2005 03 10 weekly - queensland parliament · 2005. 3. 16. · 10 mar 2005 legislative assembly 509...

WEEKLY HANSARDHansard Home Page: http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/hansard/

E-mail: [email protected]: (07) 3406 7314 Fax: (07) 3210 0182

51ST PARLIAMENT

CONTENTS Page

PROOF ISSN 1322-0330

Subject

Thursday, 10 March 2005PRIVILEGE ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 509

Palm Island Aboriginal Council, Behaviour of Public Servant .............................................................................................. 509PRIVILEGE ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 509

Comments By Attorney-General .......................................................................................................................................... 509PRIVILEGE ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 509

Comments by Attorney-General ........................................................................................................................................... 509PETITIONS ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 510PAPER .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 510MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ............................................................................................................................................................ 510

Tropical Cyclone Ingrid ......................................................................................................................................................... 510MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ............................................................................................................................................................ 511

Public Hospitals .................................................................................................................................................................... 511MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ............................................................................................................................................................ 512

Australian Helicopters .......................................................................................................................................................... 512MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ............................................................................................................................................................ 512

Brown and Hurley Centre, Rockhampton ............................................................................................................................. 512MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ............................................................................................................................................................ 513

Heads of Australian Country Operations Conference .......................................................................................................... 513MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ............................................................................................................................................................ 513

Erhart, Ms W ........................................................................................................................................................................ 513MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ............................................................................................................................................................ 513

Towers of Chevron Renaissance ......................................................................................................................................... 513MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ............................................................................................................................................................ 514

Queensland Events Regional Development Program .......................................................................................................... 514MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ............................................................................................................................................................ 514

Multicultural Assistance Program ......................................................................................................................................... 514MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ............................................................................................................................................................ 515

Community Cabinet, Ipswich ................................................................................................................................................ 515MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ............................................................................................................................................................ 515

Courier-Mail .......................................................................................................................................................................... 515MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ............................................................................................................................................................ 516

BY AUTHORITYL.J. OSMOND, CHIEF HANSARD REPORTER—2004

http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/hansard/

Table of Contents — Thursday, 10 March 2005

South-East Queensland Regional Plan ................................................................................................................................516MINISTERIAL STATEMENT .............................................................................................................................................................517

Safe and Healthy Schools ....................................................................................................................................................517MINISTERIAL STATEMENT .............................................................................................................................................................517

Renal Care ............................................................................................................................................................................517MINISTERIAL STATEMENT .............................................................................................................................................................518

Building Services Authority, Complaints ...............................................................................................................................518MINISTERIAL STATEMENT .............................................................................................................................................................519

Review of Prostitution Act .....................................................................................................................................................519MINISTERIAL STATEMENT .............................................................................................................................................................519

Wolfe, Mr A ...........................................................................................................................................................................519MINISTERIAL STATEMENT .............................................................................................................................................................520

Citrus Canker ........................................................................................................................................................................520MINISTERIAL STATEMENT .............................................................................................................................................................520

Energy Crisis ........................................................................................................................................................................520PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE ........................................................................................................................................................521

Report ...................................................................................................................................................................................521LEGAL, CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW COMMITTEE ...............................................................................521

Report ...................................................................................................................................................................................521PRIVILEGE .......................................................................................................................................................................................522

Comments by Attorney-General ...........................................................................................................................................522NOTICE OF MOTION ........................................................................................................................................................................522

Environmental Protection and Other Legislation Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2004 .......................................................522PRIVATE MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS .............................................................................................................................................522

Attorney-General ..................................................................................................................................................................522National Party .......................................................................................................................................................................522Rural Queensland .................................................................................................................................................................523University Services ...............................................................................................................................................................523Cancer Treatment Services ..................................................................................................................................................524

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE .....................................................................................................................................................524Electricity Industry .................................................................................................................................................................524Electricity Industry .................................................................................................................................................................525International Business Cadetship Program ...........................................................................................................................526Energex ................................................................................................................................................................................526St Patrick's Day .....................................................................................................................................................................527Q-Build ..................................................................................................................................................................................528Queensland Ambulance Service, Paramedics ......................................................................................................................528

PRIVILEGE .......................................................................................................................................................................................529Comments by the Premier ....................................................................................................................................................529

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE .....................................................................................................................................................529Minister for Police and Corrective Services ..........................................................................................................................529Skill Shortages ......................................................................................................................................................................530Infrastructure Planning, Gympie ...........................................................................................................................................531Biotechnology and Science in Schools .................................................................................................................................531Palm Island Aboriginal Council; CMC Investigation ..............................................................................................................532Queensland Mines Rescue Service ......................................................................................................................................533Lacey, Mr R ..........................................................................................................................................................................533Public Health System; Constituent Inquiries .........................................................................................................................534Gladstone Hospital ...............................................................................................................................................................535

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT .............................................................................................................................................................535Answer to Question ..............................................................................................................................................................535

CRIMINAL CODE (CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND ABUSE) AMENDMENT BILL ..........................................................................543Second Reading ...................................................................................................................................................................543Consideration in Detail ..........................................................................................................................................................575Third Reading .......................................................................................................................................................................580

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT ..............................................................................................................................................................581ADJOURNMENT ...............................................................................................................................................................................581

Lockyer District State High School; Erhart, Ms W .................................................................................................................581The Maota Fono ...................................................................................................................................................................581Abuse of the Elderly ..............................................................................................................................................................582Capricorn Integrated Regional Traffic Plan ...........................................................................................................................582Harristown State High School ...............................................................................................................................................582Clean Up Australia Day ........................................................................................................................................................583Supported Accommodation Assistance Program .................................................................................................................584Southport Emergency Services Cadet Group .......................................................................................................................584Leukaemia Foundation .........................................................................................................................................................585Economy ...............................................................................................................................................................................585

10 Mar 2005 Legislative Assembly 509

THURSDAY, 10 MARCH 2005

Legislative Assembly

Mr SPEAKER (Hon. RK Hollis, Redcliffe) read prayers and took the chair at 9.30 am.

PRIVILEGE

Palm Island Aboriginal Council, Behaviour of Public ServantHon. RE SCHWARTEN (Rockhampton—ALP) (Minister for Public Works, Housing and Racing)

(9.31 am): I rise on a matter of privilege. Yesterday in this parliament I was asked a question with regardto a public servant's behaviour on Palm Island. I indicated at that time that I would table a letter that Isent to the council in that regard, and I so do. In doing so, I want to read a paragraph from it. I state inthe letter—I do not resile from my action in pointing out my dissatisfaction to this officer and I have further advised the Director-General of theDepartment of Housing that I am displeased with his actions.For the record I would take this action about any public servant who neglected their duty in this way.

If I went on to a Q-Build depot and found a heap of blokes laying around under a school building,I would say something to them. I regarded his actions similar to that.

PRIVILEGE

Comments By Attorney-General Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members, yesterday evening during debate on a private member's

motion the member for Maroochydore rose on a matter of privilege during the Attorney-General’scontribution to the debate. The member complained that the Attorney-General was breaching standingorder 209 by referring in the House to proceedings in a committee which had not been reported. Theonly words of the Attorney-General that related to the committee were—The transparency did exist on the committee. The committee was aware of all the connections, of all the past history, of all the CVof the appointee.

And later—Not only did we consult the parliamentary committee and provide that parliamentary committee with all the information ...

I make the following points relating to standing order 209. It is difficult for the Speaker and hisdeputies to determine whether the standing order has been breached and the extent and seriousness ofthe breach as they are unlikely to be aware of committee proceedings. It is for this reason that theMembers’ Ethics and Parliamentary Privileges Committee in its report 42 recommended a procedure tobe followed should there be an alleged breach of a committee’s confidence that involves the committeemaking an assessment as to whether there has been a breach and if it is serious enough to take anyaction. It is also for this reason that standing order 268(1) enables a committee to report a breach of itsprivilege and effectively refer the matter to the Members’ Ethics and Parliamentary PrivilegesCommittee without reference to the Speaker.

In short, the preferred method is for the committee concerned to be informed and the committeeto make an assessment as to whether its privileges have been breached and to take the action it deemsappropriate. However, I emphasise to committees considering standing order 209 that a commonsenseapproach must be made to its application and resolutions of any issues. I also note that consultationwith the committee was already a public matter. Indeed, members of the committee—namely, the chairand the member for Maroochydore—had revealed in an earlier debate on 22 February that there was aconsultation process with the committee. I intend to take no further action.

PRIVILEGE

Comments by Attorney-GeneralMiss SIMPSON (Maroochydore—NPA) (9.34 am): I rise on a matter of privilege. Mr Speaker, I

draw your attention to the fact that during the debate one of the questions that I put to you about thatmatter of privilege was how do we deal with an issue which refers not only to the proceedings but whichpotentially is misleading about the contents of those proceedings—

Mr SPEAKER: I have just answered that.

510 Ministerial Statement 10 Mar 2005

Miss SIMPSON:—which was also misleading about the contents of those proceedings. Giventhat we are bound by the standing orders that precluded us from revealing those proceedings, how dowe set the record right when—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Member for Maroochydore!Miss SIMPSON:—somebody else is misrepresenting those proceedings?Mr SPEAKER: Order!Miss SIMPSON: And that was actually part of my matter of privilege that I raised.Mr SPEAKER: Order! Member for Maroochydore, I will get this handed to you so that you can

read it. That is what I have just said. You refer the matter to the committee. I will have this handed to youby the attendant.

PETITIONSThe following honourable members have lodged paper petitions for presentation—

Great Sandy Marine Park Draft PlanMr Foley from 215 petitioners requesting the House to resolve the concerns over the proposed declaration and zoning of theGreat Sandy Marine Park draft plan in a manner that is fair and equitable to both recreational and commercial fishing interests.

Sandy Straits Yellow Conservation ZoneMr Foley from 401 petitioners requesting the House to either disallow commercial beam trawling and netting in the proposedSandy Straits Yellow Conservation Zone or re-zone the entire area to Light Blue Zone for General Use.

PAPERMINISTERIAL PAPERThe following ministerial paper was tabled—Minister for Communities, Disability Services and Seniors (Mr Pitt)—• Report on official visit to New Zealand from 31 January to 2 February 2005

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

Tropical Cyclone IngridHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.36 am): Early

this morning Tropical Cyclone Ingrid crossed the far-north Queensland coast. It is extremely fortunatethat there have been no reports of damage or injuries received at this stage, thank heavens. It is likely tobe several hours before a preliminary inspection can be made due to the high winds and heavy rainfallin the area. Cyclone Ingrid crossed the coast just after 5 am about 34 kilometres south of Lockhart Riveras a severe tropical cyclone category 4, which is the second highest rating. The cyclone is movingwestward at 11 kilometres per hour and by 8 am it had reduced to a category 3, but it still is classified asa severe tropical cyclone.

The high tide at Lockhart River occurred at 9 am and an increase of up to 1.6 metres wasexpected above the high-water mark which is likely to cause flooding in low-lying areas. TheDepartment of Emergency Services is well prepared to respond to Cyclone Ingrid. The Cairns DistrictDisaster Management Group met late yesterday and all agencies were satisfied with their planning andpreparations for Tropical Cyclone Ingrid. The Cairns District Disaster Coordinator continues to activelymonitor the situation and will chair another meeting of the district disaster management group thismorning.

Early this morning there were 25 people in the Lockhart River Police Station, 80 in the councilbuilding, 25 in the hospital, 20 in the Land and Sea building, 20 in the school and the balance of around400 remain in their homes. The district disaster coordinator and the major incident room remainoperational at the Cairns District Police Headquarters. Communities in Bamaga, Weipa, ThursdayIsland, Aurukun and Napranum have been contacted to ensure that they are aware of the overnightchanges and advised to continue preparations. Strong winds and rain are reported in the area.

At about 6.30 am, Ergon shut down the Lockhart River power stations for safety reasons due tothe cyclone impact, when lines may come down. About 150 customers are affected. Advice from thelocal power station attendant indicated at about 6 am that local conditions were reasonable, but by 6.30am conditions of wind and rain had deteriorated to the extent that it was not safe to monitor the state ofthe network, so the network was shut down. This temporary action has been taken to ensure public

10 Mar 2005 Ministerial Statement 511

safety, the safety of operational staff and the integrity of the distribution network. It is anticipated thatsome cyclone damage will occur and a crew is on standby to be flown in to repair any damage.

A cyclone warning is current for communities between Cape Grenville and Cape Melville andextends inland across Cape York Peninsula to the east coast of the Gulf of Carpentaria betweenMapoon and Cape Keerweer. Tropical Cyclone Ingrid is expected to cross Cape York Peninsula andmove into the Gulf of Carpentaria near Weipa at around 10 pm tonight. All of our emergency servicespeople, in particular the counterdisaster and rescue services and SES people, are ready to act if thereare any reports of damage or flooding, and they will be bracing for another onslaught tonight as thecyclone passes near Weipa. Chris Cummins, Minister for Emergency Services, and I will keep in contactas well as Jason O’Brien, the member for Cook. If there is anything that needs to be done, it will bedone.


Public HospitalsHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.39 am): I want to

draw to the attention of the House that the Howard government is short-changing Queensland’s publichospitals by millions of dollars a year. John Howard and Peter Costello have put up a smokescreen tohide their failures in dealing with the balance of payments, interest rates and apprenticeships. But theirfailure to properly fund the public hospital system in all states means that thousands of Australians whoneed hospital treatment are not receiving the treatment they need.

Last week I went to Sydney and, among other things, I met New South Wales Premier Bob Carrand we agreed that the Howard government must take urgent action to deal with the widening gapbetween funding for the private and public hospital systems. Mr Howard has put the brakes on theindexation allowed for cost escalation under the Australian Health Care Agreement for public hospitalsto 2.1 per cent this year. However, his government is allowing private health insurance premiums to riseby almost eight per cent.

I call on the Australian Medical Association to join us in our fight for an increase in the indexationfor the public system. The private system has succeeded in arguing the case that its costs are rising somuch that it needed increases of 7.5 per cent last year and 7.96 per cent this year. The public systemswere allowed an increase of only 2.1 per cent last year and 2.1 per cent this year. Let me put this interms which all Queenslanders, I am sure, will understand. If we had received the same percentageincrease as the private sector, we would have received an extra $75 million in 2003-04, and this year wewould be $171 million better off. That $171 million in federal funding would have enabled thousands ofextra operations.

This is why I am calling on the Australian Medical Association to join the states in seeking anincrease in the indexation for the public hospital system. We urge Mr Howard to tackle this crucialproblem at the next meeting of the Council of Australian Governments, which should be held as soon aspossible. I am happy to prepare a paper for that COAG meeting on health, as I have in the past. GordonNuttall and I are only too keen to ensure that the public sector gets a fair go. Because of time, I seekleave to incorporate more details in Hansard, plus a graph that highlights the percentages that I haveillustrated to the House.

Leave granted. Mr Howard should realise that not only are costs rising at a similar rate in the public systems, the cost pressures in the publicsector are higher because they treat a much higher proportion of chronic and complex cases.We are already worse off under the current five-year funding arrangement for the states, with the Howard government havingtaken $1 billion of hospital funding out of the forward estimates in the year this agreement started.The facts are:• The states are receiving $1 billion less under this five-year healthcare agreement than they would have received if the

terms of the previous agreement had continued;• Annual increases from the Federal Government aren't keeping up with the massive increases in costs.We have increased our funding—where is the money the Federal Government should be contributing?



Australian Helicopters Hon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.41 am): On

other good news that is happening in Queensland—Mr Mackenroth: All good news.Mr BEATTIE: It is all good news. That is right. I take the Treasurer's interjection. I want to

congratulate another Queensland company that has beaten off international competition to secure amajor contract. Brisbane based Australian Helicopters has been named as preferred supplier for theseven-year $52 million Adelaide Bank Rescue Helicopter Service in South Australia. AustralianHelicopters, which does business with Queensland’s emergency services department as well asCoastwatch, will supply three helicopters plus a crew of 17. The company already employs 80 staff andoperates 23 helicopters. This is another coup for the Queensland aviation industry, which mygovernment has nurtured, encouraged and developed. It is a standard-bearer among the Smart State’sindustries and employers of the future. I just simply say to it: well done.


Brown and Hurley Centre, RockhamptonHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.42 am): I will

tomorrow be opening an expanded $3 million Brown and Hurley sales and service centre atRockhampton. The story behind the Brown and Hurley company is a great inspiration to allemployers.Two blokes, both motor mechanics, became mates during the war years. After the war, theyopened a bike repair shop in Kyogle in 1946. Alan Brown and Jack Hurley stuck with it and, threegenerations later, it continues to be a successful family company with several branches in Queensland.The company sells Kenworth and Daf trucks from dealerships in Rockhampton, Townsville andBrisbane. It also has a spare parts outlet in Toowoomba.

Table 1 - Impact of updating the AHCA cost index to the levels approved for Private Health Insurance Funds

2003-04 2004-05 $ $

Queensland Current Indexation Arrangements 1,419,244,589 1,509,092,846 Current Indexation Arrangements (Cost Indexation Updated for Private Health Insurance Approved Increases 1,494,307,477 1,680,102,648

Total Change -75,062,887 -171,009,802 Table 2 - Indexation provided for Cost Escalation under the AHCAs compared with Private Health Insurance average premium increases WCI -1 (1998-2003

AHCA) Average PHI premium

increases approved 1999-00 1.50% 1.8% 2000-01 1.90% NIL 2001-02 2.20% 6.9% 2002-03 2.50% 7.4%

(2003-2008 AHCA) 2003-04 2.10% 7.5% 2004-05 2.10%* 7.96%

* Provisional until June 2005


An honourable member: A good company, too.Mr BEATTIE: I take that interjection from the member. Alan and Jack are still involved, as are

their offspring and two of their grandsons, Brendan and Ryan, who are apprentice motor mechanicshere in Brisbane.

Brown and Hurley opened their Rockhampton business in 1991, selling and servicing trucks andselling spare parts. The company currently employs 23 people in Rockhampton. The new facility is afurther indication of the company’s commitment to central Queensland and its confidence in the future ofthe region.


Heads of Australian Country Operations ConferenceHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.43 am): That is

not all. I will be delighted on Saturday night to address about 150 delegates at the 6th annual Heads ofAustralian Country Operations conference at Coolum. This conference is attended by the Australianchief executive officers of major, foreign owned companies. Amongst the companies represented at themeeting will be 3M Australia, AT&T Asia Pacific, Bayer Australia, BP Australia, British Airways, Colgate-Palmolive, Diners Club, Dupont, General Electric, Kodak, Kraft Foods and Rolls Royce. As memberswould understand, I will necessarily be telling those CEOs that my government welcomes investors fromall over the world. I seek leave to incorporate more details in Hansard.

Leave granted. We've also attracted investment from major Australian companies like Qantas, BHP Billiton and Macquarie Bank. I will be telling them that we will continue to pursue any opportunities available to us in our efforts to convince both Australian andinternational groups to set up operations in Queensland. I will also be providing them with details showing that Queensland is Australia's low tax state and offers excellent conditions forcompanies and their employees.


Erhart, Ms WHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.44 am): I want to

congratulate Queenslander Wendy Erhart on winning the Australian sector of the 2005 Veuve ClicquotAward, which honours the world's most successful businesswomen. Wendy Erhart based in Withcottreceived her coveted award at Sydney University’s Great Hall on International Women’s Day.

Mr Rickuss: From the Lockyer.Mr BEATTIE: I seek leave to incorporate the details in Hansard. Leave granted. Mr BEATTIE: If they are good Queenslanders, I do not care where they come from. I am pleased

to see that the local member is proud of her.She co-founded Withcott Seedlings 25 years ago, and it has grown into the largest supplier of vegetable, fruit and plant seedlingsin the southern hemisphere, producing 310 million seedlings each year for Australian farmers.Each year for more than two decades the core company has grown by 25%-30%.It's an innovative business with a product for the top end of the salad market called Smart Salads.The company has patented the Smart Salads growing technique, and Smart Salads are an emerging export to the Asia-Pacificand Middle East regions.Withcott Seedlings won a 2004 Premier of Queensland's SMART Award, received a $14,450 Queensland Industry DevelopmentScheme grant in 1999 to develop and commercialise new tomato grafting technology, and in 2002 was the first Darling Downsemployer to qualify for an Experience Pays wage subsidy.I'm delighted that the government has been able to support this leading innovator.


Towers of Chevron RenaissanceHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.45 am): I am

also pleased to advise that next Tuesday I will be officially opening at Surfers Paradise the third and finaltower of the Towers of Chevron Renaissance, which shows that development is continuing in this state.

Mr SPEAKER: Do you want to seek leave to incorporate the details?Mr BEATTIE: I do.


Leave granted.The opening coincides with the 30 year anniversary of the Raptis Group, which has been responsible for this very successfultourism development. This has been a major, multi-million dollar redevelopment of a magnificent site.The first stage of the development was the retail precinct known as Chevron Walk.The fourth stage of the project is the third and final tower, Skyline Central, which is 40 storeys.This building project has involved a workforce of hundreds of workers over several years. Of course, the retail stage of the project has already created hundreds of permanent jobs.

It is an excellent addition to our excellent range of tourism facilities on the Gold Coast.


Queensland Events Regional Development ProgramHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.45 am): On other

matters, I want to advise the House that last year my government renewed the hugely successfulQueensland Events Regional Development Program—in fact more than doubling funding to $2.4 milliona year over the next three years. I have a report from Queensland Events, which I table. All memberswill receive a copy. I seek leave to incorporate the details of how successful this has been. It is aboutjobs in the regions.

Leave granted. We also introduced two new initiatives under the program—the Significant Regional Events Scheme and the Regional EventsInnovations Scheme.I am pleased to announce the first event to receive support under the Regional Events Innovations Scheme is Dalby's AustralianCotton Week—and I look forward to making more announcements over the coming weeks.Time and again, the state's wide range of events proves its greatest strength in securing important tourist dollars. 2005 is already shaping up as an exciting year for events tourism...... I encourage you to read this publication ("2005 and beyond")which highlights some of the great work that my government's Queensland Events does.A terrific example is the long and proud history we have with the ANZ Ladies Masters and the impact these sorts of major eventshave on promoting Queensland.Karrie Webb again reigned supreme at the event on the Gold Coast two weeks ago (Feb 24-27, 2005)—but she was chased to theend by rising star, Ai Miyazato who's superstar status in her homeland drew a contingent of more than 30 Japanese media. Japan's leading national newspaper—the Yomiuri Shimbun—which at 40 million copies claims to have the highest circulation inthe world—ran the ANZ Ladies Masters on the front of the sports section (Sun Feb 27). The Japanese media frenzy fuelled by Ai and her outstanding performance resulted in the weekend's event airing on the JapanGolf Channel and in various other leading Japanese publications—giving the Gold Coast publicity that just can't be bought.In addition to the close media attention on Ai, the event and the Gold Coast was broadcast to a potential viewing audience of160 million worldwide through global television coverage. Here in Australia, five-hours of play was televised nationally by Network Ten on the Saturday and Sunday. Importantly, working with tournament organisers, Queensland Events ensured the two final days of play aired live in New Zealandand Korea—this was a particularly strategic move as Korea is one of Queensland's most exciting emerging tourism markets. It's thrilling to see the Gold Coast and our other major event destinations attracting the right type of global attention throughevents.

This type of exposure for Queensland is exactly what we had in mind when Queensland Events began back in 1989.


Multicultural Assistance ProgramHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.45 am): Finally,

there are two other matters that I want to mention quickly. One relates to multicultural events. We arepursuing our Multicultural Assistance Program. I am delighted to announce today that the Feast of StJoseph at New Farm will receive additional help this year, along with other groups. We are going tocontinue to fund multiculturalism. I seek leave to incorporate details in Hansard.

Leave granted. This month the government is funding four significant events and projects through the Multicultural Assistance Program, at a costof $11,300.The Casa Italia Community Centre will celebrate the Feast of St Joseph at New Farm Park on Sunday 20 March with the help of$5,000. This event attracts up to 10,000 people from throughout South East Queensland and celebrates the life and values of St Joseph—faith, perseverance, courage, trust and hard work. It's a fantastic event for the Italian community.


Deception Bay State High School has received $2,000 to host a Harmony Day program with an anti-bullying theme on 21 March,as well as celebrations of other cultural days later in the year.Out in Gin Gin, the Gondwana Multicultural Group received $3,700 for the Kolan Diversity Project, to be held during the WildScotchman Capture Festival (26-27 March).That festival celebrates the capture of Scottish bushranger James McPherson at Monduran Station, near Gin Gin, on 30 March1866.The Iranian Society of Queensland has received $2,600 for its New Year celebrations.There will be an event at the Greek Club in South Brisbane on Sunday 20 March, with a free party at Bowen Park on 2 April from10 am until 3pm.Through Multicultural Affairs Queensland we are also delivering 23 cross-cultural training sessions to approximately 400 staff in anumber of government agencies throughout the State.


Community Cabinet, IpswichHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.45 am): My

cabinet likes Ipswich so much that we are heading back for our fourth community cabinet meeting sinceour election in 1998. On Sunday, 20 March and Monday, 21 March we will be there as a team for oursecond community cabinet meeting of the year. This follows the hugely successful Charlevillecommunity cabinet.

This Ipswich gathering will be our 81st community cabinet since election in 1998 and again anideal opportunity for the people of the Ipswich region to meet ministers and directors-generals. We willmeet with, listen to and respond to Queenslanders wherever they live and work. I know that the Ipswichregion MPs, Don Livingstone, the member for Ipswich West, Rachel Nolan, the member for Ipswich, andJo-Ann Miller, the member for Bundamba, are delighted that we are coming. I seek leave to incorporatethe details in Hansard.

Leave granted. We have some great announcements and we are keen to meet with the locals.The informal Community Cabinet proceedings will occur on Sunday 20 March from 1.30pm to 3.30pm, at the CommunityRecreation Centre, Redbank Plains State High School, Willow Road, Redbank Plains.Formal deputations will follow at the Community Recreation Centre at Redbank Plains State High School from 3.30pm to 5pm thatday.

On Monday 21 March, Cabinet will meet from 9.30am at Brothers Leagues Club, Wildey Street, Raceview.


Courier-MailHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (9.46 am): I thank

the Courier-Mail for publishing part of my letter today in relation to some of the matters that we havedebated this week. I did criticise them for not publishing a previous letter. They did publish most of thelatest letter that I wrote to them. I thank them for that. I seek to incorporate the full letter in Hansard.

Leave granted. QueenslandGovernmentPremier of Queensland and Minister for TradeLetter to the EditorThe Courier-Mail Campbell St, Bowen HillsDear EditorI note your editorial on 9 March 2005 in which you accuse the Government of shooting the messenger in its criticism of yourcoverage of recent issues.I believe that the media has a significant role to play in public debate.Indeed, the Courier-Mail's commitment to pursuing issues of public interest, such as planning in southeast Queensland, problemsin the child protection system and the need for greater investment in electricity infrastructure has led to further Government actionin these areas, and rightly so.However, your suggestion that debate on important public issues should proceed without the Government exercising its legitimateright to correct inaccuracies, to put facts that have been omitted by the media on the record or clarify distortions of facts, cannot gounchallenged.Balanced, accurate reporting which gives equal weight to all sides of a story is a fundamental tenant of journalism.Any citizen who believes that a matter involving them, their family, their company, or their organisation has not been reportedaccurately or fairly has a right to seek a correction. The Government asks for nothing more and nothing less.


In my view, the Government's efforts to correct in the Parliament repeated factual errors in the Courier-Mail's coverage of theQueensland Building Services Authority and the appointment of the Information Commissioner, are examples of the robustenvironment in which public debate should occur.I look forward to continued fearless reporting by your journalists and trust that they will welcome all efforts by myself and myMinisters to ensure their reports are balanced and accurate.(sgd)PETER BEATTIE MPPREMIER AND MINISTER FOR TRADE

Mr BEATTIE: I look forward to vigorous debate on appropriate issues of interest forQueenslanders.


South-East Queensland Regional PlanHon. TM MACKENROTH (Chatsworth—ALP) (Deputy Premier, Treasurer and Minister for Sport)

(9.46 am): I wish to inform members of the House that consultation on the draft south-east Queenslandregional plan has been a resounding success. Submissions have now closed and the state government,through the Office of Urban Management, has received more than 8,500 submissions. That equates toabout 70 submissions on each day of the four-month consultation period. We received more than 2,000submissions alone on the closing day last week.

These kind of numbers prove that the draft regional plan is one of the most sought-afterdocuments ever produced by a Queensland government. To say that the Office of Urban Managementis going to be busy over the next few months could be an understatement. However, when the Premierand I launched the document, we promised that each and every submission would be carefullyconsidered before the plan is finalised. I stand by that commitment today. I could not be happier with theenormous volume of feedback, particularly the broader array of submissions received. We have hadfeedback from families, residents, government agencies, councils and other local government bodies,environmentalists, religious organisations, developers, industry stakeholders, state and federalmembers from different sides of politics, special interest groups and many others. We receivedsubmissions not only from every corner of the region but also from other parts of Queensland and otherstates and territories such as New South Wales, Victoria, Canberra and Tasmania. We even had interestfrom other countries, including the United Kingdom and South Africa.

Only last week the Office of Urban Management briefed a delegation from Brunei, which isexperiencing similar high growth rates and were eager to find out how we develop such a plan. The levelof interest that the public debate has generated has been fantastic, but it is not only the number ofsubmissions and widespread coverage that has impressed me. What pleased me most was the level ofdetail and thought put into the submissions. Virtually every aspect of the draft plan was commented onand completely different views have been expressed across-the-board.

Some have said that we have not supplied enough land for urban development. Some have saidthat we have supplied too much. Some have said that we have overestimated our population growth.Others have said that we have underestimated it. However, the majority of submissions support the planin principle and a number of them support it wholeheartedly.

I want to say a sincere thankyou to all of the staff at the Office of Urban Management for the greatwork they have done so far. They fielded thousands of phone calls and hundreds of emails each monthand distributed more than 16,000 hard copies of the plan. They looked after the regional plan web site,which received more than 100,000 visits in which more than two million maps were downloaded andviewed. But that was not enough: they undertook an extensive communication campaign which includeda series of public information sessions which attracted more than 3,000 people throughout the region.They also attended around 120 additional community and industry briefings to ensure the widestpossible consultation. They met with councils, both individually and at their various regionalorganisations, such as SEQROC. However, there is still a lot more work to be done.

As I said before, all submissions will be examined to determine what part of the plan needs to beamended. The Office of Urban Management has a very thorough process in place to ensure that eachsubmission is treated confidentially yet fully evaluated. This process will finish up within the next fewmonths, after which time recommendations will be made to me as minister responsible for urbanmanagement and also the regional coordination committee.

I stress to members that a plan of this kind cannot and will not accommodate the specific wishesor requests of every individual in south-east Queensland. Our government has endeavoured to take astrategic approach to regional issues and look at how we as a community can live, work and play. It willnot have all the answers. Some issues are best left at a local level. Some will need to be addressed atthe federal level. I will formally release the final regional plan by the end of June this year. Localgovernments will then have 90 working days to advise the state of any necessary changes they need to


make so their local planning schemes are consistent with the regional plan as required under theIntegrated Planning Act. They will also be expected to implement local growth management strategiesto reach the dwelling numbers and other targets set out in the plan. State agencies will also be requiredto review their own planning documents so that they align with the plan. In the meantime, I will join withthe Premier to launch the south-east Queensland infrastructure plan and program by the end of April.


Safe and Healthy SchoolsHon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Minister for Education and the Arts) (9.52 am): The

Queensland government is committed to enhancing the health of Queensland children. My departmentis implementing a number of initiatives under the Safe and Healthy Schools policy announced at the lastelection. The Safe and Healthy Schools policy is an $11.1 million initiative that aims to encourage moreyoung Queenslanders to adopt healthy lifestyle choices. Unfortunately, our children are playing lesssport and doing less physical activity. It is alarming that around one in four children are now consideredoverweight or obese—the result of poor food choices and limited physical activity.

Schools can play a significant role in educating children about the importance of regular physicalactivity and healthy eating. Schools also provide opportunities for students to take part in a wide rangeof sport and physical activity. I am pleased to inform members that the first healthy schools van waslaunched last week on Tuesday, 1 March. Based at Mabel Park State School, the van will initiallysupport teachers and students in the Logan-Beaudesert district. Two other vans will join the fleet in thecoming months to support other areas to deliver comprehensive nutrition, health and physical educationprograms. Each van will be staffed by a teacher and nutritionist who will support and motivate schoolcommunities to promote the benefits of a healthy lifestyle. The healthy schools van staff will also provideinformation and assistance to parents about child nutrition and physical activity.

Other Safe and Healthy Schools initiatives include the expansion of the successful Active-Ateprogram, CPR skills training for all students before leaving year 12 and a requirement for interschoolteam sports to be offered by all schools with more than 300 students. In addition, a second round ofSmart and Healthy Schools grants will be available this year to schools as part of a $1.5 million three-year grants program to support innovative sport and physical activity initiatives in schools. Forty projectsat the school and cluster level benefited from the half a million dollar first round of the program last year.Applications will open in term 2, 2005 and I encourage members to work with their schools to put ingrant applications. The grants will be distributed in July 2005.

I have also been advised today that the Commonwealth minister for health intends to sendHealthy and Active School Communities kits directly to schools later this week. While I welcome theCommonwealth getting on board to address this important issue, communication with the states and acollaborative approach would surely maximise the reach of both of our resources and the results gainedfor our children. The federal government need only have asked the Smart State and we would havebeen happy to help. The healthy schools van initiative is another example of our government'sdedication to the health and wellbeing of young Queenslanders.


Renal CareHon. GR NUTTALL (Sandgate—ALP) (Minister for Health) (9.55 am): Renal care for all

Queenslanders is a priority for this state government. In the 2004-05 budget $16 million as part of a$33.8 million initiative over three years was allocated to help treat kidney disease. From the border toThursday Island, the aim is to ensure that patients can be treated or trained for ongoing self-treatmentcloser to where they live. Due to a shortage of organ donors, more than 1,200 Queenslanders rely onrenal dialysis to manage end stage renal disease.

This government recognises that need. Commitments such as the establishment and operation ofadditional dialysis machines on the Sunshine Coast and redevelopment at Robina campus for increasedservices are well under way. In fact, all our commitments with regard to renal care are on track. Thisincludes increasing services in the far north of our state. Far-north Queensland has one of the highestincidences of renal disease in Queensland, which brings me to Bamaga. Let me put it as simply as Ican: a recent allegation that four new dialysis chairs were sent to Bamaga and that three of those chairswere then redirected to Cairns after it was discovered they were not needed is completely inaccurate. Itshould come as no surprise to this House that the allegation came from the honourable member forMoggill, a man whose scant regard for the truth is now becoming legendary.

The facts in this case are that currently four dialysis machines have been purchased, three ofwhich are in Cairns for allocation to specific Bamaga individuals. The first Bamaga resident has been


trained in use of the equipment and returned to Bamaga in September last year. Another Bamagaresident is currently undergoing training on the equipment in Cairns and will return home when theirtraining is complete, while a third Bamaga resident is receiving dialysis in Cairns and is awaitingstabilisation before starting training. There is absolutely no evidence that equipment was sent toBamaga and returned to Cairns, and why would there be? Health care, and in this instance renal care, isnot ‘seat of the pants'. It is carefully planned, developed and carried out. It is nothing less than expectedand deserved by Queenslanders from their public health system.


Building Services Authority, ComplaintsHon. RE SCHWARTEN (Rockhampton—ALP) (Minister for Public Works, Housing and Racing)

(9.58 am): Since Saturday, Courier-Mail investigative journalist Tuck Thompson has written severalstories about home owners who he has reported have suffered while the toothless tiger, as he describesit, the Building Services Authority, simply looks on and does nothing. On Saturday he featured threecases, of which two were outside the jurisdiction of the BSA and were in fact contractual disputes andmatters for the Commercial and Consumer Tribunal. On Tuesday, Tuck Thompson featured a number ofstories but most were anonymous. Once again, he failed to approach the BSA or my office for commentor to verify the stories, and as a result it is impossible for me to get to the bottom of these matters.

The major article was about the Allens family. They complained that their pool was installed in thewrong place. This, once again, is a contractual dispute and as such is outside the jurisdiction of the BSAand is a matter for the CCT, but the headline once again was ‘Building watchdog horror stories come outof woodwork'.

Then there was yesterday's paper. On page 2 there is a nice big photo of Greg Peek complainingabout his architect. Once again Tuck Thompson has it wrong. The work of architects is covered by theBoard of Architects and the consumer, Mr Peek, should take his complaint to the relevant body, theCCT, to resolve his contractual dispute with the architect. He then cites five cases by anonymous peoplecomplaining about the BSA, but Tuck Thompson once again fails to check the stories with the BSA toconfirm that they fall within the jurisdiction of the BSA or to check if the builder or the BSA are at fault.But he prints it under the headline ‘More victims count the cost of inaction’.

Tuck Thompson then features a builder contractor, Mr Ken Marshall, who was complaining aboutpeople who abuse the system. If Tuck Thompson had done some basic digging around he would knowthat the same Mr Ken Marshall himself abuses the system and the BSA has rightly taken action againsthim on behalf of consumers. Mr Marshall was suspended twice In January 2002 for two weeks andagain in January 2004 for a further two weeks for not paying his licence fee and for failing to provide hisfinancial information at licence renewal. Seven consumers have lodged dispute notifications against MrMarshall and the BSA had to direct Mr Marshall to rectify his work on two occasions. The BSA is also inthe process of recovering $100,000 from Mr Marshall which the BSA paid out in an insurance claim to aconsumer under the statutory home warranty insurance scheme. The Courier-Mail holds Mr Marshall upas being some paragon of virtue when, in fact, he is nothing of the kind.

Mr Hopper: They’ll give you a run tomorrow. Mr SCHWARTEN: I hope they do give us a run tomorrow on it, and I hope they do print the story

about Mr Marshall. I will note the member’s defence of Mr Marshall. Mr Hopper: Talk about Bill Pollard. Mr SCHWARTEN: I am just about to. Today's report is about Mr Pollard. A government member: You stick by him, too, do you?Mr SCHWARTEN: Does the member want to stick by him, too? Does he want to stick his neck

right out over him? Mr Pollard entered into a contract with a licensed builder, Mr Pullar, on 1 July 1996when Liberal Party minister Dr David Watson had ministerial responsibility. The contract was a cost-pluscontract. These types of contracts were abolished by my colleague the current minister for police. Thismeans that the work progressed until the limit of $62,000 was reached, regardless of whether the workwas completed. As I said, my predecessor, the honourable minister for police, restricted contracts of thistype as part of the better building reforms package in 1999.

Mr Pollard took Mr Pullar to the then Queensland Building Tribunal in November 1997. Thetribunal dismissed seven out of the eight items Mr Pollard was disputing and it ordered Mr Pullar torectify the eighth item. Mr Pollard refused the builder access to the property to rectify the work. It is a bithard to fix the job if you cannot get access! The case has been referred to the CMC and theOmbudsman, and all of Mr Pollard’s allegations have been dismissed. The matter was also referred bythe BSA to the Board of Professional Engineers. I also had the manager of the BSA and a member of


my staff at the time go and visit Mr Pollard to see if they could help him. They bent over backwardstrying to help him.

The real inaction has been in Tuck Thompson’s research. Of the seven cases that TuckThompson has reported that people are willing to put their names to, only two were matters for the BSAto resolve, which it did. All the other complaints are contractual and need to be adjudicated by the CCT.I suggest that Tuck starts his investigative research by simply going to the BSA web site and the CCTweb site to find out the difference between the two. He clearly does not know. He would then know thatevery decision made by the BSA—whether it is a judgment on a defect, an insurance payout matter, alicensing matter, a direction issue or any other decision—is reviewable by the independent tribunal, theCCT. The reality is that Mr Marshall and these other cases are not good examples for anybody to beholding up.


Review of Prostitution ActHon. JC SPENCE (Mount Gravatt—ALP) (Minister for Police and Corrective Services) (10.04

am): More than 15 years ago the Fitzgerald inquiry identified the link between illegal prostitution andcorruption. At the time Commissioner Tony Fitzgerald recommended that prostitution should beregulated to break this link. Since then, laws have evolved to a position where Queensland now has thebest prostitution laws in Australia, if not the world.

The CMC’s review of the Prostitution Act, released in December, could not find a better approachto regulating prostitution than the one this government has taken. The CMC found that Queenslandlegislation ‘has resulted in a crime-free legal industry that provides one of the safest and healthiestenvironments for legal sex workers in the country’. The report comments that a number of organisationshave helped to make the law work effectively. The CMC commends the contribution of non-governmentorganisations, including the organisation representing sex workers, SQWISI, as well as the owners oflegal brothels and the Queensland Adult Business Association.

Importantly, the report comments on the effectiveness of the Queensland Police Services’ StreetProstitution Project Group. The CMC said that it was impressed with the positive efforts of this group. Itswork has contributed to the low level of street based prostitution, which the CMC estimates at onlytwo per cent of the total number of sex workers in Queensland. The report also commends the approachof the Prostitution Licensing Authority, the PLA. I would like to place on the record my thanks to the PLAboard, which has remained almost unchanged since the legislation came into effect. In particular, Iwould like to thank Bill Carter and Dr Ian Wilkey, who have indicated to me that they do not wish tocontinue on the board when it is up for reappointment in May.

While the CMC has found that Queensland is on the right track, the government hasforeshadowed the need for some minor changes in line with the CMC’s recommendations. One of thecriticisms by the CMC related to the relationships between the PLA and licensees. The CMC has alsorecommended that the PLA adopt a complaints handling mechanism in line with the recommendation ofthe Ombudsman. The CMC realised that the legal industry needs to be a financially viable alternative tothe illegal industry and, therefore, impediments should not needlessly be placed in its path. I willencourage the new PLA board to work towards establishing more streamlined procedures and simplerlicence conditions which do not reduce accepted community standards. The CMC has alsoacknowledged that escort agencies make up a large part of the industry. Because escorts are one of themost difficult areas to regulate, the CMC has decided to undertake a further review of this part of theindustry. The government will consider the CMC’s recommendations when this review is complete. Anylegislative changes will maintain the balance between industry viability and the community’s interests.

I am keen to pursue ways to encourage women to leave the industry or, at the very least, bringmore women operating in the illegal sex industry into legalised brothels. Any changes will be madewithout reducing health and community standards. The CMC has shown that Queensland has theworld’s best system for regulating prostitution, and Queenslanders can be assured that this governmentwill continue to make improvements to make it even better.


Wolfe, Mr AHon. PT LUCAS (Lytton—ALP) (Minister for Transport and Main Roads) (10.07 am): I wish to

inform the House of the jailing of Rockhampton scrap metal dealer Tony Roy Wolfe for six monthsyesterday. Wolfe was convicted on six charges relating to grounding of the 450-tonne barge Karma nearAgnes Water in mid 2003. At the time of the grounding Wolfe was described as an ‘environmentalmenace’ by the Premier.


