legislative assembly hansard 1985 - queensland parliament · chairman did not ever have in his...

Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

THURSDAY, 5 SEPTEMBER 1985

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

Ministerial Statements 5 September 1985 761

THURSDAY, 5 SEPTEMBER 1985

Mr SPEAKER (Hon. J. H. Warner, Toowoomba South) read prayers and took the chair at 11 a.m.

AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORT

Treasurer's Annual Statement Mr SPEAKER announced the receipt from the Auditor-General of his report on

the Treasurer's Annual Statement for the year ended 30 June 1985.

Ordered to be printed.

PETITIONS

The Clerk announced the receipt of the foUowing petitions—

Skate World, Benowa From Mr Jennings (485 signatories) praying that the Parliament of Queensland wiU

ensure that the Skate World faciUty at Benowa be preserved.

Electricity Tariffs From Mr Jennings (2 157 signatories) praying that the ParUament of Queensland

will reduce the price of electricity to general consumers and for a 25 per cent rebate to pensioners.

Petitions received,

PAPERS The foUowing papers were laid on the table—

Regulations under the Public Service Act 1922-1978.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS

Oxenford Totalisator Administration Board Agency Licence; Allegations by Member for Salisbury

Hon. R. J. HINZE (South Coast—Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing) (11.3 a.m.), by leave: I refer again to the aUegations made by the honourable member for Salisbury (Mr Goss) about the granting of the Oxenford TAB agency Ucence.

Yesterday in this House the honourable member for Archerfield (Mr Palaszczuk) asked me whether I had ever attended a TAB board meeting and asked the board for that Ucence to be granted to my famUy company, Junefafr Pty Ltd. I repUed, "No."

The honourable member for Salisbury seemed to become upset by the ministerial statement that I read to this House yesterday. He again aUeged, without the sUghtest shred of evidence, that I had told the TAB to give Junefair Pty Ltd the Oxenford agency licence, and that that instmction had been made at a meeting of the TAB board.

Again I reject that allegation absolutely. It is simply not tme. Two days ago I wrote to the chairman of the TAB (Mr Ian CaUinan, QC) and posed a number of questions. Yesterday I received his reply and I read that letter into the record—

"Dear Minister, Thank you for your letter of 3rd instant.

762 5 September 1985 Ministerial Statements

I preface my reply to your letter by reiterating that I do not have any personal knowledge of the matters into which you enquire and accordingly I must rely upon information conveyed to me by officers of the Board. I should also say that I have not enquired, and indeed, do not have the means to enquire, of other persons who might be interested in these matters to ascertain their views on them.

You asked me the foUowing questions:— 1. Am I confident that the existing files relating to the Oxenford TAB Agency

matter contain the full and accurate record?

Answer. In view of what I was told and conveyed to you in my letter of 28th ultime,

I cannot be confident that the existing files relating to the Oxenford TAB Agency matter contain the full and accurate record.

2. If I do not have absolute confidence, could I please advise of any reason why I and/or TAB officers are not confident?

Answer. Mr Harriott has assured me once again that he did indeed write the Memorandum

dated the Eighteenth day of April 1984, to which I referred in my letter of the 28th August last to you. One of the officers of the Board also raised with me a possibility that there may have been cortespondence received from Messrs. Short Punch and Greatorix, Solicitors, acting on behalf of Junefair Pty. Ltd. before the Thirtieth day of May, 1984.

I can find no officer who has any actual recollection of any such correspondence but the possibUity is raised because of a reference in a letter from the General Manager dated the Thirtieth day of May 1985 to 'previous correspondence',

3. Could I please fumish you with a complete record of TAB Board Minutes relating to the Oxenford TAB agency matter.

Answer, I attach copies of Minutes of all such Board Meetings as I have been able to

discover and in which an Agency or Sub-agency at Oxenford was referred to. I am assured by Board officers that there are no other relevant minutes.

4. Could I please advise if any evidence exists on the official files which indicates, in any way, if you, as Minister, ever instmcted, attempted to instmct, influenced or attempted to influence the Board to either refuse the application by the Friths for the agency licence or grant the licence to Junefair Pty. Ltd.?

Answer, No evidence on any official file of the kind referred to can be located by any

Board officers, 5. Could I please ascertain from any TAB officer if, at any time, the former

chairman requested copies of Board files on the Oxenford agency matter and, if so, when those requests or orders were made and if any TAB officer was given any reason for that request or order?

Answer. I am informed by Board officers that their best recollection is that the former

Chairman did not ever have in his personal custody the Oxenford Agency file but that on two occasions, in about April 1984, and shortly before the Twenty-ninth day of April 1985, he did request and obtain copies of some material on the Oxenford Agency file. Those officers tell me that they are now unable to recollect precisely which material the former Chairman sought to have copied.

Yours faithfully, I. D. F. CalUnan Chairman."


Having read that letter, I now table the TAB board minutes fumished by Mr Callinan and seek leave to have the document incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

Minutes 19 August 1985

Operations: Sub-Agency—Oxenford/Coomera: The report submitted by the Town Planning Consultant, Mr V. G. Feros, at the request

of the Board was discussed m detail. It was moved by Mr C. Robertson and seconded by Mr K King that in view of the

recommendation made by the consultant, together with Executive confirmation of this recommendation, that the sub-agency at Oxenford be awarded to the applicant, Junefair Pty. Ltd., in accordance with the Board's sub-agency conditions, and on the condition that the applicant comply with any necessary rezonings or planning requirements, and fiirther, that the establishment thereof be submitted to the Minister for his approval.

The motion was carried. It was also agreed that the Chairman make a suitable press release on this matter.

Minutes 8 July 1985

Operations: Sub-Agency—Oxenford/Coomera As all Board Members had not had the opportunity to study the report prepared by the

town planner engaged for this purpose, it was moved by Mr C. Robertson and seconded by Mr A. HoUindale that this report be circulated to all Board Members with a decision to be taken at the next Board meeting.

The motion was carried.

Extract from Board Minutes 8 June 1985 Engagement of Town Planner: The Chairman reported that following the May meeting, Mr V. G. Feros was engaged at

an all-up fee of $2,500 to advise the Board on the most suitable location for the Beenleigh/ Coomera sub-agency.

Signed as a correct record

I. D. F. Callinan

Chairman Minutes of the two hundred and seventy-fifth meeting of the TotaUsator Administration

Board of Queensland held at 240 Sandgate Road, Albion, Brisbane, on Monday, 13 May 1985

Present: Mr I. D. F. Callinan (Chairman) Mr P. R. Gallagher (Deputy Chairman) Mr J. S. Galwey Dr J. F. O'Dufly Mr C. C. Robertson Mr C. L. Krogh Mr J. W. Houston, A.M. Mr K. J. King, C.M.G. Mr A. D. HoUindale, O.B.E. Mr P. Burge

Also in attendance: Mr C. Harriott (General Manager) Mr P. W. Lamb (Secretary)

The Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing in opening the meeting, welcomed the new Chairman and wished him and the Board every success for the future.

After stating that he did not wish to dwell on the unfortunate circumstances which had transpired, the Minister proceeded to advise the Board that there were some matters which he wished to bring to its attention.

These matters were as follows: (a) That in respect of capital exi)enditure by the Board, he wished to be advised of all

intended purchases for amounts in excess of $50,000.


(b) That in respect of the present deliberations by the Board on the subject of the distribution formula, he was in agreement with the distribution being based on 65% of prize money for the current year on the condition that no club received less than in previous years.

(c) That on the subject of race broadcasts, he would be having a discussion with another party on the possible acquisition by the Board of Radio Station 4AM, Mareeba, at a suggested sale price of $1.5 million, but that he would not be making or giving any undertakings and that this matter would be referred to the Board in due course for its consideration.

He further suggested that there was a possibility that Federal Govemment approval could be given to the granting of a "specific purpose" licence in the Townsville/Caims area and suggested that discussions be held with Mr R. Archer to ascertain what may be required to achieve this result.

The Minister then left the meeting, at which time Mr P. Gallagher, on behalf of the Board, welcomed the new Chairman.

Confirmation of minutes:

It was resolved: "That the Minutes of the Board Meeting held on Monday, 1 April 1985 be confirmed"

Business arising out of minutes: Matters for Discussion with Minister: The General Manager indicated that the Executive was not aware of the results of

the discussions which were held between the Minister and the Board on Monday, 22 April 1985 and was advised as follows:

(1) The Minister had indicated that he would not be requiring any additional financial assistance from the Board, over and above the existing commitments.

(2) The Minister had agreed with the proposal to alter the distribution formula in accordance with the recommendation made in the discussion paper.

(3) On the subject of trifecta operations, the Minister accepted the proposal to introduce 50 cent trifectas, and agreed further that the number of trifecta pools per meeting should remain at the present level for the time being.

(4) The Minister supported the concept of the TAB seeking to become an on-course operator, and after responses are received from the clubs involved to the Board's proposals, the matter should be referred to his attention for final approval and drafting of any necessary legislative changes.

Sub-Agency—Oxenford/Coomera. Details were provided to the Board of the applications received for the above sub-

agency following recent press advertisements.

It was moved by Mr P. Gallagher and seconded by Dr J. O'Duffy that before making a decision on this sub-agency, that a town planner be engaged to advise the Board of the most suitable location, and to the extent that such was within his field of expertise, the best application.

The motion was carried.

It was also agreed that a town planner could be engaged in future whenever it was deemed necessary.

The General Manager in consultation with the Chairman, will engage a suitable consultant at an appropriate fee and report back to the next Board meeting with the results of their investigation.

Extract from board minutes 11 February, 1985 Other business:

Oxenford:

The Board was advised that a further survey had been carried out in the Oxenford area, and after discussing the results of this survey, it was moved by Mr P. Gallagher and seconded by Mr P. Burge that the Board reaffirm its original decision on this matter, and instmct the Executive to call applications from parties interested in establishing a Sub-Agency in this area in April, to enable a decision to be taken at the May meeting. Short Punch & Greatorix, Solicitors for Junefair Pty. Ltd., are to be advised of this decision. This motion was agreed to by the Board.

Extensions to Coolangatta Freehold:


Extract from Board Minutes 14 May 1984, TAB Service—Oxenford:

The Board was provided with and discussed all relevant correspondence associated with the possible provision of a TAB service in the Oxenford area. It was moved by Mr P. Gallagher and seconded by Mr P. Burge that before making any decision on this matter, that the Executive be directed to conduct a fresh survey in this area, with this information to be provided to the Board meeting set down for Tuesday, 29 May, 1984. This motion was agreed to by the Board. Executive salaries:

The General Manager sought approval for the flow-on of the recent National Wage decision to the Board's Executive. It was agreed that this matter be deferred to the Board meeting set down for Monday, 18 June, 1984. Upper Mt. Gravatt:

The Board was advised that an opportunity existed to acquire freehold premises at Upper Mt. Gravatt. Because of the position, the Executive was directed to fiirther investigate the location, particularly in relation to available parking and to re-submit details to the Board meeting of 29 May, 1984.

Date and Location of Next Board Meeting: It was confirmed that the next meeting of the Board be set down for Tuesday, 29 May,

1984, with a further meeting set down for Monday, 18 June, 1984, at 240 Sandgate Road, Albion at 10.00 a.m. There being no further business, the meeting closed at 6.00 p.m.

Signed as a correct record.

Sir Edward H. Lyons, Chairman.

Extract from Board Minutes 14 January 1985, TAB Sub-Agency—Oxenford:

The General Manager tabled a letter received from Short, Punch & Greatorix, on behalf of Junefair Pty. Ltd., requesting re-consideration by the Board of the establishment of a TAB Sub-Agency in the premises occupied by the Oxenford Hotel. The matter was to be reviewed in May, 1985.

It was agreed that the Executive be directed to re-survey the area, and that a report be tabled at the next meeting of the Board. The Executive was directed to notify the applicant accordingly.

Date and location of next board meeting: It was confirmed that the next meeting of the Board be set down for Monday, 11 Febmary,

1985, at 240 Sandgate Road, Albion, at 10.00 a.m. There being no further business, the meeting closed at 1.40 p.m.

Signed as a correct record.

Sir Edward H. Lyons, Chairman.

Mr HINZE: In case there is any Ungering doubt about these minutes, I stress that all have been signed, as a tme and accurate record, by Sir Edward Lyons when he was chairman and by Mr Ian Callinan, QC, since he has been chairman.

I again ask the honourable member for Salisbury to withdraw his allegation that I asked the TAB board for the Oxenford licence for Junefair Pty Ltd, and I again ask for an apology from the honourable member.

To refresh the mind of the honourable member for Salisbury, I point out that he said that if I tabled the documents and I proved to this House what I had said previously, he would be prepared to withdraw. Whether he apologises or not, I do not care.

Health and Hospital Services; Criticism by Member for Stafford

Hon. B. D. AUSTIN (Wavell—Minister for Health) (11.9 a.m.), by leave: Yesterday in this place, honourable members were subjected to yet another lecture from the honourable member for Stafford on his peculiar and uninformed views about the Queensland health system. This so-called Liberal health spokesman has obviously decided


to attack and undermine the health and hospital services of this State in a personal vendetta against me as the responsible Minister.

Let me say at this point the honourable member for Stafford is, in one particular respect, well-qualified to be party spokesman in this area—certainly not because of any special knowledge or training in respect of health matters, which is clearly evident from his hopelessly ignorant and impractical proposals on health policy. No, this member's one and only qualification in this area is his well-recognised position as the poUtical surgeon of the Liberal Party, which has left him with a considerable amount of blood on his hands over the years.

In this role of political surgeon, the honourable member has already stabbed two of his party leaders in the back, one being the present leader, the honourable member for Nundah (Sir WiUiam Knox) and the other Sir Llewellyn Edwards. It is interesting to note that both these men were also former Health Ministers, and that leads me to wonder whether the honourable member harbours a particular bent against people who hold that office.

I also note with interest the honourable member's rather petulant and juvenile remarks about coverage that I have received in the news media. One would expect a "small" person to make remarks such as those. Obviously, the news media sees some value in the issues concemed, otherwise such coverage would not be forthcoming. Perhaps the honourable member, in his considered opinion, believes that the news media lacks judgment or even integrity in its treatment of my ministerial activities. If the member for Stafford had taken more notice of the content of some of that media coverage instead of just privately cursing it, as he obviously does, he might be a bit better informed about some of the health issues on which he pontificates.

With a grandiose flourish, the honourable member yesterday unfurled what he described as his six-point program for health services in this State, Little do the people of this State realise how fortunate they are that this piece of academic nonsense would never be adopted as Govemment policy, irrespective of the political persuasion of the Govemment.

