legislative assembly thursday october€¦ · 1136 ministerial statement (19 october 1972]...

Queensland

Parliamentary Debates [Hansard]

Legislative Assembly

THURSDAY, 19 OCTOBER 1972

Electronic reproduction of original hardcopy

1136 Ministerial Statement (19 OCTOBER 1972] Questions Upon Notice

THURSDAY, 19 OCTOBER 1972

Mr. SPEAKER (Hon. W. H. Lonergan, Flinders) oread prayers and took the chair at 11 a.m.

PAPERS The following paper was laid on the table,

and ordered to be printed:-Report of the Queensland Health Educa

tion Council for the year 1971-72. The following papers were laid on the

table:-Orders in Council under-

State and Regional Planning and Development, Public Works Organization and Environmental Control Act 1971.

City of Brisbane Act 1924-1972. Regulations under the Children's Services

Act 1965-1971.

MINISTERIAL STATEMENT UNIFORM, DISMISSED RAILWAY EMPLOYEE

Hon. K. W. HOOPER (GreenslopesMinister for Transport) (11.5 a.m.): I refer to the questions asked by the honourable member for Wynnum on 17 October about uniforms said to have been issued to a former temporary porter, Ron Douglas Thomas, and my intimation that I would have further investigations made.

As the insinuations by the honourable member caused me no little concern, I have had the position clarified. Mr. Thomas was not officially issued with any part of a uniform. However, workmates who took pity on him gave him two pairs of discarded t:rousers and a couple of shirts. In fact, Mr. Thomas was also given a number of nonuniform shirts to assist him. I am assured that no money was paid as has been alleged by the honourable member.

Incidently, the honourable member did not table the shirts and trousers and collars in the House as he stated he would. If he had done so, it would ha¥e simplified the investigation of this matter.

Mr. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker,--

Mr. SPEAKER: Order! When the honourable member rises he will please state whether or not he is rising to a point of order. If he is not, he will please resume his seat.

Mr. HARRIS: I am rising to a point of order, Mr. Speaker, in relation to the statement made by the Minister for Transport. I did table the trousers and they were available at any time. I placed them on my office desk for safe-keeping. (Laughter).

It is all very well for honourable members opposite to laugh, but I did table them on my desk here, and I later placed them in my office.

QUESTIONS UPON NOTICE

HEN LEVY AND EGG MARKETING, NoRTH QUEENSLAND POULTRY INDUSTRY

Mr. Tucker, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Primary Industries,-

(1) Has any action yet been taken against North Queensland egg producers who have been compelled under extreme pressure to publicly repudiate liability to the Commonwealth Poultry Industry Levy Act 1965-66 following the termination of assistance through reimbursement of the paid levy? If so, by whom was the action taken?

(2) Is it intended that the South Queensland Egg Marketing Board dominate the northern market with unreal market prices and thus bankrupt egg producers in that area who finance their own marketing and who have no privilege of representation and do not share in any State entitlement?

Answers:-( 1) "Any action for recovery of hen

levy which is a levy imposed under Commonwealth legislation would be taken by the Commonwealth through the Commonwealth Deputy Crown Solicitor. I have been informed that recovery action is being withheld by the Commonwealth to give North Queensland poultry farmers every opportunity to meet their liabilities by the end of this year. Details of any action which may have been taken at any time would only be obtainable from the Commonwealth authority."

(2) "The Egg Marketing Board is an autonomous marketing organisation and does not represent the Crown for any purpose whatsoever. However, I understand that some changes in marketing policy have recently been made by the Board as a means of containing wholesale margins in certain areas within reasonable limits and also improving distribution in the interest of increasing overall sales of eggs, particularly in areas where currently, production falls short of local requirements."

RAPE OFFENCES INVOLVING CHILDREN

Dr. Scott-Young, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Justice,-

( 1 ) How many cases of death following rape have been reported in this State?

( 2) How many children of immature years have been raped in Queensland during the last 10 years?