The Karma ran aground off Deepwater National Park after its engine failed after leavingMaryborough. The ship was unseaworthy, unregistered and uninsured and had no proper safetyequipment. Mr Wolfe ignored an order to remove 7,000 litres of potential pollutants from the barge. MSQhad to do that job at cost of $60,000. He also refused to remove the vessel, so a private contractor hadto be hired for $306,000. The ship could not be saved and sank soon afterwards in deeper water. Thecourt found Wolfe guilty on six charges.

I make no apologies for being tough on cowboys who put the beautiful and fragile environment ofour waterways at risk. I also feel no sympathy for people who endanger the safety of Queenslandboaties. Wolfe has an appalling track regard as an environmental menace. In June 2003 he was fined$25,000 for discharging 2,200 litres of diesel into the Fitzroy River from a derelict vessel in July 2001.Around that time he was jailed on Environmental Protection Agency charges over leaking containers oftoxic material at a Gracemere property.

After the Fitzroy River incident, the Beattie government amended the law so vessels of 35 metresand over have $10 million in insurance to pay for pollution and salvage. We also strengthened the lawon abandoned vessels.

Since 2001, Wolfe has cost taxpayers more than $834,000 for removal of pollutants, salvage,scrapping and legal costs with vessels. After the Karma incident, the Beattie government is continuing toexamine possible policy changes to further improve prevention and response measures. You could saythat Mr Wolfe will now have six months to sit in jail and reflect on how bad Karma comes from being anenvironmental menace and a marine safety pest.


Citrus CankerHon. H PALASZCZUK (Inala—ALP) (Minister for Primary Industries and Fisheries) (10.09 am): I

have more good news for Queensland’s citrus industry; especially good news for our Queensland citrusindustry. All citrus growers in Queensland, other than those in the Emerald pest quarantine area, nowhave full access to interstate markets in time for the 2005 fruit season.

New South Wales and Victoria reopened their markets to citrus fruit from Gayndah andMundubbera at 12:01 am yesterday morning. South Australia has reaffirmed that its markets will reopenon 12:01 am Friday morning. The Northern Territory has also agreed to accept Queensland citrus fruitas long as it is accompanied by a ‘declaration of area freedom’.

This is a good result for citrus growers, and is the direct result of an outstanding effort by theDPI&F staff to ensure the industry can continue to operate. The efforts by DPI&F staff has always beento finalise surveillance and have interstate movement restrictions on Queensland citrus removed asquickly as possible. Obviously the sooner that such restrictions can be removed; the smaller will be theimpact on our Queensland producers.

Extensive and careful surveillance has been completed across Queensland, particularly in thecitrus growing region of Gayndah and Mundubbera and, I would like to inform the House, in record time.

Department staff have worked hard for the citrus industry and have made a concerted effort tohave the surveillance completed so growers would not be financially impacted during the 2005 season.The DPI&F is now working through the process of regaining domestic market access for Emerald citrusgrowers following the outbreak of citrus canker in central Queensland in July last year.

The Queensland government has strictly adhered to the protocols and processes that are basedon international standards and agreed to by both industry and government, and I am hopeful of apositive result in the near future for Emerald citrus growers. That is my priority now.


Energy CrisisHon. RJ MICKEL (Logan—ALP) (Minister for Energy and Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait

Islander Policy) (10.12 am): The federal government’s failure to make a decision on the route of a vitalhigh-voltage transmission line is placing power reliability, economic growth and jobs in far-northQueensland at risk.

The Queensland government has been waiting since December 2003 for a decision from theHoward government on the preferred route for a replacement line between Innisfail and Kareeya—14months without a decision, a decision which should have taken 14 days. This transmission line must bebuilt by 2007 in order to deliver a reliable power supply to far-north Queensland and to meet the growing

10 Mar 2005 Legal, Constitutional and Administrative Review Committee 521

demand for electricity. Without it, the network will struggle to cope with demand and that meanseconomic growth, small businesses, tourism and jobs in the far north are at risk.

Electricity is an essential service but, regrettably, our efforts to deliver a reliable, secure powersupply to far-north Queensland are being frustrated by the Howard government. In the 2003-04 financialyear, the peak demand for electricity in the Cairns region grew by almost 12 per cent, while annualdemand was forecast to increase by more than 21 per cent over the next five years.

The existing line was built when Cairns was a provincial city. It is inadequate for the sophisticatedinternational tourism destination that Cairns is today. Powerlink Queensland wants to remove theexisting line from the Wet Tropics World Heritage Area and replace it with a line running along a coastalroute between Innisfail and Tully. For some reason the federal environment minister, Ian Campbell, isstruggling with the concept of making a decision to remove a powerline from a World Heritage area. It isunconscionable that he would even contemplate building a replacement line through a region which ishome to rare and threatened species and a major tourist attraction.

Last week, the federal Treasurer threatened to ‘name and shame’ state governments which fallbehind on infrastructure spending. Peter Costello could start by naming the federal environmentminister.

Senator Campbell’s Parliamentary Secretary, Greg Hunt, could also do his job by helping hisminister make a decision. I notice Mr Hunt was attacking the record of state governments oninfrastructure in Monday’s Australian Financial Review. He would have more credibility as acommentator on infrastructure if he helped to get a project such as the Innisfail-Tully link up andrunning.

I did notice in last week’s Innisfail Advocate that Senator Campbell was promising a decisionsoon, but I won’t hold my breath. I cannot stress strongly enough that the window of opportunity forcompleting the transmission line is about to close. Construction of the transmission line must commenceearly next year in order for it to be completed by mid 2007. Powerlink must meet that timetable in orderto fulfil its obligation to provide a secure and reliable electricity supply to far-north Queensland.

In addition, Ergon Energy has asked Powerlink to complete the southern section of the linebetween Tully and El Arish by late 2006 to support their distribution network in Mission Beach and ElArish in the electorate of Hinchinbrook, and I noticed throughout this contribution of mine today that themember for Hinchinbrook has not once stood up for his electorate, and the people in far-northQueensland should know that the power failure resides partly with the federal government and also withthe member for Hinchinbrook. Make no mistake, the reliability of El Arish and Mission Beach is at risk. Itis paralysis by analysis by the federal government.

In conclusion, I would like to thank Ergon Energy for its preparations for Cyclone Ingrid. Powerhas been turned off at the Lockhart River power station as a safety precaution. Ergon Energy advisesme they will need to carefully assess the integrity of the distribution network and the power stationbefore any attempts are made to restore supply. Damaged powerlines will need to be isolated andrepaired by qualified linespeople before being re-energised. A crew is on stand-by to be flown into thecommunity but that will only happen after confirmation that flying and landing conditions are safe.

PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE

ReportMr LIVINGSTONE (Ipswich West—ALP) (10.17 am): I lay upon the table of the House the Public

Works Committee report No. 87 on its inquiry into the Queensland Rail $88 million coal electriclocomotive project upgrade. I would like to thank all those who have assisted the committee with itsinquiry. Thank you to my fellow committee members for their support and assistance. Thank you also tothe committee staff. I commend the report to the House.

LEGAL, CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW COMMITTEE

ReportDr LESLEY CLARK (Barron River—ALP) (10.18 am): I lay upon the table of the House report

No. 48 of the Legal, Constitutional and Administrative Review Committee titled Publication of CommitteeProceedings dated 22 February 2005.

522 Private Members’ Statements 10 Mar 2005

PRIVILEGE

Comments by Attorney-GeneralMiss SIMPSON (Maroochydore—NPA) (10.18 am): With the tabling of this report I am now able

to refer to the comments of the Attorney-General in the House and present the facts as to why he wasmisleading the House about the information which was available to the Legal, Constitutional andAdministrative Review Committee members when they were briefed after the selection of Cathi Tayloras the new Information Commissioner.

The Attorney-General claimed in the House last night that the committee was ‘aware of all theconnections, of all the past history, of all the CV of the appointee’, a comment you repeated in yourcomments this morning

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Member for Maroochydore. The report has just been tabled. I think theappropriate course is to go back to the committee with this. You are debating a report that is not—

Miss SIMPSON: No, it is a matter of privilege relating to comments of the Attorney-General—Mr SPEAKER: Order! I think you are debating the report.Miss SIMPSON: He has mislead this House. Mr SPEAKER: Order! You are debating the report. Miss SIMPSON: His comments were simply not correct. Mr SPEAKER: Order! You are debating the report. Resume your seat! If the member writes to me

on that matter, I will respond.

NOTICE OF MOTION

Environmental Protection and Other Legislation Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2004Mr RICKUSS (Lockyer—NPA) (10.20 am): I give notice that I will move—

That part 4, section 32 of the Environmental Protection and Other Legislation Amendment Regulation (No. 1) 2004 (SubordinateLegislation No. 316 of 2004) tabled in the Parliament on 22 February 2005, be disallowed.

PRIVATE MEMBERS’ STATEMENTS

Attorney-GeneralMr SPRINGBORG (Southern Downs—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (10.20 am): In question

time yesterday the Premier referred to certain allegations against the Attorney-General as ‘anonymoussmut'. This is simply untrue. While the allegations raise serious doubts about the Attorney's capacity toseparate his ministerial affairs from his personal affairs, neither of the two sets of allegations against himare anonymous.

In the case of the WorkCover allegation, the name of the complainant is very clearly known to theAttorney and, it is our understanding, to the Premier himself. In the case of the allegation concerning theAttorney's alleged conduct at the staff Christmas party held by the Office of the Director of PublicProsecutions, the identity of the main witness is not only known to the DPP but also protected by her toprevent feared reprisals. We also understand that there are other witnesses known to the DPP who cancorroborate the events documented by the protected witness.

It may suit the Premier to pretend that the complainants are anonymous, but he knows in at leastone case and should know in relation to the other that this is simply untrue. It is just another example ofhim trying to discredit decent, law-abiding public servants whose only action has been to make acomplaint against a government minister. It is yet another example of the Premier's contrived dishonestywhich, according to his own public statements on honesty in government, should mean his resignationor his condemnation as a hypocrite.

National PartyMr TERRY SULLIVAN (Stafford—ALP) (10.22 am): When the Morgan poll of 31 January 2003

gave the National Party a primary vote of just nine per cent, the party machine said that Mr Horan had togo as leader. Mr Horan had increased support by one per cent, but Mr Springborg said that that was notgood enough and that Mr Horan would have to go.

10 Mar 2005 Private Members’ Statements 523

Yesterday's Morgan poll gives the Nationals just 10 per cent of the primary vote. That means thatin two years as leaders Mr Springborg and Mr Seeney have achieved an identical improvement of justone percentage point on the figures which resulted in Mr Horan and Mr Johnson being sacked.

Mr Springborg now has an identical achievement—two years in office and just a one per centimprovement in the Morgan poll. After reaching 17 per cent of the primary vote last year, the Nationalsunder Mr Springborg and Mr Seeney have now plummeted five per cent to just 12 per cent.

Just before they were deposed, Mike Horan and his deputy had a Newspoll dissatisfaction ratingof 31 per cent. The latest Newspoll has a dissatisfaction rating for Mr Springborg and Mr Seeney of32 per cent—one per cent worse. In other words, in two years as leaders Mr Springborg and Mr Seeneyhave achieved a worse dissatisfaction rating than the previous opposition leaders. More people areunhappy with Mr Springborg's performance now than when Mr Horan and Mr Johnson were forced togo. When deposing Mr Horan Mr Springborg said—The worst part is that it is a continuing trend. Obviously it's not good enough. Anyone in the Nats who says otherwise is in denial.

The latest Newspoll shows that this negative trend continues for the best resourced but laziestopposition in Australia. On the day he ousted Mike Horan, because of poor opinion polls, Mr Springborgmade a comment which we can now see is very true. Mr Springborg said, ‘I don't see myself as thesaviour of the National Party.' How true, Mr Speaker; how very true.

Rural QueenslandMrs PRATT (Nanango—Ind) (10.23 am): One of the indicators of just how far removed from rural

land-holders this government has become or just how much interest the government has when it comesto dealing with and communicating its requirements for the management of rural areas is found in theapplication kit for a property map of assessable vegetation.

Statistics show that over the years there has been an incredible drain on the rural productionbased population, with the majority of producers' children being discouraged from remaining on theland, thus resulting in an average age for rural based primary producers of roughly 60. The statisticsfrom the Queensland department of primary industries’ business services web site reveal that, whileyoung people aged 15 to 34 years are entering the intensive fields of pig and poultry, those engaged inbeef cattle, sheep and cropping and who are dealing with this particular piece of legislation are primarilyaged 65 years and older.

It would be fair to say that the majority of these land-holders went no further than year 6 at school.It was not expected or necessary for a man on the land to spend years at school, let alone at university.The relevant knowledge was deemed to have been learnt on the farm from childhood as parent andchild worked side by side. This is not a put-down of rural land-holders but a fact. I would put their diversepractical experience and knowledge of their industry far above that gained from books. As we all know,what works on paper does not always work in practice. Rural production is not a one-size-fits-allapplication.

The application kit is written in English. It requires a higher level of education, such as universitystandard, and a substantial grasp of computer terminology. A large percentage of land-holders, asmentioned earlier, are aged 60-plus. This document is virtually indecipherable to them. They requireprofessional help to interpret the requirements of government. The government understood this andasked them to seek help in meeting the conditions of the application. It is a shame and a disgrace thatthis government fails to convey its requirements in a manner which is easily understood but worse that itdoes it in a manner that smacks of elitism.

University ServicesMr LEE (Indooroopilly—ALP) (10.25 am): This state's student guilds, student representative

councils and student unions provide essential services on campus. They run obvious things likecanteens and bookshops but also, importantly, provide very important services like academic appeals,accommodation services and employment assistance. They do this by charging a nominal fee touniversity students. In a lot of ways it is a lot like on-campus local government.

We already know that the Howard government hates people who want to get an education unlessthey are paying fees up front. With 1 July fast approaching there are serious concerns that the Liberal-National federal government will seek to destroy student run organisations by introducing laws toprovide for what it calls voluntary student unionism for no other reason than that it has an ideological setagainst student run organisations.

This is a bit like calling for voluntary local government membership. It is really quite stupid and willdisproportionately harm the most vulnerable university students. The people I am talking about arecountry students who move to Brisbane to study. They move from country areas. They often move intomy electorate and live in suburbs like Indooroopilly, Taringa and Toowong. They live in Brisbane. They

524 Questions Without Notice 10 Mar 2005

rely upon services run by the student union at UQ. They rely upon accommodation services,employment services and, very importantly, clubs and societies at the university for entertainment.

I am very seriously concerned about this. I am working very closely with students, particularlyfrom Griffith University's SRC and the guild at QUT. Jessica Pugh from the Queensland branch of theNational Union of Students has been excellent. I know that there is a lot of concern at UQ, too.

I think we ought to see a commitment from the National Party today that it will lobby its federalcolleagues to make sure that its two voting members in the Senate block any moves to introducevoluntary student unionism. It is bad for university students who live in Brisbane, but it is worse foruniversity students who move to Brisbane to study. I call upon the National Party shadow educationminister—

Time expired.

Cancer Treatment ServicesMiss SIMPSON (Maroochydore—NPA) (10.28 am): Sunshine Coast cancer patients are waiting

months for diagnosis and treatment in the public system. This is putting lives at risk due to lengthydelays. While the state Beattie government praises itself for the health system, cancer patients arewaiting up to three months for diagnosis and treatment of aggressive cancers. I ask honourablemembers to listen to the tragedy of this comment from a constituent. She said—If I had received prompt and efficient service in the first place I would not have been caught up in the supposed unexpected largenumber of breast cancer patients.

This was not unexpected. We have warned about the problems in the cancer treatment area. I amconcerned that patients are paying for this government's ineptitude. My constituent has been told by hersurgeon that she will have to wait four to six weeks to have a mastectomy to address an aggressivecancer. However, due to delays in the Queensland health system for initial diagnosis the wait time in factis far longer. The total wait time for this lady's treatment is actually nearly three months. This is a ladywho has had cancer before and had symptoms.

This delay was not due to her actions but owing to the time it took to receive an appointment atBreastScreen Queensland for a mammogram and the subsequent wait time to see specialist doctors fora biopsy, ultrasound and consideration of surgery in the public health system. Since discovering thelump, she estimates that it has doubled in size and is about five centimetres in diameter. As she has ahistory of breast cancer, being told that she had to wait this long for surgery has distressed her. But sheis not alone. I understand that her GP is horrified and has urged her to go privately rather than wait toolong. I understand that other women have been put through this distress of the uncertainty of when theywould receive timely and appropriate attention to this issue. I understand that the Sunshine CoastHealth District is trying to get these people in for surgery earlier, but it highlights that there is a problemin the system when those who are most vulnerable, not with a minor condition but a life-threateningcondition, are unable to get timely diagnosis and treatment.

Time expired. Mr SPEAKER: The time for private members' statements has expired.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

Electricity IndustryMr SPRINGBORG (10.30 am): My first question without notice is to the Premier. Premier, on 23

June 2003 Energex and Powerlink released a document entitled Emerging network limitations whichrevealed that backup transformers were so old and deteriorated that they would probably fail if used,which they did; major electrical cables were 10 years past their shelf life, which they were; powerfailures could occur earlier than predicted if temperatures exceeded 35 degrees Celsius and humidityexceeded 66 per cent, which happened; and concern at the increase in airconditioning units in cityapartments and offices, which happened. Premier, on 2 November 2003 in the media Minister Lucasdenied any problem and said that the report identified issues ‘well ahead of them potentially becomingproblems'. Within days the minister's statement was proven to be untrue and the very issues identified inthe report were later confirmed as major issues by the Somerville report. As the Premier believes thatlying ministers should be sacked, will he apply the exact same standard to Minister Lucas as heexpected from the member for Clayfield?

Mr BEATTIE: I thank the honourable member for his question. The report he refers to is requiredunder the competition rules.

A government member: It's a three-stage process.Mr BEATTIE: It is indeed, as the minister indicates, a three-stage process. As a result of that

three-stage process, extra money was allocated for the inner-city network. The reason for that was—A government member interjected.

10 Mar 2005 Questions Without Notice 525

Mr BEATTIE: That is right; the work is being undertaken right now. The reason for that was that—Mr Springborg interjected.Mr SPEAKER: Order! I warned the opposition leader yesterday about interrupting during

questions and answers. I want to hear the answer. I am sure every member here wishes to hear theanswer.

Mr BEATTIE: What was identified in this report was that, because of our growth—everybodyknows we have a large population moving here from interstate every week—the number of units in theCBD had been increasing, which put extra demands on the network and so on. What we have here isvery simple. We have a three-stage process. There is a requirement for this report under thecompetition rules. Not only that, it identified future directions where money needed to be spent. Thatmoney has and is being spent. It was identified that it needed to be spent. In addition to that, we alsocommissioned the Somerville report to ensure that the issues in the network were addressed. Energexand Ergon, with our full support, have allocated significant amounts of money to ensure that the networkis upgraded and meets our future needs.

Mr SPRINGBORG: I rise to a point of order. Given what the report said and given what theminister said, the question is simple: did he lie or not?

Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not a point of order.Mr BEATTIE: The answer is very simple. If the Leader of the Opposition would give me an

opportunity, I would respond. Having explained the process that has been followed here and havingexplained the transparency of the process and what work was done, the answer to the Leader of theOpposition's question is no. The minister did not, under any circumstances, do what the Leader of theOpposition suggested. Indeed, if the Leader of the Opposition looks at the transparency of the process,it is self-evident.

Electricity IndustryMr SPRINGBORG: My second question without notice is to the minister for energy. I refer to the

minister's failure to answer question on notice No. 1519 in which he was asked to identify projects of thestate's electricity corporations outlined in the 2004-05 state budget capital works statement that werebehind schedule. Rather than putting it on the public record, why did the minister write a private letter tothe member for Lockyer and admit that over $92 million worth of projects are in fact now behindschedule? Why did the minister try to cover this up from the public record?

Mr MICKEL: Some cover-up! I write to the member and that is the cover-up! The oppositionleader just does not get any better, does he? What the Leader of the Opposition has not realised is this:that we are his opposition, but his enemies sit around him. As the member for Stafford said this morning,his enemies are approaching. Let us look at some of the interesting things that members have said inrelation to the electricity industry. On 14 October the member for Callide—and, oh, how we miss him—said that people in Queensland should be stocking up on candles and that they should be buying torchbatteries and portable generators. Then he said this in the Australian on 21 December—Oh, there's every chance of Christmas dinner by candlelight this year when the power goes out.

What did he say after we had had summer with a record demand? What did he say? He said, ‘Oh,the doomsday situation hasn't eventuated.' He cannot make up his mind, and the point is this: I havelistened for a couple of days now to the Leader of the Opposition berate and defile the Premier's family.One would think that the way the opposition behaved over this was something new. It is almost threeyears to the day—

Mr SPRINGBORG: I rise to a point of order. That is simply untrue and offensive, and I ask that itbe withdrawn.

Mr MICKEL: I will withdraw, but I refer the House to a report on a matter of privilege—that is,report No. 52—where the member for Callide defiled the brother of the Premier. What was it called? Atactical lie! So what we have is mendacity, mendacity, mendacity!

Mr SPRINGBORG: I rise to a point of order. My question was simple: why did you hide—Mr SPEAKER: That is no point of order. Resume your seat.Mr Springborg: Why don't you answer that?Mr MICKEL: Because he implied dishonesty. Let us look at what the report said. It said that the

imputation, even if it were not deliberately or knowingly misleading, was made by Mr Seeney and did infact mislead the House. Under that criterion, the opposition leader should have insisted on theresignation of the member for Callide. He did not. Rather than do that, he promoted him! He promotedhim! The situation is that he does not have double standards; he has no standards. Under the oppositionleader they might be going nowhere, but under the member for Callide they have got nowhere to go. Heshould insist on the same standards that he is insisting of the Premier. He should ask for his resignation,and do it now on the same basis that he insisted on for the member for Clayfield.


International Business Cadetship ProgramMrs CROFT: My question is to the Premier, and I ask: can the Premier please tell the House if

there have been any further cadetships created under the International Business Cadetship programwhich was initiated by the government in its first term?

Mr BEATTIE: Before I do, let me share some good news with the House. The latestunemployment figures are out, and unemployment has gone down one more point to 4.6 per cent.

Government members: Hear, hear!Mr Mackenroth: Nationally 5.1.Mr BEATTIE: Well, there you go. I take the Treasurer's interjection that nationally it is 5.1 per

cent. You see, we work; the opposition whinges. That is what Queenslanders want. I thank allQueenslanders for making the effort to continue to drive down the unemployment rate in this state. Ifone looks at it, the trend rate for Queensland is 4.6 per cent, down from 4.7 per cent. The trend rate forAustralia is unchanged at 5.1 per cent. We created 5,100 jobs, or 21.8 per cent of the 23,400 jobscreated in Australia for February. Queensland created 104,000 of the total 285,600 jobs over the pastyear and 81,800 of the total 189,900 full-time jobs over the past year—that is, 43.5 per cent. We are theengine room of Australia, and I am delighted about it.

In answer to the honourable member's question, let me talk about how we are building for thefuture of Australia,. Three people have begun work in the Department of the Premier and Cabinet for aperiod of 29 weeks as part of the International Business Cadetship program. This is about driving jobsand opportunities—building that export culture that we need. They were chosen from a highlycompetitive pool of applicants and, after induction with government agencies and sponsors, will workoverseas in the Queensland government trade and investment offices. So we put them overseas in ouroffices to get first-hand experience about exports.

I established this program in 1999 to enable high-calibre young people to explore trade andinvestment opportunities for Queensland industry. The cadets undertake a research project with thesupport and collaboration of selected Queensland industry sponsors. This year the research will focuson exploring opportunities for innovative technologies. Ms Andrea Bevan of Runaway Bay, which is inthe electorate of the member for Broadwater—as she well knows—will be based in the Los Angelesoffice for 20 weeks doing research on behalf of Brisbane based mining innovation companyGroundprobe. Mr Ian Hanrahan of Capalaba West, in the electorate of the member for Capalaba, will bebased in the London office for 20 weeks researching opportunities for EasyPost. EasyPost is aQueensland research and development company dedicated to developing a desktop mail solution.Mr Daiji Takshima from the Isle of Capri will be doing research for Matilda Pty Ltd in the Tokyo office for20 weeks. He is also from the Gold Coast. From its base in Queensland's Darling Downs, Matilda hasexported fresh broccoli to Japan, Taiwan and South-East Asia.

Three of last year's international business cadets are pursuing career opportunities overseas.Two have positions in Los Angeles: one with the Queensland Government Trade and Investment Officeand the other with Austrade. The third is pursuing opportunities in the United Kingdom. The remainingtwo cadets are back in Queensland. One is exploring export opportunities for a Queensland basedcorporation and the other has returned to university. That is the culture that will deliver the jobs oftomorrow. This is not just a strategy for today; it is a strategy for tomorrow as well.

Mr SPEAKER: Before calling member for Warrego, could I welcome two groups of students andteachers in the public gallery: students and teachers from Lockyer State High School at Gatton in theelectorate of Lockyer and from Belmont State School in the electorate of Chatsworth.

EnergexMr HOBBS: I direct a question to the minister for energy. I note that he did not answer the last

question, but maybe he will do a better job this time. Mr SPEAKER: Order! We do not need the preamble. The member will just ask the question. Mr HOBBS: I refer to the recent findings of the Queensland Competition Authority that Energex

had—Improved its profits during the current regulatory period by failing to undertaking necessary investment and maintenance.

Given that this shortfall was valued at $98 million at June 2004 and the Queensland CompetitionAuthority now estimates that Energex will underspend on operating and maintenance by $105 million byJune 2005, can the minister explain to the House exactly what he has done to rectify this situation andensure that profits have not remained as Energex's main focus during the state's electricity crisis?

Mr MICKEL: The situation is this: there is a QCA determination process. That is going on. TheQCA made a decision as recently as this week. As a government, we have responded. Energex isresponding to that to ensure that the matters raised by the QCA in relation to funding are being


addressed. Anybody would know that, with the competition authority, there is always a little bit of argy-bargy.

I want to say this, though. Last year members would have heard the opposition saying that all theproblems were caused by the dividends. Do members remember that? When the members oppositewere in government, they ripped out $850 million in dividends. All year—ever since I have been energyminister—I have heard that it is the dividends that are the problem. I did a little bit of research and Ifound this. Guess who said this on ABC Radio on 4 February 2004: ‘We are not saying that they shouldnot pay a dividend to the state. There is no doubt that they should, because they are public enterprises'?That was said by none other than the Leader of the Opposition. So it is okay to rip out $850 million whenthey are in government, it is okay on 4 February to say ‘Yes, dividends are okay, because’—

Mr SPRINGBORG: I rise to a point of order. That is a clear misrepresentation. We have alwayssaid that they should pay dividends. The minister knows that. We argued against the amount of thedividend. That has been our consistent position. The minister is misleading the House. It is a dishoneststatement. I ask him to withdraw it.

Mr SPEAKER: You are debating the issue. Resume your seat. Mr MICKEL: I will save the poor old thing from embarrassment. I am desperate to hold him up in

front all of those people. The numbers are being counted. Just as the member for Stafford read it out thismorning, we can see the new leaders all lining up and that is what is happening here.

Mr HOBBS: I rise to a point of order. My question was on the operation and maintenance, not thedividends. Can the minister tell us what he is doing about the operation and maintenance.

Mr SPEAKER: The minister is answering the question, if you will give him the opportunity. Mr MICKEL: I have already explained that. I will say that one of the great difficulties I have had is

that, because the power has been on this summer, my poor little fax machine got this document. It istitled Should the Queensland National and Liberal Parties merge? We have heard the Leader of theOpposition talk a lot about honesty. He said that the greatest majority of people support this. When Iread the document, I found that there were 82 respondents. I ask members to remember that the Leaderof the Opposition said that it was the greatest majority who support this. Thirty-seven out of 82 said thatit was a good idea. That is the greatest majority! We are going backwards to the Joh days. Do membersremember the gerrymander? Thirty-seven per cent was the greatest majority. Thanks to my little faxmachine, there we have it again. The poor old Leader of the Opposition is under some doubt again.

St Patrick's DayMr TERRY SULLIVAN: My question is directed to the Premier. One week from today many

Queenslanders will celebrate St Patrick's Day. I ask: how is the state government working in partnershipwith the Irish community to build on past achievements and to strengthen our cultural and businesslinks?

Mr BEATTIE: I thank the honourable member for the question. With a name like Terry Sullivan,there is no need to work out where he came from. I am delighted to answer his question. I want to thankthe member for Stafford for his question—

An honourable member interjected. Mr BEATTIE: We know the member's, too. I note the ongoing involvement of the member for

Stafford with Queensland's Irish community. The Irish have made a tremendous contribution toQueensland. They have helped build this state and they have made immeasurable impacts as clergy,industrial leaders, sporting greats, artists, publicans, farmers, intellectuals, lawyers, humanitarians,journalists and, yes, even politicians. Most of all, they have made their mark as down-to-earthQueenslanders with abundant intelligence, humour and passion. There is no doubt that these IrishQueenslanders have helped shape our Smart State and I thank them today for that.

I also thank the member for Stafford in particular for his persistence over more than a year to helpbring about the very successful Irish trade seminar held at Parliament House last October. In workingwith the Irish Business Association and the Queensland Irish Association, the department of trade andthe department of state development assisted more than 130 Queensland businesspeople whoexpressed their interest in increasing our trade links both directly with Ireland and also through Ireland toEurope. I thank the member for that. As members know, I have visited Ireland twice as Premier and I willbe encouraging other ministers from time to time in the future to visit Ireland. In fact, as the Minister forHealth knows, they have brought in recent smoking bans, an example which we followed. I know thatthe Minister for Health is keeping a very careful eye on that.

The state government is proud to contribute $25,000 as the biggest sponsor of the St Patrick'sDay parade in Brisbane, which this year will take place on Saturday, 12 March. I will be there. I alwayslook forward to attending these parades as well as the St Patrick's eve dinner at the Irish club. I knowthat the QIA President, Eamon Gaffney, will host one of Brisbane's premier celebrations at Tara House.Brisbane began staging St Patrick's Day parades in the 1890s and they were an annual event until


World War II. Organisers of the early parades met in the Valley Hotel, now Dooley's. In 1989 publicanJan Dooley decided to resurrect the annual parade.

Of course, Queensland was not the address of choice for the first Irish arrivals. Irish convict JohnFinnegan has been credited with creating the impetus for early European settlement of Brisbane. SomeIrish were among the first convicts and military guard to officially arrive in Queensland in 1824. Our firstGovernor, Sir George Bowen, hailed from Donegal and three of his four immediate successors werealso Irish born. Between 1861 and 1865 about 40 per cent of arrivals were Irish. Surges in Irish arrivalsto Queensland came in the 1880s and from 1900 to 1915. Nineteenth century shearing world championJackie Howe had Irish forebears, as did Danny Sheahan, the poet who wrote the original version of ThePub With No Beer. Arthur Hoey Davis, who wrote On Our Selection as Steele Rudd, was the son of atransported Irish orphan girl and a convict exile. I table the rest of that information for the Housebecause I think that the Irish are worth it.

Q-BuildMr MESSENGER: My question is directed to the minister for public works and housing. The

Moore Park State School P&C was recently informed that Q-Build services must be used to install theschool's airconditioning, even though local independent contractors were up to $180,000 cheaper. Itable a copy of those quotes. Are Q-Build's inflated prices just a way of feathering the government'snest? Will the minister commit to giving schools greater opportunity to choose their own contractor andgiving P&Cs more bang for their buck?

Mr SCHWARTEN: I thank the member for the question. He has been in the parliament for only ashort time. I notice that those opposite are building up the theme of Q-Build hatred, which we all knowabout. The honourable member has been here a short—

Opposition members interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! We are going to hear the answer to this question.Mr SCHWARTEN: Let them go, Mr Speaker, because the reality is that we on this side of the

parliament know the vitriol and the hatred they have for day labour in this state. I am very proud that weare the only government in the world with 450 construction apprentices on our books.

Mr MESSENGER: Mr Speaker, I rise to a point of order. The question is not about apprentices;the question is about airconditioning.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Mr SCHWARTEN: I am trying to educate the poor fellow about what Q-Build does. I could fill a

reasonable size chaff bag with the number of letters that I have had from that side of politicscomplaining about Q-Build, and 99 per cent of the time they get it wrong in terms of costs and all the restof it. I know of cases where schools have had airconditioning installed and the contractors have cutthrough the roof and cut through the ceiling, and guess what it is made of? Asbestos. He is the verygentleman who has been going on about it. It is plastered throughout the school. Q-Build does not dothat.

An opposition member: Which one? Name them. Mr SCHWARTEN: I am happy to bring the list in here and table it. I have done it on previous

occasions. Q-Build had to go and fix it up at a great deal of expense. Q-Build was able to build that veryschool down there in the honourable member's electorate which I went and visited earlier this year. Q-Build did a damn fine job when the private contractors could not do it. I will continue to defend Q-Buildand its capacity to build in the private market. Our quotes are competitive with private enterprise. Whatwe invariably find is that—

Opposition members interjected.Mr SCHWARTEN: They are reverting to form. We know they want to privatise Q-Build. I know

that. They use every opportunity they can to attack Q-Build. The record of Q-Build speaks for itself. Itguarantees its product. By the way, 60 per cent of the work is given to private sector subcontractorsthroughout Queensland who would go broke tomorrow without Q-Build. It is very well defended by theQueensland Master Builders Association and it has a proud record of training.

Queensland Ambulance Service, ParamedicsMs LIDDY CLARK: My question is directed to the Minister for Emergency Services. It was

pleasing to hear that four new paramedics have started at Chermside Ambulance Station as part of thelatest round of new paramedics. Can the minister inform the House what else is in the pipeline for theAmbulance Service?

Mr CUMMINS: I thank the member for the question. She is not the only government MP who hascommented to me on the new faces at their local ambulance stations after 47 new paramedics hit the


road at stations around the state last week. More new paramedics are obviously great news and, yes,we continue to improve ambulance response times. I am also pleased to announce today anothermultimillion dollar commitment from the Beattie government which will also assist in improving ourresponse times. Following the midyear budget review, the Executive Council has now approved extrafunding of nearly $5 million to fast-track the acquisition and installation of my department's upgradedcomputer aided dispatch system. This will replace the three systems that currently operate across theQueensland Ambulance Service and the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service communications centresintroducing—

Mr MACKENROTH: Mr Speaker, I rise to a point of order. Will Mr Springborg please give himselfthe Logie?

Mr CUMMINS: This will replace the three systems that currently operate across the QAS and theQueensland Fire and Rescue Service communications centres introducing a single common platformstatewide. This extra $4.8 million in funding brings the total allocation to nearly $6 million.Queenslanders will agree that this funding is very well deserved.

This new computer aided dispatch system is great news not just for our paramedics but for allQueenslanders. By providing a greater level of functionality it will strengthen and improve our dispatchsystem, and by providing a more efficient control of the ambulance fleet it will help improve responsetimes by ensuring the most appropriate responses to emergencies. We can have the best paramedicsand the best firefighters in the world—and I think we do have them here in Queensland—but they needthe best equipment and the best training to back them up. This new computer aided dispatch system willdeliver that, supporting our paramedics as they carry out their work on the front line. Preparations for thesystem are well advanced. My department is currently finalising contract details, and once these arecompleted implementation will begin.

Improvements to the QAS like this improved computer aided dispatch system and the boost toparamedic numbers are a direct result of the community ambulance cover. We are seeing moreparamedics, more new stations and more new vehicles than ever before, and we are seeing the benefitsof that as response times continue to improve. For the past seven consecutive months we have seenQAS response times continue to improve. It clearly shows that the Beattie government made the rightchoice when it took the hard decision to introduce the community ambulance cover.

Interruption.

PRIVILEGE

Comments by the PremierMr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (10.56 am): Yesterday, while I

was unavoidably absent from this House, there were some unfortunate remarks made about myphysical appearance. Leaving aside the cowardliness of making such remarks while I was absent, Iwould like the House to know that I was pleased and proud to launch the Leukaemia Foundation Shavefor a Cure in central Queensland last week, and we raised many thousands of dollars. I would hope thatthe unfortunate remarks made in this House do not jeopardise that major fundraiser for the LeukaemiaFoundation this weekend. I urge all members of the House and all Queenslanders to support thosepeople who are courageous enough to participate in Shave for a Cure. Let us do something real to carefor kids with leukaemia.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not a point of privilege. Resume your seat. Mr BEATTIE: I made no unfavourable reference in relation to the Deputy Leader of the

Opposition's appearance. I made references to the fact that he was a bully. He was a bully before hehad the haircut and that remains the case.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICEResumed.

Minister for Police and Corrective ServicesMrs STUCKEY: My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Police and Corrective

Services. When she was first appointed as minister she stated that she was well qualified because shewatched the television series The Bill. Given that all her dreams came true this week when she met herTV idols, can the minister tell us exactly what was the point of her and the Premier discussingQueensland police matters with British soap actors? Is this not just another example of the ministerconfusing fantasy with reality, just like when she claimed that there were enough police to keepBrisbane's streets safe?


Ms SPENCE: I was very pleased to join the Premier in meeting the cast of The Bill on Mondaythis week. June Ackland and Jim Carver—the television characters—are wonderful people. But in reallife they are lovely people; they are friendly and they are down to earth. We certainly talked to themabout Queenslanders' love of that particular television show.

In my first interview after being named police minister I was asked a number of questions. One ofthose questions was, ‘Do you like watching police shows on TV?' I replied, ‘Yes, I do. In fact, I try towatch The Bill. It's one of my favourite shows.' That certainly was never nominated by me as a reasonwhy I thought I had some qualifications for the Police portfolio. In fact, I did go on in that pressconference and talk about the fact that I had been responsible for juvenile justice for three years, that Ihad been responsible for domestic violence, that I had been responsible for the Aboriginal and TorresStrait Islander portfolio for six years, that I had been responsible for child protection for three years andthat all of those insights gave me some understanding of police work. To trivialise my qualifications, asthe member has done today, is very shameful and unnecessary.

Talking about police numbers, I am very proud that this government has increased policenumbers, and we will continue to increase those numbers beyond our expectations. We had anagreement with the Police Service and the Queensland public that we would have 9,100 police officersin this state by September this year. As a result of budgetary allocations last year we are going to dobetter than that. We will have 9,150 police officers in place. Even better is the fact that we went to theelection with a commitment to keep the police to population ratios above the national average. TheBeattie government is committed to putting more police out there on the beat. We are employing morepolice officers and we are civilianising more police positions. In fact, we have a commitment tocivilianise an additional 500 police positions over the next two years. The member can be very pleasedthat we will have police out there on the beat where Queenslanders want to see them.

Mr SPEAKER: Before calling the member for Woodridge, could I welcome a second group ofstudents and teachers from Belmont State School in the electorate of Chatsworth.

Skill ShortagesMrs DESLEY SCOTT: My question is to the Minister for Employment, Training and Industrial

Relations. Top industry leaders who met in Canberra this week have called for new approaches toovercoming our national skills shortage which is worsening every month. Can the minister tell membersabout the Queensland government strategies already being implemented to ease these problems in ourstate?

Mr BARTON: I thank the member for the question because I certainly can; I would love to tell theparliament about Queensland's activities and strategies. Early last year—almost a year ago—theQueensland government announced that it would invest $1 billion over three years in a strategydesigned to meet the skill needs of Queensland's industries. One of the most critical issues facingQueensland and indeed Australia is the availability of skilled workers. Our strategy named SmartVETwas designed to deliver a range of training and employment strategies to support the skill needs ofQueensland industry and individuals, particularly in those traditional trades experiencing skill shortages.

It was very illuminating for me to hear that industry representatives had gathered at anemployment, education and training round table in Canberra this week to discuss their solutions to skillshortages on a national level. They spoke of the need to reduce the time taken for apprenticeships.They spoke of closer working relationships with industry. They talked about the advantages ofintroducing young people to a career in the traditional trades via their school.

I am very pleased to say that here in Queensland we are not talking about skill shortages, likethey were with the Howard government in Canberra this week. We are actually delivering strategies inQueensland. They have been delivered for some years under this government, and they have beenstrengthened during this term of government. We have 17 pilot accelerated apprenticeship schemesunder way around the state where mature-age people are being fast-tracked into apprenticeships.These apprenticeships are occurring in the building and construction, manufacturing, engineering,tourism and hospitality industries.

We have initiated the recognition of prior learning process in a number of areas to enable peoplewith industry experience to gain qualifications. We are working with industry to share the cost of trainingfor existing workers in skill shortage areas under our program titled Industry Training Partnerships. Bythe end of March we expect to have arrangements in place to train 1,870 workers in a wide range ofindustries under that program alone. We have introduced cadetships in the forestry industry.Queensland continues to lead Australia in the implementation of school based apprenticeships andtraineeships, with more and more young Queenslanders across the state taking them up. More than halfof all the school based apprenticeships and traineeships in Australia are in Queensland.

Rather than telling young people to leave school at year 10, as the Prime Minister did this week,the federal government should be putting into place programs and helping us with the Education andTraining Reforms for the Future initiative, which is encouraging young people to train for a career,


including vocational education careers, while finishing year 12. The point is that the Prime Minister andhis government just discovered skill shortages during the election campaign last year. We were warningagainst it and doing something about it the entire time.

Infrastructure Planning, GympieMiss ELISA ROBERTS: My question is to the Treasurer. As the minister stated in his ministerial

statement this morning, south-east Queensland is eagerly awaiting the release of the government'sinfrastructure plan. Can the minister advise what plans the government has to address Gympie's needfor infrastructure given that the government has excluded Gympie from the South-East QueenslandRegional Plan?

Mr MACKENROTH: I did not draw the boundaries for south-east Queensland. That is whyGympie is actually just on the border of it. The Cooloola shire meets Noosa, and the south-eastQueensland region is regarded as being from Noosa to the Gold Coast and out to Toowoomba. I givethe member the assurance that I will not forget Gympie because my mother came from there. As everwe go about things, I will always remember Gympie. I spent many holidays there as a youngster so I willnever forget Gympie, nor will I forget the rest of Queensland.

We are preparing to release in April this year an infrastructure plan for south-east Queensland.This will go together with the final south-east Queensland plan which will be released in June. The planthat will be released in June is about growth in south-east Queensland and where that growth is going tooccur. The infrastructure plan goes with that so that people living in south-east Queensland are aware ofwhen government is planning to provide infrastructure so that people and councils are able to develop.One of the important things for the infrastructure plan in south-east Queensland will be that the 18councils in south-east Queensland that have been talking to me a lot about how they would like to beinvolved in our infrastructure plan can actually all do their own plan as to how they are going to providethe infrastructure on a local level for the local roads, the local sewerage and the local water. Thecouncils will be able to do their own infrastructure plans to fit with this.

Outside of south-east Queensland there is already a state infrastructure plan which is released bythe minister for state development each year, but the Premier and I have discussed the need to do somemore localised regional infrastructure plans for the rest of the state. We will be making anannouncement shortly as to the exact process involved in that so that no region in Queensland shouldfeel left out. I am certainly not going to do that.