The honourable member delights in using terms that have absolutely no relevance to the ordinary provider or recipient of health service. He attempts to disguise his lack of understanding and superficial knowledge by serving up a whole lot of theoretical nonsense full of meaningless jargon.

Let us look at his disastrous blueprint for the State's health services. One key element of his plan is caUed decentralisation, which means the wholesale expansion of bureaucracy to fragment administrative control of the health system. For the information of the honourable member, I point out that this policy has been tried in a variety of forms throughout much of the rest of this country with an outstanding lack of success. Everywhere that this has been attempted, costs have sky-rocketed and management problems have increased enormously. In fact, the trend in other States now is towards a system very like the model that has been used so successfully in this State, It is precisely because the Queensland health system is so decentralised in delivery that a very capable and centralised control is absolutely essential.

The honourable member talked also about the need for rationalisation; in effect, he set about reinventing the wheel. Again for the honourable member's information, I point out that a very effective system of rationalisation has been established in the Queensland Health Department during my administration. It is interesting to note that this was based on a White Paper prepared by one of the victims of the honourable member's political surgery whom I mentioned earlier. Sir Llew Edwards, during his term as Health Minister. However, although the honourable member now attempts to claim it for the Liberal Party, this policy of rationalisation almost went no further after being buried during the term of his other victim, the honourable member for Nundah (Sir William Knox), as Health Minister.


So that he might become better informed, I invite the honourable member for Stafford to pemse my address to the Chamber during the Estimates debate on 23 October last year, wherein I detailed, among other things, the Govemment's achievements in the rationalisation process.

The remainder of the six points raised by the honourable member can easily be seen as no more than political rhetoric.

I am proud of the standard of health services in this State and the record of achievement in reducing morbidity and mortality rates right across the board. Our success in combating the major killers such as heart disease and cancer is equal to that anywhere else in the country, which is a credit to the dedicated team of health professionals we have in this State. There is no justification for claims that Queensland is delivering anything but a highly effective and cost-efficient health service.

Fire Services; Allegations by Member for Redcliffe

Hon. M. J. TENNI (Barron River—Minister for Environment, Valuation and Administrative Services) (11.13 a.m.), by leave: At 12.17 a.m, yesterday, the honourable member for Redcliffe made a series of allegations about Brisbane's fire services. As is usual with the honourable member, he never lets the facts get in the way of a good emotional outburst.

I refute his allegations that the fire services are mn down. As I have said before in this House, I am reviewing the effectiveness and efficiency of the service and plan to introduce reforms progressively as their need is identified. My office continues to receive feedback from serving officers and firemen that the reforms that I have introduced are long overdue.

I can well imagine that some people will profit from the maintenance of inefficiency and wiU complain to the honourable member. I suggest that he check the veracity of these complaints before he races off and wastes the time of the House.

The honourable member referted to pump 66 as being due for replacement. The House should also be aware that pump 66 is a 1973 model vehicle with less than 80 000 km on the clock. No expensive fire appliance of this age would be due for replacement unless the vehicle had been badly neglected by the people responsible.

In referring to snorkel number 79, the honourable member claims that the vehicle has only 25 per cent braking efficiency. Again the member for RedcUffe (Mr White) misleads the Parliament. The honourable member seems to have ignored a statement that I made in this House last week. He should refer to that for information on the condition of fire appliances.

The honourable member seems to be concemed that fire stations are left unattended. He should be aware that firemen do not sit idly at their stations waiting for a fire caU. Duties undertaken include—

district inspections to ensure that they are famiUar with the fire risk of their area;

hydrant inspections to check the location of fire hydrants and to test the adequacy of water flow; and

participation in training exercises, including breathing apparatus training. Often it is necessary for appliances to leave a station to undertake these duties. During any such absence from stations, they are in two-way radio contact at aU times. The district serviced by that station is also covered by appUances from other fire stations.

The Metropolitan Fire Brigade maintains a network of stations capable of providing support one to the other. At no time are the people of Queensland left at risk because of the essential training and other duties carried out by firemen. The risk would be in not carrying out these duties.


The Taigum Fire Station has not been closed and continues to form an important part of the fire protection of Brisbane.

It is inappropriate that I respond directly to the honourable member's comments about an officer of the Metropolitan Fire Brigade Board making public statements, as the matter is subject to proceedings by the metropolitan board. However, it staggers me that the honourable member is trying to distort the facts of this case by suggesting that the board is out to victimise this officer.

The honourable member should direct his attention to the fact that both the Metropolitan Fire Brigade Board and the previous Liberal Minister, who was supposedly responsible for this portfolio, failed to ensure that very expensive fire brigade appUances were properly maintained. The problem of mst in the Metropolitan Fire Brigade's vehicle fleet did not happen ovemight or in the last two years. It has been a long-term problem, which the board and the officers responsible for these vehicles failed to address adequately.

Unlike the previous high-spending Liberal Minister, who was more interested in junkets, I ordered an independent report by the Govemment Motor Garage into the mst problem with Brisbane fire appliances. A repair program is now under way at the Govemment Motor Garage and steps are being taken to overhaul maintenance procedures at the Metropolitan Fire Brigade workshop. The honourable member claims that the MetropoUtan Fire Brigade is 44 men short on its approved strength. This is totally incortect, I do not know where the honourable member gets his information, but he should be more careful in future.

The approved strength of a brigade is determined by the Govemment in the exercise of its responsibility to provide an effective and efficient fire-fighting service. The Metropolitan Fire Brigade is currently at an appropriate strength, and I have only recently approved the employment of a further 10 fire-fighters to fill vacancies which have occurred.

The member for Redcliffe is on record as causing the mination of the State Liberal Party, One would have thought that he would have leamt a lesson from that. Now, by innuendoes and false statements, he is trying to min the fire services; but because of my strong leadership, he may as well give up.

It is interesting to note that the honourable member for Port Curtis has thrown in his lot with the Liberals in criticising the operation of our fire services. It is weU known that the Liberals and the ALP enjoy sleeping in the same bed when it comes to poUtical opportunism. The honourable member for Port Curtis should be the last person to claim that I have made misleading comments about the commercial fire levy. The ALP has a dismal track record of spreading misinformation, distortions and falsehoods over the introduction of the fire levy in Queensland. All I can say is that it is at least consistent in its policy. Once again, it is setting out to distort the fact that this Govemment is doing an excellent job in spreading the cost of our fire protection fairly among the property-owners of this State.

Foreign Investment in Queensland; Speech by Member for Lytton Hon. V. P. LESTER (Peak Downs—Minister for Employment and Industrial Affairs)

(11.20 a.m.), by leave: In this Chamber yesterday, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition (Mr Bums), in a msh to "bag" Queensland, quoted figures on foreign investments in Queensland. He stated that the expected new foreign investment in Queensland during 1983-84 would be no more than a miserable $2m. As the Minister in charge of statistics, I thought that I had better check that information because it did not seem to be correct.

Although the honourable member received a great deal of publicity for his little effort, I found that the correct figures, as published by the Foreign Investment Review Board in its 1983-84 report, showed that Queensland expected new investments totalUng $499m—second only to New South Wales, which has nearly double Queensland's population.


Mr Burns: Table the document.

Mr LESTER: I am sorry to tell the honourable member that the document from which he quoted is not correct. The $2m that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition quoted for Queensland was actually for the Labor-led State of South AustraUa. I suggest to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition that, in future, he carefully check his facts and not be so ready to msh in to "bag" Queensland, because aU it means is that he gets "bagged" himself

I table the documents and seek leave to have them incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted,

TABLE 1.11: FOREIGN INVESTMENT PROPOSALS, BY LOCATION OF EXPECTED INVESTMENT (a), 1 JULY 1983 TO 20 JUNE 1984

State or Territory

New South Wales Victoria Queensland South Australia Westem Australia Tasmania Northem Territory ACT

Other (c)

Total

Number

346 119 33

159 165 24 10 7

863 153

1,016

Consideration (b)

($m)

483 508 21

221 373

15 15

1

1,638 840

2,478

Expected new investment

($m)

111 499

2 146 : i 2 189

3 —

1,879 142

2,021

Total expected investment

($m)

1,210 1,007

23 367 685 204

18 2

3,517 982

4,499

(a) The table does not include 175 proposals for the restructuring of companies and 17 company financing arrangements.

(b) Payments for shares and assets. (c) This category includes 'off-shore' acquisitions and proposals where the expenditure was

expected to be undertaken in more than one State or Territory.

CORRIGENDUM TO TABLE 1.11, PAGE 50, FOREIGN INVESTMENT REVIEW BOARD REPORT 1983-84

TABLE 1.11: FOREIGN INVESTMENT PROPOSALS, BY LOCATION OF EXPECTED INVESTMENT (a), 1 JULY 1983 TO 30 JUNE 1984

Consideration Expected new Total expected State or Territory Number (b) investment investment

($m) ($m) ($m)

New South Wales Victoria Queensland South Australia Westem Australia Tasmania Northem Territory ACT

346 159 119 33

165 10 24

7

483 221 508

21 373

15 15

1

727 146 499

2 312

3 189 —

1,210 367

1,007 23

685 18

204 2

Other (c)

Total

863 153

1,016

1,638 840

2,478

1,879 142

2,021

3,517 982

4,499

(a) The table does not include 175 proposals for the restmcturing of companies and 17 company financing arrangements.

770 5 September 1985 Personal Explanations

(b) Payments for shares and assets. (c) This category includes 'off-shore' acquisitions and proposals where the expenditure was

expected to be undertaken in more than one State or Territory.

PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS Mr BURNS (Lytton) (11.21 a.m.), by leave: This moming, the Daily Sun reports

on page 12 part of my speech in the House on Tuesday night in relation to Keith Thompson.

The Daily Sun story attributed to me comments that were made by the Gold Coast town clerk in a letter to the city's mayor. I make it clear that it was the town clerk who rang P and C Introductions and established that the service offered was introductory only, not meals.

In the Daily Sun and in other media. Alderman Thompson has said that if he ever found the need to visit a brothel, he would pay cash. For the information of honourable members and Alderman Thompson, I table a photocopy of an American Express credit card charge, to the account of the Gold Coast City Council, signed by Keith Thompson for a total of $132 for "P and C Int. Service" of Narembum, New South Wales,

Whereupon the honourable member laid the document on the table.

A Government Member: Has the price gone up?

Mr BURNS: The Minister would know the price.

I table a memorandum from the town clerk to the mayor of the Gold Coast City Council and seek leave to have it incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

Vide Item 27

GOLD COAST CITY COUNCIL Courtesy is Catching

INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM

15th July, 1985.

Memo To: His Worship the Mayor, Alderman Denis Pie

From: Town Clerk

Re: American Express International

You mentioned to me over the weekend that you wanted to re-examine the matter of a charge made by Alderman Thompson about October/November 1983—

Details

1. Panda and Cupid Introductory Service Narembum N.S.W. $132.00

2. Alderman Thompson tendered $90 in settlement (7.11.83), claiming that the balance was a meal expense incurred on his own behalf while engaged on Council business (a conference or meeting at Newcastle as I recall).

3. The blue docket submitted by Alderman Thompson was blank where the name of the supplier should have shown.

4. The white docket which comes with the monthly account to Council showed P & C Int Service. The more detailed personal account show the details in 1. above.

5. I confronted Alderman Thompson with the fact that the charge was for an introductory service (massage parlour or whatever you want to call it) and that the whole amount should be refunded to Council.

6. Alderman Thompson professed at all times that the charge was for meals, however, I had taken the trouble to ring and establish that the service offered was introductory only, no meals.

Personal Explanations 5 September 1985 771

7. Alderman Thompson paid the balance ($42:00 16.11.83) still claiming that it was for a meal.

(R. H. Brown) TOWN CLERK

RHBiLCB

Mr BURNS: In the memorandum to the mayor of the Gold Coast City Council about the American Express Intemational credit charge for Panda and Cupid Introductory Service of Narembum, New South Wales, the town clerk said—

"I confronted Alderman Thompson with the fact that the charge was for an introductory service (massage parlour or whatever you want to caU it) and that the whole amount should be refunded to council."

My advice to Alderman Thompson is that if he wants to save the rate-payers money in future he should put his money where his mouth was and pay cash on the knocker.

Mr GOSS (SaUsbury) (11.24 a.m.), by leave: As to the statements put to the House this moming by the Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing (Mr Hinze)—he said, in particular, that I had said in this Chamber that I would withdraw and apologise if he proved his innocence. In fact, I said that I would consider withdrawing if he answered the questions and tabled the whole file. He has not done that. However, I am prepared to consider what he has said in the Chamber this moming and the fact that he has tabled a letter from the current chairman of the Totalisator Administration Board dealing with the question whether or not he attempted to influence the board of the TAB in relation to the Junefair application. As I understand it, the letter that he tabled is to the effect that there is no documentary evidence to show that the Minister attempted to exercise such influence. The Minister is unable to produce a statutory declaration from the then chairman and the board members that he did not try to argue the case for his family company.

I will neither withdraw nor apologise.

Mr PREST (Port Curtis) (11.25 a.m.), by leave: Yesterday, my speech to the House was made on the basis of questions asked of and answers given by the Minister for Environment, Valuation and Administrative Services (Mr Tenni). If the answers given by the Minister to questions asked by me are an embarrassment to him, and if he claims that what I said is untme, it is his fault if he misled the House when answering questions. What I said was factual, and the Opposition will continue to speak out on such important matters as fire services and their administration in this State.

Mr HENDERSON (Mount Gravatt) (11.26 a.m.), by leave: A document headed Show Your Opposition: Restore Democracy has been fairly widely distributed at Griffith University by a group calling itself the Democratic Rights Association. I gather that it was produced by the Griffith University Union of Students. My copy of the document— and I stress this—was handed to me by Dr Peter Coaldrake of Griffith University.

The document contains a number of interesting statements—it almost seems like a continuing episode of General Hospital—and one of them reads as follows—

"PLUS EARLIER THIS YEAR— When asked to condemn the introduction of tertiary fees, Mr Henderson

responded with the view that public education was outdated, and the State should look at 'private' universities as an altemative."

Dr Coaldrake has circled that and underlined it. He also personally wrote the following comment on it—

"Not fair. Henderson at council strongly opposed fees in any form."

772 5 September 1985 Questions Upon Notice

Dr Coaldrake handed it to Ms Bond, the student representative on the council, Ms Bond then wrote on it—it is there in her handwriting—

"Leaflet writers aren't supervised weU enough," Perhaps an eye needs to be kept on them.