(3) What charge can be laid against the perpetrator of this heinous crime?

Answers:-(1) "During the last 10 years 12 deaths

following sexual assaults (including rape) have been reported in Queensland."

Questions Upon Notice [19 OCTOBER 1972] Questions Upon Notice 1137

(2) "This information is not readily available but it will be sought."

(3) "If a female dies after having been raped, depending upon the circumstances, the perpetrator can be charged with murder, manslaughter, or rape."

SELECTION OF A.L.P. REPRESENTATIVES, AUSTRALIAN CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION

Mr. Aikens, pursuant to notice, asked The Premier,-

( 1) Has his attention been drawn to the front-page article in The Courier-Mail of October 18, wherein it was reported that, after the Opposition had duly selected its five members to represent this Parliament, together with others, at discussions on proposed amendments to the Commonwealth Constitution, the selection had been referred, on appeal, to a man named Egerton for his determination?

(2) As no person of that name is a member of this Parliament, will any selection or interference by him be a breach of the Constitution Acts and, if so, will this man be ordered to appear at the Bar of the House to answer charges against him in this regard?

Answer:-(! and 2) "I saw the article in question

and another in today's Press on the same subject. It is, of course, essential that the status and authority of the Constitution of Queensland be upheld at all times and I am sure therefore that the House can accept the statement made yesterday by the Acting Leader of the Opposition that the composition of the Australian Labor Party representation in the delegation to the proposed Constitutional Convention has not been determined by any agency or individual outside this Parliament. I have already given notice of a motion concerning the Queensland Parliament's participation in the convention."

COURSES OF STUDY FOR VALUERS

Mr. Hanson, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Education,-

(!) What courses are available at present for students who desire to become registered valuers?

(2) As there seems to be a strong demand for valuers, both in the public and private sector, what professional training is available to young people desirous of entering this specialised course of study?

(3) If there are courses available in this field and if any such course at tertiary level is contemplated, will it be a degree or diploma course of a standard comparable to courses available to students in other States?

Answers:-(!) "A four year part-time certificate

course in real estate valuation is offered at the Kangaroo Point Technical College and through the Brisbane Technical Correspondence School for country students. This course which is of comparable status to courses offered in other States satisfies the examination requirements of the Valuers Registration Board of Queensland."

(2) "There is a demand for this course and enrolments for 1972 are-Brisbane, 78; and Correspondence, 208."

(3) "A diploma course in business studies (property valuation) has been approved for introduction ~t the Queen~land Agricultural College m 1973. This will be a three year full-time course with an entrance requirement of passes in five subjects at one senior examination with a total score of not fewer than 20 points and a minimum of three points in English and four points in Mathematics I."

FISH DISEASE, "RED SPOT"

Mr. Sherrington, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Primary Industries,-

( 1) Has he any knowledge relating to the disease in fish, known locally as "red spot", which seems to be occurring in the coastal waters off South-east Queensland? If so, has the cause of this disease been definitely established?

(2) Is there any relationship between the cause of this disease and the pollution of waters by chemical or fertiliser run-offs?

Answers:-

(1) "Yes. The disease to which the Honourable Member refers appears to be due to a fungus infection."

(2) "The high incidence of fish suffering from this infection during the early winter months of this year is believed to be due to the prolonged and heavy wet season experienced in the first half of the year, which in turn led to a protracted period of lowered salinity in South Queensland estuaries. As few infected fish have been seen in recent months, it would appear that the epidemic has run its course."

CoNTRACT FOR SOUTHPORT PENSIONER UNITS, JoHN SILK BUILDING GROUP

Mr. D'Arcy, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Works,-

( 1) What were the terms of the contract let by his Department to John Silk Building Group, Southport, for the building of 13 single and five double pensioner units at Railway and North Streets, Southport?

1138 Questions Upon Notice [19 OCTOBER 1972] Questions Upon Notice

(2) As this tender was accepted by the Executive Council on July 27 and as work has not yet begun, will he give special attention to the penalty clauses, if any?