The member for Gympie would remember that last June I did give to her local paper a completelist of all of the things that I had delivered for Gympie in the budget. I can assure the member that I neverforgot Gympie then and I will not forget Gympie tomorrow.

Biotechnology and Science in SchoolsMrs CARRYN SULLIVAN: My question is addressed to the Minister for State Development and

Innovation. Can the minister inform the House of any initiatives to promote biotechnology and scienceamong schools in Queensland?

Mr McGRADY: I thank the member for the question. Before I reply, I inform the Premier and theHouse that, whilst we can talk about the activities on 17 March in Brisbane, there are many regionalplaces, including Mount Isa, which have far greater activities than those which are carried out here in thecapital of the state.

Mr Beattie: I stand corrected. Mr Schwarten: You fought and died for Ireland, didn't you? Mr McGRADY: I fought and died for Ireland. I certainly did. I am happy to announce that the state

government's BioBus will hit the road in May to give Queensland high school students the opportunity todiscover the very exciting world of biotechnology. The schedule is still being finalised, but I can tellmembers that it will be operated by the Queensland Museum. It will have a full-time teacher fromEducation Queensland on board who will deliver a classroom educational program. I thank myministerial colleague Ms Bligh for her assistance and cooperation.

The bus will be kitted out with several interpretive and interactive exhibits to give youngQueenslanders in some of the state's more remote areas the chance to see just how biotechnology isimproving the quality of their lives. Hopefully the two-year travelling roadshow will encourage manystudents to consider taking up a career in the sciences.

The Smart State certainly needs more scientists—particularly in biotechnology, which is one ofthe fastest-growing sectors in Queensland. The Smart State has many advantages. We have thegreatest biodiversity of any Australian state. This is creating enormous opportunities for thedevelopment of new drugs and treatments to battle global diseases such as cancer and Alzheimer's.Australia is one of only 12 megadiverse environments on earth. Up to 80 per cent of Queensland'smarine and terrestrial species are not found anywhere else on the planet.


The Queensland government has recognised the value of the biotechnology sector and hasinvested millions of dollars in building some of the largest and most significant research facilities in theSouthern Hemisphere. These include the Queensland Biosciences Precinct at the University ofQueensland. Seven hundred scientists are working there on ways to use the genes and proteins ofplants, animals and humans to improve our lives. The Queensland Institute of Medical Research isconducting world-leading research into developing—

Time expired.

Palm Island Aboriginal Council; CMC InvestigationMr SEENEY: My question is addressed to the Premier. I will read it slowly and gently so that he

does not think he is being bullied. Mr SPEAKER: Order! No preambles. Just read the question. Mr SEENEY: As long as he does not cry. I really cannot stand crocodile tears. Mr SPEAKER: Order! Read the question.Mr SEENEY: I refer the Premier to the question I asked him on Tuesday. The Premier has said a

number of times that when he found out that Aboriginal activists were travelling to Palm Island at publicexpense he gave very firm instructions that that decision be reversed. Indeed, that was confirmed in astatement to the House on Tuesday by the former minister. When the Premier saw Liddy Clark's pressrelease claiming that it was never intended that the government pay, he could not help but realise theinconsistency of the former minister's claim, given his very firm instructions to reverse her previousdecisions. Yet the Premier continued to criticise me for referring the matter to the CMC. Can the Premiertell the parliament why he so vigorously defended this shining example of his government's integrity?

Mr BEATTIE: I thank the honourable member for his question and I thank him for redrafting it. Idraw the CMC report to the attention of the House. In fact, I table page 39 of the report. Page 39 in partstates—Turning to the specific allegation raised by the Acting Leader of the Opposition that 'staff in the Premier's office had been involvedin concocting a cover-up', it is not difficult to appreciate why Mr Yanner interpreted matters in the manner he did.

It goes on—In light of the circumstances prevailing at the time—

Mr Springborg interjected.Mr BEATTIE: I am actually very happy to answer this. Mr Seeney interjected. Mr SPEAKER: Order! We are going to hear the answer. Mr BEATTIE: It states—

In light of the circumstances prevailing at the time, the reality is that it would have been utterly fanciful for the Premier or anyoneon his staff to expect that Mr Foster and, in particular, Mr Yanner, would assist in mounting a 'cover-up'—even—

Mr SEENEY: Mr Speaker, I rise to a point of order. The Premier is deliberately not answering thequestion and misrepresenting what the question was.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Mr SEENEY: The question was: why did he not act when he saw the minister's press release in

December instead of criticising me for referring it to the CMC? Mr SPEAKER: Order! Resume your seat. I have said repeatedly in this place that we as a

parliament are entitled to hear the full answer from the Premier. The Premier has been on his feet forjust a few seconds and now you are up saying that he has not answered the question. I would ask allmembers to give whoever is answering the question the opportunity to do so.

Mr BEATTIE: I table page 39. Page 40 of the CMC report states—Therefore, while the Premier's intervention undoubtedly influenced much of what followed, the allegation that staff of the Premier'soffice were involved in concocting a cover-up strategy is not one supported either as a matter of logic or, more significantly, by theevidence. The allegation cannot be sustained.

Let me specifically answer the question. This matter was referred to the CMC. I took the view—and Iacknowledged this earlier—that I did not believe the Deputy Leader of the Opposition should havereferred it there. But when he did, I did what I always do: I let the independent watchdog do theinvestigation. I provided, through my staff, all the information that was required.

Mr Seeney interjected.Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Callide will cease interjecting. That is my final warning. Mr BEATTIE: That included the email that was provided to my office. That included any

interchange that took place between my office and the minister's office. Mr Copeland interjected.


Mr SPEAKER: Order! Member for Cunningham, this is my final warning. Mr BEATTIE: Do members know what I did? There was no political interference. I let the CMC

investigate. What did it do? It looked at what the Deputy Leader of the Opposition said, it looked at hisallegation and it said that the allegation cannot be substantiated. That is the answer to the question. Theindependent watchdog determined that the allegation made by the Deputy Leader of the Oppositiontoday had no substantiation. That means, in English, that there was no basis to it. That means, inEnglish, that there was nothing to it.

The answer to the question is very simple. The CMC report found adversely that a misleadingstatement was issued. The former minister had the courage and the guts to take the principled positionto resign, for which I said she deserves credit. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition cannot come inhere and say, 'I agree with that part of the report but I do not agree with that part in relation to thePremier's staff.’ He cannot have it both ways.

Mr SEENEY: I move—That the Premier be given an extension of time so that he can tell the House why he did not act in December when he read theminister's dishonest press release.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Resume your seat. Mr Seeney: Answer that one. Why didn't you act in December? Mr SPEAKER: Order! Resume your seat. Mr BEATTIE: Mr Speaker, I rise to a point of order. I did act in December. I acted in December by

doing the right thing according to the law. I let the CMC do its investigation and I accepted the outcome.One thing about my government is that we are honest and we let the independent watchdog do its job. Iwill never support, under any circumstances, a tactical lie, which the Deputy Leader of the Oppositiondoes.

Queensland Mines Rescue ServiceMr PEARCE: My question is addressed to the Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Energy.

I refer to the major fire burning out of control in the giant Buchanan underground coalmine in Virginia,USA. Can the minister advise the House whether Queensland Mines Rescue Service personnel willplay a key role in emergency operations to extinguish the blaze?

Mr ROBERTSON: I thank the honourable member for Fitzroy for his ongoing interest in themining industry, particularly the Queensland Mines Rescue Service. The Queensland Mines RescueService has this morning deployed a specialist team to the United States to help extinguish theBuchanan mine fire. The fire has been burning out of control for over a week now, and all efforts todistinguish the blaze have proved unsuccessful. As a result, the mine owner, CONSOL Energy, sent anSOS to the Queensland Mines Rescue Service for expert help.

The QMRS state manager, Wayne Hartley, tells me his 11-man team left Brisbane at first light tojoin a senior QMRS supervisor already on the ground at the mine. Our QMRS personnel are recognisedworldwide as the Red Adairs of suppressing underground mine fires using the gag inert gas generatorsystem. The gag system is basically a jet engine which burns oxygen out of the atmosphere inunderground mines. It produces 20 cubic metres per second of atmosphere with less than two per centoxygen. This is pumped into the mine to starve the fire of oxygen.

QMRS teams are world leaders at utilising this equipment and have successfully extinguishedcoalmine fires in Queensland, New South Wales and the United States. Coincidentally, it is almost twoyears to the day since the QMRS team helped suppress a major underground fire at the Loveridgecoalmine in West Virginia using the gag system. QMRS maintains two mobile gag units at its Dysartbase and can quickly deploy them to any underground coalmine in Queensland.

The Queensland mining industry enjoys an international reputation for its mine safety record andworld-class mine safety expertise. Our assistance in this mine emergency will not only provide valuableexperience for our mines rescue personnel but also further enhance Queensland's deserved reputation.I congratulate the Queensland Mines Rescue Service for its rapid response to assist in this internationalemergency.

Lacey, Mr RMr LANGBROEK: My question without notice is to the Minister for Natural Resources and Mines.

I refer to the minister’s decision to employ Robert Lacey as a regional cultural heritage coordinator. Thisis the same Robert Lacey who pleaded guilty to two counts of fraud and was sentenced to a communityservice order prior to testifying in the recent trial of Sugar Ray Robinson. Given that Mr Lacey later hadhis community service order vacated on the grounds of ill health, how is it that this convicted fraudster istoo sick to do community service, but healthy enough to satisfy the employment conditions of theminister's department?


Mr ROBERTSON: I thank the honourable member for the question. I will deal with a number offacts in relation to Mr Lacey. Robert Lacey has been employed with my department as a regionalcultural heritage coordinator in Rockhampton since mid 2004. His job involves liaison with traditionalowners on the identification and protection of Indigenous cultural heritage.

At the time of his appointment he had no conviction recorded. He did, however, make thedepartment aware of his involvement in court proceedings and that he had pleaded guilty. No convictionwas recorded. His supervisor checked with the department's human resources section as to whetherthis would affect his employment. The advice was that it would not affect his employment as a culturalheritage coordinator because the position did not involve duties where he would be responsible for orhave access to financial matters.

Mr Lacey offered to resign when the court subsequently reinstated his conviction. The convictionwas recorded only because he could not complete a community service order due to illness. Mr Laceycame to the department with very good references from the community and was appointed through anopen merit selection process. To date he has performed his duties with the utmost professionalism, inline with departmental standards and requirements.

At all times Mr Lacey has been open and honest with my department in relation to the mattersthat I have mentioned. Determinations have been made all the way along that those matters do not andshould not have any bearing on either his employment or his ongoing employment as a cultural heritageofficer. I restate for the honourable member's benefit that when this matter was brought to mydepartment's attention a determination was made that because he was not in control of financialresources or taxpayers' dollars his recorded convictions would not have an impact on his role as acultural heritage officer.

I should mention that on the weekend of our community cabinet meeting in Charleville a numberof weeks ago Mr Lacey was travelling with two Aboriginal elders out west to conduct work. Tragically,they had a very serious motor vehicle accident. Whilst I understand Mr Lacey is recovering from thataccident, the injuries sustained by the two Aboriginal elders were very serious indeed and I believe theyremain in intensive care. I take this opportunity to wish Mr Lacey well in his recovery and my bestwishes and thoughts go out to the elders. I wish them a speedy recovery.

Mr SPEAKER: Before calling the member for Cleveland, I welcome a third group of students fromBelmont State School in the electorate of Chatsworth.

Public Health System; Constituent InquiriesMr BRISKEY: My question is directed to the Minister for Health. Can the minister advise the

House on the most effective way to help constituents should they approach members regardingQueensland's public health system?

Mr NUTTALL: I will just digress for 30 seconds. This morning at around 8.30 there was a firealarm in the Parliamentary Annexe. I understand that it was as a result of the honourable member forMoggill actually lighting the 55 candles on his birthday cake.

Dr FLEGG: Mr Speaker, I rise to a point of order. The minister is misleading the House. I litnothing and I knew nothing about it. It would be very sad if I had to light my own birthday cake.

Mr NUTTALL: I do wish him a happy birthday. On a number of occasions in the past I havechallenged members of parliament to go direct to the relevant district managers in Queensland Health ifany patient related issues are reported to them. I have opened up these lines of communicationbecause this provides the most direct process for helping patients. My focus in this portfolio is do justthat—help people.

I have also made it clear that if matters are not resolved through this process, members are ableto contact my office. Yesterday, the honourable member for Moggill chose to grandstand in thisparliament rather than taking the direct route to help people. Once again he denigrated our healthsystem without checking his facts. I have said time—

Dr FLEGG: Mr Speaker, I rise to a point of order. The minister is misleading the House again. Iwrote, on behalf of the patient who was named in parliament, to the appropriate hospital. I did not simplybring the case to parliament.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is no point of order. Mr NUTTALL: I have said time and time again that I will not discuss the private health matters of

individuals in this chamber and I stick to that position. However, I can say that my department hasinvestigated both patient issues raised by the member in his question to me yesterday. Once again, themember for Moggill has been found to be loose with the truth.

Neither of the cases brought to this chamber by the member opposite demonstrate what heimplied in his remarks yesterday. Doctors make decisions about appropriate timing of surgery andreview appointments in Queensland Health, not politicians. In both cases the member for Moggillbrought before the House decisions made by doctors. I respect and trust those decisions. The memberopposite is a politician and every time he chooses to be loose with the truth he shows that even hismedical degree does not give him credibility in this chamber.


I have recognised in this House that our health system is not perfect. We have a shortage ofdoctors that make providing some services difficult, but we are constantly working to improve thesystem. This week in a national publication, the national AMA vice-president estimated Australia hadvacancies for some 4,000 doctors. He said—There is no quick solution. It takes time and must begin with larger intakes of medical students into Australian universities.

This is one very rare occasion of late where the AMA and I are in complete agreement. I havechallenged members of this House before and I repeat my challenge today. If they actually want to helppeople who have problems with the health system they should take the problem to the district manager.Anyone who follows a different course of action, either through the media or in this chamber, is showingthat they are not about helping people but about furthering their own political agendas to the detrimentof all.

Mr SPEAKER: Before calling the member for Gladstone, I welcome to the public gallery studentsand teachers of Toowong High School in the electorate of Indooroopilly.

Gladstone HospitalMrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM: My question without notice is to the Minister for Health. Concerns have

been expressed to me that a number of positions at the Gladstone Hospital have been reclassified toallow the work to be done either from the Gladstone or Rockhampton hospitals. This will allow thetransfer of these positions to Rockhampton and a further eroding of services to my constituents. Doesthe minister agree with this strategy which has created uncertainty for staff in affected work areas? Willhe investigate and reverse the process?

Mr NUTTALL: I thank the honourable member for the question. I am not aware of any structuralchanges that are taking place in the Gladstone district, but I will give an undertaking to the honourablemember that I will investigate the matter. We are not about—and I re-emphasise this—taking awayservices from the people of Gladstone. I will investigate those matters and come back to the member.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Fouras): Order! The time allotted for questions has now expired.


Answer to QuestionHon. PD BEATTIE (Brisbane Central—ALP) (Premier and Minister for Trade) (11.28 am), by

leave: Yesterday in question time the Leader of the Opposition raised a number of issues which I will notgo over. I want to make sure though that there is no suggestion that I have not fully and completelyanswered the question that he raised with me. On Sunday, 21 March 2004 I held a news conferencewhere I made a number of announcements. I table a full transcript for the information of the House.

Pages 11 to 23 of that transcript deal with the issues raised by the Leader of the Oppositionyesterday. For completeness so that this answer is absolutely complete and nothing is left out, I seekleave to incorporate the details of that news conference—every word—in Hansard so that the world canmake its own judgment.

Leave granted.TRANSCRIPT

PRESS CONFERENCE WITH PREMIER PETER BEATTIESUNDAY 21 MARCH 2004

RE: PETER FORSTER CHILD PROTECTION BLUEPRINT;

PREMIER'S FAMILY'S USE OF ELECTORATE CARBEATTIE: OKAY, THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT TODAY. FIRSTLY THE TREASURER

AND I HAD A BRIEFING FROM PETER FORSTER ABOUT HIS REPORT WHICH WILL BE DELIVERED TO USTOMORROW AND WILL GO TO CABINET. THE FIRST THING I WANT TO SAY IS IT'S FAIRLY CLEAR THATTHE COST OF THESE REFORMS WILL BE CONSIDERABLY MORE THAN THE ONE HUNDRED ANDTWENTY-FIVE MILLION DOLLARS THAT WE ASSESSED INITIALLY. I WANT TO SAY TWO THINGS, EVENBEFORE IT GOES TO CABINET. FIRSTLY, WE'RE DETERMINED TO FIX THIS PROBLEM. AS MANY OF YOU KNOW I'VE PERSONALLY IN MYLIFE BEEN A BENEFICIARY OF ASSISTANCE FROM THE FAMILIES DEPARTMENT AND I THEREFOREHAVE A VERY STRONG PERSONAL COMMITMENT TO ENSURING THAT THESE REFORMS FROM THECMC ARE IMPLEMENTED, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE COSTING MANY MILLIONS OF DOLLARS MORETHAN WE ANTICIPATED. AND THAT WILL REQUIRE US TO OBVIOUSLY DELVE INTO THE STRONGBOTTOM LINE THAT THE STATE HAS. WE ARE IN A VERY STRONG FINANCIAL POSITION LUCKILYBECAUSE OF SOUND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT. AND ACCORDINGLY WE WILL USE THAT STRONGBOTTOM LINE TO FUND THESE PROVISIONS. BUT THESE ARE RECURRENT PROVISIONS, THIS IS NOT CAPITAL, THIS IS PROVISIONS THAT WILLREQUIRE EXPENDITURE ON AN ONGOING BASIS. I DO, HOWEVER, WANT TO ASSUREQUEENSLANDERS THAT WE WILL NOT BE INCREASING TAXES AND CHARGES TO FUND IT. IT'LL BE


FUNDED OFF THE STATE'S BOTTOM LINE, THAT STRONG, SOUND BOTTOM LINE. AND NOT ONLY THATTAXES AND CHARGES WILL BE INCREASED IN THE NORMAL WAY, LINKED TO CPI. BUT THIS WILL BECONSIDERABLY MORE THAN WE ANTICIPATED. I DO WANT TO ALSO MAKE THE POINT THAT CREATINGTHE DEPARTMENT OF CHILD SAFETY WILL BE A PRIORITY FOR THE GOVERNMENT. THE BLUEPRINT THAT PETER FORSTER WILL BE GIVING TO US TOMORROW, AND WE'VE TALKEDABOUT THE DETAILS, SOME OF THESE DETAILS WITH PETER FORSTER, CLEARLY GIVES US A RANGEOF STRATEGIES TO IMPLEMENT THIS CMC REPORT AND TO IMPLEMENT PETER FORSTER'S REPORT.I'M GRATEFUL FOR THAT AND I WANT TO THANK PETER FORSTER UP FRONT. WHILE HE'S DELIVEREDA REPORT THAT WILL GIVE US A LOT OF PAIN, THE GAIN WILL BE FOR THE PEOPLE OF QUEENSLANDAND THAT'S THE RIGHT THING. IN TERMS OF DEPARTMENTS OUTSIDE THE DEPARTMENT OF CHILDSAFETY, THERE ARE ALSO RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT HOW MUCH STAFF NEED TO BE EMPLOYED BYOTHER DEPARTMENTS. THEY CAN COME FROM A COMBINATION OF EXISTING RESOURCES OR ADDITIONAL RESOURCES. WENEED TO WORK THAT THROUGH. BUT I WILL BE SAYING TO THAT OTHER DEPARTMENT, THAT THEYNEED TO REAPPRAISE PRIORITIES TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY MEET THIS NEED. AND THAT'S NOT ANUNREASONABLE THING FOR US TO DO. IN SOME OF THOSE DEPARTMENTS THEY HAVE SUBSTANTIVEASSESSMENTS OF PRIORITIES FROM TIME TO TIME. THEY WILL NEED TO REASSESS THOSEPRIORITIES TO MEET THE DEMANDS THAT HAVE BEEN SET OUT IN THIS REPORT. NOW, AS I SAY IN THE NEWS RELEASE, THE BLUEPRINT MAKES RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT OTHERDEPARTMENTS. THE CBRC WILL EXAMINE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS TO DETERMINE HOW BESTTHEY CAN BE DELIVERED, INCLUDING THE REARRANGEMENT OF PRIORITIES. YOU MAY RECALL INJANUARY I ANNOUNCED THAT PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES FROM QUEENSLAND TREASURY FOR THEFULL COST OF IMPLEMENTING RECOMMENDATIONS OF ABOUT A HUNDRED AND TWENTY-FIVEMILLION. AT THAT TIME THE GOVERNMENT HAD ALREADY ANNOUNCED AN EXTRA FORTY MILLIONEACH YEAR JUST PRIOR TO THE CMC FINDINGS. I SAID AN ADDITIONAL EIGHTY-FIVE MILLION A YEAR WOULD BE FULLY FUNDED FROM CONSOLIDATEDREVENUE, WELL, WE NEED MORE THAN THAT. THE OTHER THINGS THAT I WANT TO SAY TODAY ARETHESE: I URGE EVERYBODY TO WORK WITH US IN TERMS OF THESE REFORMS. ONE OF THETHRUSTS OF THE REPORT FROM PETER FORSTER WILL BE THE NEED FOR CHANGE, THE NEED FORCULTURAL CHANGE. THERE NEEDS TO BE A BETTER RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENTAND THE NON-GOVERNMENT SECTOR. UNFORTUNATELY, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE HAS BEEN A LEVEL OF CYNICISM IN THATRELATIONSHIP. IT'S ABSOLUTELY IMPORTANT THAT WE NEED TO BUILD TRUST BETWEEN THEGOVERNMENT AND THE NON-GOVERNMENT SECTOR. AND AS THE CMC HAVE INDICATED WE NEEDTO COME UP WITH A CULTURE AND PHILOSOPHY THAT BRINGS ABOUT FIXING PROBLEMS RATHERTHAN TRY TO HIDE THEM. SO THAT RELATIONSHIP NEEDS TO BE STRENGTHENED BETWEEN NGOs,NON-GOVERNMENT SECTOR AND THE GOVERNMENT SECTOR, TO BUILD A STRONG A POSITIVERELATIONSHIP. AND WE WILL WORK THAT THROUGH AS BEST WE POSSIBLY CAN BUT THERE WILL NEED TO BECULTURAL CHANGE. AND I WANT PEOPLE TO WORK WITH US ON THAT CULTURAL CHANGE. THECREATION OF THIS NEW DEPARTMENT WILL BE DIFFICULT, IT WILL NOT BE EASY. AND THE REFORMSOVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS WILL NOT BE EASY. AND NO-ONE SHOULD THINK THAT WE'VE GOT AMAGIC WAND TOMORROW, WHAT WE HAVE IS A BLUEPRINT. AND THAT BLUEPRINT WILL REQUIRE ASTRONG COMMITMENT FROM GOVERNMENT, A DETERMINATION TO IMPLEMENT IT, BOTH IN TERMSOF MONEY AND STRUCTURE. THEY WILL HAVE. AND I'LL HAVE MY PERSONAL COMMITMENT TO THAT.BUT SECONDLY WE ALSO NEED GOODWILL FROM THE NGOs TO WORK WITH THE GOVERNMENT. TOO OFTEN WHAT HAPPENS IN THIS SECTOR IS THAT THERE ARE ALL SORTS OF EXCHANGES THATGO ON AND CYNICISM AND MISTRUST. AND WE HAVE TO TRY AND PUT THAT BEHIND US. FOR THEFIRST TIME WE HAVE A GOVERNMENT IN QUEENSLAND THAT'S DETERMINED TO MAKE THESECHANGES BUT WE NEED A LOT OF GOODWILL TO DO IT. AND IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT AREA YOU'REIN, AND WE'VE GOT THIS RECENTLY IN THE SUGAR REFORMS, IF WE DON'T HAVE GOODWILL BOTHFROM GOVERNMENT AND THE NON-GOVERNMENT SECTOR, THESE CHANGES WILL TAKE LONGER.AND I ASK PEOPLE TO PUT ASIDE THE POINT SCORING, I ASK FOR THE NGOs TO WORK WITH THEGOVERNMENT. I ASK FOR COMMITMENT WITHIN THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF IN ALL THE LEVELS AND I ALSO ASK NOTJUST FOR COMMITMENT AND GOODWILL BUT A DETERMINATION TO GET THE RESULTS. I ALSO ASKFOR BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FROM THE OTHER POLITICAL PARTIES TO ACTUALLY GET THE CHANGES.IT'S TOO EASY IN THIS AREA TO JUST SCORE SILLY POLITICAL POINTS. WHAT WE NEED TO DO ISLOOK AT THE SYSTEM. NOW, THERE ARE MECHANISMS FOR IMPLEMENTING THE CHANGES IN THEREPORT AND WE'LL LEAVE THAT UNTIL TOMORROW. THERE ARE ALSO TIME PERIODS ABOUT WHENTHINGS NEED TO BE REASSESSED, WE'LL BE WORKING WITHIN THOSE TIMELINES. I THINK PETER FORSTER HAS GRABBED THIS PROBLEM BY THE THROAT AND HE'S TACKLED IT HEADON. AS I SAID, SOME OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE PRODUCING PAIN FOR US IN TERMS OF THEEXTRA COST AND THE REALITY FOR US IS WE HAVE TO FACE UP TO THAT. AND THAT'S WHY I'MSAYING BEFORE THE REPORT'S RELEASED, I'M SAYING IT UP FRONT, WE WILL FUND IT, NO MATTERHOW PAINFUL THAT IS. SUCCESSIVE QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENTS HAVE BETRAYED THE CHILDRENOF THIS STATE. WE NEED TO GET IT RIGHT.

JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: I DON'T WANT TO SPELL THAT OUT. YOU WILL GET ALL THAT TOMORROW BUT IT IS CONSIDERABLY

MORE.JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: YEAH, I THINK THAT'S…THAT'S…WELL, LET'S SEE THE REPORT TOMORROW. THAT'S A BIT EXCESSIVE

BUT IT IS STILL A SUBSTANTIVE INCREASE. A SUBSTANTIVE INCREASE. I'LL LEAVE YOU (INAUDIBLE)TOMORROW. OH, IT'S TENS OF MILLIONS MORE, YES, IT'S TENS OF MILLIONS MORE.

JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)


BEATTIE: NO, NO, I DON'T…ROSEMARY IT'S PROBABLY FAIRER FOR ME TO SAY I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO THECOMPARISON ABOUT THAT FIGURE OF, THAT YOU MENTIONED. LET'S SEE WHAT HAPPENSTOMORROW.

JOURNALIST: WHAT'S BEEN THE MAIN CAUSE OF THAT BLOW-OUT?BEATTIE: OH, I THINK BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU WORK THROUGH THE SYSTEMS ABOUT PRODUCING

EXTRA STAFF AND AS YOU KNOW WE'VE PROMISED EXTRA RESPONSIBILITIES AND POWERS FOR THECHILDREN'S COMMISSIONER. THAT'S COSTING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY. BUT DON'T THINKI'M BEING CRITICAL ABOUT THIS, PLEASE DON'T MISUNDERSTAND ME, I'M JUST IDENTIFYING WHERETHE MONEY IS GOING. AND THERE ARE EXTRA MONEY FOR PROGRAMS AND VARIOUS OTHERTHINGS. AND WHEN PETER FORSTER HAS ACTUALLY GOT INTO THE BOWELS, IF YOU LIKE, OF THE CMCRECOMMENDATIONS AND WORKED THEM THROUGH, IT'S MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE THAN THE INITIALASSESSMENT THAT WAS MADE BY TREASURY. AND I'M JUST SIMPLY INDICATING WE WILL FUND IT.NOW, YOU'LL GET THE AMOUNT TOMORROW AND YOU'LL BE ABLE TO WORK THOSE THINGSTHROUGH. THERE ARE SOME AREAS YOU WON'T GET IN THE REPORT LIKE WE NEED TO WORKTHROUGH THE PRIORITIES OF OTHER GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS WITH THE STAFF THEY'VE GOT,REARRANGING IT, THAT'S SOMETHING WE'LL HAVE TO WORK THROUGH CBRC SO YOU WON'T GETTHAT TOMORROW. BECAUSE THE REPORT DOESN'T DEAL WITH THAT, IT JUST DEALS WITH THENUMBERS.

JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: NO, NO, BUT I THINK…I MEAN LOOK, FROM TIME TO TIME GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS COMPLETE

PRIORITIES AND THOSE PRIORITIES SHOULD BE LEFT AND WE MOVE ON. I MEAN SOME PROGRAMSARE DESIGNED TO LAST FOR A PERIOD OF TIME AND THERE WILL NEED TO BE IN SOMEDEPARTMENTS A REORGANISATION OF PRIORITIES TO DELIVER THIS. BUT I'M SENDING A VERYCLEAR SIGNAL TODAY: WE REGARD THIS AS THE NUMBER ONE PRIORITY AND THE DEPARTMENTSWILL HAVE TO FACE UP THAT HEAD ON.

JOURNALIST: WHICH DEPARTMENTS ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: OH, ALL OF THOSE WILL BE IN THERE TOMORROW BUT AND I DON'T WANT TO BE TOO EXPRESSIVE

TODAY UNTIL THE REPORT…BUT, YOU KNOW, THEY INTERFACE WITH HEALTH AND OTHERDEPARTMENTS. I MEAN YOU KNOW IT'S NOT JUST THESE DEPARTMENTS THAT DEAL WITH THESEISSUES. HEALTH HAS A SIGNIFICANT ROLE TO PLAY AND IT'S NOT THE ONLY DEPARTMENT.

JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: NO, NO, NO…WHAT PETER FORSTER HAS SAID TO ME IN THE BRIEFING THAT HE GAVE US IS THAT WE

NEED TO HAVE BETTER RELATIONS BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT AND THE NGOs. AND HE SAYS THATTHERE'S A BIT OF CYNICISM IN THERE AND WE NEED TO REMOVE THAT TO GET TO A BETTERRELATIONSHIP. AND THE CMC APPARENTLY HAS ALSO MADE THAT POINT IN TERMS OF THEASSESSMENTS HERE. ALL I'M SAYING IS…I'M NOT BLAMING ANYBODY. I MEAN THIS IS PROBABLY A SHARED RESPONSIBILITY BETWEEN GOVERNMENTS AND NGOs. I DON'TKNOW. I MEAN I DON'T WORK ON A, ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS. BUT I'M TOLD AS PREMIER THAT THIS ISAN ISSUE. SO I'M JUST SIMPLY SAYING WE'VE GOT TO HAVE A CULTURE OF CHANGE, A POSITIVECULTURE OF CHANGE WHICH WILL ONLY COME ABOUT IF THERE'S ENOUGH GOODWILL. ANDTHEREFORE IF THERE IS SOME CYNICISM BETWEEN THE NGOs AND GOVERNMENT WE NEED TO GETA POSITIVE ATMOSPHERE OUT OF THAT. NOW, I WANT TO MAKE IT REALLY CLEAR, I'M NOT BLAMINGANYBODY, I'M NOT ATTACKING NGOs OR GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS BUT IF THAT MISTRUST EXISTSAND A BIT OF CYNICISM WE NEED TO FIX IT. I MEAN WE'RE GOING TO SPEND AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF TAXPAYERS' MONEY HERE AND IT'S NOTUNREASONABLE FOR ME AS PREMIER TO WANT RESULTS. AND I DON'T WANT GAMES FROMANYBODY, I WANT RESULTS. AND IT'S TOO EASY…THIS IS MINEFIELD. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HUMANEMOTION, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ABUSE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SERIOUS ISSUES HERE. I'M ASKINGFOR GOODWILL FROM EVERYONE TO MAKE THESE REFORMS WORK. WE'RE PREPARED TO DO OURBIT AT THE CABINET LEVEL AND CBRC WILL MEET TOMORROW MORNING ALONG WITH CABINET. AS ISAID THE REPORT WILL GO TO CABINET, WE'LL RELEASE THE WHOLE LOT OF IT. YOU'LL BE ABLE TO READ IT. I MEAN IT IS A VERY SUBSTANTIVE REPORT AND CABINET WILL GET ITTOMORROW. YOU'LL BE ABLE TO READ IT AND MAKE YOUR OWN JUDGEMENTS. YOU CAN SEE HOWMUCH DETAIL PETER FORSTER HAS PUT INTO THIS. BUT CLEARLY THERE NEEDS TO BE CULTURALCHANGE. AND I'M SAYING THAT CHANGE NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT ABOUT BY GOODWILL. WE NEED TOCHANGE. GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO CHANGE. AND THAT WON'T BE EASY. BUT I'M JUST SAYING TOEVERYONE, DON'T RESIST THE CHANGE, LET'S DO THIS IN A PARTNERSHIP. AND THAT'S ALL PETERFORSTER'S SAYING: A BETTER PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE NGOs AND GOVERNMENT. NOW, I WILLDO WHAT I CAN TO DELIVER THAT BUT WE NEED THE NGOs TO WORK WITH US TO GET THE SAMECOOPERATION.

JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: WELL, WE EXTENDED THIS, AS YOU ALREADY KNOW. AND THIS HAS BEEN AROUND NOW FOR SOME

WEEKS. I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS THAT IT'S BEEN RUSHED. NOW, I CAN'T SEE…TO BEHONEST I THINK THAT'S A BIT UNFAIR. I DON'T KNOW WHO'S SAYING THAT BUT YOU'RE AWARE THATTHERE WAS AN AUDIT REPORT LAST YEAR. YOU'RE AWARE THAT IN ADDITION TO THAT AUDITREPORT WE HAD THE CMC REPORT. AND NOW PETER FORSTER'S HAD TIME…I MEAN WHEN DID THECMC REPORT COME DOWN? YOU GUYS WILL REMEMBER THAT. I DON'T HAVE THE DATE IN MY HEAD BUT…(INAUDIBLE) WELL,THAT'S RIGHT. I MEAN WE'VE HAD A LONG TIME. IT'S NOW, YOU KNOW, WELL TOWARDS THE END OFMARCH AND THIS MATTER HAS BEEN EXAMINED THROUGH ALL THAT PERIOD. I MEAN PETERFORSTER WOULD NOT HAVE RUSHED THIS. AND THE DATES…I MEAN I HAVE TO SAY THERE WERESOME WHO WERE ARGUING IN THE PAST, IF I RECALL CORRECTLY, THAT IT WAS TAKING TOO LONG.SO I MEAN I DON'T THINK IT'S TOO LONG OR TOO SHORT. I THINK IT'S ABOUT RIGHT.



BEATTIE: OH, I THINK YOU'LL FIND THAT THIS IS IN EXCESS OF TWO HUNDRED MILLION. I DON'T WANT TO GIVEYOU THE EXACT FIGURE, THESE ISSUES, AND THIS IS ACROSS THE WHOLE DEPARTMENTS…THIS ISSOMETHING WE'LL BE MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT TOMORROW. BUT THAT'S NOT IN ADDITION TO THE ONETWENTY-FIVE. LET ME MAKE IT CLEAR. WE SET (?) ONE TWENTY-FIVE, IT'S IN EXCESS OF TWOHUNDRED MILLION.

JOURNALIST: WHEN DID HE BRIEF YOU AND HAVE YOU (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: OH, NO, HE DIDN'T AT THAT POINT. BUT HE BRIEFED US ON THURSDAY I THINK IT WAS, THURSDAY,

FRIDAY, WE'VE BEEN TALKING ON AND OFF.JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: OH, WELL, WE'VE GOT A VERY STRONG SURPLUS. YES, WE'VE GOT A VERY STRONG SURPLUS.

CONSOLIDATED REVENUE IS VERY, VERY STRONG AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO FUND IT FROM THERE.JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: OH, THE FINAL REPORT COMES THROUGH TOMORROW AND WE WILL TAKE IT TO CABINET

TOMORROW. BUT WE'VE OBVIOUSLY BEEN EXTENSIVELY BRIEFED ON IT ROSEMARY, I'M NOTSUGGESTING OTHERWISE, BUT I'M NOT RELEASING THE REPORT UNTIL IT'S GONE TO CABINET. NOW,I'VE GOT ONE OTHER MATTER I WANT TO DEAL WITH. IS THERE ANY OTHER ISSUE JUST ON THIS?

JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: WELL, PART OF THIS PACKAGE INVOLVES TRAINING. AND THAT IS A KEY PART OF WHAT WILL COME

OUT OF THIS REPORT. WE'VE ALREADY SIGNALLED THAT THERE WILL BE SIGNIFICANT TRAINING.LOOK, WHEN YOU'RE CREATING A NEW DEPARTMENT THERE WILL BE SOME CHANGE AND THAT WILLBE DIFFICULT FOR THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THAT DEPARTMENT. BUT WE EITHER DO THIS PROPERLYOR WE DON'T. NOW, THIS WILL BE DIFFICULT AND IT WILL BE PAINFUL AND CHANGE IS NEVER EASYBUT WE EITHER CHANGE OR WE DON'T. AND WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL WHEN, YOU KNOW, WEGO THROUGH THIS…THERE WILL BE PEOPLE WHO WILL COMPLAIN ABOUT CHANGE. NO DOUBTABOUT THAT. BUT WE HAVE TO CHANGE. AND I SAY TO THOSE PEOPLE WHO RESIST CHANGE, WE HAVE NO CHOICE HERE. THE OLD SYSTEMDIDN'T WORK. WE HAVE TO CHANGE. AND, YES, THERE WILL BE THE SORT OF ISSUES YOU'VE RAISEDABOUT THAT DEPARTMENT, NO TWO WAYS ABOUT IT. BUT IF WE DON'T CHANGE THEN ALL THIS IS AWASTE OF MONEY. AND LET ME TELL YOU: I'M NOT GOING TO WASTE TAXPAYERS' MONEY. WE WILLGET CHANGE AND THERE WILL BE SOME PAIN WITH THAT CHANGE. BUT IF WE DON'T CHANGE THENWE BETRAY THE PEOPLE, THE CHILDREN OF QUEENSLAND AND WE'RE NOT PREPARED TO DO THAT.

JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: OH, WELL, PUT IT THIS WAY: WHAT WE WANT TO DO HERE IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GIVE THESE

CMC RECOMMENDATIONS A FAIR GO. I MEAN I WOULD HOPE WE WOULDN'T HAVE PEOPLEUNDERMINE THESE RECOMMENDATIONS. I MEAN THIS CAME ABOUT FROM AN INDEPENDENT BODY,THE CMC. THEY CAME UP WITH THESE RECOMMENDATIONS. WE'VE HAD AN INDEPENDENT AUDIT.YOU WILL ALWAYS GET PEOPLE…THIS IS A MINEFIELD OF HUMAN EMOTION, THIS WHOLE AREA, ANDSO IT SHOULD BE. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET A UNANIMOUS VIEW. BUT THE FACT IS WE'VE HAD TWOINDEPENDENT ASSESSMENTS NOW, OR THREE IF YOU INCLUDE PETER FORSTER. SO WE'VE HADTHREE ASSESSMENTS. WE ARE GOING TO GIVE THIS BLUEPRINT A GO AND WE ARE GOING TO DELIVER ON THIS BLUEPRINT.THAT'S WHAT I PROMISED WE WOULD DO PRIOR TO THE ELECTION, THAT'S WHAT WE WILL DELIVER.THIS IS NOT A GOVERNMENT BLUEPRINT, THIS IS NOT MY BLUEPRINT. THIS IS A BLUEPRINT THATCAME FROM THE INDEPENDENT WATCHDOG, THE CMC, AND AN INDEPENDENT AUDIT, PUT TOGETHERBY SOMEONE, PETER FORSTER, OUTSIDE THE GOVERNMENT, WHO HAS AN IMPECCABLE RECORD INTERMS OF POLICE CULTURAL CHANGE IN THIS STATE FOLLOWING FITZGERALD. YOU CANNOT GET ABETTER SYSTEM THAN THAT. SO ARE WE GOING TO HAVE, WE GOING TO SUPPORT ANY EROSION OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS?THE ANSWER IS 'NO'. NOW, THERE WILL BE THINGS THAT WILL NEED TO BE WORKED THROUGH ASPART OF THIS PLAN, THERE'S NO TWO WAYS ABOUT THAT, BUT, WE NEED THESE PLANS TO BE GIVENA FAIR GO BY EVERYBODY. I MEAN DON'T FOR ONE MINUTE THINK THAT EVERYONE IS GOING TO LOVETHIS. YOU WILL GET PEOPLE…BECAUSE THIS IS AN AREA WHERE THERE IS ARGUMENTS ON A DAYTO DAY BASIS ABOUT FUNDING PRIORITIES AND A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL PUT UP THEIR HANDS FORMONEY. AND A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL APPROACH MEDIA OUTLETS LIKE YOURSELVES ARGUING(INAUDIBLE)…THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO SAY. YOU WILL HAVE NO SHORTAGE OF PEOPLE WHO WILL WANT TO TRYAND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS TO ENHANCE MONEY FOR THEIR OWNORGANISATION. NOW, THAT'S FINE, THEY CAN DO THAT, BUT IT'S GOT TO BE PART OF THE CMCRECOMMENDATIONS AND THE FORSTER REPORT BEFORE THEY'LL BE FUNDED. NOW, THAT'S NOTUNFAIR. IF YOU'VE GOT RECOMMENDATIONS WE NEED TO DO THEM. ARE THERE ANY OTHERQUESTIONS ON THIS? I DON'T…I'M NOT GOING TO SPELL OUT THE EXACT AMOUNT. YOU'LL HAVE ANOPPORTUNITY TO DEAL WITH ALL THAT A LITTLE BIT LATER ON. WE'RE RIGHT? CAN I DEAL WITH ONE OTHER MATTER. I NOTICE IN THE SUNDAY MAIL THIS MORNING THERE'S MOREREPORTS ABOUT VEHICLE ACCIDENTS AND ALL THE REST OF IT. AND THERE'S A SUGGESTION INTHERE THAT AT SOME POINT I SAID THAT NONE OF OUR CHILDREN WERE INVOLVED IN ACCIDENTSINVOLVING MINISTERIAL CARS. I WAS ASKED A QUESTION LAST YEAR, AND STEVE BISHOP, MY PRESSSECRETARY, ANSWERED THIS QUESTION AS TO WHETHER THERE WAS A PARTICULAR ACCIDENTDOING THE ROUNDS, A PARTICULAR RUMOUR, WHETHER IT INVOLVED MY CHILDREN. IT DIDN'T. AND I MADE THAT VERY CLEAR TO THE SUNDAY MAIL. NOW THAT THIS MATTER'S ON THE RECORD IT'SIMPORTANT THAT I CLARIFY EXACTLY WHERE WE ARE. IT IS TRUE THAT MY CHILDREN DON'T ANDHAVE NEVER DRIVEN MY MINISTERIAL CAR. THAT'S THE LTD OR WHATEVER IT'S CALLED. I'VE NEVERALLOWED THEM TO DRIVE IT AND THEY DON'T. SO WHAT'S IN THE PRESS THIS MORNING ISABSOLUTELY CORRECT. MY CHILDREN HAVE NEVER HAD AN ACCIDENT IN MY MINISTERIAL VEHICLEBECAUSE THEY DON'T DRIVE IT AND THEY NEVER HAVE DRIVEN IT.