On Tuesday, The Courier-Mail continued the comments on page 2 with the following statement—

"The Democratic Rights Association convenor, Mr Andrew McNee, said: 'Mr Henderson, since he has been on council, has denigrated the public education system and has worked with minority extremist groups off campus to interfere with the university curriculum.'"

Those statements are demonstrably untme. They are a lie. I strongly urge the Democratic Rights Association of Griffith University and The Courier-Mail to consult their solicitors on the defamation laws in relation to such statements.

The same pamphlet also contains the following statement— "Ian Henderson passes material to Griffith Uni Vice-Chancellor which calls on

QLD Parliament to establish a committee of enquiry into tertiary instmction in 'all matters relating to the family and the relation between the sexes.' (See next Griffitti)"

Ms Patricia Keegan, along with 39 other people—I remind honourable members that 40 grasshoppers do not make a plague—confronted me on Monday night at Griffith University and read to me a prepared statement containing the following question—

"Why did you give material which calls for a parliamentary committee of inquiry to the vice-chancellor instead of tabling it openly at council?"

That material came into my possession and, out of courtesy to the vice-chancellor, I sent the petition to him with the following little note attached—

"For your information. You may be pleased to leam that this is circulated widely in Queensland."

The implication contained in the material is incorrect.

Presumably, "DRA" stands for Democratic Rights Association. However, I suggest that I have established today that those letters stand for "demonstrably ridiculous allegations"

QUESTIONS UPON NOTICE

Questions submitted on notice were answered as follows—

1. Alleged Breaches of Totalisator Administration Board Legislation by Sir Edward Lyons

Sir WILLIAM KNOX asked the Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing—

With reference to the serious nature of the allegations made by him during the week ended 31 August concerning actions of the former chairman of the Totalisator Administration Board in destroying TAB files—

(1) WiU he investigate the possibUity of any breaches of the (a) Criminal Code, (b) Racing and Betting Act and Rules made under that Act, (c) Public Service Act and (d) Financial Administration and Audit Act and as well examine the possible breach of a fiduciary duty to the board during the term of office of the immediate past chairman of the TAB?

(2) Will he give details of any alleged breaches of these Acts, which I have mentioned, and which have come to his notice and what action does he intend to take?

Questions Upon Notice 5 September 1985 773

Answer—

(1 & 2) In relation to the allegations made against the former chairman of the Totalisator Administration Board in respect of certain matters alleged to have occurred prior to his resignation on 29 April 1985, I am aware that an opinion was given to certain members of the board on 26 April 1985 by Mr C. E. K. Hampson, QC. This opinion was not sought by the Totalisator Administration Board or by the Crown, and I therefore consider that it would not be appropriate for me to make any comments in respect of the contents of that opinion. This would be a matter for the board members concemed.

I will refer to the Honourable the Minister for Justice and Attomey-General for advice allegations made in respect of the alleged removal of documents from TAB files by the former chairman of the board and his aUeged instmctions to a board officer in relation to the destmction of copies of those documents.

2. Relative Federal Funding for States Mr HENDERSON asked the Deputy Premier and Minister Assisting the Treasurer— (1) When compared with ALP States, such as New South Wales and Victoria, what

is the extent of the Hawke socialist Govemment's underfunding of Queensland in the foUowing areas of Govemment activity: (a) health, especially Medicare, (b) education, especiaUy tertiary places available to Queenslanders, (c) Expo 88, compared with the defence of the America's Cup, (d) main roads, especially in terms of the bicentenary petrol levy, (e) housing, especially in terms of the failure of the Canberra centralists to move to a per capita-based grants system, (f) industry, especially in terms of the levels of tariff and subsidy assistance to New South Wales and Victoria, (g) primary industry, especially the reluctance to assist our sugar industry, compared with Hawke's assistance to the steel and motor industries, (h) aboriginal welfare and housing, (i) allocation of defence and supply contracts and (j) any other area of Govemment activity such as banking?

(2) Were Queensland to be funded fairly and equitably with New South Wales and Victoria, what would be the effect on the Queensland economy?

(3) Why does this obvious discrimination occur and what can be done about it?

Answer—

(1 to 3) I congratulate the honourable member on his obvious understanding of the discrimination and inequities that the Federal Labor Govemment is trying to inflict on the people of Queensland. The very matters that he has raised will be addressed by the Honourable the Premier and Treasurer in his Budget speech to the House this aftemoon. I am confident that the Honourable the Premier's speech will provide the necessary answers to the questions he has raised. However, if there are other matters of detail that the honourable member beUeves have not been adequately covered, I will be only too happy to answer any questions he may have.

3. Child Abuse

Mrs HARVEY asked the Minister for Welfare Services, Youth and Ethnic Affairs— (1) Is he aware of the great concem in the community at the incidence of child

abuse? (2) Is he satisfied with the efforts being made by Queensland authorities to cope

with this serious problem and will he do everything possible to ensure that child abuse is reduced?

Answer—

(1 & 2) I assure the honourable member that I am aware of the great concem in the community at the incidence of reported child abuse. It is a concem which I share.

774 5 September 1985 Questions Upon Notice

It is an unfortunate fact that reported cases of child abuse are increasing not only in Queensland but also in the other States. All thinking people will agree that that is a tragedy that needs urgent attention. The honourable member may be assured that the Queensland Govemment is determined to do everything possible to stop this abuse of our young people.

Although the figures are high, they do offer some encouragement in that they indicate an increasing community awareness of the problem. People are now more prepared to come forward and report child abuse rather than deny the problem exists. FamiUes affected by child abuse are now more inclined to seek professional help.

The reasons for child abuse are many and varied. They include parent fmstration, ignorance of a child's needs, personality conflicts, discipline problems and deep-seated problems.

Action has been taken to attack this matter in a number of ways. From a legislative basis, there will be wider provisions relating to the protection of children in the new Family and Community Development Bill. Secondly, the establishment of community-based SCAN teams has been supported. These teams will relieve some of the pressure on the present hospital-based SCAN teams and enable complaints to be dealt with locally. Thirdly, the Child Abuse Research and Education Committee, known as CARE, has been established under the chairmanship of the honourable member to consider, particularly, the important role which education and educators can play in the prevention of child abuse.

It is generally recognised that, by the time the children come to the attention of a SCAN team, they have been mistreated to an increasing degree for some time. The honourable member's committee will help co-ordinate an overall plan aimed at the prevention of child abuse. Education must play an important role. This involves educating parents, teachers, chUdren and the wider community.

The CARE committee has already made its first recommendation, which is that an officer of my department compile appropriate material and up-to-date statistics which could be referted to my colleague the Honourable the Minister for Education for consideration for inclusion in the teacher-training curriculum. This would assist in raising teacher awareness of the problem. I am in the process of nominating that officer. Children have to be made aware of their right to physical safety and their rights as individuals.

I mention that, where child abuse is suspected, contact should be made immediately with the Department of Children's Services or the local SCAN team,

4. Oxenford Totalisator Administration Board Subagency Licence Mr HAMILL asked the Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing— With reference to the question asked of him on 3 September by the member for

Rockhampton, namely, "Who apart from the Minister could possibly have been responsible for the undenied political interference in the granting of a licence for a TAB agency at Oxenford?", to which he replied that it was blind Freddy—

Are bUnd Freddy and Sir Edward Lyons one and the same person?

Answer—

I answered a question in the House yesterday from the honourable member for Lytton indicating that I have no knowledge of interference by any person in proposals for the establishment of a TAB agency at Oxenford,

Mr WARBURTON having given notice of a question—

Mr WARBURTON: I lay on the table what I believe to be an accurate copy of the information supplied by Mr C. E, K, Hampson, QC, as requested by the seven members of the Totalisator Administration Board,

Whereupon the honourable gentleman laid the document on the table.

Questions Without Notice 5 September 1985 775

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

Fire Services Levy

Mrs CHAPMAN: In directing a question to the Minister for Environment, Valuation and Administrative Services, I refer to an allegation made yesterday by the honourable member for Port Curtis (Mr Prest) to the effect that the Govemment is using the new fire services levy as a means of raising revenue beyond what is necessary to operate fire services in Queensland. I ask: Will the Minister comment on this claim?

Mr TENNI: I thank the honourable member for Pine Rivers for the question.

Mr COMBEN: I rise to a point of order. I point out that no question has been asked by the honourable member. The Minister has been asked to comment. He has not been asked a question, and, on this matter, the Standing Orders are clear: the honourable member must ask a question.

Mrs CHAPMAN: I am sorry. I will rephrase what I have said. I now ask: Will the Minister outline in detail the reasons why the honourable member for Port Curtis made that statement yesterday, and will the Minister comment on it?

.Mr TENNI: Before replying to that question, I must say what a wonderful representative the people in the electorate of Pine Rivers have in Mrs Chapman. Mrs Chapman is a great person, who wishes to get the tmth through to the people of Queensland. I have pleasure in answering the question.

As usual the honourable member for Port Curtis has made a number of wild assertions in which he has plucked figures from any number of sources in his attempt to prove what the honourable member for Pine Rivers has alluded to.

I will not waste the time of this House by responding to his allegations in detail, for the honourable member for Port Curtis has proved time and time again that he does not listen. I worry for the future of the Opposition because they are represented by boneheads of the calibre of the honourable member for Port Curtis; and the honourable member for Redcliffe might also listen, instead of spending so much time in plotting the overthrow of his leader.

The situation is this: for a number of years, public complaints about the funding of fire services through an insurance levy focussed on the inequity of that system. The Govemment took note of these complaints and decided to implement a system of funding fire brigades under which all persons who expected a fire service helped to pay for that service.

Legislation passed by this House limits the total sum raised to that actually required to fiind the fire services.

In transferring the funding system to a property base, which was adopted as the most equitable, there was an expectation that problems would arise and that they would be solved as the scheme progressed. That expectation was correct. Stage 1 of the proposed levy has been implemented with relatively few problems, and there is widespread community support for it.

Stage 2 of the levy has been troublesome, as we move to define categories of industrial and commercial property. These problems will exist for some time yet, but there is strong support for the new system from the commercial and industrial sector. Given this fact, I am confident that all problems will eventually be overcome, and the community will be the beneficiaries of a progressive and equitable system of funding fire services.

The efficiency with which fire-protection services are delivered is a separate but equally important issue, because implicit in the new funding system is the objective that expenditure of funds raised by the fire levy will be made more accountable. As the

776 5 September 1985 Questions Without Notice

member for Redcliffe has noted, the Govemment has already moved to ensure that expenditure growth is subject to much closer scmtiny than has occurted in past years. This scmtiny will lead to change without prejudicing the level of fire protection enjoyed by the community, and I am confident that this will also lead to a far better career service for firemen than has existed in the past. The days of fire unions plundering the public purse have finished, and the members for Port Curtis and Redcliffe associate themselves with that cause at their electoral peril,

Mrs CHAPMAN proceeding to give notice of a question

Mr Mackenroth: Shame!

Mrs CHAPMAN: I can't help it if the honourable member for Archerfield has a funny name,

Mr PALASZCZUK: I rise to a point of order. I ask that that comment be withdrawn.

Mrs CHAPMAN: I withdraw it.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! For the edification of the honourable member for Pine Rivers, the correct pronunciation is "Palashay",

Mrs CHAPMAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker, It is very difficult to pronounce.

Opinion of Director of Prosecutions

Mr BURNS: In asking a question of the Minister for Justice and Attomey-General, I refer to his claim to have obtained an opinion from the Director of Prosecutions (Mr Sturgess, QC) regarding the credit-betting activities of the former TAB chairman (Sir Edward Lyons). I ask: Does that opinion exist in written form? As the opinion of another eminent QC (Mr Cedric Hampson) regarding this same matter has now been made public and tabled in this House, will the Minister table Mr Sturgess's opinion so that the Parliament and the public can properly assess the contents of both documents and determine any discrepancies which may exist between them?

Mr HARPER: I will not take time to clarify the position, but I do not recaU ever having told this House that I have an opinion from Mr Sturgess, QC. I believe that, in the past, any information that I would have given to the House would be that I have an opinion from the Solicitor-General and Crown law officers,

Mr Burns: Will you table them?

Mr HARPER: No, I will not table the opinions that I have from Crown law officers, I will say that my primary advice in this area was from the Solicitor-General (Mr Ken Mackenzie, QC), who at that time was acting Solicitor-General. It is a long-established practice that such opinions are not made public. They are intemal documents within a Govemment department, in this case the Department of Justice.

I am aware of the opinion given to certain members of the Totalisator Administration Board by Mr Hampson, QC, an eminent barrister for whom I have a very high regard. On the expression of opinion by Mr Hampson about the possibility of a criminal act, I inform the House that Mr Hampson did not have available to him all of the information and details that were available to me as the Minister for Justice and Attomey-General and to my officers. I believe that had those details been available to Mr Hampson, his opinion may have been slightly different.

At this stage, I do not intend to go into any greater detail than I have indicated to the House, but I do give an assurance to the House that the statement I have made previously about this matter, namely, that it was the opinion that no criminal act had been perpetrated by the person involved, was cortect. I stand by any statement that I have made previously, on the ground that it was the best possible advice available having regard to all details available at that time.


Legal Action to Recover Totalisator Administration Board Funds Mr BURNS: I refer the Minister for Justice and Attomey-General to page 21 of

Mr Hampson's document that was tabled in Parliament today—I am talking now of civil and criminal action—in which he wrote, "I tum now to consider whether the Chairman's activities may give rise to civil or criminal UabiUty by him.", and later, wrote—

"To the extent that its account was in overdraft or that it could have used the cash it would be possible to compute damages in the form of interest lost. In my opinion it is entitled to compensation for postponement of its use of its money."

I now ask the Minister whether, as Attomey-General and Minister for Justice, he will take action against Sir Edward Lyons to see that the TAB gets back the money that would be lost to the board through the loss of the use of that money.

Mr HARPER: If a request is made by the Totalisator Administration Board or by the Minister responsible for that board, or if these matters are brought to my attention and action is sought by those responsible, certainly consideration will be given to it. However, I believe—and, again, I am relying on my memory—that at the time of these incidents some months ago I indicated that, if anything, there may have been cause for civU action. That was a responsibility of a civil nature. My recoUection is that the civil action would not necessarily involve the board as a Govemment instmmentality.

Application by Junefair Pty Ltd for Totalisator Administration Board Subagency Mr HAMILL: In directing a question to the Minister for Mines and Energy, I refer

to allegations surrounding the granting of the Oxenford TAB licence and to a letter written by him to the Minister for Racing (Mr Hinze) in Febmary 1983 supporting the application by Mr and Mrs Frith for the Oxenford TAB Agency. I refer also to a letter from the Minister for Mines and Energy to the then chairman of the board (Sir Edward Lyons) dated 30 November 1983, in which he raised the matter of the delays with the Frith appUcation, in the following terms—

"I understand that although they have discussed this with TAB officials several times in the last few months they have not yet been given a clear indication whether their application will be successful."

