance minute, to the Committee's Report. I am informed that an advanced draft Finance Minute, incorporating responses from the Departments of Industry, Technology and Commerce (DITAC), Administrative Services, Treasury, Defence, Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Australian Trade Commission was prepared in mid-May 1988. However, there are still several matters that require further clarification and the provision of additional information, before my Department will be in a position to finalise the minute. On receipt of the response, which is expected shortly, the Finance Minute will be finalised and I anticipate this to be early in the Budget Sittings. Senator Cook —On 29 April 1988 (Hansard, page 2172), Senator Sanders asked me, as Minister representing the Minister for Primary Industries and Energy, questions without notice arising from correspondence relating to the relabelling of South African uranium to get around Finnish and Soviet embargoes. This correspondence was provided to Senator Sanders by Jup Weber, a Greens member of the Luxembourg Parliament. The Minister for Primary Industries and Energy has supplied the following answer to the honourable senator's question: (1) In my statement to the Parliament on 20 April I outlined the conditions under which the Australian/Euratom Agreement permits safeguards obligations to be exchanged within the jurisdiction of the European Communities. I would further note that an exchange of safeguards obligations within Europe can only be achieved with the approval of the EURATOM Safeguards Directorate (ESD) after application by the relevant organisation concerned. (2) It is certainly not a fact that exchanges of safeguards obligations in the European Communities are privatised and unregulated. The approval of the ESD is necessary before any obligation exchange can take place. The ESD is of course an official agency of the European Commission. It is the authority which regulates movements of, and exchanges of obligations on, nuclear material. The prior consent of Australia for exchanges of safeguards obligations within EURATOM is not required provided certain conditions, set out in my statement of 20 April, are adhered to; (3) Internal exchanges of safeguards obligations involving Australian obligated nuclear material do not alter the amount of nuclear material subject to Australian bilateral safeguards agreements. Neither do they affect the total amount of nuclear material which remains within the control of a bilateral partner country or group of countries. International flag swaps (IFS) however have the same effect as a physical transfer of nuclear material from one safeguards jurisdiction to another. Under Australia's bilateral safeguards agreements no Australian obligated nuclear material can be re-transferred from a bilateral partner's safeguards jurisdiction without Australia's prior consent. Therefore any IFS involving Australian obligated nuclear material would also require Australia's prior consent. For these reasons IFS are different from internal exchanges of safeguards obligations and require a different set of conditions. (4) Australian safeguards agreements do not ban exchanges of safeguards obligations on equivalent quantities of nuclear material within a jurisdiction. Their design and implementation have been successful in ensuring that obligated nuclear material subject to these agreements remains in exclusively peaceful non-explosive use. Senator Walsh —On 19 May 1988 (Hansard, page 2513), Senator Powell asked me a question without notice concerning a document about a large number of community youth support scheme (CYSS) projects in Victoria. I undertook to provide some information additional to my answer. The Minister for Employment, Education and Training has provided the following information for the honourable senator: In the context of the 1987/88 Budget, the Government announced its intention to integrate the three existing community programs-the Community Youth Support Scheme (CYSS), the Community Training Program (CTP) and the Community Volunteer Program (CVP)-into a single community training and employment assistance program. On 15 June 1988, the Minister for Employment and Education Services, Mr Duncan, announced details of the new program, to be called SkillShare. Members of Parliament and Senators have been supplied with detailed information packages about SkillShare. The document referred to by Senator Powell is part of a preliminary examination of information about existing programs undertaken in the light of the impending introduction of SkillShare. However, it is a working document with no official status, and will not be used as the basis for any future funding decisions under the new program. Further, departmental officers were not under any direction to consider political issues during this exercise. SkillShare has been designed to meet the needs of disadvantaged unemployed people and the local labour market, and funding priority will be given to those projects which are best able to offer activities and structured skills training to accord with SkillShare's guidelines and its emphasis on meaningful outcomes for participants. Distribution of funds will be dependent on local levels of unemployment and the needs of the local labour market, as well as the capacity of prospective sponsors to meet program objectives. Prospective project sponsors will be invited to apply for funding in July. No decision has been taken on the continuation or otherwise of existing projects, which will be funded under current arrangements until 31 December 1988, and all applications for funding will be considered without prejudice. Members and senators will be kept informed of the situation in relation to approval of projects in their electorates.