HOWEVER, IN RELATION TO ELECTORAL CARS, WHEN THE RULES AND ENTITLEMENTS ALLOWED FORMY WIFE TO DRIVE A MINISTERIAL VEHICLE SHE DID AND I HAVE TO SAY SHE ALSO HAD AN ACCIDENT,A MINOR ONE, BUT SHE DID HAVE AN ACCIDENT. PRIOR TO THE CHANGES TO THE RULES, MY SON,ONE OF MY SONS ALSO HAD A MINOR ACCIDENT IN APRIL LAST YEAR. NOW, WE HAD A BIT OF AFAMILY DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS. I THINK IT'S ABOUT TIME THAT WE ARE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THERECORD BUT I ALSO WANT THERE TO BE AN UNDERSTANDING ABOUT THESE ACCIDENTS, THATTHERE IS NO EXPENSE TO THE TAXPAYER. MY SON, ONE OF MY SONS HAD A MINOR ACCIDENT INAPRIL LAST YEAR. THE TOTAL COST OF THE DAMAGE, AND I'LL TELL YOU THAT IN A MINUTE, WAS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OFMONEY. BUT WHEN THE CAR WAS TAKEN IN FOR REPAIR IN APRIL LAST YEAR, THE AMOUNT OFMONEY INCLUDED REPAIRS FOR BUMPS AND SCRATCHES THAT HAD HAPPENED AT SHOPPINGCENTRES AND OTHER PLACES, WHICH INEVITABLY HAPPENS TO A CAR WHICH WE'D HAD BY THATTIME ALMOST THREE YEARS. THE TOTAL DAMAGE INVOLVING THAT ACCIDENT WAS TWO THOUSAND,NINE HUNDRED AND SIXTEEN DOLLARS AND FIFTY-TWO CENTS MINUS ALL THE OTHER SCRATCHESAND BUMPS THAT HAD BEEN AROUND IN SHOPPING CENTRES OVER A PERIOD OF TIME. WE'D HAD THAT VEHICLE ALMOST THREE YEARS AT THE TIME IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY ANDTHERE WAS ALL SORTS OF DINTS AND BUMPS. WHEN I BECAME PREMIER I SAID THAT WHENEVERTHERE'S AN ACCIDENT THE NON, THE CLAIMABLE AMOUNT…THERE'S AN AMOUNT WHICH EVERYPERSON HAS TO PAY WHICH IS THE NON-AMOUNT COVERED BY THE INSURANCE. WHAT'S THE TERMFOR IT? EXCESS, THAT'S RIGHT, THANK YOU. I MADE SURE THAT EVERYONE HAD TO PAY THE EXCESS.SO IN THE CASE OF MY SON'S ACCIDENT HE PERSONALLY HAD TO PAY THE EXCESS OF FIVEHUNDRED DOLLARS. NOW, I MEAN I PAID IT BUT I MADE HIM PAY US. SO HE PAID THE EXCESS. PRIOR TO MY BEING PREMIER TAXPAYERS PAID THE EXCESS. THEINSURANCE COMPANY, WHICH WAS THE RACQ GIO, IT COVERED THE CAR. SO THERE WAS NO, THEREWAS NO COST TO THE TAXPAYER IN THE SENSE THAT THE EXCESS WAS PAID BY MY SON AND THECAR WAS COVERED BY INSURANCE. SO THERE WAS NO COST FOR THIS MINOR ACCIDENT TOTAXPAYER, TO TAXPAYERS BECAUSE IT WAS COVERED BY AN INSURANCE POLICY AND MY SON PAIDTHE EXCESS. IN TERMS OF HEATHER'S ACCIDENT WHICH WAS IN JULY LAST YEAR, AGAIN IT WAS AMINOR ACCIDENT, IT WAS FIFTEEN HUNDRED AND SIX DOLLARS. THE EXCESS HAD (?) INCREASED AT THAT STAGE TO SEVEN HUNDRED AND FIFTY SO I PAID THESEVEN HUNDRED AND FIFTY ON BEHALF OF MY WIFE. BECAUSE WHAT, HALF OF MINE WAS HERS ANDHALF OF HERS IS MINE SO I PAID THE SEVEN FIFTY. BUT THERE ARE TWO MINOR ACCIDENTS HERE. IWANT TO BE REALLY CLEAR ABOUT THIS. THE SUNDAY MAIL ARTICLE, IN MY VIEW, COULD HAVE BEENMISINTERPRETED. I'M NOT GOING TO HAVE A MISINTERPRETATION OF WHAT HAPPENED HERE. NONEOF THIS CHANGES WHAT I'VE SAID. BOTH OUR SONS HAVE GOT THEIR OWN CARS. NO-ONE HASELECTORAL VEHICLES ANYMORE, MY SONS DON'T DRIVE MY MINISTERIAL VEHICLE. MY SONS HAD NO ACCESS TO A PUBLICLY-FUNDED VEHICLE. SO LET ME BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THIS:THERE WERE TWO MINOR ACCIDENTS. ONE OF THEM, ONE OF MY SONS, TWO THOUSAND NINEHUNDRED AND SIXTEEN DOLLARS AND FIFTY-TWO CENTS FOR WHICH HE PAID THE FIVE HUNDREDEXCESS. AND I SHOULD SAY TO YOU, THAT FIGURE OF TWO NINE ONE SIX IS MODEST IN TERMS OFVEHICLE ACCIDENTS. BUT I SHOULD SAY TO YOU IT WAS ALSO THE CULMINATION OF ALL SORTS OFDINTS AND SCRATCHES WE'D HAD OVER THREE YEARS. AND HEATHER'S WAS FIFTEEN HUNDREDAND SIX OF WHICH AGAIN RACQ GIO WAS THE INSURANCE COMPANY, THEY PAID THE REST. AND WEPAID THE EXCESS OF SEVEN HUNDRED AND FIFTY. NOW, I DON'T MOVE AWAY FROM WHAT I'VE SAID ON ALL THESE THINGS, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WHENMATTERS ARE CONSIDERED IN SOME DEPTH, THAT ALL THE DOCUMENTS BE CONSIDERED BYCABINET, WHICH I HAVE DONE, AND WE MAKE A DECISION. WE DON'T TAKE DOCUMENTS TO CABINETSIMPLY TO AVOID THEM, WE TAKE THEM THERE TO MAKE A DECISION, AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHATWAS DONE. AND AS A RESULT OF THAT TWO THINGS HAPPENED. ONE, INITIALLY CHILDREN WEREBARRED FROM DRIVING CARS ALTOGETHER, THIS IS THE ELECTORAL VEHICLE; AND SECONDLY THECARS WERE ABOLISHED. THERE IS NO MINISTER WHO HAS AN ELECTORAL VEHICLE. THERE IS NOMINISTER WHO HAS AN ELECTORAL VEHICLE. NOW, LET ME BE REALLY CLEAR ABOUT THIS BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S INCREDIBLE CONFUSIONABOUT HOW THIS WORKS. THERE IS AN ELECTORAL VEHICLE, THERE WAS AN ELECTORAL VEHICLEWHICH DOESN'T EXIST ANY MORE AND THERE ARE MINISTERIAL VEHICLES WHICH IS THE WHITEONES YOU SEE DRIVING AROUND HERE, OR DIFFERENT COLOURS THEY ARE NOW. THEY'RE THEDIFFERENT TWO CARS, OKAY.

JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: OH, IT CAME ABOUT BECAUSE FRANKLY, TO BE HONEST, I THINK THERE'S BEEN A

MISUNDERSTANDING. IT WAS PARTLY THAT…I MEAN I CAN'T AS PREMIER LET THE RECORD BE, YOUKNOW, STAND THAT'S INCORRECT. RIGHT? I HAD TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RECORD STANDS. IT'S AMATTER OF INTEGRITY AND HONESTY FOR ME. SO I HAD TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RECORD WASCORRECTED BECAUSE QUITE FRANKLY SOMEONE COULD HAVE COME BACK TO ME AND SAID, 'WELL,YOU SAID THIS'. THERE'S ACTUALLY TECHNICALLY NOTHING WRONG WITH THE SUNDAY MAILARTICLE. BUT I'M NOT SAYING THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG WITH IT TECHNICALLY BUT IT COULD LEAD TO AMISINTERPRETATION. AND I DON'T WANT THAT TO BE THE CASE. I MEAN I STAND ON MY INTEGRITYAND MY HONESTY'S IMPORTANT TO ME. I DIDN'T WANT THAT TO BE MISUNDERSTOOD WHICH IS WHYI'VE DONE IT. BUT THE OTHER REASON IS I HAVE NEVER, BECAUSE I'VE BEEN SO BUSY TRYING TO DOOTHER THINGS, AND I HAVE…WHEN ALL THIS HAPPENED WITH MERRI ROSE I GOT ALL THE MATERIAL,HAD A LOOK AT IT, SAID KIDS SHOULDN'T DRIVE IT. BANG. THEY WERE GONE. AND I GOT RID OF THEVEHICLES ALTOGETHER AND I MOVED ON. RIGHT? THIS WAS SORT OF RESURRECTED LAST WEEK. AND I THINK, AND I READ ENOUGH STUFF ABOUT IN THE COURIER AND THE SUNDAY MAIL AND THEAUSTRALIAN ABOUT IT TO KNOW THAT THERE'S NOT ENOUGH UNDERSTANDING ABOUT HOW THISWORKS. THE CARS ARE INSURED. ANY EXCESS THAT HAS TO BE PAID ARE PAID BY…WELL, THIS ISOLD NOW…AT THE TIME THE CARS WERE INSURED BECAUSE THEY DON'T EXIST ANY MORE, THEYWERE INSURED AND ANY EXCESS HAD TO BE PAID FOR BY THE PEOPLE WHO WERE INVOLVED IN THE


ACCIDENT WHICH IS WHY…I MEAN IF YOU TAKE HEATHER'S ACCIDENT. HEATHER WAS ONETHOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED AND SIX DOLLARS. AND SHE PAID SEVEN HUNDRED AND FIFTY. AND THE INSURANCE COMPANY PAID THE OTHER…WELL,WHAT'S THAT, SEVEN FIFTY, SEVEN FIFTY-SIX DOLLARS WAS PAID BY THE INSURANCE COMPANY. ANDTHEN, GO ON…

JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: AND I NEVER…NO, I DIDN'T BECAUSE…OH, WELL, YES AND NO. BUT YOU GOT TO REMEMBER IN ALL

THIS WE GET A BIT SENSITIVE ABOUT OUR CHILDREN. I MEAN I LOVE MY CHILDREN. I MEAN IT'SREALLY TOUGH BEING MY KIDS. I MEAN I HAD THE EXERCISE WHEN SCHOOLIES WERE ON WHERETHERE WAS ALL SORTS OF RIDICULOUS RUMOURS SPREAD ABOUT MY KIDS, THAT THEY WEREINVOLVED IN SOME FIRE HOSE INCIDENT AND ONE OF THEM HAD BROKEN THEIR ARM. YOU KNOW, HETURNED UP AT HOME WITHOUT A BROKEN ARM. YOU KNOW, I GET A BIT TIRED OF ALL THENONSENSE THAT GOES ON. AND WE HAD ONE TV CHANNEL THAT WAS CAMPED OUTSIDE WHERE ONE OF MY OTHER SONS WERE.YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I HAVE TWINS THEY ALL GET MIXED UP AND, YOU KNOW, I, ACTUALLY TO THECREDIT OF THE TELEVISION STATION ACTUALLY RANG THEM AND SAID, 'WHAT'S THE GO HERE? IFTHERE'S A PROBLEM IN RELATION TO SOME BEHAVIOUR, TELL ME ABOUT IT.' AND TO THEIR CREDITTHE TELEVISION STATION SAID THEY'D HAD THIS STORY WHICH WE HAD CHECKED WITH MY SONWHICH WAS A RUMOUR AND THEY DROPPED OFF. BUT THAT DIDN'T STOP THE RUMOURS DOING THEROUNDS ABOUT THEM. AND OUR KIDS…I TRY AND PROTECT OUR CHILDREN. THEY'RE NOT INVOLVED IN POLITICS. THEYRARELY EVER DROVE THE ELECTORAL VEHICLE. THEY ONLY DID IT WITH MY PERSONAL PERMISSION.IT WASN'T SOMETHING THEY DID REGULARLY. THIS ACCIDENT HAPPENED IN BRISBANE. IT WASN'T ASIF IT HAPPENED SOMEWHERE ELSE AND IT WAS A MINOR ACCIDENT. LOOK, MAYBE I COULD HAVE,BUT MAYBE I SHOULD HAVE EXPLAINED THAT THERE'S AN INSURANCE COMPANY SCHEME HERE ANDTHE EXCESS IS PAID BY INDIVIDUALS. MAYBE I SHOULD HAVE SAID THAT. BUT YOU GOT TO UNDERSTAND, I'M A PARENT TOO AND HEATHERAND I LOVE OUR KIDS. I DON'T WANT TO SEE MY KIDS HOUNDED OR BEATEN UP. I TRY AND GET THEMTO BE NORMAL KIDS. WE DON'T GET CARRIED AWAY BECAUSE THEY'RE MY SONS. AND I HAVE TOSAY…OR MY DAUGHTER…AND I HAVE TO SAY MY KIDS ARE PRETTY LEVEL-HEADED. MY DAUGHTERACTUALLY GOES TO UNIVERSITY IN SYDNEY BECAUSE SHE HATES ALL THE FUSS THAT GOES WITHBEING MY DAUGHTER AND HEATHER AND I LOVE HER VERY MUCH. WE'D LOVE HER TO BE HERE. BUTSHE HATES GOING TO PARTIES AND PEOPLE POINTING AT HER. IT'S NOT EASY TO BE MY CHILD. AND THEREFORE WE ARE NORMAL PARENTS IN THAT I TRY TO BEPROTECTIVE OF THEM. I MEAN I, IF YOU SAY TO THE, YOU KNOW, I'M HAPPY TO TAKE WHATEVERCRITICISM I GET BUT I JUST SAY TO TAXPAYERS: THERE WERE TWO ACCIDENTS, ONE FOR TWOTHOUSAND NINE HUNDRED AND SIXTEEN WHICH IS A BIT UNFAIR BECAUSE IT HAD EVERY BANG ANDDINT THAT WAS GONG FOR THREE YEARS OF WHICH MY SON PAID FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS WHICHWAS COVERED BY INSURANCE. NOW, PERHAPS I SHOULD HAVE SAID THAT BEFORE BUT I DON'T LIKESEEING MY CHILDREN BEING, YOU KNOW, ON THE FRONT PAGE OF THE NEWSPAPER OR ANYWHEREELSE AND WE TRY AND PROTECT THEM.

JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE) WILL BE THE PERCEPTION THAT YOU DIDN'T RELEASE THESE DOCUMENTS ABOUT THEACCIDENT BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T (INAUDIBLE)

BEATTIE: OH, I'M SURE THERE WILL BE THAT PERCEPTION BUT I THINK…I DON'T EXPECT EVERYONE TO BEFAIR-MINDED BUT I THINK MOST PEOPLE ARE FAIR-MINDED ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT SINCE MY SONPAID THE FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS EXCESS HIMSELF, THAT IT WAS A MINOR ACCIDENT AND THEINSURANCE COMPANY PAID THE REST, THAT TAXPAYERS DIDN'T PAY FOR IT, I THINK PEOPLE WILLUNDERSTAND THAT. I MEAN I HAVE ALWAYS…YOU GOT TO REMEMBER WE GO THROUGH SOMEEXERCISES WHICH AS A FAMILY WE DON'T LIKE. I HAVE TO SAY YOUR NEWSPAPER FOR EXAMPLE, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO BE CUTE ABOUT THIS,RANG US WHEN MY DAUGHTER FINISHED GRADE TWELVE. AS I SAID MY DAUGHTER IS A VERYSTRONG, INDEPENDENT PERSON WHO DOESN'T LIKE POLITICS. AND BECAUSE HER OP SCORE HADHER GOING INTO BIOTECHNOLOGY THEY RAN AN OLD PHOTO OF HEATHER AND I AND HER FROM ASPORTS AWARDS UP THE SUNSHINE COAST. SHE DIDN'T LIKE IT. AND YOU GOT TO RESPECT HERRIGHTS. SHE DOESN'T RUN FOR PUBLIC OFFICE. I ACCEPT IT'S FAIR GAME FOR HEATHER AND I AND THEREFORE I'M VERY PROTECTIVE OF MYCHILDREN. IT'S ONE OF THE REASONS LARISSA DECIDED THAT SHE WAS GOING TO GO TOUNIVERSITY SOMEWHERE ELSE. SO I'M JUST SIMPLY SAYING YOU GOT TO REMEMBER WE'RE PEOPLETOO AND WE HAVE CHILDREN WHO AREN'T INVOLVED IN POLITICS. THEY'RE NOT MEMBERS OF THELABOR PARTY. THEY'RE NOT MEMBERS OF ANY PARTY THAT I'M AWARE OF BUT THEY'VE GOT THEIRRIGHTS TOO, YOU KNOW.

JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: WELL, IN A SENSE YOU COULD SAY I AM BUT I'M DOING IT TO HIGHLIGHT VERY CLEARLY THAT THE

SYSTEM THAT WORKS HERE. YOU SEE IF YOU READ…AND I'M NOT TRYING TO PICK A FIGHT WITHANYBODY, RIGHT? I'M BEYOND ALL THAT. THE FACT IS THAT IF YOU READ SOME OF THE REPORTSTHAT HAVE EMERGED THROUGH THIS WHOLE THING, PARTICULARLY IN THE LAST WEEK, YOU WOULDASSUME THAT TAXPAYERS ARE PAYING THE BILL HERE WHEN IN FACT WHAT YOU'VE GOT IS YOU'VEGOT AN INSURANCE POLICY WHERE THE EXCESS IS PAID FOR BY THE PERSON WHO HAS THEACCIDENT. NOW, I THINK I NEEDED TO EXPLAIN THAT. I THINK I SHOULD HAVE EXPLAINED THAT A LONG TIMEAGO. BECAUSE I'VE MOVED ON AND DOING OTHER THINGS I DIDN'T, WELL, NOW I AM. AND I'M DOINGIT IN MY OWN CASE TO HIGHLIGHT EXACTLY WHAT THE SITUATION IS AND I THINK TO HIGHLIGHT THATTHE WAY THIS SYSTEM WORKS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT'S NEVER BEEN REPORTED.



BEATTIE: NO, I'M NOT GOING TO MOVE AWAY FROM THE CABINET PRINCIPLE I ESTABLISHED BEFORE. I MEANTHE REALITY IS IF I DO THIS ON THIS MATTER IT'LL HAPPEN EVERYWHERE AND THE WHOLE CABINETPROCESS WILL COLLAPSE.

JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: NO, I'VE DONE IT IN MY CASE NOW. NO, I'VE DONE IT IN MY CASE NOW TO EXPLAIN HOW THE SYSTEM

FOR CARS WORKS AND I THINK THAT'S FAIR ENOUGH. WHAT YOU'VE GOT TO REMEMBER IS THEWHOLE NATURE OF THE WESTMINSTER SYSTEM IS THAT CABINET HAS GOT TO BE ABLE TOCONSIDER MATTERS AND REPORTS WITHOUT FEAR OR FAVOUR. IF EVERY MATTER THAT GOES TOCABINET IS RELEASED PUBLICLY YOU WILL NOT GET GOOD CABINET DECISIONS BECAUSE THEBUREAUCRACY WILL WRITE REPORTS ON THE BASIS THAT THEY WILL BE RELEASED PUBLICLY ANDTHEY WILL NOT BE AS FRANK AND OPEN AS THEY SHOULD BE. AND IF YOU DO THAT YOU WILL NOT HAVE ALL THE FACTS BEFORE CABINET. NOW, I KNOW THATTHERE ARE PEOPLE IN THE MEDIA DO NOT SHARE THAT VIEW. MY DECISION IS TO MAKE SURE THATWHEN A MATTER ACTUALLY GOES TO CABINET, NOT A MATTER…MATTERS AREN'T DRAGGED THEREJUST TO HIDE THEM. THIS WAS ACTUALLY A MATTER THAT WENT TO CABINET. I TOLD EVERYBODY ITWAS GOING TO CABINET AND WHEN IT WENT THERE WE CHANGED THE RULES. I MEAN YOU KNOWTHE DECISIONS. WE MADE TWO DECISIONS: ONE THAT CHILDREN WOULD NOT ACCESS THEM ANDTWO, THE CARS WOULD GO ALTOGETHER. I MEAN IT'S NOT AS IF WE TOOK IT THERE AND NOTHING HAPPENED. TWO DECISIONS CAME OUT OFIT. I MEAN THAT IS THE CABINET PROCESS WHICH GIVES US THE INTEGRITY TO BE ABLE TO MAKE THERIGHT DECISIONS. I'VE ALSO SAID, I'VE MADE THIS CLEAR THIS WEEK AND I THINK YOU WERE THEREROSEMARY, AND I'VE ALSO SAID NOW THE DECISIONS ARE MADE THE NORMAL FOI PROCESS WORKS.THAT IS, IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO FOI THE NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS MINISTERIAL VEHICLES HAVE,THEY CAN DO THAT, THEY WILL GET THEM. AND THEY WILL BE ABLE TO MAKE ASSESSMENTS OFTHEM. BUT I NEEDED TO GET ALL THE FACTS BEFORE CABINET SO I COULD MAKE A DECISION WITH MYCOLLEAGUES ABOUT WHAT WAS TO APPLY. NOW, I THINK THAT'S A PERFECTLY REASONABLE CASE. IACCEPT THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO DON'T SHARE THAT VIEW AND THAT'S FINE. BUT THERE WILL BE,YOU KNOW, I CAN'T SEE ANY REASON NOW WHY ANYONE FOI-ing MINISTERIAL VEHICLES IN THEFUTURE WON'T GET EVERY CRASH AND BASH THAT HAPPENS.

JOURNALIST: DR BEATTIE…BEATTIE: SURE, I'M NOT, I'M AN IMPOSTOR.JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: YEAH, THE ANSWER IS YES IF SHE'S DOING OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS AND STUFF, YEAH.H BEATTIE: YES, YES.BEATTIE: BUT SHE DOESN'T HAVE…THE ELECTORAL VEHICLE WAS AVAILABLE…UNDER THE RULES…SEE,

YOU'VE GOT TO APPRECIATE HERE NO-ONE DID ANYTHING WRONG. THE RULES THAT EXISTED ATTHAT TIME ALLOWED ALL THIS USE. AND THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS THEY'RE GONE. NONE OFTHE, NONE OF THE RULES WERE BROKEN. MY SON HAS BROKEN NO RULES. BROKE NO RULES ATALL. AND WHEN HEATHER'S DOING OFFICIAL THINGS, YES, SHE DOES.

JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: HEATHER'S ACCIDENT WAS A SINGLE VEHICLE ACCIDENT. SHE SWERVED TO AVOID AN ANIMAL ON

THE ROAD AN RAN UP THE GUTTER DAMAGING THE CAR. SHE'S AN ANIMAL LOVER. WE GOT A CATAND A DOG, SO THERE YOU GO. THE ONE INVOLVING MY SON, HE SKIDDED IN HEAVY RAIN ANDCLIPPED THE REAR TRAY OF A PARKED UTILITY. IT WAS RAINING HEAVILY AND THERE WAS NO CLAIM FROM THE OTHER VEHICLE. SO AS YOU CAN SEETHE TOTAL BILL WAS TWO NINE ONE SIX AND I SHOULD AGAIN JUST EMPHASISE THAT BILL HADEVERY DINT AND CLIP THAT HAPPENS IN SHOPPING CENTRES AND ALL SORTS OF OTHER THINGSOVER THREE YEARS. SO THAT'S WITH BOTH THE ACCIDENTS.

JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: OH, IT'S JUST A SMALL…WHAT WAS IT?H BEATTIE: A HOLDEN…BEATTIE: SMALL HOLDEN.H BEATTIE: A BLUE ONE.BEATTIE: IT WAS A BLUE ONE, YEAH, WE'RE BIG ON CARS. IT WAS A SMALL, BLUE ONE.JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: OH, WE TALKED ABOUT THIS AS A FAMILY THIS MORNING AND…H BEATTIE: …ONE OF THE CHILDREN.BEATTIE: ONE OF THEM. WE'D RATHER NOT SAY WHICH ONE AND THE OTHER TWIN IS VERY LOYAL TO HIS

BROTHER, GAVE HIM A BIT OF A TICKLE UP (?)JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: WELL, THE DIFFICULTY FOR THEM IS THAT, WELL, THE PROBLEM IS WE, YOU KNOW, I, I UNDERSTAND

(INAUDIBLE) FRANK WITH THESE THINGS. I JUST WOULD HOPE, AND I KNOW I'M NOT DIRECTING THISAT YOU SO PLEASE DON'T MISUNDERSTAND ME. I HOPE THAT WE WOULDN'T HARANGUE MY KIDSABOUT THIS. I MEAN IF YOU WANT TO HARANGUE ANYONE, HARANGUE ME. BUT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT, IT'SVERY DIFFICULT FOR THEM, YOU KNOW, BUT IF I NAME ONE OF THEM AND IT JUST BECOMES TOODIFFICULT. SO WE HAD A BIT OF A FAMILY CONFERENCE AND DECIDED…BOTH OF THEM WILL END UPWEARING IT. (INAUDIBLE)


JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: OH, I THINK WHAT I…THE REASON I'VE DONE IT TODAY…I'M HAPPY TO TALK TO THEM ABOUT THAT, I

WOULD PREFER THEY DIDN'T FOR THE VERY SIMPLE REASON THAT THEY ALL KNOW WHAT HAPPENSHERE AND WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO YOU GUYS I KNOW WHAT'LL HAPPEN HERE. IT MEANS THAT IFWE DO THAT THEN EVERY TIME THERE'S A CABINET SUBMISSION RELATING TO A PARTICULARMATTER THEN WE'LL SAY THIS IS A ONE-OFF AS WELL AND THE WHOLE CABINET PROCESS WILLCOLLAPSE. I WOULD ADVISE THEM AGAINST THAT. I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS A CONSTRUCTIVE WAYTO HANDLE CABINET DECISIONS TO BE PERFECTLY HONEST.

JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: NO, THERE WEREN'T A LOT OF OTHERS AND AS I SAID THROUGH THE WEEK I HAVE BEEN VERY

FRANK ABOUT THIS. I'VE BEEN CAREFUL WHAT I'VE SAID BUT I'VE BEEN FRANK ABOUT ALL THIS.THERE WAS NO EXCESSIVE NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS HERE FOR PEOPLE, IT WAS JUST A NORMAL RUNOF ACCIDENTS. I MEAN YOU'VE GOT TWO MINOR ACCIDENTS HERE. WHEN YOU'VE GOT A NUMBER OFMINISTERIAL VEHICLES AND ELECTORAL VEHICLES OUT THERE, INEVITABLY THEY WILL HAVEACCIDENTS. I MEAN THERE ARE ACCIDENTS THAT HAPPEN ON A REGULAR BASIS FOR PEOPLE WHO WORK FORTHE COURIER-MAIL, THE AUSTRALIAN, CHANNEL NINE, CHANNEL TEN, CHANNEL TWO, CHANNELSEVEN. IT HAPPENS. IF YOU CAN FIND A GROUP, EITHER GOVERNMENT OR CORPORATE, THATDOESN'T HAVE ACCIDENTS, PLEASE LET ME KNOW BECAUSE WE'D LOVE TO FOLLOW THAT MODEL.BUT I CAN'T SAY THERE WAS EXCESSIVE NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS, NO. I THINK PEOPLE AREREASONABLY PRUDENT WITH THEM. BUT THERE WERE ACCIDENTS AND I'VE SAID THAT. I MEAN ITHINK IT WOULD BE BIZARRE IF WE GOT A STAGE WHERE THERE WEREN'T ACCIDENTS. THERE AREACCIDENTS. THERE ARE. THEY HAPPEN. AND MOST OF THEM ARE PRETTY MINOR. DRIVING AROUND THE CITY YOU GET SMALL ACCIDENTS LIKE THE TWO THAT WE HAD. BUTOCCASIONALLY I GUESS IF YOU'RE ON THE FREEWAY THERE MAY BE BIGGER ONES. BUT WHEN I HADA LOOK AT THOSE ELECTORAL VEHICLES, I CAN'T SAY THAT IT STRUCK ME THAT THERE WAS ANYHUGE NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS BEYOND WHAT I ANTICIPATED TO BE NORMAL. IMEAN…YEAH…HEATHER JUST REMINDED ME, LAWRENCE HAD ONE TOO. LOOK, IT HAPPENS. ITDOESN'T MATTER WHETHER YOU'RE LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION. I MEAN I TRY TO AVOID HAVINGTHEM ON THE FREEWAY WHICH IS WHAT LAWRENCE DID. BUT IT HAPPENS. IT'S NOT HIS FAULT.

JOURNALIST: (INAUDIBLE)BEATTIE: IF YOU…LOOK, IT'S MORE THAN THAT. IT'S JUST THAT MY INTEGRITY'S IMPORTANT. THE REPORT IN

THE SUNDAY MAIL TODAY COULD HAVE BEEN MISINTERPRETED AND I HAVE TO MAKE SURE ASPREMIER THAT I HAVE THE PUBLIC RECORD CORRECT. I MEAN IT WOULD HAVE BEEN FAIR FOR ANYONE OF YOU TO SAY TO ME IN THREE YEARS' TIME, 'WELL, YOU SAID AND THE SUNDAY MAIL'SREPORTED IT THAT NONE OF YOUR CHILDREN HAD AN ACCIDENT IN A MINISTERIAL VEHICLE'. AND ICOULD SAY TO YOU, WELL, IN MY GOVERNMENT CAR. AND I COULD SAY TO YOU THAT'S TRUE, THEYDIDN'T. BUT THERE'S A CONFUSION IN THE MEDIA'S MIND ABOUT WHAT'S MY MINISTERIAL VEHICLE ANDWHAT THE ELECTORAL CAR IS. AND IT WOULD HAVE BEEN IN MY VIEW INAPPROPRIATE TO LEAVE THEPUBLIC RECORD THE WAY IT WAS. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS I'VE DONE IT. NOW, AS ISAID THE SUNDAY MAIL IS TECHNICALLY CORRECT IN WHAT IT'S REPORTED BUT ANYONE READINGTHAT COULD INFER THAT THAT IMPLIES NOT JUST TO MY MINISTERIAL CAR BUT TO THE ELECTORALCAR AND THAT'S NOT AN UNREASONABLE INTERPRETATION TO MAKE. I DON'T THINK THEY MEANTTHAT, OR THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE, BUT I DON'T WANT YOU SAYING TO ME IN THREE MONTHS' TIME,'BUT YOU'VE ALREADY SAID THAT THERE WAS NO ACCIDENT IN ELECTORAL CARS'. AND THEN YOUSAYING, 'WELL, HANG ON, THAT'S IN THE SUNDAY MAIL'. AND THEN I'VE GOT TO SAY TO YOU, WELL, HANG ON, THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY MEANT, THAT'S NOTWHAT WE SAID. AS PREMIER I HAVE TO MAKE SURE AS BEST I CAN THAT THE PUBLIC RECORD ISCORRECT. AND, YOU KNOW, I TAKE…THIS IS DIFFICULT FOR US. I MEAN I'LL GIVE YOU ANILLUSTRATION ABOUT HOW DIFFICULT ACCOUNTABILITY IS. I INDICATED TO THE PARLIAMENT THEOTHER DAY AFTER AN EXCHANGE OF LETTERS WHEN I WROTE TO THE CMC AND THE AUDITOR-GENERAL THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE SECURITY UPGRADED AT MY HOME BECAUSE WE HAD AHOME INVASION AND THERE WAS COPYCAT THREATS AND ALL THE REST OF IT. I WAS DRIVING BETWEEN FUNCTIONS THE OTHER DAY AND I JUST HAPPENED TO HAVE STEVEAUSTIN AND THE ABC ON. AND SOMEONE RANG UP AND SAID THEY THOUGHT IT WAS OUTRAGEOUSTHAT THERE WAS SOME EXPENSE OF FORTY THOUSAND DOLLARS GOING TO BE SPENT ON THEUPGRADE. NOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE EXPENSE IS GOING TO BE. THE QUOTES ARE OUT THERE,NO-ONE KNOWS. WHAT HAD HAPPENED WAS, IN THE LETTER, AS REPORTED QUITE ACCURATELY INTHE COURIER-MAIL, IT SAID INTERIM MEASURES OF FOUR THOUSAND DOLLARS. SO I'M GOING TOHAVE PEOPLE RINGING THE ABC BAGGING ME FOR AN EXPENSE OF FORTY THOUSAND DOLLARS. AND I RANG STEVE BISHOP AND SAID, WHERE DID THIS FIGURE COME FROM, WHAT IS THIS? WEDON'T KNOW. IT WAS A MISINTERPRETATION. THE PROBLEM WITH ALL THIS IS TO ACTUALLY GET THESTORY AND EXPLAIN IT WHICH IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO HERE. IT IS VERY DIFFICULT. AND SOME OFTHESE SCENARIOS WHEN YOU ARE PROVIDING (?) TO BE ACCOUNTABLE IS TO HAVE IT PROPERLYREPORTED IN A BALANCED WAY. YOU KNOW, I ACCEPT THAT I'VE BEEN AROUND LONG ENOUGH TOGET BEATEN UP BUT THAT'S THE SORT OF PROBLEM YOU GET. OKAY? SO I DON'T WANT THERE TO BEMISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT THE RECORD. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE COST OF THE UPGRADE OF THE HOUSE WILL BE, THE SECURITYMEASURES, ALL THE REST OF IT, I DON'T KNOW. NOR DOES ANYONE ELSE. ANYONE ELSE WANT TOTALK ANY MORE ABOUT THIS? OKAY.

10 Mar 2005 Criminal Code (Child Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill 543

CRIMINAL CODE (CHILD PORNOGRAPHY AND ABUSE) AMENDMENT BILL

Second ReadingResumed from 9 March (see p. 476).Ms LEE LONG (Tablelands—ONP) (11.29 am): I rise to speak to the Criminal Code (Child

Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill 2004. This bill is a sad reflection of some of the negativeimpacts new technologies are having on our world. I am sure that the inventors of the computer and theinternet could not have foreseen the disgusting uses to which their inventions have been put. Theintroduction in this bill of specific offences relating to these matters is an appropriate response. I notereferences in the explanatory notes of further discussion at national forums about how these practicescan best be attacked. I am not a technophile, but I do suspect that given the transborder nature of theinternet this may well be a case where the best possible answer is in fact a uniform national one.

I do have a number of concerns. One is the definition of child exploitation material to include thatdepicting someone who is only apparently a child under 16. It is an old sore: there are people whom onecan look at and never guess their real age—that is, appearances can be very subjective and varygreatly from someone's real age. So what we should rely on is another fact which is not subjective—thatis, the actual age of someone. I imagine that this definition is intended entirely to capture thoseoffenders with material of a highly objectionable nature but about which the chances of finding thesubjects and establishing their real ages is, in practical terms, impossible.

I understand that entirely. However, the minister might like to address how he anticipates dealingwith the circumstances where the legality of an image of an act relies entirely on the age of the subjects,and that is that if they are of age it is legal—I would say not acceptable—and if they are underage it isentirely offensive. I am also concerned about the possibility that unwarranted emails, known as spam,might carry offensive material to an innocent person's computer. It is possible that the computer ownermay not even know such material is there. I know that my electorate office address, despite thesophisticated efforts of the Parliamentary Service, does still at times receive email advertisements for arange of offensive subjects. So what chance does an average mum or dad have whose computer hasan internet connection? I am fully supportive of efforts to catch and punish those animals behind childpornography, but I do have concerns about the possibility of unknowing innocent people suddenly facingvery serious allegations. I am further concerned that, if it is in a family situation, our other child safetylaws may well kick in and place the family itself at risk of being broken up.

I note that among defences provided in this bill is that of a genuine artistic purpose. That is theloony Left running wild. There is absolutely zero artistic merit in depicting the sexual exploitation ofchildren. An artist engaging in creating such material should be charged with the offences contained inthis bill and anything else that might apply, especially as there are separate provisions for educational,legal, medical and scientific public benefit purposes.

I also note yet again a reversal of onus of proof in relation to where the material of interest hasbeen classified. The explanatory notes indicate that this is essentially because it would be costly for theprosecution to establish in every case where material was either not classified or not capable of beingclassified. Innocent until proven guilty is a very basic tenet of our society. To argue that it should bereversed for no other reason than cost is to say our justice system should ignore justice and insteadconcentrate on being as cheap as possible. In terms of the organisations listed as having beenconsulted, there appears to me to be major holes. I do not see the Civil Liberties Council listed. Moreimportantly, I do not see Bravehearts or any similar organisation nor any victims groups. In this area, Ibelieve the input of organisations such as these would have been enormously useful. In this instance,however, I intend to support this bill as any move to attack this vile industry deserves all of the support itcan get. I support the bill.

Mrs CARRYN SULLIVAN (Pumicestone—ALP) (11.34 am): I rise today to speak to the CriminalCode (Child Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill. The growing amount of reported incidences ofchild pornography is very disturbing and it seems that one cannot watch a news report without somemention of the topic. That must be extremely worrying to parents, particularly those with young children.In this day and age, they already have enough to be concerned about without this extra worry. I recentlyread an article which quoted one such parent who said—The danger is everywhere and we need to be responsible for our children's future and protect them—no-one else seems to betaking the threat seriously. The laws are way too lenient and we need to get tougher penalties not just to punish but to deter othersfrom following.

The government has been working on implementing a range of new measures to combat theepidemic of child pornography and other related child sex offences. This state already has the mostcomprehensive range of child sex offences across Australian jurisdictions, with severe penaltiesattached to those offences. The Attorney-General, the Hon. Rod Welford, stated in his second readingspeech—... every piece of child pornography represents an ongoing abuse of an innocent child.

544 Criminal Code (Child Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill 10 Mar 2005

It is a comment like that that would send shivers up anyone's spine and is a lasting reminder thatwe must do everything in our power to stamp it out and protect our children, one of the most vulnerablegroups in our community.

The bill proposes to respond to the growing incidences of child pornography by inserting specificoffences with appropriate penalties into the Criminal Code. With the ever-increasing use of the internet,it has made it easier for child pornography to be accessed. Most will remember that a recent crackdownon an internet child pornography ring resulted in hundreds of arrests across the country and certainlyraised the profile of current Queensland and interstate child pornography offences and penalties. Withthe internet increasing the range and volume of child pornography material, we as a government arewell aware of its effects and last year the state government committed $1 million to the Argos ForensicComputer Examination Unit to be better equipped to tackle people who are abusing our children byproviding bugging powers that do not, to date, exist elsewhere.

This bill reaffirms our continuing commitment to protecting our children by introducing tougherlaws for child pornography offences. The bill targets the production and possession of child exploitationmaterial by treating it as a criminal conduct. Under the current legislation, that is not the case. Atpresent, it is designed only to classify material to determine whether it is an M rating or an R rating anddoes not recognise the nature of the conduct involved in child pornography. This bill introduced by theAttorney-General, the Hon. Rod Welford, increases the maximum penalties for offences with regard tochild exploitation material and illustrates the offences in a manner that truly reflect its crime andexploitive nature. This material has a broader definition and depicts other forms of abuse of children,including torture. The offences are all indictable and will be located in chapter 22 of the Criminal Codealong with serious sexual offences against children. This bill will help send a strong message, as withpreviously implemented legislation, that these types of behaviours will simply not be tolerated.

The opposition bleats about us not doing enough. A letter attacking me in a local paper this weekfrom the opposition leader stated, and quite wrongly, that our legislation targeted at people who prey onchildren is not effective because Dennis Ferguson walked free. The member for Southern Downs failedto mention two important things. One: our legislation did not come into effect until after Dennis Fergusonwas released. He was convicted in 1988 and served his full sentence. It would be illegal for anygovernment to have kept him further, although that probably does not make any difference to theNational Party. Two: the National Party, which the member for Southern Downs leads, should ask itselfwhy, back in 1988 when it was in government, it did not appeal when Ferguson was originally sentencedto just 14 years jail for his heinous crimes against young children. I want to take this opportunity toreiterate what this government has done to ensure the safety of children. Since Dennis Ferguson wasreleased from jail, the Beattie government has introduced the strongest community protection in thiscountry with the Dangerous Prisoners (Sexual Offenders) Act 2003.

Under this act the Attorney-General can apply to the Supreme Court to keep dangerous sexoffenders who are due to be released behind bars. The Attorney-General may make an application ifsex offenders do not complete rehabilitation before release or fail to demonstrate that they have notlearned from rehabilitation courses. For those people who have offended against children and arereleased, they are now covered by the Australian National Child Offender Register where they mustreport to the police every time they change their job, their car registration, their address et cetera. If theystep out of line, they will go back behind bars. Queensland is one of the first jurisdictions in Australia tohave implemented this register. We have implemented a number of reforms and I am very proud to bepart of this government, which continues to protect our children. I would really hope that the NationalParty sees fit to agree with this bill.

Mr MESSENGER (Burnett—NPA) (11.40 am): I do not think that there are very many members ofthis House who would argue that there is not a discernible and significant connection between childpornography and child sexual abuse. Katrina Holz, who is the acting coordinator of the Bundaberg AreaSexual Assault Service, says that there is a definite connection between collecting child pornographyand the sexual abuse of children. She also says that children are not able to protect themselves and thatthey should not have to. That is why I welcome the introduction of the Criminal Code (Child Pornographyand Abuse) Amendment Bill 2004. I welcome the strengthening of the child pornography laws. Childpornography in any media format is pictures, video and sounds that tell obscene stories and causeimmeasurable hurt and harm to the victims and their families. It also eats at the very soul of our cultureand our society. Child pornography is an abhorrent, ugly cancer that needs to be detected quickly anddestroyed.

The people, often men, who make and engage in child pornography need to understand just howseriously our society regards this vile and repugnant behaviour. This bill is proposing to increase themaximum jail sentence for a person who involves a child in the making of child exploitation material to10 years. Mr Deputy Speaker, I ask you: why only 10 years? I think that I can speak for the majority ofthe Burnett when I say that 20 years would give a judge a more appropriate range to work with. AlthoughI commend the Attorney-General for this initiative, let us not turn it into a feel-good PR exercise for theLabor government. Increasing the maximum jail sentence allows us to breathe a sigh of relief and say,‘Thank goodness the government is doing something real to protect our children.' This measure could


quite easily turn into a window-dressing exercise and the cynic in me says that the Attorney-Generaland the Premier are putting on their aprons and fluffing the legal curtains.