I now ask: Why, having already raised the matter of the Frith application with the Minister for Racing, did the Minister for Mines and Energy go round his feUow-Minister to the chairman of the board? Was it because he beUeved that the Minister for Racing was blocking the Frith's application?

Mr I. J. GIBBS: The letters to which the honourable member referred have been tabled in this House; and it is quite clear what they contain. My coUeague the Minister for Racing (Mr Hinze) has adequately answered questions in this House arising from this issue, and I have no further comment to make on this matter.

Application by Junefair Pty Ltd for Totalisator Administration Board Subagency Mr HAMILL: In directing a question to the Minister for Local Govemment, Main

Roads and Racing, I refer to his statement in the House this moming and to his recent denial of the suggestion that he attended a Totalisator Administration Board meeting to ask for the granting of the Oxenford licence to his family company Junefair Pty Ltd. I now ask: Did the Minister at any time attend a board meeting when the Oxenford agency was discussed and, if so, did he express the view that Junefair Pty Ltd should not be prejudiced in its application because of its connection with him?

Mr HINZE: The honourable member could be charged with provoking an argument. I beUeve that I have tried to answer these questions adequately on so many occasions that this matter is becoming old hat. Honourable members may continue to ask questions, but I ask the honourable member to put his question on notice. He will get his answer.


but he will not put me in the position of saying one thing today and something else tomorrow. He has no chance of doing that.

Mr HAMILL: A "yes" or "no" would have been adequate, but I put the question on notice accordingly.

Effect of Action by Electrical Trades Union on Electricity Industry Mr BAILEY: I ask the Minister for Mines and Energy: Given the continuation by

the Electrical Trades Union of what can only be described as its despicable campaign to harass and intimidate South East Queensland Electricity Board workers and to discredit the board, can he advise the House whether this action is having any effect?

Mr I. J. GIBBS: The harassment and attempted intimidation of SEQEB workers, which is still continuing in various forms, is despicable and un-Australian, but it is having no effect on the electricity industry. Yesterday, another crowd gathered out the front of this place, chanting away.

Mr Gunn: Rent-a-crowd.

Mr I. J. GIBBS: Yes, rent-a-crowd.

That group of people, who are supported by the mob who sit on the other side of the Chamber, are professionals; they take money to make a noise or create a disturbance. They are all socialist Left people and are supported by Opposition members, at whom Govemment members stare day after day.

The Courier-Mail of 28 August 1985 carried the headlines, "Vandals could blow themselves up—and cut off power" and "SEQEB misled public on staffing—union". They are good examples of the type of statements that are being made. A great deal of stupid vandalism is occurring which is causing great inconvenience to many people. The word "vandalism" should stand out, because that is what it is. It is harassment, interference and vandalism of public property. When those vandals get caught, the full force of the law under the Criminal Code will be applied.

Acts such as shooting electrical insulators are certainly un-Australian. When the wind blows, the insulators fall to pieces, as happened in the South Coast area. No doubt, that is an example of the vandalism that these people have set out to do.

Let me get down to the real facts of the matter. The Govemment is quite determined that these people will have no effect on the electricity industry. Early in the piece some of those union-leaders made the mistakes. They misled and misinformed the people whom they are supposed to represent. Very recently the Govemment had to go to the tribunal and apply for a flow-on of wages from the national wage case; the unions would not represent their people. On that score they have set their members back another 10 years. The Govemment looked after them and made sure they got that flow-on. There is more to come yet.

The Govemment has been criticised for bringing workers from New Zealand. At present the board has 30 vacancies. The Govemment has never misled the people. It has always given out the correct figures and Wayne Gilbert has always given out the correct figures. I can assure honourable members that the end result of all this will be that the Govemment will continue to make great savings to consumers of electricity in Queensland, as it already has.

Many other problems, such as demarcation disputes, bans and limitations have been unearthed. They may not be obvious to the public at this stage, but they wiU be made public very soon. Over the next two years, through the elimination of unnecessary expenditure the Govemment will save millions of dollars. That will be reflected through the electricity bills of the people of this State. The Govemment now knows why, in the past, it has been criticised for the price of electricity to consumers. I assure honourable members that the Government is now on the scent of all the problems and will make


sure that, in the near future, all of these problems that have been created and caused by the unions will be overcome. Because of the Govemment's determination, there is no doubt, in the next year or two, that Queensland will have the cheapest power in AustraUa.

Australian Broadcasting Corporation Radio Coverage of Queensland Races Sir WILLIAM KNOX: In asking a question of the Minister for Local Govemment,

Main Roads and Racing, I refer to the reduction of service by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation in providing racing information and racing commentaries. I ask: Has the Minister had any influence at aU on the ABC to reverse that policy, particularly as it affects those people in the community who relied very heavily upon the information that came from that source, particularly those little people in the community who benefited from that information? The decision also has an adverse effect on the TAB. Perhaps the Minister would care to enlighten the House as to what has happened in regard to his efforts in this matter?

Mr HINZE: Just as the honourable member and everybody else involved in the racing industry is concemed, obviously I am concemed about the attitude of the ABC to the racing industry, and particularly to Larry Pratt. I have had people telephoning and writing to me about Larry Pratt.

Mr Gunn: He is an exceUent man.

Mr HINZE: Of course he is an excellent man. He is a household word in Queensland.

Some people in the ABC seem to be determined to cut services from this State completely. I guess that is another indication of the Federal Govemment's attitude to Queensland. Perhaps our colleague the shadow spokesman for communications (Mr Moore) may have raised the matter on behalf of Queenslanders. I have not had talks with Mr Moore, but I certainly intend to do so.

The matter is so serious that it will affect TAB tumover. The Govemment and I beUeve that this is a serious matter. If there is any way members opposite have any influence with their "friends", perhaps for once they might like to assist Queensland and get together to obtain a bit of service for the people who are prepared to have a legitimate bet in this State. The services referred to by the honourable member for Nundah should be demanded from the ABC.

Strike by Queensland Jockeys Sir WILLIAM KNOX: My second question to the Minister for Local Govemment,

Main Roads and Racing relates to the jockeys strike. In view of his efforts to resolve this matter

Mr Price interjected.

Sir WILLIAM KNOX: This happens to be very important. Although it may not be important to the honourable member, it happens to be important to many people in the community.

The Minister has made some efforts to try to resolve this matter. I ask: Is he prepared to advise the House of the results of those efforts so far and whether the matter can be resolved? The jockeys strike is causing a great deal of inconvenience to trainers.

Mr Palaszczuk interjected.

Sir WILLIAM KNOX: I will ask it again, because in the last few hours some new developments have taken place, I ask the Minister: Can he inform honourable members as to the latest position?


Mr HINZE: I know that the honourable member for Nundah represents, in this Assembly, many trainers. Of course, they would be concemed that the dispute has arisen again,

I convened a conference on 30 August, at which all members of the racing industry were present. I believed that the matter was settled amicably. All that the representatives had to do was go back to their respective organisations and obtain confirmation.

I am now placed in the unenviable position in which the principal club, together with its stewards, controls racing. It is not within my province to intmde. Although I would like to resolve the matter, the stewards have said that the jockeys must remain suspended. That is rightfully within the jurisdiction of the stewards. Today's press indicates that the jockeys have intimated that they will not attend any further conferences. That is very bad. I repeat that the racing industry is a major industry in Queensland, It is too big to allow further confrontations to take place, I know that when the matter was discussed in this House

Mr R. J. Gibbs: It is a good case for a royal commission, isn't it?

Mr HINZE: When a debate took place in this Chamber, many members suggested that consideration should be given to the establishment of a racing commission, I hold views on that matter. If the Opposition wants the Govemment to intmde to that extent, that is a serious matter.

However, let us look at the issue seriously. If the disputation continues and there is no possibility of obtaining answers, I will have to hold further discussions with the chairman of the Queensland Turf Club, Sir Edward Williams,

Wages Agreement between Australian Council of Trade Unions and Federal Government

Mr SIMPSON: I ask the Deputy Premier and Minister Assisting the Treasurer: Is he aware of the wage rise deal by the Australian Council of Trade Unions, to be ratified by the Federal ALP Govemment, that will increase wages by $15 a week, plus an additional productivity rise for superannuation of $22,50 a week, and a further $5 a week by way of a reduction on tax—making a total of $32.50 per week? I ask also: Does the Minister know who will pay for this and what effect it will have on the AustraUan economy?

Mr GUNN: No prizes will be awarded for guessing who will pay for it. Of course, it will be the people of Australia, However, it makes one thing loud and clear. It gives an indication of who is mnning Australia, The ACTU was not elected by the people of Australia.

It was painfully obvious at the tax summit who is mnning the country. During it, the Prime Minister, the Federal Treasurer and members of the Cabinet were seen retiring into private rooms at the Lodge for hours at a time to make deals with the ACTU. That will be the albatross round the neck of the Federal Labor Govemment as long as it is in office—which will only be for the remainder of the curtent term.

Aurukun School Mr SCOTT: I ask the Minister for Education, who is having a nice little snooze

over there: What is the classification of the most senior Education Department officer to visit Aumkun this year and when did the visits occur? Why has the regional director of the Peninsula region not visited the Aumkun school recently? If the Minister will not agree to the transfer of the principal of the Aumkun school, will he direct the regional director to visit the school to try to restore the confidence of the parents and citizens of Aumkun in the administration of the school?

Mr POWELL: I thank the honourable member for Cook for his question. The honourable member will find that I am more wide awake than he is, I wiU not involve


my officers in poUtical interference, such as the honourable member for Cook is attempting at Aumkun. It is perfectly clear to anybody who is a fair observer of what is going on at Aumkun that political interference has been stirred up by the honourable member for Cook.

The most senior officer who has visited Aumkun this year is the regional director, Mr Alf Garrone, for whom I have the highest regard and respect.

Mr Scott: When did he visit it?

Mr POWELL: The honourable member for Cook continues to interject in a stupid manner, which is typical of him.

A Government Member interjected.

Mr POWELL: Yes, it is customary. If the honourable member for Cook will just wait, I will tell him what is going on.

Mr Scott interjected.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The honourable member for Cook has asked his question,

Mr POWELL: I make the point that, on 17 occasions this year, either the regional director or the regional inspector has visited Aumkun in an attempt to settle down some of the parents who are causing the trouble at Aumkun. The majority of the parents are keen to see the school get on with its work.

The school is staffed according to the total number of children available—224—or was staffed in that manner until my colleague the Minister for Local Govemment, Main Roads and Racing visited Aumkun and informed me of the numbers of children actually attending the school. I contacted the Peninsula regional office. That office confirmed that the Minister was cortect. I said that the school should not be overstaffed and, therefore, three teachers were transferred immediately.

The Department of Education will continue in its attempt to ensure that education continues in Aumkun to the advantage of the children and not to the advantage of a few stirrers in the community.

Education Funding and Priorities Mr STEPHAN: In directing a question to the Minister for Education, I refer to

the Commonwealth Govemment's belief that priority should be given to disadvantaged and minority groups. Bearing in mind that Govemment's attempts to restrict funding for improvements in education generally and the diversion of funds from its education budget to its own preferred groups, I ask: Would it not be an advantage to direct attention to the challenge of education, thus assisting students to successfully acquire a place in the work-force?

Mr POWELL: I thank the honourable member for his question. In the last 24 hours, the media reported a speech delivered by the Queensland Director-General of Education, Mr George Berkeley, at an Australian College of Education meeting. That speech has aroused a considerable amount of criticism, which is totaUy unjustified, particularly from an organisation known as QATIS—the Queensland Association of Teachers in Independent Schools. For some obscure reason, that is an extremely left-wing organisation that constantly harps at Govemment schools and at what happens in them.

I am interested that the fellow who is the spokesman for QATIS has attacked my Director-General for his remarks, attempting to impute in his statement that the State education system and the Govemment are not interested in children who for some reason or other are disadvantaged. That is not so. The Queensland Education Department, through its Division of Special Education, works very hard for children who are handicapped or disadvantaged in some way or other.


I tum to the remarks made by the honourable member for Gympie. One should note that the Federal Govemment, in attempting to direct State Govemment education priorities, wishes to enter into what are euphemistically called resource agreements. My colleague in New South Wales, Mr Cavalier, has told the Federal Govemment that there is no way in which the New South Wales Govemment will enter into any resource agreements with it. Queensland has taken a like stance. The reason is that of the total amount of funding available for education in Queensland, slightly less than 7 per cent is provided by the Federal Govemment. The Federal Govemment attempts to use that 7 per cent to direct policies in Queensland, and, for that matter, in the other States as well.

We have not fallen for the three-card trick. Queensland is primarily concemed with preparing young people for the time when they leave formal education. We have a belief that they will then be entering the work-force. There are those in the community who believe that Federal Govemment funding should be directed at making sure that people do not enter the work-force.

As a Govemment, we are working towards broadening the programs available, particularly in the traditionaUy higher secondary area, so that young people are able to undertake courses from which they will obtain skiUs to enable them to enter the workforce. It is tme that we experience difficulties with the directions of the Commonwealth Education Department, particularly in its demands for resource agreements.

Tertiary Education, Student Places Mr STEPHAN: In directing my second question to the Minister for Education, I

refer to the provision in the Commonwealth Budget for approximately 2 000 additional student places in Australian universities and colleges of advanced education in 1986. In the light of the Commonwealth's policy to encourage young people to remain at school, I ask: What effect will that policy have on Queensland students?

Mr POWELL: It is timely that the avaUable figures be studied. The Commonwealth Govemment has said that it will expand tertiary education in AustraUa by that number of places. If Queensland were to receive the number of places that it needs to bring it to the Australian average of tertiary places in 1986, 6 800 additional places would have to be provided. When the Commonwealth Govemment says that there will be an additional 2 000 places, it does so on the basis of three-year courses, thus providing only 666 additional places in 1986, the belief being that the 2 000 is then made up by the pipeline effect of having those students in their second and third years and others coming in in their first and second years.

Let me reiterate the position as it is in Queensland, because all honourable members should be working very hard to convince the Commonwealth Govemment of Queensland's needs. I am persuaded to beUeve that the Commonwealth Tertiary Education Commission, through its chairman, with whom I have had discussions, has advised the Commonwealth Govemment correctly. It would seem that either the Commonwealth Minister for Education and Youth Affairs and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister on the Status of Women or the Minister for Finance and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister on Public Service Matters are having their day because Queenslanders have missed out.