Answers:-(!) "Price $127,563. Date for com

pletion January 25, 1973, subject to such extensions as may be approved pursuant to the general conditions of contract."

(2) "Yes, having regard to any factors which may be relevant under the conditions of contract."

BIGGERA WATERS STATE SCHOOL

Mr. D'Arcy, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Works,-

As over one-third of the children at the Biggera Waters State School are housed in temporary buildings, when will a new block be built there to relieve the accommodation situation?

Answer:-"The existing classroom accommodation

is sufficient to cater for anticipated enrolment at commencement of the 1973 school year. Funds are not available in the current works programme for the construction of permanent accommodation to replace the demountable buildings at this school."

OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL, TuLLY

Mr. Row, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Primary Industries,-

Has a recent survey been conducted by his Department into the desirability of establishing an opportunity school in Tully? If so, what were the recommendations and, if not, will he have a survey conducted forthwith?

Answer:-"The total primary school enrolments in

Tully and the surrounding districts are likely to be insufficient to provide the minimum number of slow learning children required for the establishment of a two class unit. Staff available for conducting surveys are fully committed for the remainder of this year. Consideration will be given to conducting a survey in 1973 to determine the number of children in need of opportunity schooling."

ASSIGNED LAND AND SALE OF QUOTAS, TOBACCO INDUSTRY

Mr. B. Wood, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Primary Industries,-

( 1) Has consideration been given to allowing tobacco growers to transfer their quotas from areas with poor soil to other areas with better soil which they may acquire and, if so, with what result?

(2) Has consideration been given to allowing tobacco quotas to be sold by one grower to another, separate from the land, where the grower desirous of selling has a small quota and unsuitable land? If so, what was the result?

Answers:-

(1) "In the case of a grower owning a farm with poor soils and/ or with inadequate area, the tobacco quota committee is empowered to approve of the forfeiture of the existing quota and its re-issue in the name of the same grower in respect of another area of land of adequate size and/ or with better soils in the same district, and to which no quota attaches at the time; provided that there be no sale of the farm to which the quota is so transferred, within a period of five years from the time of purchase of the original farm from which the quota is transferred. This policy has been in operation for 12 months and, to date, some six applications have been approved by the committee."

(2) "This matter is currently under consideration."

PAYMENT OF ISLANDERS FOR PUMPING HousEHOLD WATER, TORRES STRAIT

ISLANDS

Mr. Wallis-Smith, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Conservation,-

( 1) Is his Department responsible for the payment of wages to Islanders on essential island work such as pumping water for householders? If not, is he aware of the weekly wage being paid for these services and, if so, what is it?

(2) Will he consider taking over the responsibility for water supplies and providing for wages and running expenses?

Answers:-

(1) "The pumping of water and the arrangement for it at each of the islands in the Torres Strait where mechanical pumping equipment is installed is a matter for determination and management by the island council. Such arrangements could and probably do differ from place to place, dependent upon a number of factors not the least being the wide variation in the number of man hours involved."

(2) "It would not be desirable for the Department to take over such a responsibility from the island councils, indeed, in point of fact, quite the reverse is the ultimate objective as the councils assume increasing responsibilities for their own community development and local affairs."

Questions Upon Notice (19 OCTOBER 1972] Questions Upon Notice 1139

QUINTELL BEACH BARGE RAMP; FooD SUPPLIES, LOCKHART RIVER ABORIGINAL

COMMUNITY

Mr. Wallis-Smith, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Conservation,-

(!) Further to my Question relative to the ramp at Quintell Beach, has it been used by any barge-type boat since it was opened in May this year?

(2) Is he aware that serious food shortages at Lockhart River community could occur and that in fact there have been shortages in recent weeks?

( 3) What provision will be made to transport essential foodstuffs and supplies before the onset of the wet season?

Answers:(1) "No."