Let me bring to this debate a healthy dose of reality. If the Labor Party really wanted to send amessage to the deviants who indulge in this disgusting behaviour—this child exploitative behaviour—then last year it would have voted to support the National Party's private member's bill which would havemandated a jail sentence for people convicted of child sexual assault. All Queensland children would besafer if every one of the 654 people convicted of indecent treatment of children under 16 during theyears 1988 to 2003 actually served a jail sentence. Because 217 of these 654 people convicted ofindecent treatment of children did not serve time in jail, did not face a mandatory jail sentence, then allQueensland children are less safe. Let me say again that it is not good enough that approximately one-third of all convicted child sexual offenders in Queensland escape time in jail. I have made the point anumber of times in this House that the case for mandatory sentencing for child sexual offenders stillstands, will always stand, and would complement the initiatives of the Child Safety LegislationAmendment Bill 2004 and also the Criminal Code (Child Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill,which is now before the House.

Katrina Holz, the acting coordinator of the Bundaberg Area Sexual Assault Service, also said thatthere is not enough research out there to determine the causes of child pornography and sexual abuse.More research needs to be carried out, more money needs to be distributed for this research to takeplace. Research helps organisations such as the Bundaberg Area Sexual Assault Service to look atsetting up specific programs to treat offenders. Of course, it is also looking at programs to help thevictims. The services need a better understanding of why offenders commit these offences againstchildren.

I refer the House to a chart from the Australian Institute of Criminology which shows in 2003 therate per 100,000 persons of sexual assault victims. The highest rate of sexual assault was reported bygirls in the 10 to 14 years of age group at 475 per 100,000 females. For males, the rate was highest forthose under 10 years old at 90 per 100,000. Boys made up 33 per cent of sexual assault victims agedunder 10 years. In 2003, approximately 290 children aged from zero to nine were reported per 100,000and 10- to 14-year-old children were reported at 565 per 100,000 in 2003. If the Premier wants to shedtears, I suggest that he shed tears over those statistics.

Dr Tony Krone, a consultant to the Australian High Tech Crime Centre at the Australian Institute ofCriminology, stated the following on 5 November 2004 on ABC Radio National—Child sexual abuse images depict a crime regardless of any supposed consent on the part of the child and the use of child sexualabuse images is never a victimless crime. US research suggests that up to 30 per cent of those who use child abuse images are previously known to police for child sexualabuse. That means that up to 70 per cent are not. Importantly, there is no evidence that a person will go from viewing child sexualabuse images to becoming a physical sexual abuser of children. We owe it to the victims of child sexual abuse and to ourselves to better understand this crime type and to deal with offenders withan appreciation of the varying severity of the crime. Armed with knowledge we can better address the issues of crime prevention,child protection and, where possible, the rehabilitation of offenders.

The Australian Institute of Criminology's Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, whichwas published in November 1998, states—As paedophiles become more sophisticated in their use of personal computers, society will experience difficulty in monitoring theiractivities. Paedophiles will gravitate towards technologies that maximise anonymity.

Katrina Holz, the acting coordinator of the Bundaberg Area Sexual Assault Service, says thatcommunity members come into the organisation because of photos that have been taken and placed onthe internet. The victims react differently to what has happened to them. Mostly they are traumatisedand suffer post-traumatic stress because of the betrayal of trust and the fact that they do not know howto go about getting the pictures off the internet. Katrina said that stricter laws are needed by thegovernment and there is a need to see these laws through.

Locally, very few cases actually reach the court process and in very few cases does the offenderactually go to jail. Instead, it seems that the sentences imposed range from nothing to a slap on thewrist. In fact, Katrina does not know of any cases locally where the offender received the maximumpenalty. That is what I use as evidence for my call for mandatory sentencing.

Katrina said, ‘With kids, all they know is black and white, right and wrong. If you are wrong, youget punished. But, when the offender does not get punished for the offence to that child, the child doesnot understand why. How can you explain to a child that it is not their fault for what has happened? It'sjust the legal system, there was not enough evidence or the child is too young to give evidence.' Katrinasays it cannot be explained to a child when the system has let them down.

Many years ago in a different state I was on a jury in a child abuse case. It was a very informativeprocess for me to see what happens to children when they are put on the stand and to see how a veryslick and competent Queen's Counsel can absolutely destroy a child's evidence. I know that often itcomes down to the child's word against the alleged offender's word, but I have seen how easily a child'sconfidence and credibility can be destroyed on the witness stand.


We cannot afford to have a justice system which fails to protect our children. Let us not let themdown. I would like this House to think about the people who are charged with the responsibility ofenforcing these laws and working with these laws. I refer them to a report from the Australian Institute ofCriminology. The original title of the research project in the name of Professor Frieda Briggs was‘Threats and intimidation in the lives of professionals employed in the child protection field'. The studyinvolved the investigation of the occurrence of violence, threats and intimidation in the lives ofprofessionals while engaged in their duties to protect children from abuse and neglect. It examined theeffects of violence on the health, work and wellbeing of these professionals.

The study was based on a survey of 721 participants from a variety of professions involved inchild protection. Findings indicate the extremely stressful nature of working in situations that involvechild protection, with over 90 per cent of respondents reporting that they were subjected to intimidatingexperiences in the course of their child protection duties within the last five years, while nearly one-quarter had been physically assaulted. Of concern was the perception by almost three-quarters ofrespondents that nothing in their training had prepared them for exposure to threats and violence in theworkplace. The effects of intimidation, threats and violence were reported as predominantlypsychological, with the majority of respondents—74 per cent—reporting emotional and/or health effectsas a result of experiencing abusive behaviours. Over two-thirds of the respondents reported feelingburnt out by their work. The study has considerable significance for the professional trainers anduniversity educators in all professions involving children. It also poses a significant challenge toemployers to improve management responses to workers who encounter abuse and intimidation.

In closing, I would like to remind the House once again of the words of Katrina Holz, the actingcoordinator of the Bundaberg Area Sexual Assault Service, who says that there is a definite connectionbetween collecting child pornography and sexual abuse of children. Children are not able to protectthemselves and they should not have to. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr ENGLISH (Redlands—ALP) (11.53 am): I am going to shock the House this morning: I amgoing to agree with part of the speech of the member for Burnett. There was a small gem of wisdom inhis speech. Like the member for Burnett, I have been in numerous court cases involving child abusematters, and I have also sat through and witnessed instances where lawyers have taken advantage ofthe age of some of the witnesses involved and have torn apart a witness on the witness stand. I am veryproud, however, of the reforms that this Beattie Labor government has put in place to protect childwitnesses and to make it easier on child witnesses.

A basic tenet of our legal system is the right of an accused to face his accuser. Within that basicunderpinning framework we need to do whatever we can to protect our child witnesses, to make givingevidence as easy and non-threatening as possible. However, I have said in a previous speech that, nomatter what steps we take—I have walked into numerous courts to give evidence—entering a court togive evidence will never be a pleasant experience, but we need to do what we can to make it ascomfortable as possible for these child victims. I would like to congratulate the police who undertake thisdaily work of surfing cyberspace trawling for this human scum—paedophiles. The police undertakingthis work on a day-to-day basis within Task Force Argos all deserve our praise and admiration. I join withall members of this House in condemning child pornography and child abuse in its many forms.

The bill before us this morning puts the offences where they should be. These matters arecriminal offences. They are not concerned with the classification of the standard of images. This is not adebate about whether a movie should be classified M, R or PG. This is about people committing criminaloffences. We are putting the offence provisions where they should be—in the Criminal Code.

In this process we are increasing the penalties for both possession and production of childpornography. I am pleased that the Attorney-General has put in the legislation a clarifier that it is tocause offence to a reasonable adult. I do not think any of us want to become a nanny state where wecannot take photographs of our own children. Many of us go to our children's sporting events and asproud parents, one and all, we take photographs of our children undertaking their endeavours. I believeas parents we need to be able to do that. I do not want to see Queensland become a nanny state.

This is a very difficult and vexed issue, however. Many paedophiles like to collect trophies of theirvictims. One particular scrapbook that a paedophile kept had a range of obscene and sickening images.At the same time, however, this sick man had photographs taken from brochures that we get deliveredto our mailboxes every day from major shopping centres. We live in an era when decent photographscan be used for indecent means. It is a very difficult issue for our society to deal with, and I am quitehappy to stand here today and say that I do not have the answers. In this scrapbook this perverted manhad cut out images taken from these brochures of children in their underwear advertising underwear.What can we do about that? I do not have the answers. These are decent photographs—the kind ofadvertising material that we see day in, day out that we do not blink at because it is not indecent, it is notobscene and it should not be illegal. These images can, however, be used for some very sick purposes.

How many of us have taken photographs of our babies when they are very young with no clotheson? Ninety-nine per cent of the time that is a normal, healthy reaction of a parent. What happens whena sick person decides to take that image and use it for some other purpose? Is the problem with the


image or is the problem with the person who is using it? We need to be careful. It is a very difficult andvexed issue.

The opposition has proposed some amendments, and I would just like to comment briefly onthem. It is asking that the sentence for possession of child pornography be increased to 10 years. I haveissues with that. This bill is about achieving some national standards. If we accepted that amendment itwould then put us at odds with other jurisdictions. There are other bills such as the Drugs Misuse Actthat have always had a different penalty in relation to possession of a dangerous drug and production ofa dangerous drug. Production is always seen as a much more serious offence.

The opposition is also asking for the government to delete the word ‘artistic' as a possibledefence. Again I am concerned about this in light of what I spoke about before—sometimes it is not theimage that is the issue, it is the use that it is put to. I hope Anne Geddes never comes to Queensland ifwe accept the opposition amendment and delete the word ‘artistic' from one of the possible defences.We may have to kick her door in and charge her with some criminal offences. What about sculptorsdoing sculptures of cupids? I do not condone child pornography. However, I believe that there are somereasonable artistic reasons for that. I cannot ask for a show of hands, but a lot of us have seen AnneGeddes's work.

Dr Lesley Clark interjected. Mr ENGLISH: Exactly. For every image that appears in an Anne Geddes’s calendar I would

assume that there might have been 50 or 60 shots to achieve that one shot—the baby may not havebeen sitting quite right or the baby may have been doing something that the photographer did not wantit to do. In the process that image could be seen to be somewhat more graphic than the image thephotographer was aiming for. I do not support the amendments proposed by the opposition.

Some members opposite say they like mandatory sentencing. Again, I am not supporting childpornographers or child abusers. However, there is a well-known cycle of abuse. I would hate to see a17- or 18-year-old person who has lived through maybe 14 years of sexual abuse, possibly by one oftheir parents, and offends against one of his siblings being locked away for a mandatory 10 years. Thatis why we give judges discretion. Mr Ferguson is a grub. I am not about condoning that behaviour, butthere is a huge difference between the conduct of Mr Ferguson and other sickos like him and a youngoffender who is just continuing the cycle of abuse. That is why I do not condone mandatory sentencing.That is why I believe we should give our judges discretion—so the judges can assess whether they havea grub before them or whether they have another victim before them who has committed offences andneeds to be sanctioned and needs to be punished. But, again, we need to differentiate between the twotypes of offenders.

I conclude by thanking the Attorney-General and his staff for their ongoing commitment toprotecting the most available asset of our state, our children. I commend the bill to the House.

Mrs STUCKEY (Currumbin—Lib) (12.03 pm): Let me state from the outset that the Liberal Partysupports the Criminal Code (Child Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill. The Prime Minister wroteto state premiers in October 2004 seeking their support for new laws and their cooperation to improvethe liaison between law enforcement agencies responsible for investigating offenders. The PrimeMinister's stance to make child pornography a leading issue for reform on the agenda of federal-staterelations reflects the sentiment of the general public that more needs to be done to protect children fromonline sexual deviants as access to the internet spreads rapidly throughout Australia.

The Australian newspaper reported in December 2004 that no states had responded formally toMr Howard's plea. The introduction of these amendments before us today is a step in the right directionto reform the current laws. However, it is essential that Queensland works with all of the other states ona national level to combat a crime that does not respect or recognise jurisdictional boundaries within acountry or, for that matter, between countries.

The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare reported that there were 198,355 notifications ofsuspected child abuse and neglect throughout Australia during the 2002-03 period with 31,068 of thosein Queensland. This figure represents 70 per cent of substantiated cases and earns Queensland theunsavoury title of the state with the highest notification number in Australia. Sexual abuse made up10 per cent of the substantiated cases and physical abuse made up 28 per cent.

Clinical studies indicate that those engaging in this activity tend to be men between 25 and 30years of age with little or no criminal history. They tend to have good educational standards, high IQs,are generally employed and are married or in relationships. This typology makes it extremely difficult todetect offenders as they are the norm within society and they often hold highly regarded positions withinthe work force. This is why the blue card is such an important tool. It is a tool that needs to be constantlyreviewed and strengthened to help eliminate offenders working closely with children.

Technological advances have transformed child pornography into a global and multibillion dollarindustry. The digital age has greatly facilitated the trade in pornographic materials. Accordingly, childpornography is cheaper and faster to produce and distribute, and the risk of detection has beensubstantially reduced. Queensland already has laws relating to the production, sale and possession of


child abuse material which are contained in the classification acts that are a part of a Commonwealth-state scheme for the classification of publications, films and computer games.

As I have said, these amendments are a significant step in reforming the current laws in respectof the nature and conduct related to the content of pornographic material. We have come to a point intime where the traditional laws are struggling to keep pace with the formidable impact of moderntechnology on the trade in child pornography.

The major difficulty with making new laws in relation to child pornography can be found ininternational characteristics of this type of crime. What constitutes child pornography in one jurisdictionmay not necessarily be classified as child pornography in another. Furthermore, definitions of a childand child pornography may even vary between legal jurisdictions in the same country. One of thebiggest concerns affecting the fight against child pornography is that the content of materials thatconstitute child pornography also varies.

The child pornography industry has moved into the home through the use of camcorders, VCRs,CDs, microphonic devices, home editing and computer graphic software. This has made the industrymore hidden and more difficult to detect and police. Visual and audio pornographic materials can nowbe produced instantaneously with little or no expertise. Advances in computer technologies now allowelectronic images to be manipulated. Photos can be scanned into a computer and manipulated inalmost any way imaginable. These images are referred to as morphed images and are quite commonamongst child pornographers because the process obscures the identity of the children involved andconsequently hampers the chances of finding the source.

It is also now possible for the production of entirely computer generated images. This hasresulted in sexually explicit materials that appear to feature children but do not actually contain realchildren. The upside to this is that real children are not being abused. However, it may cause a person’sconduct to escalate and seek out contact with a real child and cause further sexual exploitation ofchildren.

The main problem from a law enforcement perspective is that the internet has impacted childpornography in such a way that it has no respect or response to national boundaries, as I mentionedearlier in this speech.

It has also made it anonymous and therefore difficult to pinpoint the source of the material. Thematerial can also be downloaded and viewed from the safety of the offender's own home, providingthem with a large degree of security and anonymity which is illustrated by the rapid increase in thedistribution of child pornography online over the past decade. It is highly likely that the ease ofdownloading child pornography has contributed to the increase in population of child pornographyconsumers who did not actively seek out such material via the more traditional methods.

In the 2002 article ‘Child Pornography and the Internet: Policing and Treatment Issues’, adramatic increase in the use of child pornography is noted and this seems to be directly related to theinternet. Between 1989 and 1994 approximately 12,000 items of child pornography were seized byofficials in Australia. In contrast, in 2001 an apprehension in South Australia caught one offender withover 21,000 images of child pornography and a further 1,300 stories depicting the sexual abuse ofchildren.

In 2004, during the Operation Auxin raids, approximately two million pornographic imagesinvolving children were seized. It would seem that the internet has promoted the pornography industryas it probably provides the largest collection of pornography currently available, including sexual chatchannels, pictures and text.

In 2003 the Australian Minister for Justice and Customs reported that about 85 per cent of childpornography seized in Australia is distributed over the internet. Australian research has found thatinternet pornographic content is more violent, extreme and deviant than what was found in othermediums such as videos, books or games. Whatever the end use, the production of child pornographyclearly encourages voyeurs to see a child in a sexual context, either through actual events or the use ofmorphing or digitally altering photographs.

Research seems to indicate that there is a close link between child abusers and the users of childpornography. A study by US Customs revealed that 80 per cent of identified users of child pornographywere themselves child abusers. A Chicago police study, albeit some years ago, found that whenarresting people for the possession of child pornography they almost always found photographs of thearrested person engaging in a sexual act with children.

The current legislation is directed at protecting children from being exposed to pornographiccontent in the games that they view, hire, purchase and play. Child pornography falls under a totallydifferent category to that covered by the classification acts, which are concerned with whether or not thefilms or items should be classified or refused classification. It is essential that we have legislation thatcreates offences regarding objectionable material relating to child abuse in accordance with agreednational guidelines. Presently offence provisions are aimed at the commercial production of childpornographic material such as the classification acts. The makers of much of this material often do not


intend it for commercial sale, nor is it always made for profit, but it is nevertheless a deviant andabhorrent practice.

This bill inserts definitions in relation to child exploitation material, as well as proposing a suitablepenalty of 10 years imprisonment. This new addition to the Criminal Code makes it an offence to depictsomeone who is apparently under 16 years of age in a sexual context or in an offensive or demeaningcontext or being subjected to abuse, cruelty or torture. It will not be necessary to prove that the childdepicted is actually under 16 years or is, in fact, a real person. If the material causes offence to areasonable adult who believes the material depicts a child under 16 then it will be classed as childexploitation material.

This legislation covers the use of digitally altered photos or the use of computer-generatedimages to depict a child in a sexual context and makes it an offence. A person may also be liable for agreater penalty of 20 years imprisonment if it can be shown that the person has taken an indecent photoor recorded an indecent visual image of a child under 16 years.

This legislation causes the onus of proof to be reversed. The accused has to prove that they hadthe images for a legitimate purpose under section 228E. A fundamental part of our judicial system is thatthe prosecution has to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Legislation that reverses the onus ofproof should be carefully considered and the Liberal Party has concerns in relation to the number of billsbeing put through of late that have reversed the onus of proof. While I accept that in this instance it isnecessary that the accused should have to prove, on the balance of probabilities, the manner ofdefence, it is only because the possible exculpatory matters are within the accused's own knowledgeand do not lie with the prosecution. It is critical that we protect our children, as in many cases they areunable to protect themselves from sexual predators in our communities.

A recent Newspoll survey of young people aged 16 and 17 years who were asked about theirexposure to sex sites on the internet found that 84 per cent of boys and 60 per cent of girls who use theinternet reported accidental exposure to sex sites; a worrying figure, I am sure honourable memberswould agree. Of greater concern were statistics of around 38 per cent of boys reporting that theyactually searched the internet for sex sites and 22 per cent reporting that they accessed such sites atleast every two to three months. The true statistics may well be much higher.

It is to be hoped that these amendments to the Criminal Code will be a strong deterrent to thosewho want to access child pornography in any form and thereby drastically reduce the number of childrenbeing exploited in this manner. I commend the bill to the House.

Dr LESLEY CLARK (Barron River—ALP) (12.15 pm): It is with pleasure that I rise to support theCriminal Code (Child Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill 2004, which delivers on Queensland'scommitment to join with other states in providing uniform laws to combat this abhorrent area ofbehaviour.

The escalation of child pornography on the internet is emphasised by the fact that lawenforcement agencies seized around 12,000 child pornography items between 1989 and 1994, whereasthe recent Operation Auxin uncovered approximately two million pornographic images involving childrenwhen police carried out raids across the country in 2004 and arrested some 200 people for pornographyoffences. It is interesting to note that the profile of those alleged offenders caught by that operationclearly shows that collectors of child pornography and paedophiles are not the crime novel stereotypes.The men charged included teachers, police officers, businessmen, church ministers and doctors. Manywere fathers with normal lives, careers and no previous convictions. I think this is what disturbs so manypeople in the community about this kind of offence; it really is the case that abusers and users of childpornography could be anywhere in our community and we just do not know where they are.

The use of sophisticated technology for child pornography poses considerable challenges to lawenforcement bodies, challenges that Queensland is recognising. Software exists to allow for theconcealment and encryption of content so that only authorised, authenticated persons are able todecrypt the data and view the image that has been encrypted and transmitted online. Those sendingimages and other content in this way can also retain anonymity through using a remail service, whichintakes messages, removes the address and gives it an anonymous identification code number with aremail or service address and then sends it on to its final recipient. Replies can be sent in the same wayto preserve the anonymity of the responder. The online activities of the international Wonderland Clubwere protected in this way. Access to the group was password protected and the content was encrypted.In addition, the offender may be physically located in another country, which makes prosecution moredifficult unless the law enforcement bodies are prepared to cooperate at an international level, as indeedthey are.

In terms of detection, there has been progress made in strengthening mechanisms for informationsharing and coordination between law enforcement agencies around the world. For example, a lawenforcement agency which identifies a person's email address in another country as one which issending child pornography can inform their counterpart in that other country. Law enforcement officersfrom the United Kingdom, Canada, the FBI and the Australian Federal Police are joining forces to formthe Virtual Global Task Force. Australia's involvement in this task force is under the control of the AFP's


High Tech Crime Centre. It enables police to have a virtual presence online, particularly in domainswhere child pornographers and paedophiles operate. For example, police are successfully infiltratinginternet chat rooms and acting as children to catch paedophiles who are seeking out children forgrooming for eventual contact. The police, as part of the task force operation, will patrol the chat roomsmost popular with children and talk to some of the children online, much as they would in school.

It is surveillance of this kind which will hopefully destroy the myth that the internet provides ananonymous and safe playground for this abhorrent behaviour. I turn to the situation in Queensland. In2001 the Queensland Police Service formed the Sex Crimes and Investigation Unit, combining the ChildSexual Assault Investigation Unit and Task Force Argos. The unit investigates child abuse, serial sexoffences and offenders, organised paedophilia, institutionalised abuse, child exploitation and the use ofthe internet in exchanging child pornography. During 2003-04 around 100 offenders were arrested byTask Force Argos on more than 2,300 charges.

In September last year, the Queensland Police Service launched a new education campaigntargeting parents whose children use the internet to ensure that parents realise the dangers ofpaedophiles attempting to groom children in internet chat rooms et cetera in order to win their trust foreventual contact and sexual abuse. The initiative includes a booklet entitled Who's chatting to yourkids?, which sets out the warning signs that parents should look for and provides tips about whatparents can do if they believe that their children have been contacted by a paedophile or anyone in thehousehold has been sent child pornography. It also advises installing filtering software and monitoringchildren's emails. I sent information about that particular program to all of my Neighbourhood Watchgroups and I am really pleased to see that some have included that in their newsletters.

In November last year, Australian police ministers agreed to uniform laws against childpornography, including tough minimum prison terms based on the New South Wales legislation, makinga person in possession of child pornography liable to a term of five years imprisonment. A standard termof 10 years jail will apply for using a child for producing pornography. The legislation we are debatingtoday is, as I said at the outset, delivering on the Queensland commitment to uniform laws by amendingour Criminal Code.

I will outline the amendments, because I wish to convey this information to the people in myelectorate through this presentation. It is proposed that we have a new section 228A in the CriminalCode. It creates an offence of involving a child under 18 in making child exploitation material. Themaximum penalty will be 10 years imprisonment, up from five years where a child is used in apublication and up from three years where a child is used in a photograph, film or computer game orimage. Where it can be established that an offender has actually abused a child in making the materialthen a substantive offence such as rape or indecent dealing will be the appropriate charge.

Proposed new section 228B creates an offence of making child exploitation material, with amaximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment. Again, this represents a substantial increase on the currentpenalty of five years for making a child pornography film or computer game and of three years formaking a child pornography publication.

Proposed new section 228C creates an offence of distributing child exploitation material, with amaximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment. Again, this represents a substantial increase in thepenalties applying to the current offences of selling child pornography publications, photographs orfilms—the penalty is currently two years—and selling an objectionable computer game, for which thepenalty is currently only six months.

Proposed new section 228D creates an offence of knowingly possessing child exploitationmaterial. The maximum penalty here is five years, up from one year for possession of child pornographypublications and photographs—although it is two years if its possession is for the purpose ofpublication—one year for the possession of films and two years for the possession of computer gamesand images. I fully support the distinction being made between possession and the other more seriousoffences.

As has been referred to in the House, there are a number of defences for these four new offencesas set out in those proposed new sections. It is a defence to prove that the person charged engaged inthe conduct alleged to constitute the offence for general artistic, educational, legal, medical, scientific orpublic benefit purposes and the person's conduct was, in the circumstances, reasonable for thatpurpose. We have already heard in the House that the amendment being proposed by the NationalParty to delete that defence of artistic use could really lead us into some very absurd situations. Unlikethe member for Tablelands, I do not think artists are actually the ‘looney Left', or whatever term it wasshe used to refer to them. I think that is a very genuine defence. I certainly have confidence in it beingused appropriately, as with the other defences. It is with great pleasure that I support the legislationbefore the House.

Mr CHRIS FOLEY (Maryborough—Ind) (12.24 pm): I rise to speak in support of the CriminalCode (Child Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill. Let me be clear from the outset that childpornography is evil incarnate. We hear the very tragic stories of abuse and then those abused going on


to abuse others. This cycle of abuse needs to be broken—no more stringently so than in relation to childpornography.

Many speakers in this debate have spoken of the anonymous nature of the internet. It does allowvile pornography to flourish. We see people who have become addicted to pornography. It seems thatthat addiction is just as strong as an addiction to heroin. As a pastor I have counselled numerouscouples whose marriages have been severely strained by people becoming addicted to internetpornography. Based on my pastoral counselling experience, I have noted that people with addictivepersonalities can fall victim to that addiction. Without exception, that seems to lead to them accessingincreasingly graphic and sick material. Let us make no mistake that child pornography is the worst of theworst. Children, as the most innocent ones in our society, deserve our utmost protection. I support theNational Party call for even stronger penalties in this area.

I note that the Attorney-General made a statement in his second reading speech which Iabsolutely agree with. He said that every piece of child pornography represents an ongoing abuse of aninnocent child. Once those disgraceful pictures are put on to the net, it is extremely difficult to controltheir spread. I also noted from the second reading speech that child exploitation material is defined inproposed new section 207A as—... material that, in a way likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult—

and this is the really important part—describes or depicts someone who is—

I underline this—or apparently is, a child under 16 years—(a) in a sexual context ... engaging in a sexual activity; or (b) in an offensive or demeaning context; or(c) being subjected to abuse, cruelty or torture.

The member for Currumbin touched on the issue of morphing. Computer images are manipulatedin all sorts of manners to come up with even sicker images. Members on both sides of this debate havethis morning touched on how incredible this problem is.

Statistics show that one search engine received in one day 116,000 requests for childpornography. Even allowing for the fact that some of those may have been research requests, that is stilla horrible statistic. There are approximately 100,000 web sites offering illegal child pornographyworldwide. Some 89 per cent of sexual solicitation of young people was made in chat rooms. That isobviously a very big problem. Other members have touched on that issue.

There are scary statistics about this problem. The average age of the first internet exposure topornography is actually 11 years. I remember when I was kid, boys would snigger over a copy ofPlayboy or something like that. The scary thing now is that people have access to this in their homes.When a 12-year-old kid's parents go down to the shop or something like that they can hit the net andaccess all sorts of graphic material with seemingly no control. The largest consumer group for internetpornography is actually the 12- to 17-year-old age group. That statistic surprised me. I thought it wouldbe adults who were looking at that vile material. Disgustingly, child pornography generates worldwidearound $3 billion in revenue. I am told that 90 per cent of eight- to 16-year-olds have viewed porn onlinemostly while doing homework.

It is a really sad fact of life that, in terms of businesses, 70 per cent of all internet porn trafficapparently occurs during the 9 to 5 work day and nearly one out of three companies has terminated anemployee for inappropriate use of the internet. Based on research funded by the Australian High TechCrime Centre, the Australian Institute of Criminology has recently released A typology of online childpornography offending. It states—There is an increasing seriousness of offending, from offences that do not directly involve a child, to offences that involve directcontact with children, from online grooming to physical abuse.Knowing the differences in how online child pornography offences are committed is vitally important to understanding andcombating the problem of the sexual exploitation of children ... The most important factor in law enforcement is the reliance onnetworks by many offenders. Concentrating on these linkages is likely to help address the problem of the proliferation of childpornography ... By catching trawlers and deterring those who may be thinking of experimenting with child pornography a low levelof offending will be disrupted.The Australian High Tech Crime Centre works with the Virtual Global Taskforce of police from the UK, USA and Canada.A nationwide police operation in late September 2004 resulted in charges against at least 191 people involving more than 2,000separate alleged child sex offences.

I agree with the member for Barron River in that it is an interesting exercise to look at the broadrange of people who had been caught. Operation Auxin raids yielded more than two million images ofchildren ranging in age from two to 16. Those implicated included teachers, academics, ministers, policeofficers, doctors, public servants, child welfare officers and defence personnel. The operation resultedfrom information gained from a 2003 United States FBI child pornography task force that followed acredit card trail to a Russian mafia company trading under the name Regpay Ltd. The company supplied


material to about 20 US web sites which was then onsold around the world. Clearly, it is a Herculeantask to try to stamp out this very vile activity.

When we look at the law in other states, in Victoria the law states that child pornography means afilm, photograph, publication or computer game that describes or depicts a person who is or who lookslike a minor under 16 engaging in sexual activity or depicted in an indecent manner or context. Clearly,criminal internet activity is very difficult to police. I commend the police who are really being veryproactive in this area. Earlier this week in the press we saw details of a paedophile in a Queenslandtown who was busted for disgraceful activities, and the courts need to deal very harshly with people inthat situation.

Before digital technology came along, perpetrators of child pornography were risking arrestduring the many stages of manufacture and marketing simply because the material had to be physicallyhanded from one person to the next. But with the advent of things like digital cameras, modems and theinternet, such material can now be distributed world wide in a lot easier fashion. Overt web sitesdedicated to child pornography are becoming less common now that many internet service providersaround the world have refused to host illegal or offensive material. Web sites are also more visible andpose a greater risk of arrest because they can be equally accessed by the police. Paedophilescommunicate with each other and exchange materials online via chat rooms and news groups, and theanonymity and immediacy of the internet makes it difficult for law enforcement agencies to policecriminal activities.

A horrible story from my own household unfolded a little while back when I found one of mychildren was in a chat room for teenage girls. I sat there and watched what she was typing in for amoment. It dawned on me—horribly—that a person purporting to be a 13-year-old girl living in Englandinvited my daughter to participate in what she called a ‘fashion survey'. The fashion survey started outasking what sort of shoes she was wearing and progressed to what sort of underwear she was wearingbefore I realised that this was a paedophile hitting on one of my children in my own home. I immediatelybanned my children from chat rooms altogether. That is a very personal story, but it is something thathas impacted on me deeply and made me very concerned as a parent of numerous children. I commendthis bill to the House. I commend the Attorney-General for taking a strong stand. I want to place on thepublic record that I would be supportive of even stronger sentencing. I do commend the bill to theHouse. I think it has very good intent.

Ms MALE (Glass House—ALP) (12.35 pm): I rise this afternoon to support the Criminal Code(Child Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill 2004. Child pornography is a heinous and secretivecrime which impacts severely on the children of our nation. We as legislators must do everything in ourpower to assist the law enforcers in their job of investigating, prosecuting and punishing offenders andhopefully reduce the incidences of child sex offences and child pornography offences. This bill isresponding to the prosecution options by inserting additional specific offences with appropriate penaltiesinto the Criminal Code which encompass production, distribution and possession of child exploitationmaterial.

The internet has made it very easy for offenders to access child pornography in an anonymousway and actually makes the offender feel as if the images of child sexual abuse are not their fault, thatthey are not hurting anyone by just looking. But this is not the case. Real children are abused daily tofeed the growing market for these images. Real children are the victims of these crimes, so in my mindthat makes these viewers of child pornography criminals who deserve to be punished.

This bill increases the maximum penalties for offences relating to child exploitation material anddescribes the offences in a manner that truly reflects its criminal and exploitative nature. The bill alsoextends the offences to a broader range of material so that it becomes a catch-all for all materialincluding images, sound recordings, objects and written descriptions. It also includes data from whichtext, images or sounds can be generated. The offences are all indictable offences and will be located inchapter 22 of the Criminal Code along with serious sexual offences against children. It is important tonote that child exploitation material is defined as material that, in a way likely to cause offence to areasonable adult, describes or depicts someone who is or apparently is a child under 16 years either ina sexual context including, for example, engaging in a sexual activity in an offensive or demeaningcontext or being subjected to abuse, cruelty or torture.

The other key elements of the bill are as follows: it creates the offence of involving a child under18 in making child exploitation material, with a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment, and createsthe offence of making child exploitation material, with a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment.The offences of distributing child exploitation material will also have a maximum penalty of 10 yearsimprisonment. There is a new section which creates the offences of knowingly possessing childexploitation material, with a maximum penalty of five years. It is important to note here that I wouldencourage the courts to think carefully when sentencing people under these particular provisions andthe other provisions to protect our children and call on them to consider the maximum penaltiesavailable to them reflecting the penalties that this parliament and the community expect to see forpeople who commit such horrendous crimes against our children.


I am also pleased to see that this bill requires a court to exclude all non-essential persons fromthe courtroom while child exploitation material is on display. I want to remind the House and the peopleof Queensland that we need to be ever vigilant when it comes to our children. We need to protect themand keep them safe. That means that we need to look critically at the people who are closely involvedwith our children, either at home, at friends' places or at sport and other recreation facilities. Offenderscome from all walks of life and from across the age spectrum. We need to teach our children how to talkto us about what is happening in their lives. We need to break down the secrecy and silence whichsurrounds child pornography and which allows these criminals to abuse our children.

Queensland already has the most comprehensive range of child sex offences across Australianjurisdictions, with substantial penalties attaching to these offences. This bill confirms our commitment toprotecting our children as it increases the penalties for those offences. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr JOHNSON (Gregory—NPA) (12.39 pm): I rise to speak to the Criminal Code (ChildPornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill 2004. What a sad day it is for Queensland when we have todebate legislation in this House that will try to counter this element of society. At the outset, Icongratulate the Attorney-General and I congratulate the government on trying to keep abreast of thishorrible scum of society who are out there interfering with the innocence of our children. There isnothing more sacred in our society than our children. Whether they are my children, your children orsomebody else's children, they are not negotiable. Through this bill, the Attorney-General and thegovernment have increased the penalties for offences committed on children by paedophiles andpredators. For those people who cop the full brunt of the law and do 10 years in jail, I hope that if afterthose 10 years they have not been reformed from the ills of their ways they stay in jail. I would like theAttorney-General to refer to that matter in his reply.

This is very important legislation. In October last year, an international child pornography ring wassmashed. Perhaps the way we have to go now is to catch the people who are in those rings. It is veryfrightening to know that the internet is being used for this activity. I see computers in the House here.They are now a part of the technology that is required for the ongoing operations of everything that wedo. Our little children are able to access those computers. Today in this House I have heard memberssay that parents cannot be there all the time watching what their children are doing. These kiddies learnhow to access internet sites or they come across these sites by mistake and then they go back to them.We just heard what the member for Maryborough had to say. That is a frightening aspect of moderntechnology. No doubt, parents such as the member and his wife are very caring and loving parents whoare watching over their children, but a lot of parents and guardians cannot be there watching theirchildren all the time and sometimes they are not aware of the internet sites that their children areaccessing. For God's sake, what sort of depraved mongrels are preying on innocent little children!

All I can say to the Attorney-General is that I would not want to give such people 10 years jail; Iwould like to give them their whole lives in jail. The former police minister, Tony McGrady, said to me oneday that a lot of these people think it is their God given right to do such things to children. Until such timeas those people reform and realise that they have done the wrong thing, we have a very hard battle tofight.

I am very pleased to see that both sides of the parliament support this legislation. The war onpornography is a bit like the war on terrorism: there is no front line. We do not know where these peopleare or who they are, or where they fit in our society. A lot of these people who were involved in the childpornography ring that was smashed back in October last year were police officers, schoolteachers anddoctors. We look up to such people in our society and we teach our children to look up to and respectsuch people.

We have a huge battle on our hands, but I believe that we can win the battle by fighting ittogether. The court system plays an integral part in the battle to protect our innocent children—thechildren of today, the children of tomorrow and those children who are not even born yet. It makes mewonder what sort of protection laws have to be put in place to really get across that message.

Mr Deputy Speaker, you and I were brought up in a society where we were not subjected to thisscum. We had a lot of fun growing up. There are many young members of this House who have youngfamilies or will have young families. I hope and pray that those kiddies will never, ever be interfered withor will never, ever be subjected to this filth. I get very passionate about this matter. I do not care whosekids they are; it is our God given right to protect them. As I said, they are not negotiable and they willnever be negotiable. As the member for Redlands said, our children—the young people of this state andthis nation—are the most important and most sacred possession that we have.

We have technology such as DNA testing and other tools that police can use to track down thecriminal elements of our society and bring them before courts. Today I appeal to the government toconsider the opposition policy of granting telephone tapping powers to the police. I believe that we haveto give our Police Service every tool possible to allow them to undertake surveillance of these people,apprehend these people and then bring them before the courts. Technological tools are certainlyassisting the criminal element of our society. We have to make absolutely certain that we give thosesame tools to our Police Service so that it can counter this element that it is trying to bring to heel.


Recently, I was fortunate to be a member of a Queensland parliamentary trade delegation thatvisited the United States and Canada. I saw first-hand how the police services on the other side of theworld work to apprehend some of these criminals in question. One thing that was really driven home tome was the technology that is available to be shared by police services throughout the world. Thattechnology was used to smash that child pornography ring last October.

The police minister, Judy Spence, was with me on that trade delegation. She managed the tourvery ably and very professionally. I think a lot of good things came out of that delegation to the UnitedStates. It really made us aware of what a sophisticated, up-market police service we have. But we haveto make absolutely certain that we give it every advantage to apprehend these people in question.

Last year the government saw fit to introduce a new ministerial position of responsibility for childsafety, with Minister Reynolds in charge. Probably another $500 million is required to protect the kids ofthis state. We are probably talking about less than two per cent of the children of this state who are atrisk—I do not know. But it is a sad indictment on an educated and intelligent society that we have tohave a special ministry to protect kids. If we have to put something else in place in order to protect kids,then we will just have to do it. At the end of the day, that scum who prey on children cannot survive.They cannot be given oxygen anymore.

As legislators, we have adopted a bipartisan approach to this bill. Every member feels the sameabout the issue. We are passionate about it. We have to give the police every opportunity and everyassistance possible to apprehend these offenders. The Minister for Child Safety has a difficult portfolio. Italk to people in my electorate all the time, especially those people involved in family services. Some ofthe terrible stories that I hear from those officers about what is happening in our society really make mewant to cry tears of blood.

I think I have said enough about this issue. I know that I am probably going over old ground, asmany previous speakers have expressed the same views. But I say to the Attorney-General that this isvery important legislation. I congratulate him and congratulate his government on making it a reality.

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Shine): Order! Before calling the member for Woodridge, I welcometo the gallery teachers and pupils of the North Arm State School in the electorate of Nicklin.

Mrs DESLEY SCOTT (Woodridge—ALP) (12.50 pm): Abuse is an abhorrent crime. It is someoneexerting power over another person. However, abuse against children, and in this case the exploitationof children for the production of perverted pornographic material, is almost an unspeakably evil act. Foran adult to steal the innocence of a child in this way and betray the trust which a young child shows isincredibly damaging.

The internet and the electronic age have obviously made the transmission and sharing of childpornography, and indeed the sale of such material, far easier. The internet has proved to be a wonderfulresource but also a very dangerous one if not well regulated. A recent visit to the Task Force Argos unitat police headquarters was a very sobering experience for me and a number of colleagues. Theseespecially skilled police officers have the very unenviable task of tracking down these web sites and alsotracking down paedophiles seeking to meet young children whom they may meet and befriend in chatrooms.

I well recall the answer given when we asked how these police officers are able to walk out theirdoor each day and leave their horrific work behind them, for much of it is very sickening stuff. The thingwhich keeps them going is the number of charges and ultimately the number of convictions to take theseperverts off the streets. It was very sobering to hear that the senior officer has a young daughter and willnot have the internet in his home. He deems it such a dangerous tool. I can only encourage parents tobe ever vigilant. They should keep the computer in a common area of the home where they know whattheir children are viewing. They should talk to their children about values and how important it is to guardtheir young minds from this evil. Relationships between parent and child need to be developed from anearly age and confidence given to a child that it is important to have open and honest discussion withparents.

Like prostitution, if there was no-one buying the so-called service or commodity, it would simplydisappear. However, it is too naive to even consider that might happen and so we must tighten our lawsand make increased penalties apply. I believe many people underestimate the power of the mind andhow the viewing of this material can normalise perverted behaviour. People can very easily becomedesensitised and not even recognise that they are on dangerous ground and that it is a short step toabusive action, not to mention the abuse of the children in the production of the material.

I believe this bill sends a strong message that no material of this nature in its production, viewing,sharing or sale is in any way other than criminal and those involved should be punished and hopefullyrehabilitated. The offences apply to children under 16 or to someone who appears to be under 16 andwill apply to materials such as images in photos, videos, sound recordings, written descriptions orcertain objects as well as depictions in video games. Maximum penalties will increase from five to 10years imprisonment for these serious offences of production and distribution of material which exploitschildren. The penalty for possession will increase to a maximum of five years imprisonment. Adequatesafeguards have been included to protect legitimate artistic, educational, medical, scientific and similarmaterial. To affect these would cause unintended consequences.


This bill will send a clear message to those who may even be tempted to dabble in this area tostay clear. As for those who are perpetrators, we need to put them out of business and put them awaywhere children are out of their reach. I commend the Attorney-General and those who prepared this billfor adding to the protection of our vulnerable children.

Mr LANGBROEK (Surfers Paradise—Lib) (12.54 pm): I am pleased to rise to speak to theCriminal Code (Child Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill. This is a wonderful move by theAttorney-General and I am happy to see these vile offences receiving legislative recognition in theCriminal Code. I am very pleased to see the strong penalties for the making and distribution of childexploitation material, and I cannot support strongly enough the placing behind bars of these barbaricpeople who prey on innocent children. Over recent times technology has increased the risk of theexploitation of children. However, it is very good to see that the same technology is being used to fightthese criminals. The Australian High Tech Crime Centre, which is run by the Australian Federal Policeand their state counterparts, has been successful in recent times, catching five men who were chargedwith more than 1,000 offences. These were men who had images ranging from naked children to thesick images of babies being sexually assaulted. It is also very pleasing to see that the federal justiceminister, the Hon. Chris Ellison, has been working with the state attorneys-general and the state policeministers to put together and continue the Australian National Child Offender Register. There are somevery real concerns these days, particularly with the rise in the number of children entering and chattingin chat rooms, and the lack of transparency with that whole process.

I share the concerns of the honourable members for Maryborough and Woodridge as well asother members about our children and their activities in chat rooms. My wife and I have both had to giveadvice with regard to being careful about identifying themselves when on the net when they are not surewho is on the other end. This shows us that our children are innocent, naive and gullible, andunfortunately there are people out there who will exploit these delightful traits. This is something that weneed to be very conscious and aware of.