The figures for 1984-85 are these: for Queensland, the recurrent Commonwealth grants made to the States, as a percentage of total grants for universities, was 14.3 per cent of all the States' grants, yet Queensland had 16.4 per cent of the students. In the category of colleges of advanced education, Queensland received a total of 15.2 per cent of all grants made to all States, and again, Queensland had 16.4 per cent of the total potential student population. In the category of technical and fiirther education, Queensland received 11.1 per cent of the total amount of Commonwealth money available and, again, Queensland had 16.4 per cent of the total potential student population.

Next year, Queensland will be allocated 6 800 extra places in the period of a year. If one were to use the Commonwealth's own logic and take into account the pipeline


effect, that would mean that 20 000 places are required in Queensland for the next triennium. That means that, in respect of the university sector, Queensland should receive another $20.9m; in the advanced education sector, Queensland should receive another $7.5m and in the technical and further education sector, Queensland should receive $6.5m. Queensland should therefore receive an extra $35m over and above the grants that are being made at the moment.

The impact on students in Queensland has been that they have listened to the rhetoric of the Prime Minister (Mr Hawke). He said that he would provide extra traineeships for people, and I have no objection to that principle. What I do object to is that the Commonwealth Govemment does not follow up its rhetoric with the provision of hard cash so that Queensland's education system can catch up on capital works and then meet the current costs involved in education.

Mr Simpson: The Commonwealth Govemment is not fair dinkum.

Mr POWELL: As the honourable member for Cooroora has said, one could only deduce that the Commonwealth Govemment is not fair dinkum, because it tries to put the blame back onto the States.

In 1973, the Commonwealth Govemment took over total fiinding of tertiary education, and it is about time that the Commonwealth Govemment either accepted honestly that responsibility as it relates to Queensland or, altematively, withdrew from the education field completely. If the Commonwealth Govemment were to withdraw, it ought to hand back to the States their right and proper entitlements to income tax reimbursement.

Regulation of Wholesale Petrol Price Mr McLEAN: In directing a question to the Minister for Employment and Industrial

Affairs, I refer to a vote of no confidence passed by the service station proprietors division of the Motor Traders Association and the circulation of a petition to service station proprietors throughout Queensland calling on the Queensland Govemment to control the wholesale price of petrol. Service station proprietors have claimed that, by taking that action, the Govemment would permanently reduce the price of petrol in Queensland by 4c to 5c. Bearing in mind that vote of no confidence, I ask: When will the Minister take measures to control the rorts, which have been adequately described in the Auditor-General's report on petrol-pricing in Queensland, to stop the collusion that has occurred in setting artificially high petrol prices—particularly in north Queensland—so that lessees will not be discriminated against by oil companies and so that petrol prices wiU be permanently reduced for consumers by the regulation of the wholesale price, as has been recommended?

Mr LESTER: What the honourable member for Bulimba seems to have forgotten is that I am also the Minister in charge of consumer affairs. Of course, one of my responsibilities is to see that, across the board, the people of Queensland pay reasonable prices for fiiel. I carry out that responsibiUty, despite the fact that the Federal Govemment increases the price for fiiel aU the time.

The interesting point that I wish to draw to the attention of aU honourable members is that, over the past two years or so, as an average, Queenslanders have paid the cheapest price for fuel in Australia. Having said that, I also point out that one of the reasons is the absence of a fuel tax in Queensland.

At the present time, there is a price war in Brisbane, and the public are getting a very fair deal indeed. I have received literally hundreds of telephone calls from members of the public saying, "We've never had it so good."

As to the little vote of no confidence that the honourable member was carrying on about^-does he know that there are 500-odd service station proprietors in Brisbane and 2 500 throughout the State, yet approximately only 30 people attended the meeting called


by Mr Harris? So I would not be too worried about any comments like those that were made. The Govemment has no intention of fixing the price, because that would mean only that it would rise.

Small Business Contract Employment Mr McLEAN: In asking a second question of the Minister for Employment and

Industrial Affairs, I refer to the small business contract employment proposal put forward by the Minister and to his statement that that move would create more jobs and better conditions for workers. I ask: Can the Minister possibly explain how he came to that conclusion, when it is obvious to aU that that type of system can only produce an employment option with jobs going to the lowest bidders? As Queenslanders are now the lowest-paid workers in AustraUa, can the Minister say how much below negotiated award rates Queenslanders are expected to accept? What guarantees can the Minister give the workers relative to, firstly, security of employment; secondly, the preservation of wage justice; and, thirdly, the preservation of/or improvement to the health and safety of workers in the work-place?

Mr LESTER: This moming, I cited some statistics that indicate that development projects in Queensland are being initiated at a higher rate than that anywhere else in Australia. The rate was slightly behind that of New South Wales, but on average, Queensland is presently doing the best of any State.

Development means jobs. If the Queensland Govemment implements policies that wiU ensure more jobs, that is a good thing from the point of view of the unemployed. The honourable member said that employees will get a very poor deal. That is not the case at Mudginberri, where the workers are paid over double the rate the union could achieve for them. So the honourable member can understand why a great many workers are now coming to me and saying, "Look, Vince, we're worried about what the unions are doing. We're losing jobs." Because of union activities in the meat industry, 28 500 jobs have been lost. The honourable member cannot deny that. In that industry, since 1980, 15 meatworks have closed down

Mr SPEAKER: Order! There is too much noise in the House and in the gallery. I ask the people in the gallery to be as quiet as possible.

Mr LESTER: As I said, 15 meatworks have closed down, 25 are in an on-and-off situation and another 10 are producing only for the export market. So, under the old system, the unions have not done a very good job for their members. Furthermore, the unions in the metal trades industries have recently lost 30 per cent of their membership.

The honourable member should look at what is happening in the United States. The rough figures I have indicate that 85 per cent of people employed in the United States outside a union award are doing far better than those covered by union awards. It must also be remembered that that type of scheme to which I have referted was started by Ronald Reagan when he was Govemor of Califomia. The people were so impressed by his performance in that position that they elected him as President of the United States. He then implemented that type of system throughout the United States. What did the public think of that? Because the contracts were better and because there was more trade—some of it gained at Australia's expense—they re-elected him with an increased majority. I believe that Australians have to modemise their thinking and accept the contract system, which will provide more jobs in this State and in Australia as a whole.

Attraction of High-technology Industries Mr BOOTH: In asking a question of the Minister for Industry, Small Business and

Technology, I refer to a statement in this morning's Courier-Mail by the Federal Minister for Science and Minister Assisting the Minister for Industry, Technology and Commerce, in which he claimed that Queensland was unlikely to attract industries requiring a high


degree of technical skiU. I ask: Can the Minister inform the House whether that is correct and, if not, why not?

Mr AHERN: I noticed in this moming's issue of The Courier-Mail the statement that was made by Mr Jones. In summary, it is an indictment of the Federal Govemment's policy and an endorsement of what our Education Minister has been saying consistently in the public fomms and at meetings of the Australian Education CouncU in recent times. There is no doubt at all, as the Minister for Education stated to the House this moming, that Queensland has justification for another 6 800 positions in universities and colleges of advanced education if it is simply to come up to the national average. We must have a reasonable allocation from the Federal Govemment and an understanding of that fact.

In recent times the Federal Govemment has said that a further 2 000 permanent positions across Australia wiU be achieved at the end of three years. That is clearly not enough because 6 800 extra positions are required in Queensland today. That is the quantitative position.

I will now comment on the qualitative aspect as well, because that is important. We have a number of students lining up trying to get into computer-science courses in Queensland. We have a small number of positions, but employers are crying out for people with graduate qualifications in computer science. Those are the plain facts of the situation.

Yesterday an employer who operates an office in Brisbane and another in Singapore came to see me. He said, "I advertised for a graduate in computer science and I got three applicants from the whole of Australia. I advertised in Singapore and I got 400 applicants."

The world is moving quicker than Australia in this field. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Boston has one-third of its undergraduates undertaking computer science. In Australia, the Federal Govemment, with sole responsibility in this area, is not waking up to what the rest of the world is doing. Mr Jones, rather than trying to achieve results, is trying in a feeble way to sheet home, to the State Govemments, responsibility for the failure. He should look to his own quarters because he is directly responsible. What he is saying is an indictment of the Federal Govemment's policy.

At the same time, he has not understood that the number of people with tertiary qualifications is only one criterion on whether a State has a successful, coherent, good, positive, technology strategy. It is only one criterion, but it is not the most important one. What is required is a framework of assistance measures that will encourage the commercialisation of innovation by research institutions, teaching institutions or other bodies. We have the technology strategy. We have the framework necessary to encourage the commercialisation of innovation. We have an innovation centre and we have technology parks.

This aftemoon, a range of new initiatives will be announced in the Budget. I think they will put us up well with the leaders in Australia in technology strategy. I am very pleased with what we have. We have a very positive program which, I am quite confident, will work. I can take honourable members to many situations throughout Queensland where it has worked and will be working better in the future.

Queensland Museum Mr BOOTH: I ask the Minister for Works and Housing: Can he advise the House

of the position on the building of the new Queensland Museum at the Cultural Centre and when the present museum will close to the public?

Mr WHARTON: A tender has been accepted for the Library foundations. Tenders are being called for the Library building. We will soon know the result of them. I should say that the Museum buUding will be finished before the end of 1985. I take it that, by that time, the old Museum will be available for other use.

68704—27

786 5 September 1985 Canned Fmits Marketing Act Amendment Bill

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The time allotted for questions has now expired.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT

Electricity Industry Dispute; High Court Judgment Hon. N. J. HARPER (Aubum—Minister for Justice and Attomey-General) (12.30

p.m.), by leave: This morning, the High Court delivered judgment in two cases relating to the recent electricity dispute. The court found in favour of Queensland in the case conceming discriminatory legislation forced through by the Federal Government for the purpose of denying, to the Queensland Govemment, rights enjoyed by any other party appearing before the Federal Conciliation and Arbitration Commission. All of the judges held major parts of the legislation invalid. Two of the judges would have found minor parts of the legislation valid but the majority would have found them invalid as well.

This decision completely vindicates Queensland's view that the way in which the Federal Govemment and the unions were trying to override Queensland's rights was contrary to the Constitution. The effect of this decision and the other decision in which the court declined to overmle the long series of decisions on what constitutes an interstate dispute means that, if the unions wish to seek a Federal award, they must go through the ordinary processes and not through some special process discriminating against Queensland imposed upon the Queensland Govemment by the Hawke Labor Govemment.

It remains to be seen whether the unions can make out a case for a Federal award. It is plain that any resumption of industrial action taken by the unions, as a result of the High Court decision, deserves to be condemned roundly and will no doubt be seen by the public of Queensland as nothing more than bloody-mindedness.

If it supports such action, the Australian Labor Party will lose any remaining credibility—that is, if any does remain.

CANNED FRUITS MARKETING ACT AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading—Resumption of Debate Debate resumed from 21 August (see p. 52) on Mr Tumer's motion—

"That the Bill be now read a second time."

Mr KRUGER (Murmmba) (12.32 p.m.): The Opposition is aware of the time restriction and will assist the Govemment in attempting to finish the debate before the luncheon recess.

The Opposition has no real objection to the legislation because it is complementary legislation. The Canned Fmits Marketing Act was introduced in 1981 as complementary Commonwealth/State legislation aimed at overcoming serious marketing problems faced by canners of apricots, peaches and pears at that time. The Queensland industry is not significant in comparison with that in the other States and, as a result, does not have major problems. However, that is not to say that, in the future, Queensland will not need to be concemed about this industry.

The legislation improved the marketing outlook for the canned deciduous fmits industry and, as I have said on other occasions in this place, the marketing of our primary products is very important. It is common practice in Australia to experiment and improve production without giving consideration to marketing that produce. Apart from a slump a few years ago, the canned fmits industry has maintained reasonable sales on overseas markets, and the marketing of that produce has been handled better than many of Australia's other primary export products.

Queensland does not produce commercial quantities of canned deciduous fmits, but the original legislation assisted Queensland's canned pineapple industry to overcome

Canned Fmits Marketing Act Amendment Bill 5 September 1985 787

market dismptions. The canned pineapple industry has been a major industry in this State for many years.

The Bill extends the marketing arrangements for a further three years, which makes good sense because the arrangements have been working very weU.

The Minister pointed out that the Bill is part of a number of pieces of complementary legislation passed by the Commonwealth and the States. There is no good reason why Queensland should not be part of that process. Although Queensland does not have a great deal of this type of produce at the moment, in the future it could. The Opposition is very, very pleased to see satisfactory legislation covering the marketing of canned fmits.

The Bill provides for the improved functioning of the corporation and requires that that body develop a corporate plan and annual operational plans. That those plans be put into effect is very, very important. Only benefit can come from such things. If those things are not done, further problems could arise in the future.

The penalty provisions are being updated. As prices and costs are always changing, it is appropriate that any penalties relate to current-day values.

The Minister said that the Bill has the full support of the Queensland friiit industry. I have raised this question time and time again. I tmst that the Minister has had appropriate discussions with all sections of the industry. The reason I say that is that at times the Minister's predecessor told the Opposition that an industry supported a particular piece of legislation but, when members of the Opposition had time to get out in the field, they found that only sections of the industry concemed had been consulted and the grassroots operators in the industry and the producers had not been consulted. That has happened in the sugar industry, the dairying industry and other industries, but 1 shall not go into great depth on that except to say that, when the Opposition receives an assurance from a Minister that legislation is supported by an industry, it would be nice to think that the Minister has in fact done his homework and that aU the detaUs do not require checking. It is possible to go to a sectional group committee that represents producers and not always have revealed exactly what is required.

The Minister claimed that, because in the near fiiture it is not likely that Queensland's production will exceed the trigger-point of 50 000 basic cartons per season, the State's involvement in the scheme is relatively minor. As I have already said, although there is not a great likelihood of that occurring, it is nice to be part of the legislation.

Because of the sugar content in canned fmits, the sugar industry is involved. If the canned fhiits industry can be made more viable, it is possible that it wiU use more sugar, and that will assist the sugar industry. In the canned fhiit industry, altemative sweeteners have not been proven to the same degree as sugar. Because of the so-caUed health risk of sugar, I know that the industry produces some unsweetened canned fhiits. That is a matter for the individual. It is not the role of this House to get over involved in that. The State may as weU gain a benefit from those who desire sweeteners in thgfr canned fruits. That would be in the interests of the sugar industry of the State.