(2 and 3) "For a short time there was recently a shortage of perishable vegetables at Lockhart River occasioned by unavoidable influences at Cairns which precluded the unslipping of the regular supply vessel. The Lockhart River administration reports that adequate basic supplies have been held at all times with no serious food shortages and at least one month's reserves are presently held. Vegetable requirements are satisfactory. Ordering provides for continuity of this policy and whilst from time to time some slight inconveniences may be occasioned, based on unforeseen and unavoidable natural hazards associated with shipping, every effort continues to be made to provide maximum service at all times to the residents. Indeed, to overcome unforeseen shortages at isolated centres the Department has on occasions in the past utilised aircraft to avoid undue inconveniences."

ROADS WORKS, THURSDAY ISLAND

Mr. Wallis-Smith, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Mines,-

In view of the recent Press release concerning works, including road works, to be undertaken at Thursday Island-

(!) When will road works commence and to what extent?

(2) Will consideration be given to widening existing bitumen streets and sealing all unsealed streets?

Answers:-

(1 ) "Work will be commenced on widening the existing main road next financial year. Timing for gazettal and construction of 50 chains of Aplin Street from the hospital to the Torres Strait college hall not been elltablished as I understand that there are certain works being carried out by the Department of Harbours and Marine at present."

(2) "Main Roads Department financial resources can be applied only to declared roads so that sealing of all unsealed roads other than above on the island does not involve this Department, and this matter should be referred to the Thursday Island administration."

AMENITIES, ROCKHAMPTON RAILWAY WORKSHOPS

Mr. Yewdale, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Transport,-

In view of the fact that firm promises have been made to progressively install better amenities within the Rockhampton railway workshops, is it intended to provide the required new amenities in the carriage and lifting shop at the workshops? If so, will they be installed in the current financial year and, if not, when can it be expected that they will be installed?

Answer:-"Approval has been given for the expen

diture of $27,846 for the provision of an amenities block in the woodworking section of the Rockhampton workshops. This amenities block is to cater for employees of the lifting shop, carriage shop and wagon shop. Action ill being taken to order the necessary material with the object of commencing the work in 1973 and having it completed by the end of the financial year, if at all possible."

PURCHASE BY JAPANESE COMPANY OF YEPPOON FREEHOLD PROPERTY

Mr. Y ewdale, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Lands,-

(1) Is the Japanese company, which purchased some 3,500 acres of freehold property at Y eppoon, registered as a _company either in Queensland or Australia?

(2) Can foreign-registered companies buy unlimited freehold land within Queensland?

Answer:-(! and 2) "I understand that a company, Iwasaki Sangyo Co. (Aust.) Pty. Ltd., has purchased some freehold lands near Y eppoon. The matter of registration of companies and also their purchase of freehold land does not come within my jurisdiction and I suggest that the Honourable Member redirect his Question to the Honourable the Minister for Justice and Attorney-General."

PRE-SCHOOL EDUCATION CENTRES

Mr. Yewdale, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Education,-

As it was initially announced that there would be 12 pre-school centres established in a pilot scheme, subsequently announced


that there would be 37 centres established and then announced on October 16 that there will be 19 centres established-

( 1 ) Has a definite figure been decided upon?

(2) Of the 19 centres announced, are any to use existing school buildings and how many of the remaining 18 projected centres will use existing buildings?

( 3 ) When will the remaining 18 centres be put into operation?

Answers:-

( 1) "It is the Government's policy to provide free pre-school facilities throughout the State. Details have been finalised in respect of the 19 centres announced on October 16, 1972. A further 18 areas are presently being examined in detail in accordance with the prior announcement that 37 centres would be investigated with a view to determining the feasibility of early provision of State pre-school facilities. The reference to 12 pre-school centres refers to an early off-the-cuff statement I made, when pressed to indicate the likely number of pilot centres. I suggested that it would be reasonable to anticipate about a dozen. We have in fact been able to exceed this number. Our objective is to establish as many centres as possible, as speedily as possible. We are approaching the matter in a flexible way, not being wedded to any dogmatic approach of so many now, so many later."