Children are now subjected to so many unregulated views, opinions and influences on theinternet, and this is worrying to me as a member of this parliament but, more importantly, as a parent. Toabuse technology in this manner is an absolute disgrace and, while there will always be new frontiers tofight, I am proud to see that the good guys are putting up a good fight in taking on these sexualpredators. This legislation brings about a significant change in the protection of children from thesepredators by moving the focus of the current legislation to the key focus, which is that of protectingchildren. Where the previous provisions, hidden away in the classification legislation, were more aboutprotecting children from seeing explicit material such as this, they were weak in terms of protectingchildren from being a part of these horrible movies and pictures. That is to say, by placing suchprovisions in the classification legislation, we are saying more strongly that we do not want people tosee these acts. We do not want them sold or published because we do not want people to get offended,upset or outraged. This is a very valid point and one that needs to remain because these are offencesand images that would outrage and disgust any reasonable person.

However, as this legislation rightly contemplates, there needs to be protection for children not justfrom viewing these acts but from being subject to these acts. While there has always been somecontemplation of this, and while we have always had provisions in place to protect children, the fact thatthere are now such severe penalties for this. That it is in the Criminal Code is a big step forward, and theAttorney-General should be congratulated on that. Aside from that, I feel the possible defences areappropriate and the bill, in general, achieves its aims. I commend the bill to the House.

Sitting suspended from 12.57 pm to 2.30 pm. Mrs MILLER (Bundamba—ALP) (2.30 pm): I rise in support of the Criminal Code (Child

Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill 2004. This bill responds to community outrage at the growingincidence of child pornography. Members of this House are aware of the internet child pornography ringthat was operating in Australia, where hundreds of people were arrested. There were arrests inQueensland as well as in other states. Those charged included professional people in our communitysuch as teachers, police officers and doctors.

Just like other criminal behaviour, child pornography crosses every socioeconomic class—fromthe very rich to the very poor. They are all involved. As a mother I want to place on record that I amabsolutely disgusted with child pornography and I want it stamped out. This bill treats child exploitationmaterial as criminal conduct and confirms the Beattie Labor government's tough stance on these issues.Proposed new section 228A will be inserted into the bill. This proposed new section states—(1) A person who involves a child in the making of child exploitation material commits a crime.

Maximum penalty—10 years imprisonment.

Proposed new section 228B states—(1) A person who makes child exploitation material commits a crime.



Also to be inserted is proposed new section 228C, which states—(1) A person who distributes child exploitation material commits a crime.


Proposed new section 228D states—A person who knowingly possesses child exploitation material commits a crime. Maximum penalty—5 years imprisonment.

I note that there are schoolchildren in the gallery. I say to them: be very cautious on the internetand very cautious when using chat rooms. You never know whether the person who says they are ayoung person is actually an older person who is trying to exploit you.

In my electorate I deal a lot with people who have been sexually abused. I am very well awarethat children who are sexually abused carry those scars for a lifetime. I often hear stories about peoplewho have had difficulty in school. Some find it hard to get a job, some find it hard to keep a job, someare severely depressed and some suffer dreadful illnesses. I have many constituents who are mature-age women who often reflect on the sexual abuse that occurred when they were young children. It is agreat shame that they have never been able to get over such abuse.

Paedophilia is a great shame on our community. Our children are non-negotiable. I think this is avery good piece of legislation. We are telling these criminals in the community that we are not going toput up with it; we want it stamped out. I thank the minister, his staff and the departmental staff who putthis bill together. I think that in many years to come we will look back on this bill as being a great stepforward for the state. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr CHOI (Capalaba—ALP) (2.34 pm): I rise to speak in support of the Criminal Code (ChildPornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill 2004. It is deeply regrettable that a member of parliament hasto stand here today to debate and pass this bill, because children are supposed to be precious assets toour community. Unfortunately, there are people in our community who will prey on them and take theirinnocence away. This government should be commended on the introduction of some outstandinglegislation in relation to child guardian and protection policies. Supporting this bill would be a major stepforward in our efforts to combat this multifaceted global menace.

Prior to the proposed amendment to the current bill there was no appropriate legislation in placethat could effectively enforce appropriate penalties for offences relating to the production, sale andpossession of child pornography. In particular, internet and computer game images came under a morebroad classification resulting in loopholes for child sexual predators to pursue child pornography withoutsuffering the severe consequences befitting this most offensive and dirtiest of crimes in our societytoday.

As a parent I firmly believe there is no penalty severe enough to compensate for the loss of achild's innocence and youth in this way. I consider child pornography to be to the most insidious form ofchild abuse currently corrupting our society. Further, it is of great concern to our society as a wholewhen the internet in particular can provide the perfect avenue for exploitation by offenders. It isdistressing to realise that, due to easy access to the internet for a variety of purposes, this media hasfuelled the demand for child pornography and expanded an already alarmingly great market. Childpornography existed before the creation of the internet; however, the internet has increased the range,volume and accessibility of sexually abusive imagery.

What scares me and should scare all parents is that there is such a large group of thesepredators functioning as seemingly normal people within our communities. Unfortunately, thesepredators do not wear labels, and their day-to-day life is merely a facade. They hide behind their family,their friends and their occupation, outwardly appearing to be a normal part of the community. These low-life predators do not discriminate in class or occupation. There are numerous reported cases of localteachers, businessmen, police officers, child-care workers and religious members who have beenaccused of buying, producing and amassing huge libraries of images in the anonymity of cyberspace.

With the ever-increasing incidence of child pornography abuse within our communities, it hasbecome a matter of urgency that we identify and implement clearly defined legislation which effectivelycovers and identifies all types of child pornography offences and fully imposes strict and more severepenalties for these crimes.

I recently came across a news article which outlined how the police criminal investigation branchcoordinated a series of raids targeting child abuse and pornography offenders. The varied backgroundsof these suspects hinted at the scale of the problem. During the operation the suspects were issued withsearch warrants. One suspect was actually caught in the act of downloading child pornography.Although this article indicated that the operation was a total success, resulting in numerous arrestsunder the current legislation, it is my hope and my belief that once this amendment bill has been passedin this House—hopefully today—a similar police operation will result in many more arrests and moreappropriate penalties will be applied. With the passing of the amendments contained in this bill, it isclear that the police will carry out their duties with regard to child pornography with far more effect,resulting in more charges being laid. I wish to state very clearly that there is a definite need within our


community to implement these amendments with a view to ongoing and further legislative amendmentsas may be required in the future.

This legislation can never be considered foolproof. Continual monitoring is essential to identifynew avenues that offenders of the future may discover and pursue to continue in their path of childabuse and exploitation. This bill clearly demonstrates the government's ongoing commitment to protectour children, who are our most treasured and—apart from the elderly—also our most vulnerablemembers of our society.

The government is doing a wonderful job in this regard and is proving relentless and vigilant in itsefforts to combat, expose and penalise these sexual predators hiding in our society. As parents wewould all agree that child pornography and abuse is the most abhorrent crime against our society today.We cannot do this alone. I ask government members to call upon communities, includingschoolteachers, parents, churches and every member of this community, to work with the government toensure that this crime will not go unnoticed. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr SPRINGBORG (Southern Downs—NPA) (Leader of the Opposition) (2.39 pm): At the outset Iwould like to thank the leader of opposition business for representing me in presenting our officialresponse to the Criminal Code (Child Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill 2004. We are verysupportive of the provisions that are contained therein and have suggested a couple of amendmentswhich we believe enhance the effectiveness and seriousness of the bill we are debating here today.

It does concern me that we have had the typical response from members opposite; that is, theyexpect bipartisanship from us but they are not prepared to demonstrate bipartisanship. In a moment Iwill go through some of the reasons that we believe our amendments will be of some benefit, given thatthey have been commented on by government members opposite.

This bill by and large responds to a growing concern and need to protect the most vulnerablemembers of our community—our children—from exploitation by parasites. These are people who seekto depict children for sexual gratification. It is very true that with modern mediums, the internet or otherelectronic forms of transfer, people are gratifying their base instincts by viewing material that showschildren being clearly exploited. Therefore, our law enforcement authorities need to have an armoury oflaws enabling them to not only arrest these characters but also appropriately prosecute thesecharacters.

When one looks at cases in recent times in Queensland where people have been arrested for, inparticular, the possession of child pornography, it is of great concern that we see many of those peoplehave held positions of trust. Recently there has been a significant number of arrests of people inpossession of a government blue card. That blue card is supposed to exist to further protect ourchildren. On the surface of it the blue card sounds like a good idea. But one thing that really does worryme about the blue card is that it gives a false sense of security to some people. Some people believethat their children are safe in the presence of someone who has a blue card. It can only work effectivelyif that person has a criminal record for certain prescribed offences. Therefore, it is a reactive approachto a person who has been an offender at some previous time. If a person has been able to hide theiroffending behaviour—has not been caught, prosecuted and convicted—they do not show up in thesystem. I caution the people of Queensland: do not expect that the blue card will protect your children inall circumstances. It is only one arrow in the quiver in our fight against child sexual abuse in this state.

The two points that I would like to touch on relate to the penalties that have been included in thisbill for involving a young person in the production of child exploitation material. The bill states that themaximum penalty for involving a child in the making of child exploitation material is 10 years, for makingchild exploitation material is 10 years and for distributing such material is 10 years. But for beingknowingly in possession of child exploitation material the maximum penalty is five years. I cannot for thelife of me see the justification for imposing on a person who knowingly possesses child exploitationmaterial a maximum penalty of only five years whereas if they had been involving a child the penaltywould have been 10 years, for making the material it would have been 10 years and for distributing thematerial it would have been 10 years.

If we believe that this material is abhorrent, that this material does expose and exploit youngpeople in Queensland, then knowingly possessing this child exploitation material should surely attract asimilar maximum penalty. There is a deterrent involved in that. There is no doubt about it. It sends anextremely strong signal to those people who have been knowingly involved in the possession of childexploitation material that this will not be tolerated and that it will not be tolerated to the same extent as ifthey were involved in making child exploitation material or involved in distributing child exploitationmaterial. Surely it indicates that that person is a sick individual; surely it indicates that that particularindividual needs to be cracked down on, needs to be convicted at an equivalent level as they would be ifthey were in those other three categories. It is highly likely that that person not only possesses one lot ofchild exploitation material, but also has been getting their satisfaction out of possessing and viewingchild exploitation material for years and years and years.

I ask honourable members opposite to think about this and look at the logic. Why do peopleinvolve a child in this material? Why do people make this material and why do people distribute this


material? It is because somebody wants to possess it. What we are talking about here is those peoplewho are involving a child and making it and distributing it for the gratification of somebody at the otherend, and yet this person will be punished in a more serious way than the person who possesses it. If wedid not have those people out there with sick minds who want to possess it in the first place, then franklypeople would not be making the material or distributing the material.

I would like to hear some justification as to why that penalty should not be equivalently high,because this material is being made for these sick individuals. It would serve this parliament well, andserve government members opposite well, if they were prepared to support that amendment. There isno minimum in this. All we are talking about is an equivalent maximum. I say to the Attorney: whywouldn't you be prepared to have an equivalent maximum? The bill is saying that the Attorney viewsknowingly possessing this material in the same way that he views all these other categories. I commendthe Attorney for the tough penalty in those other categories, but what is wrong with increasing thisparticular penalty from five to 10 years? I really cannot see what the problem would be.

The other amendment, which we have already circulated and which has been commented on bygovernment members opposite, removes the excuse that exists for people to actually produce orpossess this stuff for artistic reasons. Frankly, I think that some people get away with too much underthe guise of artistic reasons and artistic excuses. There has been much written and commented on inrelation to the free attitude or the very liberal interpretation of artistic excuse. Quite clearly there are lawswhich state that if it were done in the broader community it would offend the community standard andwould be outlawed. I am not going to go through what those are, but I think people would probably havea general idea.

I cannot see why we should give any excuse to anyone to argue an artistic defence. Childexploitation material is child exploitation material and that is the way it should be viewed. I canunderstand it from a scientific or an educational perspective, because that is about making people, suchas medical students, aware of what is going on. Nobody really argues against educating our policeservice or whatever the case may be, but when we are talking about the artistic area I cannot see anyjustification for it. We are going to have these characters putting forward all sorts of excuses as to whythey are doing certain things from an artistic perspective, arguing that it is not really child exploitationmaterial and it was their right to show their artistic skills.

A member raised a little while ago that if we remove this defence then the famous pictures andcalendars of Anne Geddes would not be able to be published. Frankly, that is a lot of rot. If governmentmembers want to look at why it is a lot of rot, they should compare our amendment with the otheraspirations of the act. The definition of child exploitation material is in section 207A. There is a necessityto have a child depicted in a sexual context, in an offensive or demeaning context, or being subject toabuse, cruelty or torture. Unless these preliminary requirements are present, there can be no argumentabout a calendar. If the calendar does depict any of these things, then the defence that anything in thecalendar is displayed artistically cannot be justified.

No reasonable person would think that Anne Geddes’s magnificent pictures are pictures ofchildren being sexually exploited and therefore would have to be excluded. I would not have thought ofcategorising that as child exploitation material. When the police undertake their investigations of acomplaint or undertake investigations off their own bat they have to consider the definitions under theact.

Last year when debating another piece of legislation in this parliament we suggested that peoplewho possessed this child pornography should go to the slammer as part of a crackdown on people whowant to sexually abuse children. The question was asked then: what happens if somebody inadvertentlyhas something of this nature on their computer because somebody sent it to them? The Premier wasjumping up and down saying, ‘What happens if innocent people get caught up?' The police came out onthat occasion and said, ‘We understand that things get sent around on the internet. What we have to dois establish an intent, involvement and complicity.' That is what happens with regard to any criminalmatter. The police have to establish deliberate intent to infringe sections of the Criminal Code orwhatever act is involved.

To mention Anne Geddes is not even close to the mark, quite frankly. We all know what childexploitation material is all about. The pictures of those little babies could not be considered to be childexploitation material. They are magnificent art. They have been used very effectively as part ofimmunisation campaigns. I know what child exploitation material is. It is something that is likely to havebeen produced by somebody who has the intent of producing it in order to gain sexual gratification eitherfor themself or somebody else.

I say to honourable members opposite that they should apply a little bit of commonsense. Weshould not have this loophole so that some people can argue that they are producing this material forartistic reasons. Unless those opposite do something about amending this provision there is no doubtthat there will be public disquiet. At some future time people will argue that something that wasproduced allegedly for artistic purposes infringes this act and should be outlawed. That is where thoseopposite are headed. It is simpler to exclude that provision now and take a commonsense approach. We


understand that for educational, scientific or medical purposes there may be a need to produce andshow those sorts of images, but there is no justification for producing them for artistic purposes. To saythat Anne Geddes calendars will be caught up in this is a nonsense.

Mr FENLON (Greenslopes—ALP) (2.52 pm): I rise to speak in support of this legislation. This is avery important piece of legislation. It must be seen as part of the armoury of legislation put in place inrecent times to address this very abhorrent set of crimes. The Criminal Code (Child Pornography andAbuse) Amendment Bill 2004 will very effectively complement the previous pieces of legislation.

The bill sends a strong message that child exploitation and abuse is abhorrent. The Beattiegovernment, more than any government ever before, has developed new approaches and new laws toaddress community concerns about sexual offences against children. Queensland was the firstAustralian state to create specific offences to deal with internet paedophiles through the SexualOffences (Protection of Children) Amendment Bill 2003. This current bill continues to lead the nation inthe development of new tough approaches to dealing with this scourge on society.

This bill targets those who produce and possess child exploitation material. The bill increases themaximum penalties for offences related to child exploitation material and describes the offences in amanner that truly reflects its criminal and exploitative nature. Proposed new section 228A creates theoffence of involving a child in the making of child exploitation material. Where a child has been used in aphotograph, film, computer game or image the maximum penalty will be more than doubled from threeyears to 10 years imprisonment. The penalty is up from five years to 10 years where a child is to beused in a publication.

Proposed new section 228B creates the offence of making exploitation material with a maximumpenalty of 10 years imprisonment. The offence of distributing child exploitation material is created byproposed new section 228C. It will carry a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment. Again, thisrepresents a substantial increase in the penalties applying to the current offences.

Possession of child exploitation material under proposed new section 228D will carry a maximumpenalty of five years. This is up from one year. Those tough new offences and penalties will attack themarket for child pornography, removing the incentive in the first place to make such appalling material.

We need to stand back and see these changes in the context of the wider operation of thecriminal justice system in this sphere. Essentially, the criminal justice system exists to detect,investigate, preserve evidence in relation to offences, to charge, prosecute, hear and determine whetheran offence has been committed and to punish and rehabilitate offenders. These proposed laws join anarmoury of laws now in place in Queensland which identify and process those offences through thecriminal justice system. Together, as an armoury of laws in this sphere, these laws say that there will beno societal tolerance of such offences.

As previous speakers have mentioned in this debate today, there is a background in terms ofchild related offences relating to the sheer difficulty of obtaining prosecutions against offenders,particularly when young children are involved. I would like to touch briefly on this. This matter hascaused great discontent and frustration among the families of those people who have been through thevery arduous process of seeking justice in relation to offences against young children. I have had thebenefit, albeit a very unpleasant experience, of receiving briefings from a family in my electorate whohave been through the process. After that process they reported to me in detail what they went throughwith their child who was deemed to be very young and the difficulties they had in obtaining evidence. Intheir case an alleged offender was not found guilty.

Those parents went through a great deal of hardship. At the end of the process they were left toask me, ‘What else can be done, what else should be done, to make sure that people who have a clearinterest in exploiting children in this abhorrent way get caught in the net?' I see the armoury of legislationthat we now have in place as highly justified and appropriate to try to catch these people in the net.Obviously, issues of entrapment et cetera can be argued. On balance, the laws that we now have inplace, which have already been referred to in this debate, whereby people who are showing an interestin these offences through the internet and are trying to communicate with children on the internet getcaught, are good. I think we should not hold back in any way in trying to identify these people throughthese processes.

If we can find potential offenders and those who may potentially physically involve childrendirectly or through the obtaining of photographs et cetera, we simply need to nail these people and bringthem into the criminal justice system. In that sense, as a society we need to put them back on track by,in the first instance, monitoring those people and, in the second instance, ensuring that we doeverything possible to rehabilitate those people and avoid any prospect that they may commit offencesin relation to innocent children. We have come a very long way in our generation. When we werechildren, parents would turn a blind eye to the amount of child abuse going on. We have come a longway. I am very proud to be part of a parliament that is progressively tightening up these laws andstrengthening the armoury and the overall criminal justice system in order to identify these people anddeal with them in an appropriate manner. People who put their heads inside this sick, murky world need


to be identified and dealt with. Indeed, this is an appropriate law to add to those already in place toappropriately nail those people and to bring them through the criminal justice system. I support the bill.

Mr WILSON (Ferny Grove—ALP) (3.01 pm): It is my pleasure to stand to speak in support of theCriminal Code (Child Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill 2004. This bill overhauls Queensland'schild pornography laws and doubles the maximum penalties, sending a clear signal about thegovernment's attitude to the sickening exploitation of children. The new offences in the code relate tothe production, distribution and possession of child exploitation material. The definition of ‘childexploitation material' is wider than just child pornography; it also includes images depicting child torture.

There are four key elements to the bill, and each is a new section. One section creates a newoffence of involving a child under 18 in the making of child exploitation material, and the maximumpenalty is 10 years. The next section creates the offence of making child exploitation material, and themaximum penalty is again 10 years imprisonment. The third new section creates the offence ofdistributing child exploitation material, and it, too, has a 10-year maximum penalty. The fourth offenceinvolves knowingly possessing child exploitation material, for which there is a new maximum penalty offive years. These new provisions are supplementary to existing provisions that are in the current act.

While child pornography offences are abhorrent and offenders should be pursued with the fullforce of the law, it is important to ensure that the interests of children are adequately protectedthroughout the criminal justice process when these offences are being prosecuted, and I wish toaddress my brief remarks to issues of defences and evidence as addressed under the bill. Thegovernment has demonstrated its commitment to ensure that our criminal justice system provides a safeand supportive environment for children with the introduction of the Evidence (Protection of Children)Act 2003. That act introduced a number of changes to make our courts more sensitive when dealingwith child victims and witnesses to ensure that the legal process does not add to their stress orsuffering. For example, child victims are now able to give evidence through closed-circuit televisionrather than have to confront their abuser in court. This bill appropriately recognises these concepts.

The new offences and penalties will be inserted into chapter 22 of the Criminal Code, and thatchapter deals with serious sexual offences. The vulnerable witness provisions enacted in 2003 thereforeapply to child victims giving evidence in these proceedings. In addition, the amendments in the billensure that the court rules which will apply in prosecutions under this act will prevent the unnecessaryshowing of child exploitation material in court. A new section requires a court to exclude all non-essential persons from the courtroom if and when child exploitation material is to be displayed. Whilerecognising that generally courts should be open to the public, this provision ensures that the number ofpeople who are able to view such material is strictly limited to those performing a legitimate function inthe court at the time.

A new section also permits a court to order, on conviction, the forfeiture of any child exploitationmaterial and anything else used to commit the offence such as a computer. The bill also includes anappropriate defence to these offences to effectively protect law enforcement officers in carrying out theirduties. For example, a police officer will not have committed an offence in copying a child exploitationimage for the purposes of preparing a brief of evidence but will have committed an offence if the imageis copied for personal use.

The bill is another weapon in our government's fight against child sexual exploitation and abusewhile continuing to ensure the interests of the child in the criminal justice process are protected. It is apleasure to see that this bill is receiving widespread support in the House. It is an unfortunate sign of thetimes in which we now live that the new technology that computers and the internet provide thecommunity, particularly younger people, has now become the vehicle for such exploitation and abuse.

The circumstances have become so serious, of course, that nationally, with the agreement of thefederal government and the cooperation of the various state governments, there has been created inCanberra a special high-tech crime unit that is focusing resources nationally on this difficult area. Icommend to members of the House the work being done by the high-tech crime unit which has been setout in a number of briefs that have been created on the Australian Institute of Criminology web sitedealing with concepts and terms involved in this whole new area of law right through to childpornography sentencing in New South Wales, hacking techniques, child exploitation and a range ofother briefs that have been produced by the Australian Institute of Criminology. I commend those sitesto members who are interested in this area, and I commend the bill to the House.

Mr WELLINGTON (Nicklin—Ind) (3.07 pm): I rise to speak in support of the Criminal Code (ChildPornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill. I also congratulate the Attorney-General on his attempt torespond to a great need in our community to address the genuine concern that many have about thelevel of child pornography and abuse. It is also great to hear the words of support from both sides of thischamber during this debate. I was very interested to listen to the Leader of the Opposition's explanationof his amendments. I certainly will be looking forward to this bill going into the consideration in detailstage to hear the government's response when we get into the nitty-gritty of debating thoseamendments in substance.


Without repeating many matters that have already been raised during this debate, I simply saythat this parliament cannot solve all of the problems by simply passing an act of parliament which willbecome a new law in Queensland. What we have to focus on is the need to work together, as themember for Gregory said. We must focus on working together and using all of our respective resourcesto address the problem at hand. Today we are talking about amending the law to respond to the issue ofchild pornography, but I really hope that we can ensure a whole-of-government response to ensure thatall resources are brought to bear so that we can carry out the intent of this legislation to reduce the levelof child pornography or the possibility of child pornography in our community.

Notwithstanding that, we as parents and members of the community also have to put ourshoulders to the wheel and show how we will all play a part in responding to this need. Many speakershave spoken about their personal experience in becoming aware of matters that have been discussed inchat rooms and other such matters. I reiterate my call for all Queenslanders to put their shoulders to thewheel and not simply say, ‘The state government will look after it for us.' I commend the bill to theHouse.

Mrs LAVARCH (Kurwongbah—ALP) (3.09 pm): The Criminal Code (Child Pornography andAbuse) Amendment Bill 2004 is another significant measure to protect our children and deserves thesupport of all. We vigilantly watch over our children in the physical world, yet the events leading up tothe need for the provisions of this bill once again demonstrate the need for all parents and carers tovigilantly watch over their children and protect them in the virtual world as well. For all the good workthat is being done to provide a safe, secure, healthy, happy and fulfilling life for our children, for all thegood work that is being done to secure the best prospects for our children's future, there are those verysick and evil people who want to exploit, abuse and use children for their own sexual gratification.

Part of that pattern of exploitation and abuse is the making and viewing of child pornography.Child pornography is abhorrent, it inflicts serious harm on children, and it puts all children at risk. In theCanadian case of R v Stroempl the Court of Appeal made the very powerful observation that I want torepeat here today. They said—The evil of child pornography lies not only by reason of real children being used in its production but also in the use to which it isput. It is used to reinforce cognitive distortions by rationalising paedophilia as a normal sexual preference. It is used to fuel theirsexual fantasies and it is used to groom children by showing it to them in order to promote discussion of sexual matters with a viewto normalising the behaviour.

The court went on to say—The possession of child pornography is a very important contributing element to the problem of child pornography. The trial judgewas right in his observation that if the courts through the imposition of appropriate sanctions stifle the activities of prospectivepurchasers and collectors of child pornography, this may go some distance to smother the market for child pornographyaltogether. In turn, this would substantially reduce the motivation to produce child pornography in the first place.

This bill confirms our tough approach to child sex offences by significantly increasing thepenalties for child pornography offences and particularly targeting those who produce and possess childexploitation material. In this way, the law will go a long way to stifling the activities of producers,prospective purchasers and collectors. By attacking the market for child pornography, we are working toremove the incentive to make it. By broadening the definition to catch any material at all—images,sound recordings, objects and written descriptions, including data from which text images or sounds canbe generated using real or digitally created children—we are strengthening the protection of ourchildren.

I note that appropriate safeguards have been included in the bill to ensure that innocent familyphotos or videos, along with innocent depictions of children, are not caught within this very broaddefinition. In the past 10 years or so, we have witnessed the revolution that is the World Wide Web.Internet technology has brought a great many benefits and positive opportunities for the global village,but as I have maintained on many occasions and across a number of examples, it has also brought withit grave dangers and the potential to inflict unspeakable harm. The flourishing of the child pornographyindustry through the internet is a case in point.

Once again, I repeat that we need to watch over our children not only in the physical environmentbut also in the virtual environment. I appeal to all to be ever vigilant of the negative attributes of thedigital age. Internet crime is a very difficult issue to tackle for all nation states and I believe that byworking together across state borders, across national boundaries, countermeasures are achievable.

I commend the Attorney-General for his leadership in the area of child protection not just in thisbill but also throughout his time as a member of parliament as he has had a very deep and a very strongcommitment to protecting children. I commend the bill to the House.

Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM (Gladstone—Ind) (3.14 pm): I rise to speak in support of this legislationand, as other speakers have done, commend the minister for responding to this emerging area ofconcern. It is an indicator of human nature that, as new technologies are developed, those grubs insociety who are of a mind to deal with children in a completely unacceptable way will use those newmediums to abuse both their positions and those children with whom they have contact. It is veryimportant that, with the emergence of new technology, criminal sanctions are put in place if the use ofthat technology is abused.


Last year, this matter was brought home to the community generally—and I think another speakertalked about this earlier—when 200 people were arrested for child pornography. More recently, 11people were arrested for such crimes. Eight of those people had blue cards and were eligible to haveregular and approved contact with children. Even with those safeguards in place, there continues togrow that number of people who are prepared to abuse children.

Another incident that has brought home to people the issue of child pornography was the recentevent of photographs of children being taken at South Bank. The photographs were of a nature thatwould be concerning to parents. One of my hobbies is photography. I know that I am often in a situationwhere an opportunity to take a photograph of a child will present itself and I will take it. But I will take thatphotograph because of the child's facial expression or their lovely eyes. At that moment that child isintrigued or is engaged in some sort of activity that imprints their character on their face. It really makesfor an engaging photograph. But there is a clear line drawn in the sand between those photographs thatare taken because they bring out and reinforce the beauty of children and those that are taken bypeople who wish to abuse and misuse children for their own purposes. To my mind, in most instances atleast, the nature of the photograph—the angle of the photograph and the focus of the photograph—would surely be able to illustrate the intent of the photographer.

This legislation creates a criminal offence of having in one's possession child exploitationmaterial. The definition of ‘child exploitation material' in the bill is very clear. People would not be caughteasily being in breach of these guidelines without a reasonable excuse. I do not believe that there is anyambiguity. For those people who are genuine, law-abiding and caring people, this legislation will notcreate a problem. For those, though, who use new technologies, including cameras in mobiletelephones and the like, it will create a problem, and justifiably.

The legislation also deals with computer games. I have to say that today some of the games thatare available for children to play should be banned completely. I am probably a bit stricter about thatthan some people would like, but some of the games are particularly violent. They are very negative anddestructive. They elicit from players, who in a lot of instances are young children, negative, destructiveemotions and thoughts. For those who are playing them they are not positive games, they are notuplifting games, they are not constructive games or educational games. In the past we have seeninstances in which some children have transferred what happens while playing that game into the realityof their lives. That has usually resulted in catastrophic and tragic circumstances. So any crackdown onthe violence in games or the sexually explicit nature of games is more than welcomed by me and, I amsure, by many parents.

The legislation brings into sharp focus a new offence of involving a child in making childexploitation material. The phrase ‘involves a child in the making of child exploitation material’ includes—(a) in any way concerns a child in the making of child exploitation material; and(b) attempts to involve a child in the making of child exploitation material.

I think history has shown that those people who are of a kind to abuse children are verymanipulative. They are able to ingratiate themselves with children and make activities in some instancessound quite enjoyable when they are not. In other instances, they make the activity obligatory with fearof pain, embarrassment or some other sort of retribution. For those children who are affected by thesesorts of activities, the damage that is done is not short-lived. It can have a lifelong impact on thechildren. No action by this government is too much in terms of ensuring that children are protected asbest as possible.

I want to deal with some of the defence provisions that are included in the legislation. Proposednew section 228E imposes a reverse onus of proof. Whilst it is a power that has to be used verycarefully, in this instance I am sure we all support the use of the reverse onus of proof. Under thissection a person has to prove that they are engaged in the conduct for a genuine artistic, educational,legal, medical, scientific or public benefit purpose. I note the amendments circulated by the Leader ofthe Opposition in relation to the deletion of the word ‘artistic'. I will be interested in the debate on thatclause because in my view—and others can comment on the view in terms of its rightness orwrongness—a genuinely artistic photograph should not be harmful to a child. Little babies can be layingon rugs without any clothes on, but they are not and should not be in sexually explicit positions. That isnot artistic; it is voyeurism at best and child pornography at worst. I will be interested in the minister'sresponse to the proposed amendment to remove ‘artistic' from the list of defences.

Medical schools, for example, may be given an exemption to possess images of tortured childrenand to show the images to their medical students. I guess it is a little like the training that bank tellers aregiven. They are told to handle so many genuine bank notes that as soon as they handle a counterfeitnote they will instantly recognise it. Medical students need to be able to recognise instantly injuries to achild that are the result of torture, not only so they can medically respond to it but also so they canrecognise and respond to the child protection issues that present at hospitals. I believe the exemption isvery clearly defined in that the moment that medical student forwards the image to his or her homecomputer or to anyone else then that defence will not apply. I believe that is a very clear line in the sandand one that should very easily be interpreted.


Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Wallace): Order! I interrupt the honourable member for a minute towelcome student leaders from the Keppel Coast cluster of schools in the electorate of Keppel.

Mrs LIZ CUNNINGHAM: I would also welcome the sensitivity of the Attorney-General in changesto clause 7. It is a detail that I believe could easily have been overlooked and it was not, and that is thatchild exploitation material, or alleged child exploitation material, will be designated as sensitive evidenceunder the Criminal Code with the protections that attach to that designation. So often in the past wehave had children who, either of their own volition or through their parents or other carer, have takenlegal action because of a situation they have found themselves in. Because of that legal action and thecourt process they have been retraumatised or have had to relive that abuse. I commend the Attorney-General for the recognition of the evidence as sensitive evidence and the protections that will beafforded to it.

I believe commonsense will be applied to this legislation. I would hate to see the day when afamily or a genuinely artistic photographer could not go to the beach or places where people congregateand take photographs for the pure joy of photographing faces in particular but also people in theirnormal, day-to-day activities and recreational activities, because those photographs can bring such joy.It is a tragedy that we have to recognise that there are those who will go to public places and takephotographs for sexual and base reasons. I trust that anyone who has those motivations will be caughtby this legislation. I trust that those in the judiciary will understand the strength of feeling in thecommunity against these sorts of activities and will take the opportunity to apply the harshest penaltiesin those circumstances where child abuse is clearly being undertaken. I again congratulate the Attorney-General for the legislation, and I look forward to the years ahead when children particularly will benefitfrom his actions.

Mr FRASER (Mount Coot-tha—ALP) (3.26 pm): I rise to make a brief contribution to the debateon the Criminal Code (Child Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill 2004. I support the bill, whichbundles the laws relating to child pornography, quite properly in my view, into the Criminal Code. Thepenalties relevant to this most heinous of crimes are being substantially increased and the criminalnature of such acts is being made central to the offences. This is part of an Australia-wide endeavour toreform child pornography offences in the legislation of all Australian parliaments. We certainly do notneed to be a parent to find the subject matter of our debate today repugnant. We are all brothers orsisters or aunts or uncles or cousins and cannot imagine the motivation behind the behaviour we arelegislating upon today, but as a parent there is something quite indescribable about the force of feelingyou have when matters of child abuse are at hand.

The Australian Institute of Criminology has undertaken cutting-edge research in profiling this formof criminal behaviour, and its work is merely beginning the effort to better understand and thereby betteraddress, investigate and stop this form of criminality. I commend the institute for its efforts in this regardand all of its endeavours.

I want to make particular comment on the drafting of the provisions of the bill before the House. Itevidences, in my view, quite thoughtful and comprehensive deliberation on the part of the drafters of thebill and quite a careful effort in contemplating the many forms in which images are produced, transmittedand published. I therefore commend the drafters of the bill, the Attorney-General and the bill to theHouse.

Dr FLEGG (Moggill—Lib) (3.27 pm): I rise to speak to the Criminal Code (Child Pornography andAbuse) Amendment Bill 2004. Any measures aimed at curbing the abhorrent exploitation of childrenwith regard to child pornography are welcomed. The Liberal Party will be supporting the bill and believesthat tighter restrictions and stronger penalties relating to the sale, production, distribution andpossession of child pornography material are essential in the fight to curtail this sort of child exploitation.

The bill addresses the need to respond to the expanding incidence of the making, possession anddistribution of child pornography even within our state of Queensland. Current legislation with regard tooffences relating to the sale and possession of child pornography are part of the Classification ofComputer Games and Images Act 1995, the Classification of Publications Act 1991 and theClassification of Films Act 1991, which are part of a Commonwealth-state-territory scheme for theclassification of films, publications and computer games and for the enforcement of theseclassifications.

The bill before the House will bring in the following stronger sentences for child pornographycriminals: a maximum of 10 years imprisonment for the distribution of child exploitation material; amaximum of 10 years imprisonment for involving a child in the making of child exploitation material; anda maximum of five years imprisonment for knowingly being in possession of child exploitation material.

For this piece of legislation a child is classified as a person under the age of 16. This wasconfirmed by the Attorney-General on 3 March. The definition is vitally important and has been a point ofuncertainty in the past. These new sections to be inserted into the legislation are in addition to theexisting penalties under the Criminal Code. In section 210(1)(f) of the Criminal Code—taking anindecent photograph of a child under the age of 16—there already exists a maximum penalty of 20years imprisonment. An offender can commit an offence under that existing provision and receive a


maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment and can also commit an offence under proposed newsection 228B and receive a 10-year sentence.

In regard to the connection between child pornography offenders and paedophilia, there is limitedinformation on the link between persons viewing child pornography and those persons who, at a laterstage, become a sex offender against minors. Clearly this is not an easy area for objective study, butthere exists a need for greater investigation. The patterns of behaviour of lookers and offenders are verysimilar. The Sydney Morning Herald carried a very interesting article called ‘The bid to treat child pornviewers before they offend' by Adele Horin on 6 April 2002. This article quotes a clinical psychologistwith the Sexual Offenders Treatment and Assessment Program at the Royal Adelaide Hospital.Mr Shawn Sowerbutts learnt that voyeurs were indeed similar to child abusers. He stated—They (child pornography viewers) were sexually attracted to children; they had sexual thoughts about them just as hands onoffenders do. Some deliberately put themselves near children in sexually stimulating environments—

such as children swimming—... such as showers at school camps. Some had engaged in sexual conversations, through chat rooms, with people they believedwere children, and had frequently tried to contact them.

One could say there may be a direct link with the recent incident at South Bank, where secretphotographs were taken of children without parental consent for the purpose of displaying them on theinternet with various unsavoury connections to other internet sites. The recent incident at South Bankhighlighted this issue in the minds of people who live in Brisbane and, of course, the hole in policepowers to apprehend those people committing what I call offensive behaviour.

The courts and police can determine what is offensive, but clearly offensive behaviour is whatoffends decent community standards. Taking photographs is not, and should not, be an offence per se,but a photographer taking thousands of photographs of young children at unguarded moments—photographing secretly with a hidden camera to avoid parental objection—for the purpose of publishingon the internet is a whole different ball game. Clearly, that offends decent community standards. It isoffensive, it is intrusive and it should be made illegal.

There is a loophole in the present law where the police have not been given powers to act inthese circumstances. Voyeurism against children is not an innocent activity done by harmless people. Itis a part of exploitation. I recently had the privilege of chairing a mental health forum on behalf of someof the Rotary clubs in Brisbane. A keynote speaker there was Professor Graham Martin, who is aprofessor of psychiatry at the University of Queensland. Professor Martin is a specialist in suicide andmental illness, naturally, as a professor of psychiatry. He gave what I can only describe as a sobering orperhaps even harrowing account of the extent of sexual abuse of children and the extent to whichsexual abuse of children in our society affects mental illness in the adult population. He describedsexual abuse as ‘widespread' and ‘one of the factors, if not the major contributing factor, to seriousmental illness in adults'. This is unfortunately something that occurs and occurs all too frequently. Itsconsequences are devastating and are often perpetuated throughout the entire life of the child. Thedegree to which sexual abuse influences severe mental illness in our society, including things such asdepression, suicide, social phobia and a whole raft of other things, is widely underestimated.

I think that Professor Martin, who gives a lot of his own time to do this type of unpaid communityeducation, is keen that people should understand the seriousness of the consequences that flow fromthe sexual exploitation of children. One phrase that he used is very, very relevant to this debate. Itdisturbed me, but I think it is so important that I will repeat it. In relation to the sexual abuse of children,Professor Martin said, ‘One of the goals that we should have is to teach men to control their urges.' Icould not think of a more relevant quote in the present debate on child pornography. This is a veryserious and widespread problem in our community.

The making of child pornography by means of procuring and luring children into pornography is amost despicable crime—a crime that is driven by power over one's victims. Children do not fullyunderstand or comprehend what is being done. The offenders are able to manipulate the minds ofchildren to think that it is normal or acceptable behaviour in some way or to make the children think thatthey themselves have done something wrong; in other words, to make the victim think that they aresomehow to blame. This intrusion into the minds of children in their formative years is one of thereasons that this abhorrent offence has such a devastating effect on the mental wellness of the victimsas they grow older. Children are easily frightened into not telling anybody. It is common to threatenchildren's parents with harm if the children speak out or to make the children feel so guilty that they donot want to speak out.

A person who distributes child pornography is just as much a child abuser as those who producethe material. They contribute to the creation of a market for these images that drives further production.It treats children like a commodity. It is linked to children being violated for internet movies and it createsa market where children, in certain circumstances, are sold into prostitution. Children are vulnerable.They are trusting. They deserve the heaviest protection our society can afford to give them.

Persons in possession of child pornography give every excuse in the world when they get caughtwith this material, including that they were just looking at pictures, they were not hurting anybody or they


would never sexually abuse a real child. Those quotes came from the Sydney Morning Herald article Ireferred to earlier. But the evidence is not clear that the viewers of child pornography do not go on tooffend. The end user who is flashing his credit card on the internet is creating the market that is drivingthis exploitation and commoditisation of children in different parts of the world. There is a belief by someoffenders that this is a victimless crime. We need to be reminded that a child has to be abused to createthe images, and where there is a market there will be ongoing creation of product to supply that market.

As I said earlier, the Liberal Party is supporting this bill. I suspect that in some areas it perhapsdoes not go far enough. The most insidious feature of the internet in relation to offences of this nature isanonymity. We welcome this bill, but there is an issue relating to general internet pornography. I do notwish to speak about general internet pornography because that is an issue for another day. I probablydo not need to tell too many people how widespread that has become. There is very little, in factnothing, that really stops children viewing the sort of pornography that occurs on the internet.

There is a lot of evidence around that very significant numbers or proportions of children in oursociety are exposed to pornographic images through the net at quite young ages. I believe that there isa need for harsher laws relating to children's access to pornography on the internet, because this initself is a form of sexual abuse of children. Those who publish these sites, those who produce materialfor it and even internet service providers who allow access by children to these sites, need to takeresponsibility. It is not good enough for them to say, ‘Well, we are only the internet service provider,’, or‘We are only a web publishing company.' Anyone who handles pornographic material that ends up in thehands of children needs to take responsibility. There needs to be laws in place that can be appliedagainst people who allow internet pornography to be viewed by children. It is quite false to think that theviewing of pornography by boys is harmless. It is anything but harmless. Filtering of inappropriatematerial, where it may fall into the hands of children, should be a responsibility of internet serviceproviders. I hope the tighter control of unacceptable content will be addressed in the future.

I note that encryption of the content of child pornography web sites to allow only restricted accessis currently being used to try and avoid detection. I also note that there are web sites that publishmanuals on how to ensure that when you visit internet child pornography sites there is nothingremaining on your hard drive. Police have to infiltrate chat rooms and act as children in order to catchoffenders. This is unpleasant work, but it is essential work and I think we should take our hats off to themembers of the police force who have to do this dirty work in order to protect children in our society. It isa timely reminder of some of the things that we have to do in order to protect children. It alsodemonstrates the lengths to which child pornography criminals can go and are going to avoid detectionand to continue publishing their material.

To help the police a co-regulatory scheme exists for sexual content on the internet called theonline consent co-regulatory scheme, which is managed by the Australian Broadcasting Authority.Complaints are made to the scheme and the appropriate filtering measures are implemented. A limitingfactor is that it only covers material on the World Wide Web and does not cover ordinary emails or real-time services such as chat lines. Page 9 of the Queensland Parliamentary Library research brief givessome detail about this.

The International Labour Organisation Convention 182 calls for the elimination of the worst formsof child labour, including the use, procuring or offering of a child under 18 years for prostitution, theproduction of pornography or pornographic references. There has been recent success by authorities intrying to control this expanding crime. The Wonderland Club was a worldwide internet child pornographyring which abused 1,236 children before it was disbanded. In Australia, Operation Auxin arrested 200people across the country with hundreds more arrests to follow. With Operation Auxin offenders werefound and convicted because of the use of their credit card to download the child pornography images.