At present the only significant cannery in Queensland is the Goldem Circle Cannery at Northgate which, for a long time, has had its ups and downs in the canning of pineapples in this State. At present that cannery processes a large quantity of deciduous fruit. I do not know the exact quantities and I do not wish to go into that. That has proved to be very effective for the viability of the cannery because, when pineapples are out of season, the cannery can be kept in production by processing deciduous fhiits. Because of the method of producing pineapples at different times of the year, the pineapple industry has changed a great deal. Even with the production of pineapples spaced over a greater period, it is quite reasonable to fill any gaps with the processing of deciduous fmits when the canning of pineapples is not at full production. Everybody benefits from that.


As this is complementary legislation, it cannot be condemned, I feel sure that those Opposition members who wish to make a contribution to the debate wish merely to make a few points about problems that might occur with imports of produce into this State,

The Opposition has no real trouble with the legislation and will be supporting the Bill through all stages.

Mr CAMPBELL (Bundaberg) (12.39 p.m.): As has been said, the Act was proclaimed in 1981 and has been reasonably effective in improving the market outlook for the industry. Queensland does not produce commercial quantities of canned deciduous fmits, but the canning by Golden Circle of products with mixes of 55 per cent or more of the specific fmits that are covered by the legislation, or canned pears, could, in times to come, exceed the basic production level of 50 000 cartons per season.

It is very important for Queensland to have a stable market of canned deciduous fmits, to avoid the severe dismptions that have occurred previously to the canned pineapple market. It is very important that support be given to the Golden Circle Cannery.

In 1984, the Golden Circle Cannery had a sales tumover of $117.9m. That wiU help to support the industry. The 1984 annual report of the Golden Circle Cannery contains some disturbing facts.

It states— "Our pineapple intake, which for the last two years has been insufficient to

meet the Australian demand, let alone provide any surplus for our estabUshed export markets "

In other words, Australia is not satisfying its own demand. The report further states— "Imports of pineapples into Australia for the year ending November 1984

amounted to 10,628 tonnes fresh fmit equivalent, compared to 9,491 tonnes for 1983."

It is disturbing that although Australia has the soil, the climate and the growers, it is reaching a stage at which it will have to depend upon imported products.

The report further states— "Imports of canned and frozen vegetables into AustraUa have shown dramatic

increases in recent times, particularly in so far as frozen peas are concemed." The Minister should reflect on those statements and examine what is being done to support and protect the growers in that industry.

Queensland is protecting an industry that produces 107 900 tonnes of pineapples, 614 tonnes of apricots, 1 823 tonnes of peaches and 328 tonnes of pears. Market stabilisation will help 558 pineapple-growers, 63 pear-growers and two peach-growers. It is important that protection be afforded and that the Golden Circle Cannery be able to enjoy a profitable future.

The trends in the canning industry ought to be examined. I know that the honourable member for Burnett (Mr Wharton) would have been confronted by many growers who said, "Let's start a canning industry in Bundaberg," or, "Let's start a canning industry in Bowen." Honourable members are confronted with such suggestions all the time.

Consideration should be given to decentralising vegetable-processing industries. There are diseconomies in decentralising canning plants. One problem relates to freight; others relate to the extra weight of cans and the water that is used in the canning process. I do not believe that sufficient economies exist to warrant the operation of canning plants all over Queensland. It might be folly to establish canning plants if they will not be profitable. However, decentralisation of food-processing plants should be considered in terms of the snap-freezing and dried-food processes.

Canned Fmits Marketing Act Amendment Bill 5 September 1985 789

I caU on the Department of Primary Industries, through the Minister, to consider decentralising those processing plants in terms of snap-freezing and dried-food processing. It may not be economical now, but I believe that Queensland has the basic information conceming the required throughput, including the requirements of growers, to provide for those plants. That would be good information for the future. Areas such as Bundaberg may be suitable for a food-processing plant that incorporates a snap-freezing or drying process.

The BUl is complementary legislation that has been required of the Queensland Govemment. Opposition members support it because it will protect Queensland's canning industry.

Mr CASEY (Mackay) (12.44 p.m.): The legislation is very important. As stated by the Minister in his introductory remarks, the intent of the BiU is to overcome serious marketing problems experienced by the canners of apricots, peaches, pears and juices. Ostensibly, as the Minister clearly indicated in his second-reading speech, the legislation does not apply as much to Queensland as it does to the other States. However, it has a considerable number of connotations for Queensland.

I will draw the attention of the House to a few recent occurrances that could put at risk some of the State's well-estabUshed juice industries. The fmit juice industry must be taken as a whole. Although there is not a big market for juice from apples, peaches, apricots, pears and deciduous fmits generally in Queensland, they are very important in the context of the overaU share of the juice market that the Queensland canned industry holds.

I was very concemed about an article that appeared two weeks ago in the commercial pages of the local newspapers announcing a joint venture between the current high-flyer in the commercial world in Queensland, a company called Ariadne Australia Ltd, and the New Zealand Apple and Pear Marketing Board. Ariadne AustraUa Ltd is involved in considerable activities on the Australian share market. It is involved in a considerable number of companies. At present, Ariadne Australia Ltd is attempting to buy a large share-holding in QUF Industries Ltd in Queensland. It has a considerable investment portfolio in many other companies in AustraUa. The company is involved in the mining industry and a number of other industries in this State. As recently as this moming, the newspapers announced the company's involvement in new ventures. It also has a big involvement with Repco, a manufacturing group.

Ariadne Australia Ltd is not a small company. It has enjoyed a remarkable rise in the commercial world in Queensland since 1977, when it bought out the Federal Broom Company Pty Ltd in New South Wales, initially through a New Zealand company. The company has diversified and spread its activities in different directions. However, with its New Zealand contacts, Ariadne Australia Ltd has now entered into an agreement with the New Zealand Apple and Pear Marketing Board to distribute the fmit juices and drinks manufactured by that board in New Zealand throughout Australia.

I believe that that Queensland company will do more to upset the juice industry in Australia than any other, because it is operating quite clearly under the new guidelines of the Closer Economic Relations (CER) agreement with New Zealand. I point out for the benefit of all honourable members that by 1988 Australia will have virtually a completely free exchange, free of any tariffs whatsoever, between Australia and New Zealand, other than on very few small commodity items.

About two months ago, I visited New Zealand and took the opportunity of talking to our trade people, especially in Auckland, which is the main trade centre of New Zealand. I was amazed to discover that at present the flow of trade under the CER agreement is definitely against Australia.

Queensland businesses and businessmen have hardly been seen in New Zealand. I take the opportunity of drawing the attention of Queensland businessmen to the advantage that can be gained for manufacturing industries in this State by converting primary


products into downstream products, or value-added products, if that term is preferred, that can then be sold and exported to New Zealand on a very favourable market for Queensland.

The opposite situation now exists. As it now stands, Ariadne Australia Ltd is one of the Queensland companies that will benefit. However, the industry that will benefit with it will be the New Zealand manufacturing industry, not the Queensland manufacturing industry. The Queensland industry must get its act together. The State Govemment must accept a greater responsibility for the establishment of trade, particularly with New Zealand.

I become more concemed when I examine the deal between Ariadne Australia Ltd and the New Zealand Apple and Pear Marketing Board, because it has already been alleged that that particular board, in order to make up its quotas, is importing low-cost juice concentrate from Third World countries and other countries. That low-cost concentrate is being used to supplement a product to be sold on the Australian market in competition with our own fresh juices. That must be a matter of grave concem to the Minister for Works and Housing (Mr Wharton), whose electorate is based on the juice industry. Such a deal, involving the use of importation from Third World countries, is contrary to the intent of the Closer Economic Relations agreement. That requires investigation.

Queensland has a small apple-juice market, principally through the Golden Circle Cannery at Northgate. The 1984 annual report of the cannery, recently tabled in the House, to which my colleague the member for Bundaberg (Mr Campbell) referred, discloses that the quantity of juicing apples from Stanthorpe was dramatically reduced from 7 333 tonnes in 1983 to 2 817 tonnes in 1984. Consequently, the apple-juice pack has almost been eliminated from Golden Circle's range. That must have had a considerable effect on Stanthorpe, but I do not hear the Minister for Tourism, National Parks, Sport and The Arts (Mr McKechnie) referring to it.

The Golden Circle Cannery was well known throughout Australia for its pineapples. However, in the last 12 months its canned pineapples have almost virtually disappeared from retailers' shelves. Because of imports from overseas, the industry is in decline. So much for the National Party's interest in this State's primary industries!

I draw these matters to the attention of the Minister because the matter deserves closer scmtiny. I welcome the constmction by the Gow group of a new citms-juice plant at Mundubbera. It will be of considerable benefit to the area. Since 1980, Anneva Pty Ltd has manufactured Sun Coast fmit juices on the north coast. Those Queensland juice industries are now at considerable risk. Ariadne will add not a thing to the State's employment because it will purchase from the New Zealand Apple and Pear Marketing Board only. Consequently, jobs in Queensland's manufacturing industry are at risk. That must be of concem to the Govemment, to the State and to the nation.

Hon. N. J. TURNER (Warrego—Minister for Primary Industries) (12.53 p.m.), in reply: I thank honourable members for their contributions to the debate. The honourable member for Murmmba (Mr Kmger) cortectly indicated that it is complementary legislation. It has the full support of the Queensland fmit industry. He mentioned the amount of sugar that is used by the cannery. It is a major purchaser of sugar and it is vital that it continue to play such a significant role.

The honourable member for Bundaberg (Mr Campbell) spoke about the need for stable markets. The legislation helps to create them, particularly for the pineapple industry. He referred also to the competition from overseas imports experienced by our vegetable industries. My department has recently completed a full-scale examination of the problem and has prepared a substantial submission to the Industries Assistance Commission seeking more effective protection for the Queensland industry.

The honourable member for Mackay (Mr Casey) drew attention to the problems periodically experienced by Australia's fmit-juice industry. He expressed his concem about the implications of the CER agreements and outlined his experience when he

Estimates-in-Chief, 1985-1986 5 September 1985 791

visited New Zealand recently. CER is closely monitored by my department. At Australian Agricultural Council meetings, I have expressed my concem about its effect on Queensland industries. I assure the honourable member that the matter is kept under close and constant review. We have been reasonably successful in our negotiations with the New Zealand Govemment on items such as fish and tomatoes.

There is only a short time available for my reply, so I once again thank honourable members for their contributions.

Motion (Mr Tumer) agreed to.

Committee Mr Menzel (Mulgrave) in the chair; Hon. N. J. Tumer (Warrego—Minister for

Primary Industries) in charge of the Bill.

Clause 1—Short title and citation—

Mr CAMPBELL (12.55 p.m.): I wish to ask the Minister whether the Department of Primary Industries would examine the feasibility of decentralising the food-processing industry, and I instance dry-freezing and snap-freezing plants? I also wish to ask whether the Minister would instmct his department to undertake a study of such a proposal?

Mr TURNER: In reply to the honourable member for Bundaberg, I point out that any question of decentralisation of industry is purely and simply in the hands of private individuals or companies, and depends on whether they see a need to diversify. At the present moment, I do not think that I would direct the research staff of the department to embark upon the program mentioned by the honourable member. However, if it could be demonstrated that a need existed for such a program, I would consider the possibility of conducting an investigation.

Clause 1, as read, agreed to.

Clauses 2 to 8, as read, agreed to.

Bill reported, without amendment.

Third Reading

Bill, on motion of Mr Tumer, by leave, read a third time.

Sitting suspended from 12.57 to 2.15 p.m.

TREASURER'S FINANCIAL TABLES

Hon. Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN (Barambah—Premier and Treasurer) presented the tables relating to the Treasurer's Financial Statement for the year 1985-86.

Ordered to be printed.

ESTIMATES-IN-CHIEF, 1985-1986 Mr SPEAKER read a message from His Excellency the Govemor forwarding the

Estimates of the Probable Ways and Means and Expenditure of the Govemment of Queensland for the year ending 30 June 1986.

Estimates ordered to be printed, and referred to Committee of Supply.

792 5 September 1985 Supply (Financial Statement)

SUPPLY

Opening of Committee—Financial Statement Hon. Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN (Barambah—Premier and Treasurer) (2.17

p.m.), who was received with Govemment "Hear, hears!", said—

INTRODUCTION Mr Row,

I present the State Budget for 1985-86.

This Budget has been framed in very difficult circumstances.

These circumstances have not been within the State's control.

On the one hand, we have intemational markets for our exports still not back to normal levels with sugar particularly dealing in a very oversuppUed world market.

We also have a Federal Govemment with the apparent philosophy of trying to rein back its deficit at the expense of the States generally and Queensland in particular.

On a more positive note, the Budget has been assisted by the continuing underlying strength of the Queensland economy, which has been established and built up by the Govemment over the years.

On balance, I believe with the assistance of this State Budget we can look forward with confidence to an even stronger economic situation in Queensland in 1985-86.

Up to date relevant economic indicators support this view:—

• retaU sales in Queensland are growing strongly, with an increase of 9.7 per cent in the year ended 30th June, 1985 compared with 7.1 per cent for Australia as a whole.

• inflation in the June quarter of 1985 as measured by the Consumer Price Index was lower in Brisbane than in any other State capital city, up only 1.7 per cent compared with an average for aU capital cities of 2.4 per cent.

• exports rose sharply in the last year from $5,474 million for the twelve months to June 1984 to $6,602 milUon in the twelve months to June 1985, an increase of 20.6 per cent.

• mineral production also showed significant increases, with coal production in 1984-85 being an estimated 54.3 miUion tonnes, an increase of 23 per cent in volume on the previous year. Queensland is now the largest coal producing State in Australia.

• constmction activity is strong, especially in the area of commercial and industrial building. The value of work approved for buildings other than dweUings in 1984-85 was $1,348.2 mUlion, an increase of 13.2 per cent over the 1983-84 level.

• approvals for new dwellings in Queensland in 1984-85 were 19.8 per cent of national approvals compared with our indicative population share of 16.1 per cent.

• employment opportunities are increasing, with a consequent decline in the unemployment rate.

It is tme that our unemployment rate remains above the national average. However, employment grovrth in Queensland since unemployment peaked in Febmary this year has been above the national average. This is an encouraging sign.

Supply (Financial Statement) 5 September 1985 793

Overall, we are continuing to build on the high plateau of economic development we have created, while the rest of Australia is moving to catch up.

For a more detailed assessment of the performance of the economy, I refer Honourable Members to the accompanying Budget Paper entitled "The Queensland Economy"

COMMONWEALTH-STATE FINANCIAL RELATIONS A critical element in the Budget preparation this year has been the discrimination

by the Commonwealth against Queensland.

This has denied the State many millions of dollars to which it is clearly entitled.