(2) "Of the 19 centres announced on October 16, three will involve the remodelling of existing buildings. In the other 18 areas referred to there are eight schools which will be examined with a view to the remodelling of existing buildings."

( 3) "Centres in the 18 areas presently being examined in detail will be completed ·as circumstances allow."

CONSIGNMENT OF PROTECTED BIRDS TO VICTORIA

Mr. Blake, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Primary Industries,-

( 1) With reference to his Answer to my Question on September 21 regarding the interception by Customs officials in Victoria of a consignment of approximately 2,000 protected Queensland birds, have investigations yet been finalised? If so, what are the details and what action has been taken or is pending?

(2) Why involved?

Answer:-

were Customs officials

(1 and 2) "Investigations are still proceeding."

PoP FESTIVAL, MACLEAY ISLAND

Mr. Marginson for Mr. Baldwin, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Works,-

( 1) Further to my Question concerning the proposed Macleay Island pop festival, will he take the necessary steps to assure this House that none of the members of any of the groups to perform at the festival have had any criminal convictions, especially in relation to the use and/or the possession of drugs?

(2) If any of them have convictions, will he assure the House that such person or persons will not be permitted to land on such an isolated and vulnerable place as Macleay Island?

Answer:-( 1 and 2) "I am not in a position to

give such an assurance. The Police Department does not harass or interfere with the activities of convicted persons who are conducting themselves in a lawful manner. If any breach of the law is committed during the festival, appropriate action will be taken. Police will ensure that adequate surveillance is provided so that they can take appropriate action at the earliest opportunity if this becomes necessary."

ACCOMMODATION AND TRADE TRAINING, BRISBANE PRISON

Mr. Marginson for Mr. Baldwin, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Tourism,-

With reference to two letters which appeared in The Courier-Mail of September 1, one by W. G. Fox and the other by N. Lewis-

( 1 ) If the conditions described still exist, especially that of prisoners of homosexual tendencies sharing cells with other prisoners, will he assure the House that where accommodation is insufficient to allow one prisoner per cell suitable adjustments are made to prevent the spread of such aberration?

(2) Have certain prisoners only latrine buckets and drinking buckets in their cells? If so, will he, in the interest of the health of all prisoners, have the position corrected?

(3) How many long-term prisoners have successfully completed trade training and are still imprisoned and working in their trades?

( 4) How many long-term prisoners are at present engaged in learning trades in prisons in Queensland?

(5) How many prisoners completed trade courses in 1971?

Answers:-

( 1) "The comments made by the correspondents to The Courier-Mail on September 1 have been noted. Due to overcrowding at the Brbbane prison, some

Questions Upon Notice [19 OCTOBER 1972] Questions Upon Notice 1141

community living is unavoidable. However, in such cases a careful scrutiny is made by prison officials as to the compatibility of persons who are required to occupy community accommodation and strict attention is paid by prison officials to eliminate homosexual practices. Pro· vision of single cell accommodation has, of recent years, had a high priority in prison buildings and the Government is proceeding with all haste and within the capacity of finance available to provide single cell accommodation for all prisoners. The greatest scrutiny within human bounds is taken by staff of the prison service to ensure that homosexual practices do not take place."

(2) "Special sanitary buckets are in use and have been used for many years. They are used at night time. Fresh water containers together with drinking mugs are also supplied and can be refreshed and replenished at any time. In the present building programme for the provision of single cell accommodation, each of the single cells has its own wash basin and toilet facilities and can be compared favourably with the most modern standards. Strict observation is maintained at all times on the hygiene and welfare of prisoners and this area is supervised by the Government medical officer in conjunction with the visiting justice."

(3) "Three. However, the total number of prisoners engaged in a trade type work is 289, although many of these may be relatively unskilled."

( 4) "Sixteen."

(5) "Four."