In conclusion, I reinforce that we are supporting this bill and I would like to end with a fewobservations. Offenders who are involved in the making of, distribution of or possession of childpornography have the following profile: they tend to be male and aged between 25 and 50 years. Mencharged through Operation Auxin included people such as teachers, police officers, businessmen,clergy and, unfortunately, even doctors. They were often fathers who to the outside world lived normallives, had normal or even successful careers and, interestingly, largely had no previous convictions.They were across all types of communities and they crossed all socioeconomic barriers.

The exploitation of children is one of the most horrendous types of crime. It is a crime againstpeople who cannot defend themselves. It manipulates and damages the developing mind of children. Iam very pleased to support the government's legislation in taking one more step towards stamping thisbehaviour out.

Ms STONE (Springwood—ALP) (3.47 pm): I support the words we have just heard from themember for Moggill and all the other members in the chamber. The existing child pornography offenceswill be complemented by the new offences created by this bill. Specifically they will include offences thatrelate to the involvement of children in making, distribution and possession of material that falls withinthe definition of child exploitation material. An offence where a person involves or attempts to involve achild in the making of child exploitation material carries a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment. It


should be noted that in the case of a person taking an indecent photograph or recorded visual image ofa child under 16 years of age the penalty is 20 years. Therefore, if that is established then there will be agreater penalty.

A maximum of 10 years imprisonment will be the penalty for a person who produces or attemptsto produce child exploitation material, as with a person who distributes child exploitation material. Theease of obtaining images of child pornography over the internet is an enormous problem that can lead tothe images being displayed to children and can be used as a tool to fool children into believing that thisis normal behaviour. Therefore, the activity is not only obviously harmful to the child being used in theactivity; it is also harmful to many more children, and it is contributing to a much wider field of childabuse and other horrible crimes.

To knowingly possess child exploitation material will carry a maximum penalty of five yearsimprisonment as those who download child pornography are creating a market for this product. They arecontributing to child abuse, they are criminals and they should be treated as such.

A number of other new offences have been created and the definition of ‘child exploitationmaterial’ has been broadened. Other members have spoken about the successful operations that havebeen carried out by law enforcement agencies over the past 12 months. They have captured peopleinvolved in the abuse of children through child pornography. I am sure they will not be the last.Unfortunately, operations like that will have to continue in our society. I congratulate our police officersand our child protection officers for the work they do. It is not an easy task. They see some horriblesights. I have the utmost respect for the work that they do.

I was lucky—‘lucky’ is not really the word—enough to visit those on Task Force Argos. I havewitnessed the chat room environment. The conversations taking place and the images being displayedwould shock everyone in this House. It is absolutely appalling. I cannot believe that these people in thechat room are talking to 12-year-old girls, because the images they are presenting and the words theyare using are shocking. I do not believe that anyone here would think of half of what goes on.

This is a worldwide problem. It is happening in not just Australia. That in itself creates problems.Parental supervision of children using the internet is absolutely vital. If one is not aware of or does notuse the technology, it can be deceiving. Children pick it up very quickly. They will tell adults how to use itvery quickly. I urge parents to sit with their children and watch what they are doing. As the technologybecomes more sophisticated it will become easier to access some of these sites.

The members who have spoken before me have conveyed how we all feel on this subject andhow sad it is that we have to introduce laws like this. There are no boundaries. We all have to bevigilant. We all have to work together. As I said, as the technology becomes more sophisticated it isgoing to be tougher to watch.

In order to try to win this battle we have to make a concerted effort. The community, the police,governments and internet service providers have to play a role in this. That is what the Attorney-Generalis doing with this legislation. I congratulate him for that. I am pleased that this bill will add more strengthto this effort.

Mrs PRATT (Nanango—Ind) (3.52 pm): I rise to speak in support of the Criminal Code (ChildPornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill 2004. The policy objective of the bill is to respond to thegrowing incidence of child pornography by inserting specific offences, with appropriate penalties, intothe Criminal Code. The bill defines child exploitation material as—... material that, in a way likely to cause offence to a reasonable adult, describes or depicts someone who is, or apparently is, achild under 16 years

Child pornography is not new to our lives. The late 1960s and 1970s saw a major increase in thecommercial production of child pornography. One of the major findings of the 1986 Messe commissionin Australia was that the greatest bulk of child pornography is produced in a cottage industry fashionrather than as a major commercial industry. An inquiry into organised paedophilia activity in Australiafound that child pornography is not, by and large, a commercial endeavour but that there is considerableswapping and sharing of material among paedophiles within Australia and overseas. A considerableamount of child pornography is being produced by sex tourists, but there are numerous cases, both inAustralia and overseas, where child pornography is produced and distributed simply for commercialgain.

Whenever a child is videotaped or photographed by a paedophile there are alwaysrepercussions. The distribution of those products repeats the victimisation over and over again for manyyears to come. Children who have been exposed to pornography may be desensitised and socialisedinto believing that pornographic activity is normal for children. Children who have been used in theproduction of pornography show a multitude of symptoms including emotional withdrawal, antisocialbehaviour, mood swings, depression, fear and anxiety. They are at high risk of later becomingperpetrators themselves. The most destructive feeling these children carry for their lifetime is guilt andshame.


In the 1960s and up to about 15 or 20 years ago, still shots and videos were used quiteextensively because it was very easy to copy a video and send it around to whoever was in the network.The internet has added a new quality to the production and dissemination of child pornography. Thecomputer is the perfect medium for paedophiles. According to Kenneth Lanning, paedophiles generallyare extremely ordered and meticulous record keepers. Therefore, the computer can fulfil their need fororganisation, validation and souvenir records and, as we have been hearing today, to find victims.Paedophiles use computers to communicate with each other, to locate individuals with similar interests,to find children to abuse and to transfer and create child pornography and make a profit.

I have downloaded from the internet a few sex crime facts and stats. William Allen, a teacher andformer member of the Australian paedophile support group, boasted in the early 1980s that he hadmolested approximately 2,000 boys. There have been other instances of Australian paedophiles.Clarence Osbourne kept records of 2,500 children that he had molested.

There is no doubt that history has shown that paedophiles like to reoffend. The averagepaedophile molests 45 to 145 children. At least one-quarter of girls and one-seventh of boys in Australiawill be sexually abused this year. In the majority of cases the offender is known to the child. The truth isthat paedophiles come from all walks of life and often hold positions of authority and are well respectedin their communities. One of the other facts that came to light as I surfed the net was that only five percent of paedophiles are mentally handicapped.

An international investigation into child pornography on the internet identified over 100 suspectsas users of a worldwide child pornography bulletin board out of Denmark. Paedophiles paid $100 tobecome members of the bulletin board, which enabled them to download sexual images of children intotheir home computers. So for a lousy $100 the lives of children all around the world were scarred foreverand a day.

Don Huyke, one of the world's foremost authorities on child pornography and the seniorsupervising special agent for the US Customs Service, told a police seminar held in Melbourne in 1989that computer bulletin boards and other online services had become the new frontier for paedophiles.He stressed that governments and the police needed to react swiftly to the growing threat of theelectronic transfer of images of child sex by enacting new legislation and increasing their technicalcapabilities. That is happening right throughout Australia. Every government that has enacted newlegislation needs to be commended.

The internet is an ideal medium for the purposes of child exploiters. Already there is an enormousquantity of pornography sent via the internet. About 50 million users are online all over the world. Of theover 40 million internet pages, at least one million contain sexually explicit photographs. The netprovides absolute anonymity to its users, suppliers and clients. Digital pictures do not age. They arereproduced in exactly the same quality in any number.

Encryption is becoming more and more common. So even when messages or pictures areintercepted it is nearly impossible to judge whether they are legal or illegal. I know from experience thatone can stumble upon these sites innocently. I would encourage every household to ensure there is lockon their computer so that their children cannot access unwanted material.

When police arrested an alleged paedophile who operated through child-care centres in Victoriathey immediately notified the parents whose children attended those centres. As any parent would be,they were upset and crying. But at least they were informed. There were 28 people charged with a totalof 76 offences relating to child sex abuse and the details of the arrests were released in full. There wasa suburb-by-suburb list of those arrested and charged and the charges they faced. Among those listedwere married teachers, a doctor, two policemen, seven other teachers who taught children of varyingages, mostly in primary school, and many other people. They were not all directly involved with children,but then the full extent of this web of perverts is not known. Parents have the right to know the potentialdanger that their children are in, and I understand that in New South Wales, Victoria and Queenslandthat right has been upheld. That is something that we can all be very grateful for in this state.

This legislation, as has other legislation in the past, will send a message to criminals. I believethat they still need to be named and the people in areas where paedophiles reside should be madeaware of this. I have no sympathy for the offender, and I understand why the families in Murgonmarched against Dennis Ferguson when he moved into a dwelling in that area. Their actions weredescribed, even in this House, as vigilantism. The people who were involved said it was to protect theirchildren, even at the risk of breaking the law and going to jail. They felt so strongly about this that theywould have served any sentence than risk just one-hundredth of a chance that their child might—might—be damaged by an encounter with Dennis Ferguson. The truth is that Dennis Ferguson haschosen his path through life. He has failed to repent or seek help to rectify his problems. Therefore, hemust expect that people with or without children would find it abhorrent for him to be in their society and,as a result, he is very unwelcome anywhere in their community.

The police have an incredibly hard job when it comes to paedophilia and picking up people whodeal in child porn. I personally would encourage anybody who knows anybody who deals or even flirtswith child pornography to contact the police and dob them in. That is the wisest and safest thing for them


to do to protect their communities. Child pornography is abhorrent. All of the information that I have readsays that it creates an appetite which is reportedly addictive. It is just like any illegal drug. Researchshows that—there is no proof—those who delve into child porn go on to offend in that regard. In fact,there are more reports from paedophiles who say that that is how they started.

I for one really welcome this bill. I do not believe that we as law-makers can be in any way lenientor soft on child pornographers. It is our responsibility to protect the innocent, and there is no-one asinnocent as children. Anybody in this House can get on the internet and download any amount ofinformation on the effects that child pornography has on children for a lifetime.

Recently I was approached by people who wanted a nudist beach set up. I had a very longconversation with them. Quite frankly, I do not care if anyone over the age of 18 wishes to paradearound in the nude. That is up to them. If they want to do that in a public place, that is up to them. I justdo not want to be there. But if they want to have nude beaches to go to with their children, I think thatthey are opening themselves up for trouble. I do not believe it is appropriate to have children paradingaround in their birthday suits. There are enough children on the internet now who have been snapped atSouth Bank and other beaches. With all of the technology nowadays, a little bit of doctoring on aphotograph is not hard to do.

I do not believe that blue cards, although they are a bit of a deterrent, necessarily achieveeverything that they are supposed to. As I mentioned earlier, teachers et cetera have been involved inpaedophilia and with child porn. We are never going to rid the world of these sorts of people, but thereisn’t anything that we should not do to limit their activities in any way, and in my book the harsher thepenalty, the better.

Ms NELSON-CARR (Mundingburra—ALP) (4.04 pm): I, too, rise to support the Criminal Code(Child Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill. We cannot be sure that child pornography is practisedany more in 2005 than it was in 1905, but it is certainly far easier to access in this age of the internetthan it has been at any other time in history. Of course, every piece of child pornography is the worstkind of abuse of the very innocent. Although child pornography is not something that has only surfacedin relatively recent times, it gets more attention from authorities and causes more community outragethan ever before. And nor is it being swept under the carpet as it once was. I am thankful that we aretackling child pornography and abuse, and I am thankful that we are doing it head on.

Harsh measures are essential, and it is vital that the law closes loopholes and makes life as toughas possible for those sickening persons who get their kicks and make money from the sexual abuse ofchildren. What does concern me greatly is that, while the Queensland government and othergovernments do everything in their power to bring offenders to justice, the perpetrators will find otherways to ply their disgusting trade and satisfy their perverted sexual desires. I am afraid for thethousands of child victims in Australia and overseas who will continue to suffer indignities and have theirlives ruined at the hands of these criminals despite our best efforts to restrain them.

However, that having been said, it is imperative that as many people as possible who deal in childpornography are made accountable for their actions. We would be failing in our duty of care of childrento do any less. People who commit sex acts on children, those who supply and distribute material andthose who get their pleasures from viewing the results must bear equal guilt and face theconsequences. If there were no market for child pornography, if nobody wanted to see it, it is unlikelythat we would be debating this bill today.

Where computer games and images stray into this murky area, they, too, must be stamped on.Children can easily access that type of material, and I dread to think of the long-term effect it may haveon them. The internet itself is such a huge problem given its increased range of pornographic sites and,of course, the easy accessibility. What may begin as natural curiosity from a child can have devastatinglong-term effects.

A male journalist that I know told me that several years ago he was listening to a community radiostation in Canberra and was really shocked to hear—and I cannot believe it even today—that late-nightpresenters were extolling the virtues of paedophilia. They were talking about how wonderful it was andcould see nothing wrong in their actions. This program went to air for at least an hour. It is hard toimagine such a radio program being given a public airing now, but it does demonstrate the type ofmentality with which we are dealing. Many offenders do not see themselves as committing a crime. Notonly that, in their nauseating, distorted view, they see it as being a natural and loving thing to do.

It is a relief that more and more arrests are taking place across the nation. The Townsville Bulletinwould have a story of somebody facing the courts for paedophilia on a regular basis—several a week.We all need to keep feeling outraged. No community is immune from paedophiles, child pornographyand other forms of child abuse—not in north Queensland nor anywhere else in Queensland or thenation. But we do have the ability to express our outrage through deeds and actions under the law. Ihave no hesitation in giving my strong endorsement to this Criminal Code (Child Pornography andAbuse) Amendment Bill.


Mrs MENKENS (Burdekin—NPA) (4.08 pm): In rising to speak on the Criminal Code (ChildPornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill 2004, I do acknowledge that this bill is a significant attemptfrom the government to counter the growing incidence of child pornography and solicitation beinggenerated by the use of the internet. As use of the internet grows worldwide, so too does accessibility topornography. The internet provides a quick, easily available and confidential medium for accessing allforms of information, including sexually explicit material. It is the fact that internet use is anonymous thatmakes these crimes insidious. That human beings should stoop to the levels of utilising children in thisway is abominable. I, as I know all in this House do, totally support the strengthening of legislation toattempt to stamp out such behaviour.

There are two levels of offenders in these crimes: those who create the pornography and thosewho download it, thereby creating a market for the producers of it. This amendment bill rightly exposesthose in possession of pornographic material as well as those who have produced it.

A Parliamentary Library research brief on this bill outlines a possible profile of child pornographyoffenders. I found this profile very, very disturbing. That research brief states that clinical experiencesuggests that those who engage in the activity tend to be men aged between 25 and 50 years with littleor no criminal history. They tend to have good educational standards, have high IQs, are generallyemployed and are married or are in relationships. The relative anonymity of the internet attracts them.The great danger is that their behaviour can tend to move from just looking at the images to actuallyengaging and forming relationships with children. The most frightening thing about this profile is that itdescribes people who, because of the positions they hold, tend to engender a level of trust from adultsand children alike, which makes the crimes they commit just so much more insidious.

These crimes are abhorrent to all civilised human behaviour and we must do all in our power todetect, to deter, to punish and to educate offenders. It is time that governments really reacted to thepublic outrage and made serious attempts to stamp out these crimes.

The incidence of child abuse is often intergenerational, which is why early intervention andsophisticated education is necessary. Recently I spoke to a very concerned grandmother. She told methat her father had abused her and her husband had abused their daughter. She came to see mebecause she is very concerned about her young grand-daughter. These patterns of behaviour areapparently not uncommon and they must be stopped. This bill is certainly part of the process to achievethat end.

The Criminal Code (Child Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill inserts new offences withpenalty provisions into the Criminal Code to complement existing child pornography offences. Thespecific offences concerning the involvement of children in and making, distributing and possessingmaterial are covered by the definition of ‘child exploitation material'.

I would like to refer to the amendment that has been circulated relating to the removal of theartistic defence. New section 207A outlines the definition of 'child exploitation material' as meaning thereis a necessity to have a child depicted in a sexual context, in an offensive or demeaning context, orbeing subject to abuse, cruelty or torture. Earlier some speakers referred to the work of Anne Geddes.They suggested that her work could be defined as being artistic in nature. Anne Geddes does beautifulwork and in no way can it be classified as child exploitation material. Unless the preliminaryrequirements that would constitute child exploitation material were present, there could be no argumentabout this type of work. If a calendar depicts any of the images that would constitute child exploitationmaterial, then no defence that anything in the calendar is displayed artistically can be justified. I certainlyshare the earlier speaker's admiration of the work of Anne Geddes. She happens to be born and bredand educated in the town that I come from, Home Hill.

Mr Reynolds: Nothing wrong with Home Hill—a good spot. Mrs MENKENS: I thank the minister. I refer to new section 228A in clause 6, titled ‘Involving child

in making child exploitation material' and new section 228B, titled 'Making child exploitation material',both of which carry the maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment. On the face of it, that seems a verysevere penalty. But I will present an argument for even tougher penalties under these amendments tothe Queensland Criminal Code. In modern society, despite the public outcry over the exploitation ofchildren, child pornography still constitutes about seven per cent of the pornography market. Studiesindicate that at least 264 magazines that deal with sexual acts between adults and children are soldeach month. I have already outlined the availability and anonymity of child pornography on the internet.Child pornography may be used to lure children into sexual activity and to instruct them since youngchildren who view such material may be led to believe that this is acceptable behaviour.

In a society where parents are forced to dedicate more hours to their work and less time to theirfamilies in an effort to repay their mortgages, there can be no dispute that access to children, aided bythe internet, has become easier. For those reasons, I believe that the maximum penalty mentioned inthis amendment bill should be considered as being at the lower end of the scale for punishment. Afterall, with good behaviour and remorse for their actions, those found guilty of this crime might not evenserve half that time whilst the children they have affected will spend a lifetime without their innocenceand with their images on the internet for all to see.


In contrast, I refer to new section 228E, which lists defences for crimes committed under newsections 228A and 228D. That new section states—It is a defence for the person to prove that—(a) the person engaged in the conduct that is alleged to constitute the offence for a genuine artistic, educational, legal,

medical, scientific or public benefit purpose. I note the comments made by the minister in his second reading speech regarding attacking the

market for child pornography and removing the incentive to make it. I applaud that, but in the drive toachieve this goal, I hope that the government is able to explain properly what constitutes childexploitation material, which I referred to earlier, and what constitutes artistic material. That is a very thinline and I think it is a very difficult one to define. This may sound like a commonsense approach to adifficult problem, but I ask the minister to try to achieve this balance.

However, I do not agree that someone in possession of a computer game or film containing childexploitation material should be able to use this fact as a defence as listed in new section 228E(5). To myway of thinking, any child exploitation material is exploitation material that is harmful to children.Whether it is an R-rated film or an X-rated film, or a computer game, it should not be able to be viewedby any individual. There are strong indications that pictures, computer games or films allow paedophilesor individuals interested in child pornography the opportunity to develop a psychological integrity topornographic material that in their minds justifies or normalises this type of abuse.

That type of pornography becomes the confirming evidence against the argument that childexploitation and molestation is not harmful and is justified because the child has aggressive and sexualdrives. For that reason, I have grave concerns about this new section as an acceptable defence, giventhat it endorses the belief patterns that ultimately justify violence towards children.

Mr Welford: Which section are you talking about? Mrs MENKENS: I am talking about new section 228E as it relates to computer games. However,

I acknowledge that the ability for authorities to properly monitor the individuals possessing thesematerials is very, very limited.

I certainly welcome the addition of new section 228F, titled ‘Excluding non-essential persons fromcourt when child exploitation material displayed'. Although I believe that the courts of Queenslandshould be open to any member of the public who wishes to observe the judicial process, this newsection is a commonsense provision as it ensures that the number of people who are able to view suchmaterial is strictly limited to those performing a legitimate function in the court at the time. This newsection also limits the embarrassment and publicity for those children who, as victims of sexualexploitation, have already been subjected to pain and hardship. That is most definitely a sensibleamendment.

Further, I acknowledge the purpose of inserting new section 228G, titled 'Forfeiture of childexploitation material etc.', which states that if a person is convicted of an offence the court is permittedto order the forfeit of the offending photographs, visual images or material to the state. As the court isprovided with the power to forfeit any instrument that was used to commit the offence, includingcomputers, cameras and so forth, these are important reforms and do not rely on this equipment havingbeen seized by police in the process of obtaining evidence.

On behalf of victims who have suffered at the hands of paedophiles, the prospect that in thefuture these most depraved creatures are not able to continue to view such material is a most welcomeaspect of the bill. I am also pleased that an attempt has been made to recognise the continuingproblems with the circumstances of law enforcement authorities possessing such material as part oftheir efforts to gather evidence. This is a sensible provision.

This bill should be recognised as a critical step in the fight against child pornography in the stateof Queensland. Given the global nature of the internet, however, it is my hope that other states andother nation-states are as diligent as the Queensland parliament on this issue. Many have argued thatthe answer to ridding the world of child exploitation and child pornography is to arrest and prosecute allthose involved in the selling and distribution of material as well as the perpetrators who commit the initialabuse. This means that demand and availability is cut off at the knees and the number of childrenharmed would be reduced. To this end, the bill before us attempts to achieve this objective.

To give members an idea of the seriousness of the issue that we are confronting—and I am sureeverybody is fully aware of it—I present to the House a passage from Kate Cairns. Kate Cairns is achild-care consultant who trains social workers and other professionals in England. She publishedSurviving Paedophilia: Traumatic Stress after Organised Network Child Sexual Abuse. The purpose ofher book, she said, was to help people understand that paedophilia affects not just the primary victimsbut the whole community. Her passage gives us a glimpse of this sordid history—Like blasts from a bomb, circles of harm spread outward from paedophilia, making victims of any who stand in its way. At thecentre are the children, the primary victims who will bear the scars forever. Then there are those closest to them—whoever lovesthem enough to feel the wounds and suffer harm because of them—secondary victims through loving those who suffer most.Further from the centre are those whose work requires them to immerse themselves in the world of paedophilia—professionals itis true, but not prepared by training or experience for what they may uncover; and there are tertiary victims here, searching for alanguage to express what they have learned and an audience to hear it. And beyond [at a fourth level] the whole social order, forwhere there is corruption, no part of the social fabric can escape the taint.

I commend this bill to the House.


Mr REEVES (Mansfield—ALP) (4.22 pm): I rise to support the Criminal Code (Child Pornographyand Abuse) Amendment Bill 2004. The electorate of Mansfield has a large number of new families—young families who have moved to the south side to raise their children. I, too, have a young family. Ihave been blessed with two beautiful daughters and I can safely say that as parents my wife and I wantthe absolute best for our children. I believe this is a trait all parents share.

Like all parents across Queensland, and indeed Australia, I have been sickened by the recentexposure of child pornography rings. The proliferation of child pornography in Australia is enough tomake one physically sick. Between 1989 and 1994, 12,000 child pornography items were seized.Recently Operation Auxin—a massive national police operation involving all state and territory police—uncovered two million pornographic images involving children, some images involving babies. Thosewho commit crimes against our children are the most disgusting and depraved people in our society.

While it has been noted that child sexual offenders do not display homogenous characteristics,research suggests that some of these offenders are among society's most diabolical criminals.Research from the Adelaide Hospital's Sexual Offender Treatment and Assessment Program showedthat those engaging in sexual offences against children are aged between 25 and 50, have little or nocriminal history, are well educated with high IQs, are generally employed, and are married or are in arelationship. While it is easy to think these heinous criminals are social miscreants who lurk in theshadows, research tends to suggest that their appearance is less different than what we would like themto be. This has been proven in Queensland as Task Force Argos showed when more than 100 offenderswere arrested on more than 2,300 charges. Of these offenders, 57 were either teachers, police officersor military police. As a government—more importantly, as a society—we need to flush these vile humanbeings from the shadows. I strongly believe that the Criminal Code (Child Pornography and Abuse)Amendment Bill helps to achieve this. Anonymity is a luxury that these offenders should not be allowedto enjoy. The myth that the internet provides anonymity to these offenders should, and I strongly believewill, be destroyed by this bill.

The Adelaide Hospital research stated that the cloak of anonymity was an attractive feature forthe child sexual offender treatment survey. As members will be aware, Queensland was the first state inAustralia to create specific offences to deal with internet paedophiles. This new bill makes theseoffences more specific and much tougher. The Beattie government is doing all it can to prevent theproliferation of the child pornography industry by targeting those who produce and possess childexploitation material. The Adelaide Hospital research found that a few child sexual offenders claim thatthe earlier use of child pornography set them on a path to later crime. Not only does this substantiatethat there is a direct link between the possessing of offending material and the commission of physicalacts; it further validates the tough approach that the Beattie government is taking to the possessors ofchild exploitation material. This cycle needs to be dismantled at all costs, and this bill takes severalsteps towards achieving this goal.

Research in the child pornography industry informs us that there is a spectrum of offendersbeginning with browsers, those who come across sexually explicit images of children and knowinglykeep it; or groomers, those predators who make contact with children online in the hope of establishinga sexual relationship; or physical abusers, those who actively abuse children and use child pornographyto assist the abuse; and, finally, the producers and distributors, the most vile of the child sexualoffenders insofar as they help sustain the repulsive urges of child sexual offenders by actively creatingand then disseminating sexually explicit content involving children.

This cycle of depravity needs to be stopped at all costs. This bill will help to smash the wickedblack market by imposing severe penalties on those who possess child exploitation material. Sadly,market economics reminds us that where there is a demand there will be a supply. It is my hope, and Ishould think the hope of every Queenslander and Queensland parent especially, that this bill willannihilate the demand for this repulsive material. A 10-year maximum jail term for offences involving achild in child exploitation material or making child exploitation material or distributing child exploitationmaterial, as found in proposed changes to section 228 of the Criminal Code, is one step towardseradicating these activities and severely punishing those who seek to fulfil their evil fantasies.

Everyone in this chamber can attest to the fact that our children and their peers are much moretechnically adept in the use of information technology than we are. Even though sexually explicit contentinvolving children may not be as easily accessible as other content on the internet, it would appear thatthe ease with which children can have access to sexually explicit content is a major cause of concern formany of us. Studies have shown a direct link between the consumption of pornography and attitudestowards women and young girls. A Canadian study involving nearly 300 teenagers found that thoseteenagers who regularly viewed pornography believed it was acceptable to force a girl to have sexualintercourse. Ultimately, these issues should give rise to a completely separate debate.

Task forces assembled to dismantle child pornography rings have proven to be clearly successful.I commend the Queensland police force for their work in Task Force Argos and Operation Auxin. The billnow provides greater disincentive for those members of our society who seek to manifest their blatantlyrepulsive desires. I encourage these members of our society to seek help before it is too late. While I


would like nothing more than to have these offenders incarcerated far, far away from our children, Iwould not be comfortable with the knowledge that a child's life could have been saved from ruin had theoffender sought help.

My plea to those afflicted with these deprived thoughts is to seek help before they do anything. Ifthey do not they will be caught and they will be punished. While offenders may be in jail for a maximumof 10 years, recent events remind us that the stigma of being a child sex offender lasts for a lifetime.With that in mind, the message is clear: using children as a vice to fulfil sick and twisted fantasy isresolutely abhorrent and will not be tolerated by the Beattie Labor government. Offenders should bewarned: they will be caught, they will be punished and more than likely they will be tarred and featheredfor the rest of their days.

As a parent I believe this bill provides parents throughout Queensland with the reassurance thatour children will be protected and that those who violate their innocence in any way will be punished. Asparents, we make a commitment to protect our children. I am proud to be a part of a state governmentthat has made that same commitment in the legislation before the House. I commend the bill to theHouse.

Mr SHINE (Toowoomba North—ALP) (4.30 pm): It is a pleasure to speak in relation to this bill.Bearing in mind the fact that many members have spoken on this and have covered all aspects of thedebate, I will confine my remarks to a few pertinent points.

The concern that members have, of course, is related to the growth of child pornography offencesbecause of the onset of the availability of the internet and mobile phone cameras, as illustrated by theincident at South Bank. Concern has been expressed at the ease with which these offences have beencommitted. There is a degree of anonymity with these offences in that the offenders could be anyone inthe community. There is evidence now of the growing prevalence of the commission of these offenceswith hundreds of people being arrested in recent times. The research brief refers to Operation Auxinwhere 200 people or thereabouts were arrested throughout the country.

Further concern has been expressed in relation to the type of people who are characteristicallythe offenders. They are people who would not normally be expected to be capable of committingcriminal offences. They are people with a good education, people who have a high IQ, married men andpeople with no prior convictions. Concern has also been expressed in relation to the easy exposure toyoung people via the internet. A survey found that 84 per cent of boys said they have accidentallyaccessed pornography depictions on the internet, 38 per cent of boys deliberately searched for it and60 per cent of girls accidentally came across it. Young people also have access to X-rated videosdespite the classifications and restrictions on sale and rent. It has to be taken into account, particularlywith teenage children, that there is natural curiosity in relation to these matters and the availability of itvia the internet et cetera explains, to my mind, the rising incidence of the commission of the offence.

All of those concerns have increased the call throughout Australia for legislation to meet thechallenge. That is what we are here about today. It is pertinent to look at what the law says in relation tothis offence in Queensland. At the moment the Criminal Code has some sections that deal with this typeof offence. Section 210 deals with the indecent treatment of children under 16. Section 210(1) (f) says—... takes any indecent photograph or records, by means of any device, any indecent visual image of a child under the age of 16years.

It is a serious offence judging by the penalty that has been imposed. If the child is of or above 12years the offender is liable to 14 years imprisonment, and if the child is under 12 years the offender isliable to 20 years imprisonment. It is a very stiff existing penalty for that type of offence.

There is an offence of being an owner of a property and permitting the abuse of children on thepremises for the purposes of those matters that I have just described. If the child is of or above 12 yearsthe offender is liable to 10 years imprisonment and if the child is under 12 years, depending on whetherthere is an aggravation of sodomy or carnal knowledge, the offender is liable to imprisonment for life.Without those circumstances of aggravation the offender is liable to 14 years imprisonment.

The penalties that are in the code for offences similar to these offences are very stiff. Likewise,section 219—taking a child for immoral purposes—is a similar type of offence. With respect to obscenepublications and exhibitions, there is a section against publicly selling, distributing or exposing for saleany obscene book or other obscene printed or written matter, any obscene computer generated imageor any obscene picture, photograph et cetera. The penalties for that are similar but not as great as theones I mentioned previously, but it is at least five years or 10 years imprisonment depending on the ageof the child involved. That is in the Criminal Code of Queensland.

In the Commonwealth the offence relates to the transmission of material over the differentmethods of communication that we have in Australia. It relates to the carriage of those images. Thereare offences relating to using a carriage service for child pornography. The maximum penalty is 10years. For possessing or controlling, producing, supplying or obtaining child pornography material foruse through a carriage service the penalty is again 10 years. There are defences for public benefit andwhat constitutes public benefit and so on.


The point of reading those offences, both state and federal, to the House is to indicate that the lawhas already taken a very strict view of offences relating to the exploitation of children. As I understand it,the purpose of this legislation is to make it more certain that the authorities can deal with exploiters ofchildren in this specific way with respect to the internet et cetera. The need for this law has come aboutbecause of some criticism that there have been defects in our law in Queensland. Again I refer to theresearch brief that the parliamentary library has prepared. Because of the time factor I will not go into itin any detail. The cases that are referred to on page 14 and 15 with respect to possession of materialindicate that perhaps the courts need to reflect the increasing concern that the community has had inrecent years with respect to pornography of this nature. For example, in R v Bishop the defendant hadno previous convictions, was in possession of a small number of images and was fined $7,500. In R vSullivan the defendant was sentenced to six months imprisonment but had had a fairly extensivecriminal history. The case of R v Reid and Attorney-General of Queensland went on appeal. There wasa $20,000 fine. In the appeal court Chesterman J said—The offence does not appear prevalent or at least it is not often detected and there are few recorded instances of penaltiesimposed. ... those to which we have been referred to do not suggest that imprisonment is the norm, or ... that a non-custodialsentence is inadequate punishment.

That was in the year 2000. I think society has moved on. Certainly, the demands of society haveincreased to tell us in the legislature, the government in particular and the Attorney-General moreparticularly that more is needed. The provisions about which many members have spoken and whichwere set out by the Attorney-General in his second reading speech indicate that the government, andthe Attorney-General in particular, has listened to that call from the community.

There has been a call for mandatory sentencing—that is, that the 10 years imprisonment imposedas a penalty in this legislation be the sentence imposed in every instance. That is a fairly simplistic wayof looking at the situation which ignores the need for variance in penalties depending on the severity ofan offence. Some offences are far more gross and horrendous than others. It would be terribly unjust forthe same penalty to be imposed in all circumstances. Some people need to be punished far moreharshly than others.

We have had this system of law for hundreds of years. The English system of common law andjustice that we use in Australia demands that there be a discretion on the part of the judiciary to applythe law according to the circumstances. Of course, the courts of appeal exist to rectify any mistakesmade by the judiciary. We also have an Attorney-General in this state who is not at all shy aboutbringing an application before the court if he considers that a penalty is inadequate. That has beendemonstrated time and time again over the last few years. Personally, I feel that the case for mandatorysentencing has not been made out, and I certainly urge the government not to consider bringing suchlegislation into play.

I extend to the police, particularly the specialist police in Task Force Argos and the CMC, for theirwork with respect to internet pornography. Having served on the Parliamentary Crime and MisconductCommittee during the previous parliament, I know the amount of work that they do. The value of theirwork is absolutely tremendous. They have had quite considerable international success in this regard. Icommend them for their efforts and I encourage them to carry on their good work. I commend the bill tothe House.

Hon. RJ WELFORD (Everton—ALP) (Attorney-General and Minister for Justice) (4.42 pm), inreply: I thank all honourable members for their contributions to this parliament's lengthy deliberations onthis bill. The Criminal Code (Child Pornography and Abuse) Amendment Bill addresses, as honourablemembers have indicated, many important issues affecting the lives of children and the welfare of ourcommunity as a whole. I thank honourable members for their extensive contributions.

I will briefly address some of the issues raised by a number of members. The Leader of theOpposition specifically discussed issues that the opposition proposes to put during debate on theclauses. I will leave them to be dealt with during that debate. There is no doubt that possessing childpornography is serious criminal conduct and should be punished accordingly. That is why this newindictable offence of possession of that kind of material has been put into the Criminal Code. We haveput this into the Criminal Code rather than into the classification act to reflect the seriousness of this typeof activity. I believe that the penalty imposed of a maximum of five years imprisonment is appropriate,but that can be discussed further during debate on the clauses. Another matter raised by the Leader ofthe Opposition was in relation to the defence of artistic merit. Again, I will leave that matter untildiscussion on the clauses, if that is pursued.

The member for Burnett raised issues about the level of the maximum penalty. Again, I believethat it is appropriate, for the time being, to set the penalties at the levels contained in the bill. They areconsistent with the recommendations of the ministerial council of Australian police ministers and withthe penalties in other states. At this stage I think there is some merit in maintaining that consistency.

The member for Beaudesert expressed concerns about proposed new section 228F, whichrequires the court to exclude all non-essential persons from the court while child exploitation material is


on display. I agree with the principle of open justice that was raised by the member for Burnett. Thisclause does not mean that the public will be excluded from the entire trial process or that the communitywill be unable to observe the operation of the justice system. It simply requires that non-essentialpersons involved in the case be excluded while child exploitation material is actually on display duringthe case. As a matter of discretion, I think that is an appropriate mechanism to make available to thecourt, and it will be exercised at the court's discretion. The judiciary very strongly protects its capacity toensure that courts deliver justice in an open way. It is a very rare exercise of discretion for a court toexclude people from a courtroom or to conduct proceedings in closed court. I imagine that they willexercise that discretion only in circumstances where it is justified. In my view, the principles of protectionof our children from further trauma in the courtroom also take precedence over concerns relating toopen justice. In the circumstances, I believe that that provision is justified.

The member for Caloundra reminded us to be mindful of the major danger of the use of childpornography to groom children. The member made a valid point. It is timely that this issue be addressedin the way that we have, either through increasing the penalties or through creating new offences of thekind in this bill. One such offence is contained in section 210(1) (e), which applies to a person who,without legitimate reason, exposes a child under the age of 16 years to any indecent material. Othertypes of indecent dealing with children, and this offence, had their penalties increased up to 20 yearsimprisonment by this government in 2003. In 2003, the government also introduced new section 218A,which applies to a person who uses the internet with the intent to procure a child to engage in a sexualact. This offence allows police to proactively target paedophiles on the internet, including byrepresenting themselves as children.

The member for Caloundra also believes that the Penalties and Sentences Act should be lookedat because it is restraining courts from imposing harsher sentences. He referred to the principle that asentence of imprisonment should be imposed only as a last resort. I remind the honourable member andother members of this House that in 2003 I addressed the issue of imprisonment as a last resort so thatin sentencing an offender for an offence of a sexual nature committed against a child under the age of16 that principle is specifically excluded.

The amendments also list the factors the court must consider when sentencing for such offences;that is, offences against children. These matters include the effect of the offence on the child, the needto protect the child or other children from the risk of the offender reoffending and anything else relatingto the safety of children under 16 that the sentencing court considers relevant.

A number of other matters were raised by the members for Burnett, Caloundra, Beaudesert,Tablelands, Currumbin and Burdekin. They all raised various concerns which are understandable. Theessence of the issues raised by them was a concern that the provisions in this amendment bill shouldnot allow loopholes that will enable people who offend against children and violate the innocence ofchildren to escape the appropriate sanctions, and that is certainly the intention of this bill.

As Attorney-General, I am always ready to make any necessary amendments if in fact theprovisions of this bill prove to identify any loopholes. Mind you, much work has been done on this bill. Itsprovisions are such that they are likely to be adopted by other Australian jurisdictions. I will be workingon this with my fellow attorneys-general over the coming months. There is a meeting of the StandingCommittee of Attorneys-General in a couple of weeks where we will be doing further work on thenational harmonisation of offences of this kind.

I will leave it there. I thank all honourable members for their contributions to this debate. I knowthat there are a couple of matters in relation to some clauses which those opposite are interested incanvassing further. I will be happy to address their concerns then.

I should respond to the member for Burdekin's concern about the defence in relation to theclassification of literature and films. The member indicates that there are circumstances where, in herview, the mere fact that something is classified, whether it is R, X or whatever, should not justify its beingexcused from some form of offence for the exploitative nature of the material.

It is fair to say that material which clearly shows child pornography—that is, it represents childrenin a sexual way in film or literature—is unlikely to receive a classification. That is why I am satisfied thatif in the case of films or computer games something is able to achieve a classification which is legitimatein Queensland then it is unlikely—in fact I think it will be impossible—to be something that would breachthe provision that we are intending to operate here.

However, the law is a strange animal and there are circumstances where exceptional casesoccasionally arise. We must remain vigilant to that. I will certainly take on board the comments that themember makes and keep an eye on how the bill functions in the future. I thank honourable members fortheir contributions. I commend the bill to the House.

Motion agreed to.


Consideration in DetailClauses 1 to 5, as read, agreed to. Clause 6 —Mr SPRINGBORG (4.52 pm): I move the following amendment—

1 Clause 6—At page 7, line 18, ‘5 years imprisonment’—omit, insert—‘10 years imprisonment’.

The basic purpose of this amendment is to ensure that people who knowingly have in theirpossession child exploitation material suffer exactly the same maximum penalty as those people whorecruit, those people who make and those people who distribute child exploitation material. I madesome points in the second reading debate about why I thought this was a very good idea. I commendthe Attorney and the government for the amendments that they have brought before the parliamenttoday in this particular bill. However, for consistency, and due to its seriousness, the Nationals believethat it is extremely logical to have the same severe maximum penalty of 10 years for all four categoriesof offences. We find it extremely difficult to understand why somebody who knowingly possesses childexploitation material is eligible for a maximum jail term of five years whereas somebody who recruits achild, makes this material or distributes this material is eligible for a maximum jail term of 10 years.

Mr Shine: It is more serious. Mr SPRINGBORG: I note the interjection from the member for Toowoomba North who said that it

is more serious. This is where we disagree, honourable member. We think that knowingly possessingthis material is just as serious. I will indicate why, in my opinion and the opinion of other people, it is justas serious. The whole point of recruiting, making and distributing this material is for people who wish topossess it. These are the so-called end users—the people who actually create the demand for thismaterial.

We acknowledge and commend the government for the amendments that it has brought in—donot get us wrong. However, we are saying that these people who knowingly possess it are no better andprobably in many cases worse than those people who recruit, make and distribute this material becauseit is basically aimed at those people. It is not to say that those people who recruit the children for thispurpose, those people who make the material and those people who distribute this material do not getsome enjoyment or satisfaction out of it. But, at the end of the day, the overwhelming market is withthose people who possess it. They are the people who are causing this whole industry to flourish, asappalling and as sick as it is.

The Nationals’ view is that it is just as serious an offence as recruiting a minor and making anddistributing this abhorrent child exploitation material. If it were not for the market at the other end, thepeople who want the material in the first place and the fact that they get such enjoyment out of it, thenthe requirement and desire on the part of those people who make it would be somewhat limited. It wouldnot mean that they would not do it, but it would be even more limited and more restricted.

It is one of the most appalling types of exploitation of anyone. It strikes at our heart and soul. Thehonourable member for Toowoomba North finds it as abhorrent as we do. We view the knowingpossession of this material as being just as serious as the other categories of offences where there is a10-year maximum penalty. We acknowledge the seriousness of those and the reason for the applicationof 10 years. However, we think the same should apply to those people who have been convicted ofknowingly possessing child exploitation material.

We are not talking about people who unknowingly possess this material; we are talking aboutpeople who knowingly possess it. They have gone out and got it and they know they have it and theyknow it is wrong. The greatest majority of those people have it because they get some sort of twistedsatisfaction out of it. We are not talking about people who unknowingly have it because somebodyinadvertently sent it to them by email. Those people would not be affected. They would not be able to beprosecuted anyway because the requisite standard of proof would not exist.

We are talking about people who knowingly possess this material. If it were not for thesescumbags, there would be less material like this around. There is a genuine argument for the maximumpenalty to be the same. Frankly, what is the harm in having the maximum penalty the same? We haveagreed that the discretion of the court needs to apply. We are basically saying it is not on. We do notsupport this behaviour in any way whatsoever. I am not saying that those opposite support it. We shouldfrown upon it and regard it with the same degree of seriousness as the other three categories.

Mr WELFORD: I can understand the abhorrence with which the Leader of the Opposition andany member of the House would regard the possession of this sort of material, particularly if there arelarge quantities of the material or the material appears to be possessed for the purpose of either itspromotion or its use to further the disgusting behaviour of people who might participate in paedophilic or


child pornography activities. But I also believe that, as with other offences, we do need to recognise thatthere operates a hierarchy of relative seriousness in relation to offences. For example, in relation to drugoffences, the possession of drugs is not treated in the same way as the commercial production ordistribution and sale of drugs. Those who promote paedophilic activity or child pornography are clearly,in my view, engaging in offences which are more serious than those who may receive it.