The Commonwealth has done this by attempting to portray itself as a Govemment of fiscal responsibility, with a commitment to reducing the Commonwealth budget deficit. It has achieved a lower Budget deficit—but at the expense of the States, particularly Queensland. It has not attempted to rein in its own expenditures.

Let us look more closely at this so called fiscal responsibility.

In the Commonwealth budget introduced on August 20, payments to Queensland from all Commonwealth sources increased by 5.3 per cent compared with an increase in Commonwealth discretionary expenditure for its own purposes of almost 12 per cent.

Over the past two years, Queensland has received an increase in Commonwealth payments of 14.5 per cent while in the same period Commonwealth discretionary expenditure on its own purposes has grown 29.4 per cent.

I might add that Commonwealth tax collections in the same period increased by nearly 32 per cent.

Mr Row, it is important that the people of Queensland appreciate just what the present Commonwealth Govemment is attempting to do to the States and to Queensland in particular.

I will briefly refer to some of the more critical areas.

General Revenue Funding In the area of General Revenue Funding, that is the retum to the States of a share

of taxes collected from each of us, the Commonwealth has changed the mles to the detriment of all the States.

State grants are no longer a percentage of tax collections but are now in reality any figure the Commonwealth desires to nominate.

If the previous tax sharing formula had remained in place, Queensland would have received an additional $137.6 million this financial year.

The Grants Commission The Grants Commission was given the task of reviewing the States' relativities

under the Tax Sharing Arrangements.

In our view, the recommendations of the Commission were based on a hasty review which made major revisions to the previously accepted methodology and in respect of which Queensland has been denied an adequate opportunity to discuss or debate.

The change in interstate relativities, which resulted from the Commission's Report has meant an estimated $134.7 million less as Queensland's share of the total tax pool for 1985-86.


Identified Health Grants By changing the grovrth factor in the general revenue grants from tax collections to

the Consumer Price Index, the Commonwealth has effectively reduced its commitments in respect of the Identified Health Grants to all States.

Had the Commonwealth not changed the mles, the State would be more than $8 million better off.

Medicare I am sure the people of Queensland are weU aware of the Medicare debate.

The Commonwealth Budget documents show that Queensland is to receive an estimated $73.4 million in 1985-86 under the current Medicare arrangements.

Compared with Queensland's $29 per capita, the other States receive per capita

• for South Australia, $81

• for Tasmania, $75

• for Westem Australia, $63

• for Victoria, $63

• for New South Wales, $67

If Queensland were to receive only its population share of Medicare funds—and, after all, we all pay our fair share of the Commonwealth levy which funds Medicare— the State would receive an additional $82 miUion in 1985-86.

Overall, in the key areas of

• General Revenue Assistance,

• Grants Commission Recommendations,

• Identified Health Grants, and

• Medicare,

conscious decisions by the Commonwealth will short-change Queensland by over $362 million for 1985-86.

This shortfall of $362 miUion is quite apart from the long-standing Commonwealth underfunding of Queensland in the areas of specific purpose payments for Education, Housing and Roads, which wiU cost Queensland about $160 million in 1985-86.

THE 1985-86 STATE BUDGET Despite the impact of the Commonwealth decisions I have just outlined, the

Govemment has had clear and firm objectives for the preparation of this Budget. These are—

• To continue to present a balanced budget.

• Not to bring in new taxes or increases in existing taxes and charges other than to maintain their value as required by the Financial Administration and Audit Act.

• To maintain the State's normal Capital Works effort.

• To maintain our commitment to the $600 million Special Major Capital Works Program.

• To maintain essential services at present levels as a minimum.

• To implement the recommendations of the Task Force on Employment.

The 1985-86 Budget will achieve the objectives I have outlined.


Key Features of the 1985-86 Consolidated Revenue Fund Budget I do not propose to analyse the source and distribution of funds in great detail in

this Speech, but I commend to all Honourable Members the accompanying documents—

• The Estimates of Probable Ways and Means

• The Summary tables in regard to the Public Accounts

• Departmental Services and Programs: A Budget Perspective

• The State Capital Works Programs

These documents provide a detailed analysis of the State's recurrent and capital Expenditure proposals.

The Departmental Services and Programs document has significantly built upon the introductory work in this direction last year. The document provides a good appreciation of the full range and extent of Govemment activities and services in the coming year.

The State Capital Works Programs document provides considerable detail on the nature and scope of capital works to be undertaken by the Govemment or by the various statutory authorities of the Govemment.

1 tum now to the key features of this year's Budget.

• A Balanced Budget Total outlays from the Consolidated Revenue Fund Budget in 1985-86 are estimated

at $5,048.3 million, while revenues are expected to be $5,048.6 million, leaving a small operating surplus of $323,277.

Taking into account the accumulated surplus of $166,102 at the close of 1984-85, the accumulated surplus of the Consolidated Revenue Fund at the close of the 1985-86 financial year is expected to be $489,379.

The Budget will therefore be balanced.

• Capital Works The financial year 1985-86 will be the second year of the $600 mUlion Special Major

Capital Works Program.

As I indicated in last year's Budget Speech, the Special Major Capital Works Program represents a $600 million boost to the normal govemmental Capital Works Program over two and a half years.

The Program has been devised and implemented with the dual goals of maintaining the high level of employment achieved whilst the large Natural Resource Development Schemes were underway, and providing additional facilities such as schools, dams, roads, housing and so on for the benefit of all Queenslanders.

Expenditure on the Program is now in top gear, and projects being funded from the Program can be seen throughout the State.

It is worthwhile to recap on the Program, its goals and its achievements.

The Program aims to provide capital works in a number of key areas:

- Education $ 100 million over and above the normal Capital Works Program has been earmarked

to meet needs for education facilities across the total education sector.

A total of $17.2 million was expended in 1984-85 and the expected expenditure this year is $64.6 million.


During 1985-86

• four new and three replacement primary schools are expected to be completed • five secondary schools and one senior college will be completed as well as major

works at a further four • four new special schools, four new preschools/early intervention centres and six

special needs units for secondary schools as well as one special education assessment centre will be completed

• 44 new preschool facilities are expected to be completed, over and above the 13 completed in 1984-85

• sixteen early education facilities will come on stream.

- Water Resources $100 milUon has been made available, in addition to normal capital works funding

for new works and for acceleration of works on existing water resource projects.

In all, thirteen water resources projects will be accelerated under the Program including the Bundaberg Irrigation Project, Mareeba-Dimbulah Irrigation Works, Barker-Barambah Irrigation Project, Eton Irrigation Project, Lower Mary Irrigation Project, Gyranda Weir and Proserpine Dam.

Expenditure in 1984-85 totalled $12.6 miUion, and a further $42.2 milUon is expected to be expended in 1985-86.

- Roads $100 million has been made available under this Program for work on the approaches

to the Gateway Bridge to provide major access to the Pacific Highway in the south and the Bmce Highway in the north.

The linking of the 2 highways via the Bridge will have the dual advantages of substantially reducing traffic congestion in the inner Brisbane City area and providing direct access to our major tourist areas.

To the 30th June, 1985 seven contracts totalling $24 million had been let and expenditure in 1985-86 is estimated at $58.2 miUion.

Because of Commonwealth road funding shortfalls, the Govemment has decided to allocate $15 million over the next two years from other areas of the Program for roadworks to ensure that the momentum of road development is maintained. Of this amount $10 million is expected to be spent in 1985/86.

The Main Roads portion of the Special Major Capital Works Program will now be $115 million.

- Hospitals

The $107 million contribution from the Special Major Capital Works Program will supplement the normal Hospital Capital Program taking the total expenditure Program on hospitals to $207 milUon.

Some 22 hospitals throughout the State will benefit from this Program with major contributions to facilities at Townsville, Cairns, Southport and Nambour.

Expenditure on the overaU $207 mUlion Program totalled $89.5 million in 1984-85 and a further $97.6 million is expected to be spent in 1985-86.

- Government Buildings and Other Special Works

Total funds now allocated under the Program for Government Buildings and other Special Works are $158 million.

The constmction of a major Government accommodation building in Mary Street is now well advanced.


Work has also commenced on the building on the comer of Mary and George Streets, and the Mapping and Surveying BuUding in Vulture Street. An office buUding for the Weights and Measures Branch of the Consumer Affairs Bureau will also be commenced in 1985-86.

Govemment office buildings costing $14.2 million wiU be completed in Bundaberg, Caims and Townsville in 1985-86.

- Crown Employee Housing Of the $20 million allocated for this purpose, $3.5 million was expended in 1984-

85 and expenditure in 1985-86 is anticipated to be $14.8 milUon.

Over 250 new additional houses wiU be provided for public servants, teachers and railway employees.

The $600 million Special Major Capital Works Program has made very good progress with expenditure in its first year exceeding expectations.

Expenditure under the Program in 1984-85 totalled $94 mUUon and a further $306.8 million is estimated to be expended in 1985-86.

I am confident that this Program wiU be a resounding success, both in terms of an added impetus to the State's economy and in providing needed facilities for the citizens of Queensland.

• Taxation One option open to the Govemment in the wake of the Commonwealth's treatment

of Queensland would be to increase the State taxation burden by either increasing taxes, or levying one of the many taxes imposed by the other State Govemments.

This approach is not acceptable to my Govemment. There will be—

• No petrol tax in Queensland,

• No tobacco tax,

• No financial institutions duty, and

• No extra pay-roll tax levy on large firms.

The imposition of taxes such as these could only act as a disincentive to continued economic growth in Queensland.

Rather than increasing taxation, it has been possible to provide for further reforms in the pay-roll tax area.

From 1st January, 1986 the maximum annual pay-roll tax exemption level of $270,000 wiU be increased to $300,000.

The tapering arrangements for pay-rolls above that level will also be amended so that the maximum exemption will cease at an annual pay-roll level of $1.2 miUion rather than $424,000 as at present.

Whereas employers with up to about 25 employees benefit under the existing taper arrangements, the new arrangements will extend the benefit to employers with up to about 65 employees.

The cost of this concession is estimated at over $16 million in a fiiU year.

At the same time, the existing minimum pay-roll exemption of $39,000 will be abolished which will bring Queensland into line with the position generaUy applying in other States.

In accordance with the requirements of the Financial Administration and Audit Act, fees and charges have been reviewed having regard for cost increases and where appropriate increases have been or are in the process of being implemented.


• Maintenance of Essential Services The Budget provides for Govemment services to be maintained at present levels

as a minimum. Also, new Programs or enhancements to existing programs are being developed for implementation to continue the improvements to services and programs and for provision to meet increased demands arising from population growth.

An additional 1,108 teachers have been provided for in 1985-86 to cover increased enrolments flowing from Queensland's increase in population and to take the next step in the program to reduce class sizes. Added to the increase of 1,155 announced in the 1984-85 Budget, the Govemment has increased teacher numbers by 2,263 in two years.

Of this increase, 308 have been allocated to the TAFE sector—173 in 1984-85 and 135 in 1985-86.

The Budget also provides for an additional 270 nurses and other hospital staff to meet both the increase in population numbers and to service and staff new facilities.

The Budget also provides for an additional 104 police officers, taking swom officer strength to 4,921.

Apart from the staff increases I have just outlined, the Budget provides for enhancement of services in a number of key areas.

These are:

- Education - The implementation of stage two of a three year Program to introduce

microcomputers into secondary schools at a cost of $2.9 million in 1985-86. - Increases of 7 per cent in per capita grants to non-Govemment schools from

third term 1985. Primary grants will rise to $411 per student per annum, while secondary grants will rise to $666 per student per annum. The cost in a full year will be $4 million.

- Increases in text book allowances for students in grades 8, 9 and 11 in line with cost increases. Allowances will rise:

from $45 to $48 for students in Grade 8

from $55 to $58 for students in Grade 9

from $90 to $98 for students in Grade 11 - Increases in remote area allowances for students in the more distant parts of

the State.

The maximum allowances for primary and secondary students will increase from $806 and $1,195 to $945 and $1,261 respectively. Allowances for eligible students boarding at hostels will be increased from $350 to $369. Travel allowances will also be increased with the maximum allowance being increased from $450 to $475.

- Funds available for school conveyance schemes, including the introduction of a new transport scheme for intellectually handicapped preschool children, will increase overall by 11.0 per cent to $43.4 miUion. The allocation includes increases in the various allowances to take account of cost increases.

- Special consideration has been given to the preschool sector. The Government has been particularly concerned by the decision of the Commonwealth Govemment to cease funding for preschool education from 31st December, 1985.

This decision is typical of many we have seen from the Commonwealth in recent years. Having built up expectations of continuing support, the Commonwealth pulls out leaving the State to pick up the shortfall.


The Govemment has taken the view that the Commonwealth's disregard for community and State preschools should not act to the detriment of children and their parents. The State will therefore continue to provide, from its own resources, support to the preschool area as if the Commonwealth cuts had not been made. The State will continue to provide up to a maximum of 80 per cent of approved salary costs to approved community kindergartens. The Govemment will continue to fiind State preschools to the full requirement. The additional cost to the State Budget will be $6.6 milUon annually. The Govemment's decision means that there will be no requirement for kindergartens to impose draconian increases in fees that would otherwise have been necessary to offset the Commonwealth shortfall.

- Health

The Budget provides for— - $1.8 million towards a Commonwealth/State Program of $3.6 million for the

National Campaign Against Dmg Abuse - $0.8 million towards testing, educational support and counselling programs for

AIDS. - An additional $1.3 million for State commitments under the new Home and

Community Care Program.

- Employment and Industrial Affairs A special additional allocation of $2 million has been provided in the Budget for

Special Employment Opportunity Programs. The Programs are targeted to SF>ecific areas and include:

• A Self Employment Venture Scheme providing loan/grant assistance of up to $4,000 for individuals and $8,000 for partnerships to assist unemployed persons to estabUsh their own smaU businesses.

• A Local Employment Development Program providing grants of up to $5,000 to assist local or community groups to develop local employment opportunities.

• An Innovative Employment and Training Program providing grants of up to $30,000 to local and community groups to enhance employment readiness of the unemployed.

• Private Sector Employment and Local Govemment Training Programs to develop vocational skills for the unemployed.

Provision has also been made for an expansion of the Govemment's activities in the area of traineeships which provide an excellent complement to apprenticeship training. A very successful traineeship Program for hospitality and catering services was undertaken in 1984-85 in the Caims area.

State Govemment support will be provided for over 340 apprentices in Queensland employed under Group Apprenticeship Schemes.

Allowances paid to apprentices attending block release training will also be increased by 12 per cent from 1st January, 1986. The new maximum rate wiU be $37.90 per week.