That is not to say that the offence of possession is not taken seriously. Five years imprisonment isa serious sanction. The five years imprisonment in this bill increases the current penalties under theclassification acts which are respectively one or two years to five years. So there is a five times increasein the penalty that we are already proposing. I think it is not only a matter of legal discipline in the waythat offences are structured but also giving effect to the recommendations of the Australian PoliceMinisters Council and the path which most other Australian jurisdictions are taking.

My preference is to proceed at this stage with the proposals that are contained in the bill as theycurrently are. If circumstances arise where there are clearly inadequate penalties being imposed forserious instances of the possession of child pornography or other material depicting child exploitation,then obviously the parliament can revisit it at that time. But I think it is appropriate to draw a distinctionbetween offences such as those identified in section 228A involving children in the making of childexploitation material and the making of it and its distribution. I think that that ought to be distinguishedfrom possession.

Mr SPRINGBORG: I have listened to the Attorney's argument. I do not argue against the totalvalidity of what he has put forward. There is an element of logic in what he is saying. However, ourconcern still remains in terms of the relative seriousness of it. When I was thinking about this in the lastcouple of weeks, in my own mind I thought of the issue of the hierarchy for sentencing people in thearea of drug offences. I agonised about that for a while and I thought about the same sorts of things thatthe Attorney put forward.

If we look at it strictly in the same sort of way, it is an argument that is easy to conclude. Certainlyin the case of production of drugs, trafficking of drugs, distribution of drugs and the way that thosepeople who are convicted of those offences are sentenced by our courts and the seriousness of thepenalties and sentences compared to those who just possess, it is quite clear that there is a distinction.If we look at those areas, I understand that trafficking can carry a greater penalty than does productionor distribution. In my opinion, we have to try not to draw a complete comparison between drug offencesand the possession of child pornography because of the different circumstances, the differentsocioeconomics and the nature of drug offences themselves.

People come under the influence of drugs and possess drugs in whatever quantity because of arange of socioeconomic circumstances and peer group pressures. Once they have an addiction, it goeson from there and there is a whole cycle of crime that spirals out of control. One could argue on thesurface that, if it were not for people wanting to possess and use, then there would not be a wholesupply and distribution chain. That is not an invalid argument. In my mind, I think that it is differentbecause of the nature of the circumstances of the people who find themselves under the effects ofdrugs.

If we look at the possession of child pornography or child exploitation material, we are dealingwith people who have created a market. Not only that, there is a depth of misery and hurt that is causedto our most vulnerable citizens—being our children—in order for that person to be able to enjoy seeing achild being exploited. It is the personal hurt and the personal misery that is inflicted on those youngpeople right throughout that process that causes this person to be able to get their sense of twistedsatisfaction at the other end. So I think there is a difference. There is a distinction between this, at leasttechnically, and the whole supply chain of drug production, trafficking, distribution and possession.

I just say that to the Attorney. I appreciate his argument. It is an argument that I myself havethought about in the last week or two. I suppose it is one of subjective judgment rather than objectivevalue judgment that will cause us to vote on it tonight. But I do think that there is a difference given ourchildren and given the nature of those who are affected before it gets to the knowing possession stage.There is a difference between the relative state of those people who would possess child pornographyknowingly and those people who often fall into the cycle of drug use.

Mr McARDLE: I state at the outset that we intend to support the proposed amendment moved bythe National Party. I refer to page 1 of the library's brief on this bill. At the bottom it says—Some people may argue that possession of child pornography is not of itself harmful to children and it is a victimless crime.However, those who download child pornography provide a market for people who produce and distribute child pornographymaterial. Thus possession alone can indirectly contribute to child sexual abuse.

On page 2 it says as follows—A further danger of child pornography, apart from the fact that children used in its production are the victims of abuse, is that thematerial itself can be used to facilitate the abuse of further children. By showing it to children particularly over the internet tends tonormalise the abhorrent events being displayed to intended child victims being groomed for an actual meeting with an offender.


That is exactly what happened in the Queen and Kennings. The judgment says that the applicantin that case—Kennings—was born on 27 November 1977. At the time of the offence he was 25 years ofage and he used a computer located at his sister's home. The judgment says—He had been in the habit of accessing pornography through that computer.

Again, the judgment says—He—

referring to Kennings—graduated from university with an Arts degree in media studies and production in 2001, but had been unable to obtain full-timeemployment. As a result, he suffered from a degree of isolation and depression. It provided him with the opportunity to spend longperiods of time viewing pornography on the internet.

In this particular case, what he did was that he liaised on the internet with a girl—with a person—he thought was 13 years of age. He made out that he was 24 years of age. He used language designedfor conversation with a 13-year-old girl, set out the sexual acts he was proposing, and was insistent andaggressive about pursuing a meeting with her, putting up a number of proposed meeting places. Theyeventually arranged to meet at the Eternal Flame in Anzac Square in the city. But, when he arrived, shewas not there and he was picked up.

The concern is that he progressed from viewing pornography or having pornography to actuallygrooming a person he thought was a 13-year-old child for a sexual rendezvous. Whether or not therendezvous took place or the girl was 13 or 24 or 35 is irrelevant. It was a progression of him movingfrom viewing and possessing to actually grooming a person he believed he could meet for a sexualencounter. This is exactly the danger that arises when someone knowingly possesses pornographicmaterial. In those circumstances, to place a penalty of five years on the offence woefully underrates theimportance and the deterrence aspect of a 10-year penalty. It is most important that people understandthat possession of material that is pornographic leads in many cases to grooming, contact and othersexual abuse activities. For that reason, we will be supporting the amendment proposed by the member.

Mr WELFORD: The member for Caloundra makes two points, the first of which is essentially thesame point that was made by the Leader of the Opposition—that is, those who possess childpornography provide the market for those who distribute it. There is no doubt that that indirectly has apotentially serious adverse impact on children who are used to produce that material. That is why thepenalty of imprisonment under this provision is provided for.

It may or may not be the case that people who for their own perverse reasons possess suchpornography progress to engaging in other activities that are equally offensive, which constitute otheroffences and for which there are higher penalties. The case that the member speaks of is a case where,if I understand the facts correctly, there are multiple offences—some relating to possession, othersrelating to procuring a child for an indecent act. Those offences attract higher penalties. I think theregime of offences that we established, first with the offences that I introduced in 2003 and now withthese further amendments in relation to exploitative material, provide the full panoply of offences andnecessary penalties to provide an appropriate deterrent.

As I say, no-one on this side for one minute suggests that there is anything acceptable about thepossession of child pornography in comparison with the other activities. The only difference that one canrationally point to is that the involvement of children in the production of pornography causes moreimmediate and direct harm to people other than the person who observes the material that theypossess. It is certainly not suggested—and that is why the offence of possession exists—that justbecause someone possesses pornographic material that it is a victimless offence. It is not. But it doesnot have the same direct and immediate harmful effect as the commission of other offences. That is whythere is an appropriate distinction in the hierarchy of penalties provided for them.

I do not expect that we will be able to resolve this issue by a debate on the clauses. I understandthe opposition's perspective. It is determined to press ahead with this amendment. I suppose we canonly be grateful that the Leader of the Opposition, given his past record, is not pressing for all thepenalties to be mandatory life imprisonment. I suppose we will just have to agree to disagree.

Mr SPRINGBORG: I table my explanatory notes to the amendments that I have proposed. Iindicate to the Attorney-General that we will have to agree to disagree. The member for Caloundramade some extremely valid points. As I said, I think that there is a significant difference between that ofdrug possession and use and that of the possession of child pornography or child exploitation material.It is just as serious, and probably arguably more serious, because it is what causes the misery thatyoung people face and then consequently, possibly, older people. We know where some of these thingspotentially lead for some people further down the track as these low-lifes transcend to committing othermore serious crimes that often result in injury and possibly even death.

I say to the Attorney-General that I have not suggested mandatory life imprisonment. I usually donot suggest mandatory life imprisonment. I just suggest that we need to have a mandatory minimumsentencing regime for some crimes. I think that is probably a more accurate presentation of what Iadvocate from time to time. Maybe that does not necessarily sit well with the Attorney-General’sphilosophical beliefs, but it is really a bit different from what he suggested.


Question—That Mr Springborg’s amendment be agreed to—put; and the House divided—AYES, 25—Copeland, E Cunningham, Flegg, Hobbs, Horan, Johnson, Knuth, Langbroek, Lee Long, Lingard, McArdle, Menkens,Messenger, Pratt, Quinn, Rickuss, E Roberts, Rowell, Seeney, Simpson, Springborg, Stuckey, Wellington. Tellers: Hopper, MaloneNOES, 55—Attwood, Barry, Barton, Beattie, Bligh, Boyle, Briskey, Choi, E Clark, L Clark, Croft, Cummins, English, Fenlon, Finn,Fraser, Hayward, Hoolihan, Jarratt, Lavarch, Lawlor, Lee, Livingstone, Lucas, Mackenroth, Male, McNamara, Mickel, Miller,Molloy, Nelson-Carr, Nuttall, O’Brien, Palaszczuk, Pearce, Poole, Purcell, Reeves, Reilly, Reynolds, N Roberts, Robertson,Schwarten, Scott, Shine, Smith, Spence, Stone, Struthers, C Sullivan, Welford, Wells, Wilson. Tellers: T Sullivan, Nolan

Resolved in the negative. Mr SPRINGBORG: I move the following amendment—

2 Clause 6—At page 7, line 25, ‘artistic,’—omit.

As I indicated in the second reading debate on this bill earlier today, the Nationals have the verystrong view that there should not be an excuse for the possession or production of child exploitationmaterial based on an artistic need or an artistic requirement. As I indicated, there are all sorts ofexcuses that artists use to be able to push the bounds of what in many cases is publicly acceptable. Artis certainly in the eye of the beholder. Art is something which can be extremely subjective, and certainlywhat I would find disgusting somebody else might find to be acceptable. Sometimes what 99 per cent ofthe community would find disgusting artists can argue to be acceptable. They often do it just to push thebounds of what is acceptable. This is not true of all artists but it is certainly of some.

I think an artistic exemption has the potential to strike at the credibility of the bill—what thegovernment is seeking to achieve—and it is a loophole which we cannot afford to have. As I indicatedearlier, some government members said that the famous Anne Geddes calendars would not be exemptfrom this legislation. That is quite ridiculous, because this would not impact in any way whatsoever onthat. Nobody could argue to any requisite standard that Anne Geddes's amazing artwork is in any waychild exploitation material.

Child exploitation material, as I think most reasonable people would understand, is somethingthat somebody has produced in order for their sexual gratification. Clearly, if we look at the reasonableperson test, which we would all pass in this place, Anne Geddes calendars would not be a part of it.Again, I point out the requisite standard which would be required. As I said earlier, the answer to thissuggestion lies in the definition of child exploitation material under section 207A, under which there isthe necessity to have a child depicted in a sexual context, in an offensive or demeaning context, orbeing subject to abuse, cruelty or torture. Surely Anne Geddes calendars, or what we would think werereasonable, would not fit into that category. They would not be pursued in any way whatsoever.

We are saying that somebody should not be able to argue under an artistic exemption categorythat they can produce or possess child exploitation material. There is no doubt that there will be somepeople out there who will seek to produce certain material which most people would believe quite clearlyto be child exploitation material and then seek to argue the artistic merit or value of it. Why does thegovernment want to keep a loophole there? There is no way that it adds anything to what it is seeking toachieve in this legislation other than to produce trouble in the short to medium term.

We are subjected all the time to things that some artists do which push the bounds of publicacceptability or push the bounds of the law in this state. Sometimes it is offensive with regard to thebounds of public acceptability. If we allow a loophole here then, frankly, we are making a rod for our ownback. There is no justifiable or arguable reason to have this artistic exemption. The amendment theNationals have moved seeks to remove that as an excuse. We have no problem with regard to theeducational, scientific or medical exemptions that exist—we can see commonsense value to them—butwith regard to the artistic exemption in our minds the government is only potentially opening thefloodgates.

Mr WELFORD: Again, I do not agree with the opposition's amendment. The Leader of theOpposition, with his focus on material in a sexual context, I think overlooks the other circumstancesreferred to in relation to child exploitation material. It does not have to be sexual. It does not have toinvolve infants in the way that Anne Geddes calendars do. It can be a documentary, film or book relatingto the abuse of children. It can be material, as the member for Redlands mentioned, that happened tobe produced in the course of making of a documentary, film or other item for sale which ultimately is notoffensive, but in the course of producing photographs or other material for the ultimate production theremay be material produced that is offensive if subsequently used. But, of course, it is not because it ispart of an artistic production. The material that is ultimately used, particularly if it is a film or literature,would necessarily be required to satisfy the classification scheme that operates at the Commonwealthlevel under which material of the kind we are talking about would not get classified, anyhow.

There has to be an artistic element to the exemptions to pick up things other than things of asexual nature. It has to be there to pick up things other than things that would be prohibited by theclassification scheme, for example sculptures. There is no classification scheme for sculptures. There


may be, in the course of producing a sculpture which is an artistic production, material which on its facepeople would regard as offensive. It may or may not be sexual; it may be offensive in the way itdemeans the child that it depicts.

The onus is on the person charged with the offence to reach a very high standard in showing notonly that it is a matter that is part of an artistic enterprise but also that it is reasonable in itsrepresentation. There is a very great onus on the person charged to overcome the allegation that, primafacie, it is not a reasonable representation; that is, that it would cause offence to a reasonable adult ifthey were not aware of the circumstances and the appropriate use that might otherwise justify theexistence of the thing in the same way that scientific, educational and other defences are represented.

Those defences are really designed to operate like this. As the Leader of the Oppositionindicated, under section 270A the starting point is that the offence arises if something about a child isdepicted which would cause offence to a reasonable adult. That is, it is not reasonable. The defencethen has to show that a reasonable adult would then not find it offensive providing it was done inappropriate contexts and done in a reasonable way. The defence seeks to establish that theunreasonableness of the depiction is overcome by the appropriate manner in which the depiction ispresented. I think it is appropriate that artistic exemptions be there alongside educational and scientificexemptions for that reason.

A lot of thought has gone into the appropriate categories of defence that should apply to theseoffences. It is not something that has been just conjured up in my office or in Queensland. It issomething that has been given careful consideration right across Australia and by the Commonwealth,whose Criminal Code will contain a parallel offence. I believe there is a legitimate basis for materialwhich has some literary or artistic merit being identified as potentially reasonable, even though at firstinstance it might be offensive to ordinary people like us. If an extraordinary case is thrown up by the lawin the future then we can deal with it and tighten the law if need be.

As I say, considerable thought has gone into this. It is designed to deal with material that is notnecessarily sexual but is otherwise offensive in its depiction of children. It is also designed to coverthings which would in any event be prohibited if they could not be classified as literature or film. Thethings that come to mind are things like sculptures. I commend the existing provision to all members.

Mrs MENKENS: I take on board the minister's comments and his genuineness and earnestness.I can appreciate what he is saying, but I do have some major concerns about the artistic licence that Iknow is available to artists. I am not a major connoisseur of art, but I do have in my family several artistswho are very close to me. I know that amongst many artists there is a very broad view of what they canuse in an educational capacity yet it is used in the term of art. It is a very fine line. This really doesconcern me. I do acknowledge that the minister is aware of this and that he will be watching it verycarefully, but I have to say that I am genuinely very concerned about this particular part of the bill.

Mr WELFORD: I will add something to give some reassurance to the member for Burdekin.Someone who is accused of possessing this material cannot establish that something is artistic simplyby asserting it. The court will have to look at all of the circumstances surrounding how the person cameto have or produce this material and the manner in which it was produced. Obviously, if the person whois charged with an offence in relation to child exploitation material also happens to have in theirpossession a whole lot of other material which is clearly paedophilic in nature, which is sexuallyoffensive or which depicts the abuse of children, there is no way in the world they are going to be able toestablish that there is any legitimate defence. They are not going to be able to establish that they weredoing it for an educational or artistic purpose.

As the Leader of the Opposition said—I think this is reflected in the comments of the member forBurdekin—beauty is in the eye of the beholder. As the member says, there are some artists who doexercise quite extraordinary artistic licence in their view about their art. They may see some value in itwhile many of us would not. I think it is fair to say that in matters like this judges in our courts are goingto take a very cautious and conservative approach to what sort of art it is reasonable to engage in. Thecourt will not just be looking at the art and then trying to make some ad hoc judgment about whether it isartistic or not. In determining whether there is any genuine artistic basis for its existence the court willlook at all of the circumstances surrounding how it came to be in that person's possession or how thatperson came to be associated with it. As I say, the defence has to show that, by virtue of genuine artisticmerit, it is in fact not unreasonable in the way it depicts children.

Mr SPRINGBORG: We continue to have serious reservations about this defence that is in theamendment bill. We will certainly be opposing it. We would prefer to be proactive in our approach to itrather than reactive. My argument is simply that there is enough of an exemption or defence with regardto the scientific, medical and educational provisions of the bill to allow the publication of what needs tobe published in such a way as to ensure that the community is informed and is not disadvantaged.

I know that when the Attorney talks about ‘art' he is talking about its production though a range ofmediums. I understand that. I suppose they talked about Anne Geddes and her creations because itwas mentioned in this place. Art certainly takes a different range of mediums—there is no doubt aboutthat—including film, and so on. It is our view that the same sorts of concerns still exist, regardless, and


anything that needs to be produced within reasonable public standards will be able to be produced andbroadcast from an educational, or otherwise, perspective. However, there are some artists who willcertainly push the boundaries in what they put to canvas or print. There is no way they would be able todo that within the bounds of the normal criminal law that exists in Queensland—but they can argue thatit is art; they are able to get away with it. I will not go into the details of that because all members areaware of what it may be. Certainly this goes beyond the sexual exploitation of children. There are otherforms of exploitation or harm that can be caused to children, including something that is demeaning.There are other forms of abuse, including cruelty and torture.

From the Nationals' perspective, nothing is added by retaining an artistic defence in this bill.Anything that can reasonably be produced for the benefit or advancement of our society can be coveredunder the other defences that are proposed in this bill. In no way does the artistic exemption provide theprotection our children need if people are to potentially be subjected to the sorts of negative andoffensive images which some artists may seek to argue have artistic merit and should, therefore, beproduced and possessed. For that reason, we propose this amendment. We say that it is best to becautious initially rather than to have to revisit this some time down the track.

Question—That Mr Springborg’s amendment be agreed to—put; and the House divided—AYES, 24—Copeland, Flegg, Hobbs, Horan, Johnson, Knuth, Langbroek, Lee Long, Lingard, McArdle, Menkens, Messenger,Pratt, Quinn, Rickuss, E Roberts, Rowell, Seeney, Simpson, Springborg, Stuckey, Wellington. Tellers: Hopper, MaloneNOES, 56—Attwood, Barry, Barton, Beattie, Bligh, Boyle, Briskey, Choi, E Clark, L Clark, Croft, Cummins, E Cunningham,English, Fenlon, Finn, Fraser, Hayward, Hoolihan, Jarratt, Lavarch, Lawlor, Lee, Livingstone, Lucas, Mackenroth, Male,McNamara, Mickel, Miller, Molloy, Nelson-Carr, Nolan, Nuttall, O’Brien, Palaszczuk, Pearce, Poole, Purcell, Reilly, Reynolds, NRoberts, Robertson, Schwarten, Scott, Shine, Smith, Spence, Stone, Struthers, C Sullivan, Welford, Wells, Wilson. Tellers: TSullivan, Reeves

Resolved in the negative.Mr WELFORD (5.50 pm): I move the following amendment—

1 Clause 6—At page 11, line 25—omit, insert—

‘Examples of conduct that may be reasonable for the performance of a law enforcement officer’s duties—1 Copying child exploitation material for the purposes of preparing a brief for police

prosecutors2 Supplying child exploitation material to a classification officer for classification or to the

Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions for use during the prosecution of a person foran offence

3 Keeping child exploitation material obtained during an investigation for legitimateintelligence purposes

‘(2) However, subsection (1) does not apply to the extent that the person’s conduct consists of—(a) engaging in an activity as part of an investigation of chapter 5 criminal activity; or(b) engaging in conduct that is directed to obtaining evidence of the commission of an offence against a

particular person.1

‘(3) In this section—chapter 5 criminal activity has the meaning given by the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000.’.

1 See the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000, chapter 5, which provides for the approval of, and protection fromliability of persons involved in, controlled operations and controlled activities.

I lay on the table of the House the explanatory memoranda for the amendments that I will move.This amendment amends clause 6 of the bill by adding an example to section 228H(1) and by

adding new subsections (2) and (3) to 228H. The purpose of the amendment is to clarify that theexcusal from criminal responsibility provided for law enforcement officers who may handle childexploitation material in the course of their duties does not excuse unlawful conduct that should beauthorised under chapter 5 of the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000. Chapter 5 of that actprovides for controlled operations and controlled activities. It is appropriate that these measure areretained.

Amendment agreed to. Clause 6, as amended, agreed to. Clauses 7 to 12, as read, agreed to.

Third ReadingBill, as amended, read a third time.

10 Mar 2005 Adjournment 581

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENTHon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Leader of the House) (5.54 pm): I move—

That the House, at its rising, do adjourn until 9.30 am on Tuesday, 22 March 2005.

Motion agreed to.

ADJOURNMENTHon. AM BLIGH (South Brisbane—ALP) (Leader of the House) (5.54 pm): I move—

That the House do now adjourn.

Lockyer District State High School; Erhart, Ms WMr RICKUSS (Lockyer—NPA) (5.53 pm): I had some very interesting, stimulating and intelligent

guests for lunch in the Strangers Dining Room today—Brodie and Caley Quinn, Gemma Irving, SimonWeier, student leaders of Lockyer District State High, and Ms Vanessa Crothers. Lockyer District StateHigh can be very proud of its student leaders. These people are not only going to improve the highschool with their input but also, I am sure, benefit society in the future through their input.

We discussed during our meeting that it would be likely that they would have four or five careerchanges in their lifetime. We discussed the type of study that would interest them next year. There wasa wide range of interest within the small group such as accounting, teaching, public relations, pharmacyand research science. This just goes to show what a complete range of students Lockyer High iscatering for. Ms Crothers was saying how the numbers continue to grow. There are in excess of 850students at the Lockyer District State High. It was a wonderful chance for the student leaders to see howparliament actually functions. They watched some of question time—this being the time when thegovernment is scrutinised by the opposition about its functioning.

They also listened to some of the debate on the Criminal Code (Child Pornography and Abuse)Amendment Bill before the House. I explained that the bill was supported by all members of theparliament with some minor amendments to improve the bill. We also discussed that not all the wisdomwas on one side of the House and that on most bills the entire parliament has some input. I once againcongratulate the Lockyer students on their leadership of their school community. I wish them all the bestfor the future.

I would also like to congratulate Ms Wendy Erhart for winning the Veuve Clicquot Award. I haveknown Wendy for many years and have watched her and her husband, Graham, develop WithcottSeedlings into a very large and diversified business. Wendy would be the first to acknowledge that sheand Graham have worked tremendously hard as a team to take their business to the next level. Ipurchased seedlings off Withcott Seedlings for many years and the quality was outstanding. They havealso surrounded themselves with a good, dedicated staff who will go out of their way to make thingshappen and fix up the problems. I congratulate not only Wendy but also the people who have supportedand assisted her.

The Maota FonoHon. DM WELLS (Murrumba—ALP) (5.56 pm): The Maota Fono, the Samoan meeting house,

was officially opened by Governor Quentin Bryce on 19 November 2003. On 17 December last year thePrime Minister of Samoa, the Hon. Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi, paid us a visit in the Maota Fono, whichis the only Samoan meeting hut outside of Samoa. This building has made Deception Bay the capital ofSamoan culture outside Samoa. People, especially members of the Samoan community, come from allover south-east Queensland to events at the Maota Fono.

The Maota Fono provides a much needed, culturally appropriate meeting place where PacificIslander people can hold a range of activities. Since its opening in 2003, the usage of the Maota Fonohas gradually increased and at present it is being used regularly. Four groups use the Samoan meetinghut each week for meetings. It is used twice per week for training and twice per week for familygatherings. Church is held there weekly.

The Maota Fono is also used for cultural ceremonies. Approximately four or five are held permonth as well as particularly significant events such as the celebration of Samoan Independence Day.Some cultural activities, including church youth groups, have involved more than 100 people comingtogether to put into practice the Samoan traditions and customs. The Maota Fono has also been used toreunite people from the same Samoan villages so they can rekindle their relationships and maintaintheir traditions. Community education programs and training are now running every week at the MaotaFono.

It would be hard to underestimate the extent to which the Maota Fono has fostered ethnicharmony within my electorate. Its existence proves that we see the cultures and customs of the SouthPacific peoples and accept them. The Maota Fono has been used for one non-Samoan wedding andhas been used to assist schools to communicate effectively with Samoan parents and students.

582 Adjournment 10 Mar 2005

The meeting house was funded with $168,000 from the Queensland Department of Housing'sCommunity Renewal Program, $151,000 from the Caboolture Shire Council, $60,000 from theGambling Community Benefit Fund, $30,000 from the Jupiter Casino Community Benefit Fund and$3,000 from the local Samoan community organisation Aiga Samoa. The traditional Samoan village hasthe Maota Fono as one of its most revered buildings. It is revered in Deception Bay where it is amonument to ethnic harmony and to the decisions of a wise government.

Time expired.

Abuse of the ElderlyDr FLEGG (Moggill—Lib) (5.59 pm): I rise to expose one example of the growing problem of

abuse of our elderly, not by relatives but by people who are their paid carers. I speak about one case inparticular—that of a 91-year-old World War II digger who resided at the RSL Inverpine Home atMurrumba Downs. His family thought that, being a returned serviceman, he would receive the best careand attention there. Unbeknown to his family, a night carer, an Anne Munro of Mango Hill, was takingexceptional interest in his financial affairs. From statements made to investigators by staff and formeremployees of the home, the night carer who was responsible for about 20 residents spent adisproportionate amount of time in this resident's room each night with exceptionally long periods in theshower, presumably at the expense of time spent with other residents.

Towards the end of 2002 his family could not understand why he would not speak to them whenprior to that time the relationship was good. However, the family put it down to the illness and then thedeath of his lifelong friend. When he was most vulnerable is when his carer struck, sending him to theWestpac Bank to obtain a bank cheque for $170,000 made out to herself, Anne Munro, and even wrotethe note to be given to the teller along with a story that he was incapable of concocting. Prior toobtaining the cheque from him on that day, she resigned as a carer at the RSL home and in her ownbank account had less than $2.

Anne Munro then took a holiday to Africa and disposed of the remainder of the $170,000 withintwo months with the help of her friend, a Ms T Caldwell, a student, also of Mango Hill. But not satisfiedwith that, Ms Munro came back for a second bite at the money getting herself the power of attorney.When the family discovered what happened, the digger told his family that Anne had said that if he toldanybody she would go to jail. When the family contacted the RSL home, the management told the familythat it knew all about the money but because of privacy laws was not able to tell the family.

Although the doctors did a number of mini mental state examinations on the resident, the resultsvaried. Records show that the resident was confused about many matters over a long period of time andhad even forgotten that he had had cancer and had a record of confusion about his own finances.Ms Munro had convinced the resident that she was his girlfriend, even though when asked about her hedid not know her surname and thought she was about 16 or 17. Medical reports showed that the termsused describing the resident were frail, depressed, confused, vulnerable and eager to please.

Time expired.

Capricorn Integrated Regional Traffic PlanMr HOOLIHAN (Keppel—ALP) (6.02 pm): Many of us come into the House and hear the claim

that governments only govern for a period of three years because that is the period of elections. OnFriday, 4 February I had the pleasure of attending the release of the Capricorn Integrated RegionalTraffic Plan. It was very pleasing to see that many areas of government had gathered together, and thatplan covers 25 years. Such forward planning should give the lie to the fact that governments only look ata three-year term.

To finalise the plan, there was regional input from the Fitzroy shire, the Livingstone shire,Rockhampton city, the Mount Morgan shire, the Banana shire, the Department of Transport anddevelopment and tourism groups. The plan is so comprehensive because it covers aviation, road, rail,sea and other forms of water transport. It provides for short-term, medium-term and long-termprovisions on roads and other forms of travel. It is very pleasing for me to see that this area has beenable to put together a plan which will assist in tourism planning and other developmental planning. Icongratulate the minister for transport and his department on correlating all of that information in orderto produce this plan, which ultimately will assist in the travel plans and arrangements for so many peoplein Capricornia over the next 25 years.

Harristown State High SchoolMr HORAN (Toowoomba South—NPA) (6.04 pm): The Harristown State High School is one of the

great high schools of Queensland. It is a school of well over 1,700 students as at the end of last year.One of the highlights of Harristown State High School is its local community day. Again this year I hadthe honour of being invited to participate in this local community day. The day involves year 12 students


starting the day with an address from our mayor, Mayor Di Thorley. As usual, she made a veryimpassioned speech to the young people of Harristown to be proud of themselves and in particular tohave the inner strength to be able to say no to drugs and to reach their full potential.

The day's program also includes different people from the community spending time with fivedifferent classes each—that is, representing Young Women's Place, the Toowoomba HospitalFoundation, sportspeople, the local police and many young achievers in the business area ofToowoomba. I found it fascinating to speak one by one to the five separate class groups. We wereasked by the teacher who organised this, Annette Curnow, who is head of the department, to speakabout our life, our career, what we do, what we think about the needs of Toowoomba and then to speakwith the students themselves to get their views about Toowoomba as to what they think we need, whattheir vision for our city is and what their vision and hope is for themselves.

It was fascinating and very inspiring to see how well rounded these young year 12 students wereafter their four years at Harristown High, with another year to go. In particular, they all identified theproblem that most 16- and 17-year-olds have—that is, that they are betwixt and between when it comesto social areas or social activities outside of school on the weekends. Some of them might think thatthey would like to go to licensed premises but they realise they cannot because they are not 18. I wasamazed how many of the classes identified that what they felt Toowoomba needed was a theme park.Three of the five classes spoke about the fact that there used to be a place called Willow Springs whichhad water slides, tennis courts, barbecues and so forth and how much they had enjoyed that.

That theme park was privately built by Mr Cos Whish-Wilson. I am going to take their views to theToowoomba City Council, which is currently developing the West Creek area right through Toowoomba.I will pass on to our councillors the fact that the young people of Harristown State High School haveidentified the need for a place for them to be able to meet socially with their friends—that is, something,if possible, that is like a theme park—where they can undertake activities. I certainly thank them for theinstructive way in which they approached the day.

Time expired.

Clean Up Australia DayMr FRASER (Mount Coot-tha—ALP) (6.07 pm): Last Sunday was Clean Up Australia Day, and

once again I was happy to join with members of my local community to participate. I often remind peoplein my electorate that upon election members receive a photocopier and not a magic wand. It is equallytrue, however, that their ability to undertake real hands-on work is not removed. Thus I commenced lastSunday morning in Toowong Creek joining in the effort being auspiced by the West ToowongCommunity Association to clean up the creek. As often as I can, I join with the revegetation teamworking on a monthly basis in Toowong Creek to restore native vegetation and enhance the health ofToowong Creek. This group is coordinated by Matt Palmer, and I take the opportunity to place on therecord tonight the great work done by this group.

Last Sunday, however, was about cleaning up rubbish, not just rubbish weeds. And rubbish wefound! Close to the creek on public land was two full utility loads of construction waste, garden waste,discarded rubbish and around 200 plastic garden pots which were semiburied near the creek. Whypeople imagine that these public lands adjacent to waterways are available to them as convenientdumping grounds for their waste is completely beyond me. We toiled diligently, but the more weremoved the more we found. We need to be vigilant in our local communities and bring the full force ofavailable laws to prosecute these enviro-vandals who one can imagine believe that they have not doneanything truly wrong and who would not consider themselves in the same class as the mindless vandalwho smashes a shopfront window at night. My message to them is that they are.

I left Toowong Creek to join the team working on Coronation Drive along the bikeway. Apart froma shopping trolley, the rubbish was generally smaller in volume and harder to extract, especiallyamongst the rocks along the river. The Bardon cubs and scouts were there to lend a hand, along withtheir leaders, Matt Horden and Mark Gywnne, who joined with Shannon Lewis, who had organised thesite with the employees of a local Milton data company, and I commend that company for itscommitment to community service and willingness to participate in the local community.

They also put on a barbecue afterwards, which was especially enjoyed by those from the scoutingmovement. I might also mention that I had to attend a funeral last Friday and I was unable to join MiltonState School, as I have on other occasions, on its Schools Clean Up Day, which it conducts at EmuParade. I commend that school for once again participating in Clean Up Australia Day in their own way.

These days the environmental challenges that we face are less and less about the cute, furryanimal or the magnificent tree; they are about the structural challenges of land use, planning, energyuse and water use. Clean Up Australia Day is a wonderful reminder of the original environmentalsentiment to think globally and act locally. I commend each and every person both within my electorateand elsewhere who participated in Clean Up Australia Day last Sunday or who participated in SchoolsClean Up Day on Friday or Business Clean Up Day last Tuesday.


Supported Accommodation Assistance ProgramMiss ELISA ROBERTS (Gympie—Ind) (6.11 pm): The announcement by the federal government

of a change to the way funding is provided to each state for the Supported Accommodation AssistanceProgram—or SAAP—is a backward step and will do nothing to improve the current housing crisis.Historically, the arrangements were that the federal government provided each state with 60 per cent offunds, with the states making up the extra 40 per cent. The proposed new arrangements will see thefederal government reducing its funding to 50 per cent, with the apparent intention of utilising the other10 per cent by placing it into an innovations pool. Under this new model the states will have to increasetheir contributions to 50 per cent to cover the 10 per cent gap.

When the lack of housing is at crisis point, as it is currently, it is beyond belief that the federalgovernment would choose to reduce its funding contribution rather than increase it. The newinnovations pool is supposedly going to pay for pilot projects, which have yet to be outlined to those whoare working within the housing sector. Earlier this week, I met with representatives of SAAP who werefearful that, should the memorandum of understanding be signed at the meeting between the states atthe end of this week, the new funding model would leave their service struggling even more to meet theincreasing demand for emergency accommodation.

In saying that, it is also disappointing that the Queensland government has actually decreased itsfunding over the course of the last two agreements rather than increased it in line with the growth indemand. The Queensland government talks about how terrible the federal government is in regard to itsresponse to the housing crisis, but at the same time it has failed to even maintain its end of the bargain.The new Commonwealth offer does not provide any growth funds for SAAP, and with concerns aboutimproving the quality of service delivery and meeting the growing unmet need, it appears to be baselessrhetoric when in reality the outcome of the new funding proposal will mean that there is no chance ofeven maintaining the current levels of service, let alone improving or increasing them.

The inability to accommodate young people in particular which will result from the new changeswill vastly reduce their chances of getting off the street and into further study or employment. It wouldhave been more feasible for the federal government to keep the 60-40 arrangements as they were andif they wanted to put extra money into pilot projects or research, then so be it. With the estimated 25,000Queenslanders who are each day without safe, secure and affordable housing, it is devastating thatfunding increases to meet the housing shortage are not a priority. On an average night, only one inseven homeless people will find a bed owing to the inadequate resources available. We often hearpeople asking, ‘Why don't these people just get a job?' How does a person who has no bed, no shower,no iron and nowhere to wash clothes have the ability to put together a resume and have all of the thingsthat are necessary in order to be presentable at a job interview? They cannot even find a place to sleep.

Australia is known as the lucky country. I wonder how lucky those 25,000 Queenslanders feelwhen their governments are not increasing funding in line with increases in population and demand. Theonly way for this distressing trend of homelessness to be reversed is for funding to be increased toorganisations such as SAAP by at least 40 per cent to provide additional growth and services.

It seems that whilst people continue to pay their taxes to every level of government, theorganisations that work to decrease the burden on the respective governments, such as SAAP andwomen's health centres, are not getting their fair share of the funding to keep them afloat or, at the veryleast, to maintain the services that they provide rather than reduce them. Job initiatives and improvinglinks between services, which are meant to form the basis of the innovation fund, are great but not—

Time expired.

Southport Emergency Services Cadet GroupMr LAWLOR (Southport—ALP) (6.15 pm): On 17 February I was honoured to represent the

Minister for Emergency Services, Chris Cummins, at the 10th anniversary celebrations of the SouthportEmergency Services Cadet Group. Peter Linnell, the chair of the local cadet advisory committee,welcomed me and there were also representatives from the Queensland Police Service and thedepartment. I thank again the local cadet group coordinator, Patrick Kyriakides, and all the adult leadersfor their commitment and support of the cadet group.

Between December 1994 and February 1995, 10 cadet groups were approved to establish ayouth development program through the Department of Emergency Services. In 1995, all of thesegroups commenced operating. Of the original 10 groups, nine are still operating today and this year theycelebrate their 10th anniversary. That is a fantastic achievement and it shows how worthy this cadetprogram is. But it is all thanks to the volunteers who keep the units running.

The Southport Emergency Services Cadet Group is sponsored by the State Emergency Serviceand is supported by the local emergency services agency. The Southport cadet group has providedyoung people with the opportunity to develop initiative, leadership, self-discipline and loyalty and hasequipped them with the skills to gain future employment. Weekly training meetings provide skill


development opportunities for members that are supplemented by camps and excursions. An exampleof how these skills are supporting community safety can be seen through the efforts of Kristy Heitman.Kristy was a cadet and upon completing the program became an adult leader. Currently, she is thedeputy local cadet coordinator and is also the deputy group leader of the Southport SES group.

Since the Southport cadet group commenced in 1995, five cadets have been awarded the GoldCoast City Council Youth Achievement Award: in 1997, Kristy Heitman; in 2000, Erin Scuipanski; in2001, Elliard Spiel; in 2002, Ashlee Thompson; and in 2004, Emma Kennedy. These cadets are stillmembers today. That speaks volumes for the Southport group.

Although volunteer adult leaders are responsible for the operation of cadet groups, the SouthportEmergency Services Cadet Group is one of the very few cadet groups where an original member of thegroup is still active. Patrick Kyriakides, the local cadet coordinator, has held this position for 10 years. Iwas pleased to present a meritorious service certificate commemorating Patrick's 10 years of service. Ialso presented a certificate to Kristy Heitman on behalf of the cadet group for the 10th anniversary. Sheis the longest-serving cadet and is now a leader. Without the commitment and dedication of volunteeradult leaders, guest instructors and lecturers, the Southport cadet group would not be the success that itis today.

Leukaemia FoundationMr SEENEY (Callide—NPA) (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (6.17 pm): Each year in

Queensland 1,300 adults and children are diagnosed with leukaemia, lymphoma, myeloma or bonemarrow malignancies. That equates to one person every eight hours, or three people a day. From 10March to 12 March, the Leukaemia Foundation will stage the World's Greatest Shave to Care and Cureto support leukaemia sufferers. The Leukaemia Foundation hopes to encourage 60,000 participants toband together to raise some $3 million for leukaemia research and for patient support.

Money raised in the World's Greatest Shave to Care and Cure 2005 will help the LeukaemiaFoundation fund cutting-edge medical research into a cure as well as provide vital patient supportservices such as accommodation, counselling, financial assistance, education and transport, which areoffered to patients and their families free of charge.

Last weekend I was pleased and proud to launch the central Queensland part of the World'sGreatest Shave to Care and Cure. We had a great weekend in my home town of Monto where we raisedalmost $10,000 for the Leukaemia Foundation. We launched a fundraising event that hopefully willreach its crescendo this weekend. I would like to thank some people who were involved in thatfundraising: two young ladies, Carly Schulz and Theresa Bannister, who were entrants in LeukaemiaFoundation quest and who have been fundraising for most of the year. They have done a great job intheir community to support the world's greatest shave.

I also congratulate Edith Rutherford, who coordinated the event in Monto and made it such agreat success. I would like to thank Robyn Ogle, who is an old school friend of mine and who wasresponsible for getting me involved in this fundraising venture. I was pleased to do that because I haveworked with some of my constituents who have family members who have suffered from leukaemia. Iknow the difficulties that that presents, particularly for people who come from rural areas. The supportthat their families received from the Leukaemia Foundation was vital in the battle that they faced withleukaemia.

I encourage every member of this House and all other Queenslanders to dig deep into theirpockets this weekend and support those people who are taking part in the world's greatest shave. Isupport those people who are having their hair coloured. All sorts of colours will be on display thisweekend. They all need monetary support from all of us so that the Leukaemia Foundation can continueto do its great work. I hope that the Leukaemia Foundation and the world's greatest shave receives thesupport this weekend that it deserves.

EconomyHon. KW HAYWARD (Kallangur—ALP) (6.19 pm): I rise in the parliament to highlight the lack of

financial literacy that exists in our community. Recently we had a federal election. During the campaign,people were bombarded with propaganda about how Australians have never been better off. There wastalk about interest rates being at an all-time low. Just today we heard that Queensland's unemploymentrate is at a record low of 4.7 per cent. Even less than five years ago, that figure was not thoughtpossible.

Through advertising, the impression is created that the country is awash with money. Put briefly,financial literacy is the ability to make informed judgments about how we treat our own money, and thatinvolves matters such as savings, investments and dealing with financial issues that arise from time totime. The concern is that, while as a society we may have never been better off—or certainly we believewe have never been better off—the general level of financial understanding has not improved. Instead,the research shows that particular sections of our society are particularly vulnerable.


Basically, there is a lack of knowledge on the part of people who have a low level of education,who are generally low-income earners, who are unskilled workers and who are experiencing poor jobprospects. Interestingly, a lack of financial knowledge is felt by people at both ends of the agespectrum—people between the ages of 18 and 24 and people in the 70-plus age group. So it is at thebeginning and towards the end.

Research provided by the Parliamentary Library shows that for the last nine quarters householdsspent more than they earned. This compares with the previous 171 quarters, when households spentless than they earned. Surely we should be concerned that 40 per cent of Australians believe they willalways be in debt. That is what the research shows. During the last federal election the Prime Minister,John Howard, took advantage of that in his election propaganda, because the whole theme of theelection concerned low interest rates. Through that, I think he has taken advantage of a lack of financialliteracy by not at all mentioning the increasing and burgeoning level of personal debt that people areexperiencing and therefore the greater cost of servicing that debt. But there will be no politicaladvantage in doing that.

Many people are unaware of the potential problems, for instance, of guaranteeing anotherperson's loan, particularly the financial impact those loan repayments will have if they are not able to bemet and that guarantee is called upon. The end result of a lack of financial literacy is bankruptcy orsome other agreed arrangements which are permitted.

Time expired. The House adjourned at 6.24 pm.

GOVERNMENT PRINTER, QUEENSLAND—2005

2005 03 10 weekly - queensland parliament · 2005. 3. 16. · 10 mar 2005 legislative assembly 509...

Documents