- Industry Development In line with the Govemment's commitment to smaU business in Queensland a

substantially enhanced grant of $1.4 million will be made available to the SmaU Business Development Corporation in 1985-86. This will enable the Corporation to double its


staff from 14 in 1984-85 to 28 in 1985-86 and to continue the expansion of the Corporation's activities.

Funds are included in the provision of $1.4 million for establishment of a "Small Business House" as a focal point of small business activities.

- $5 million is included in the 1985-86 Budget for Q-Net, the Govemment's pilot satellite communications network using the Aussat Satellite,

- $700,000 is provided for technology policy and development, and - $250,000 is provided for the Department of Industry Development's

telecommunciations project.

- Police and State Emergency Service The effective functioning of a modem police force requires increasingly sophisticated

equipment and technology.

In addition to the 104 increase in police strength, provision is made for

• $3.9 million for further extensions of the police computer system

• $1.1 million for communications equipment including a three phase radio communication network.

Police stations at Goodna, Emerald, Noosa and the Gold Coast (other than Burleigh Heads) will be made operational on a 24 hour basis in 1985-86.

State Emergency Service grants to local authorities are to be increased by up to 7.1 per cent, effective forthwith with a new maximum grant of $1,900 per annum being payable.

- Primary Industries Funds available to the Department of Primary Industries for 1985-86 have increased

to $105.5 million.

The allocation includes - $21.4 mUlion for the Eradication of Bmcellosis and Tuberculosis Campaign - $360,000 for Research into Food Irradiation Techniques - $440,000 for Torres Strait Fisheries Research.

A further $ 1 million has been provided to the Department of Harbours and Marine for Fish Management Programs covering the Torres Strait, East Coast Trawl and Momington Island Trawl Fisheries.

The Food Irradiation Research proposal holds tremendous prospects for export of our primary industry products, particularly for fresh fmits and vegetables to markets such as the Middle East.

- Children's Services An additional $1.1 million has been made available to the Department of Children's

Services as follows—

• $427,000 in additional State funding towards commitments under the Supported Accommodation Assistance Program, and

• $650,000 to enable increases in a number of Programs, including increases in allowances to foster parents, maintenance of licensed institutions and assistance to famUies.

- Welfare Services 1986 will be celebrated as the Year of the Parent and an amount of $200,000 will

be provided during 1986 for this purpose including $120,000 in this financial year.

An amount of $500,000 has been allocated to enable progressive appointment during the year of a further 134 prison officers to serve the needs of the prison system.


- Rate Remission for Pensioners Under the rate remission scheme for pensioners the Govemment provides a subsidy

to eligible pensioners of up to 20 per cent of the cost of local authority rates and charges up to a maximum of $140 per annum.

In recognition of increases in rates and charges that have taken place, this maximum wiU be increased to $150 per annum from 1st January, 1986,

• Task Force on Employment In its April 1985 report, the Task Force on Employment made recommendations

in ten specific areas. All of the recommendations have been or are in the process of being addressed and I refer to each.

(i) Queensland Industry Development Corporation The first recommendation of the Task Force was the establishment of a corporation

which would promote the development of primary, secondary and tertiary industries in Queensland.

During the current Session of Parliament, the Govemment will introduce legislation to estabUsh a new financing body to be called the Queensland Industry Development Corporation.

The Corporation will operate on a commercial basis, and wiU fill a gap in existing capital markets. Finance wiU be directed to those projects or proposals which are potentially viable, but which lack the necessary capital or security to meet normal banking criteria.

Where the Corporation is required to administer Govemment schemes of assistance involving other than normal commercial artangements, the Consolidated Revenue Fund will provide appropriate financial adjustments to the Corporation.

The Corporation will seek to encourage innovative or technologically-oriented investments in industries where Queensland has particular skills, products or advantages to exploit.

Emphasis will be placed on those projects which are consistent with the State's development objectives and which offer the best prospects for increased activity in the State's existing industries or an expansion of the State's economic base—for example through the development of new products or processes or expansion into new markets.

In establishing the Corporation, it is proposed to absorb the functions of a number of existing bodies such as the Industries Assistance Board, the Agricultural Bank and the Rural Reconstmction Board and other mral financing schemes which in all provide financial support to Queensland industry generally, and to the mral sector in particular.

It will assist such diverse groups as farmers, manufacturers, tourist developers, small businessmen, exporters and other entrepreneurs.

The Corporation will be established as a statutory body under the ministerial portfolio of the Treasurer, and wiU be wholly owned and guaranteed by the Queensland Govemment. It will have a statutory capital base of $50 miUion, and the Govemment will provide initial equity of $25 million.

In addition to its equity base, it will on-lend funds secured primarily from the domestic market but also to a degree intemationally. It will have a maximum debt equity gearing ratio of 15 to 1.

(ii) Deregulation On the recommendation of the Task Force a committee has already been set up to

review the impact of Government regulation on Queensland industry.

68705—28


(iii) Economic Infrastructure Benefits in terms of new schools, dams, roads, etc. are already flowing from the

$600 miUion Special Major Capital Works Program. The $700 million Rail Electrification Program for the coal lines is making good progress.

Discussions are currently proceeding between the Govemment and potential gas producers and consumers in the development of Queensland's gas reserves including the building of a gas pipeline from the south-west field and the Denison Trough to the Queensland coast.

(iv) Program to Improve Quality and Competitiveness of Industry and Upgrade Industry Technology The Task Force recommended that the Govemment act in conjunction with industry,

industry organisations, other agencies and tertiary education institutions to undertake a program to promote modemisation in Queensland industry, to upgrade financial and business planning, management and marketing skills and to investigate means of increasing export sales.

A Technology Policy and Development Division has now been established within the Department of Industry Development. This Division will encourage technology development in industry by seminars, grants, the promotion of quality control and studies of industry sectors.

Funding has been provided in the Budget for the establishment of the Queensland Innovation Centre. Technology parks are being developed at Labrador on the Gold Coast and Eight Mile Plains in Brisbane.

(v) Wages Policy Discussions have already taken place with industry regarding junior wages. Queensland

will also be putting a strong case before the Arbitration Commission on wage indexation and wage fixation arrangements.

A committee has been established to study proposals for contract arrangements for employees of small business.

(vi) Labour Market Programs As I have already indicated, $2 million will be provided in 1985-86 to the Department

of Employment and Industrial Affairs to enable it to implement the recommendations of the Task Force.

(vii) Local Authorities Funding The Task Force recommended the provision of additional capital funding to assist

in the expansion of employment opportunities in regional areas.

The Govemment has already moved to implement this recommendation by the establishment of the Local Authorities Special Employment Scheme at a cost of $13 million in 1985-86.

This scheme involves a 50 per cent increase in the State Govemment subsidy paid to local authorities for water supply, sewerage and road and drainage projects. The scheme will mn for three years and will cost an estimated $43 million over that time.

(viii) Education

The Task Force recognised that up to 5,000 of our youth unemployed are so placed simply because Queensland cannot get its fair share of Commonwealth funding for tertiary education places.

Queensland on a per capita average only is underfunded in this area by $41.8 miUion per annum.


The Education Department, in line with the Task Force's recommendation, wiU continue to press arguments with the Tertiary Education Commission for additional tertiary places.

(ix) Tourist Industry Development Program In line with the Task Force recommendations, discussions have taken place with

the Tourist Industry on the estabUshment of a Tourist Industry Award.

In addition, $10 miUion has been set aside in this year's Budget to provide enhanced HospitaUty Industry Training. Training centres wiU be estabUshed in conjunction with TAFE coUeges in a number of major tourist oriented centres, such as Caims, TownsvUle, Mackay and the Gold Coast.

Discussions are still proceeding in regard to the best and most cost-effective means to implement the proposal.

(x) Sugar

Because of the then current Commonwealth/State Committee looking into the sugar industry, the Task Force made no recommendations on this matter. However, since the presentation of the Task Force Report, that committee has also reported.

The State is currently awaiting the very critical industry feedback on the Report, as this must be taken into account in any discussions with the Commonwealth on measures required to assist the industry over the next three years.

However, the point must be made that the Commonwealth Govemment must accept responsibility for direct price support assistance for growers and mUlers, just as it has for other industries such as steel and motor vehicles. Only the Commonwealth has the financial resources to meet this need and it is that Govemment which derives the substantial taxation and excise revenue from the industry.

We have already indicated that Queensland will be prepared to accept its share of the responsibility for the financing of the best possible adjustment scheme for the industry, consistent with its needs.

However, we are very concemed that many growers require immediate assistance and cannot wait for the special industry assistance measures to be put in place. There are on-going day-to-day expenses which must be met if these growers are to survive.

In anticipation of the Commonwealth accepting its full responsibilities in this very vital matter, the State Govemment will make avaUable immediately up to $20 miUion in loans to assist growers unable to meet expenses such as fuel, fertiliser, harvesting costs and other carry-on requirements. The finance will be arranged on the best possible terms and conditions, with concessional interest starting at around a quarter of normal rates.

Arrangements will be made to ensure that all applications for assistance are handled as expeditiously as possible.

The State Govemment expects that, in accordance with normal assistance under the Rural Adjustment Scheme, the Commonwealth will join the State in sharing the cost 50/50.

However, because the funding is needed urgently to allow farmers to plant the next season's crop, the scheme will get under way forthwith. We will resolve this and other matters between Govemments in subsequent discussions on the report as a whole.

Mr Row, the Govemment's record of action on those very important recommendations of the Employment Task Force is to be commended. It is one which clearly shows the determination of this Govemment to meet the problems of job creation head-on.

These measures plus the State's $600 mUUon Special Major Capital Works Program and the $700 miUion Rail Electrification Program are additions to the normal pubUc


sector effort and when added to the higher level of economic activity achieved for Queensland in the last decade or so, wiU ensure a strong and sustainable growth in employment and the economy generally in 1985-86.

STATE GOVERNMENT INSURANCE OFFICE I am also taking the opportunity to announce with the Budget some important

changes to the nature and operation of the State Govemment Insurance Office.

The Office operates in a totally commercial environment but is presently restricted by having to comply with requirements which do not allow it to respond in a flexible way to rapid changes in the market place.

The Govemment is also keen to move the Office function away from Govemment controls to make it subject to the full competitive forces of the industry, and to change its name to reflect that new status.

The Govemment has therefore decided to vary the operational stmcture of the Office to take it outside the public sector environment but not so far removed from Govemment that the benefits and advantages of a close working relationship are lost.

As a catalyst for the new image, the name "State Govemment Insurance Office" will be replaced by one with a more corporate image but which will still strongly identify with Queensland. The new body will be a statutory corporation set up under legislation to be introduced shortly. It is intended also that the name of the Office's Building Society off-shoot be changed to reflect the new position of the Office itself

While maintaining the present basic insurance function, the new corporation wUl take on a much larger role in the finance and investment markets for the benefit of poUcyholders and the Queensland economy generally, and will be given the necessary powers to fulfil this function.

As with a normal commercial enterprise, the Board of the corporation will have responsibility for the total operation of the corporation, although the Board will have full regard for Govemment objectives in the formulation of its overall policies.

The Board will consist of the General Manager/Chief Executive as an invited member, the Under Treasurer or his nominee and four other persons who will be drawn from people with strong business and commercial backgrounds.

The composition of the present Board conforms with this stmcture—present Board members will continue under the new arrangement.

In keeping with its new role, the staff of the corporation will no longer be subject to the Public Service Act and present staff will be given the option either to transfer eventually to other public service departments or to stay with the new corporation.

It is the Govemment's objective that the existing staff remain with the new corporation and the conditions of service of those who stay will be protected. Discussions will commence forthwith with the Public Service Board to ensure that the transition takes place as smoothly as possible.

BUDGET OUTCOME 1984-85 Before concluding, I wiU make some brief comments on the 1984-85 Budget outcome.

As I indicated to Honourable Members two weeks ago in introducing Appropriation Bill No. 1, the Govemment, through strong Budget management and financial controls, ensured that the 1984-85 Consolidated Revenue Fund Budget was balanced.

Total Consolidated Revenue Fund expenditure in 1984/85 amounted to $4,682.4 milUon against a budget estimate of $4,645.7 million. Receipts at $4,681.7 million were also up on the Budget estimate.

Special Adjoumment 5 September 1985 805

The operating deficit for 1984/85 was $757,291, which was more than covered by the accumulated surplus to 30th June, 1984 of $923,392.

The accumulated surplus of the ConsoUdated Revenue Fund at 30th June, 1985 was $166,102.

The State's Loan Fund is also in balance, with a smaU surplus of $88,157 at 30th June, 1985 and the Tmst and Special Funds were in an accumulated credit situation of $2,386 million at that same date.

Summary details are provided in the Treasurer's Annual Statement which has already been tabled in the House. Further details will be avaUable in the Auditor-General's report on Departmental Accounts Subsidiary to the Public Accounts, which wiU be presented to the House prior to the Budget debate.

CONCLUSION In conclusion I can say that in all the circumstances, the State's finances are in a

very satisfactory shape indeed.

This healthy state of affairs will be preser\'ed and enhanced by the Budget I have just outlined.

We have not allowed the very serious cutbacks imposed by the Commonwealth to affect the provision of State services to the people of Queensland to any great degree.

To achieve this the Government has had to be rigorous in developing the Budget and has had to be heavily reliant on the efficient management of its resources to achieve its principal objectives. In this, it has been successful.

- It still has a balanced Budget, - It maintains the commitment to the $600 million Special Major Capital Works

Program and the $700 million Rail Electrification Program, - It maintains the Govemment's normal Capital Works Program, - It imposes no new taxes, and in fact offers significant reform in the pay-roll

tax area, - It maintains essential services and enhances them in certain carefully targeted

areas with increases in teachers, police and hospital staff, and - It places particular emphasis on implementing the recommendations of the

Employment Task Force.

Mr Row, I believe that this Budget also provides a further impetus to the Queensland economy. The Budget is in harmony with the needs of that economy and with the wishes of Queenslanders for their future.

Government Members: Hear, hear!

Sir JOH BJELKE-PETERSEN: I lay on the table the documents referred to in my speech.

Whereupon the honourable gentleman laid the documents on the table.

I move— "That there be granted to Her Majesty, for the service of the year 1985-86, a

sum not exceeding $609,000 to defray Contingencies—His Excellency the Govemor."

Progress reported.

SPECIAL ADJOURNMENT Hon. C. A. WHARTON (Bumett—Leader of the House): I move—

"That the House, at its rising, do adjoum untU Tuesday, 17 September 1985."

Motion agreed to.

The House adjoumed at 3.8 p.m.

legislative assembly hansard 1985 - queensland parliament · chairman did not ever have in his...

Documents