RoAD AND PARK MAINTENANCE, MACLEAY ISLAND

Mr. Sherrington for Mr. Baldwin, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Local Government,-

With reference to enclaves which are held under more than one title by different families-

( 1) Who is responsible for making and maintaining roads, parks and public foreshore areas and what authority is responsible for the use of the facilities and for any injury to the public resulting from such use?

(2) With particular reference to the enclave known as Macleay Island, has the Macleay Island Progress Association been given the right to make and maintain roads in that enclave and will that organisation be responsible for any action arising out of public loss or injury occurring on its roads or in other public places?

Answers:-( 1) "Where roads, parks and foreshore

areas are under the control of a local authority, that local authority is responsible for the maintenance and exercise of control over the use thereof. Where the facilities in question are not under the control of a local authority, the authority exercising such control would be responsible for the maintenance and for the exercise of control over their use. Responsibility for injury to the public resulting from the use of the facilities in question involves a matter of legal interpretation and accordingly I make no comment thereon."

(2) "I have no knowledge whether the Macleay Island Progress Association has been given the right to make and maintain roads on that island which is not included in a local authority area. As previously mentioned, the question of responsibility for public loss or injury arising from the use of roads and public places on the island involves a matter of legal interpretation and I make no comment thereon. I would mention, for the Honourable Member's information, that consideration is being given to the inclusion in local authority areas of all parts of Queensland -including Macleay Island-which are not presently so included. Power to take this action is vested in the Governor in Council under the Local Government Act 1936-1971, and, after further investigation, it is my intention to take a submission to Cabinet in the matter."

REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND DECENTRALISATION

Mr. Aiken, pursuant to notice, asked The Premier,-

( 1) Has any formulation of State and Federal thinking designed at decentralisation, particularly of industry, crystallised to an actual definite plan?

(2) Have recent Press statements of decentralisation of certain areas such as Albury, New South Wales, had a parallel in Queensland with this Government localising certain areas for decentralisation?

(3) Has the Government submitted a cost structure of its intentions to the Commonwealth Government and, if so, what is the ratio of cost burden between the two Governments?

Answer:-( 1 to 3) "As I have gathered from

his Questions during his relatively short Parliamentary career the Honourable Member is an avid peruser of Press items. He will therefore have no doubt observed in the Press that the report of the Commonwealth/State officers' committee on decentralisation was recently tabled in the Federal House. I am sending him a copy of that report for his information."


HYGIENE STANDARDS, FooD-PROCESSING PLANTS

Mr. Aiken, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Primary Industries,-

( 1) Are there any export food-handling or processing plants in Queensland which are at present idle because of the stringent hygiene regulations imposed by the United States import restrictions and have any such factories been completely forced out of business in the past two years?

(2) Are local hygiene laws comparable in their demands as applied to homeconsumption factories which do not export?

(3) Has the United States legislation affected all spheres of food processors in building and sanitary standards to comply with American entry or has the meat industry been particularly singled out?

( 4) Have other food-importing countries insisted on standards of rigid hygiene similar to those of the United States?

Answers:-

( 1) "I am not aware of any in so far as my portfolio is concerned."

( 2) "Laws in Queensland and overseas countries are based on the same principles of sanitation and hygiene."

(3) "United States legislation affects only products imported by that country."

( 4) "Standards of purity, quality and hygiene in relation to food for human consumption are recommended at international level by specialist committees operating within the United Nations Organisation. The implementation of these standards is of course a matter for individual nations. As a general statement, all developed countries have adopted the basic recommended standards."

ENCOURAGEMENT OF YOUNG PEOPLE TO ENTER PRIMARY INDUSTRY

Mr. Aiken, pursuant to notice asked The Minister for Primary Industries,_:_

( 1) Have any surveys been taken at Government level of the average age of Queensland farmers and of the farmer content of young people?

( 2) Has the rural drift to the cities been analysed and is the main drift considered to be by young people?

( 3) Because of the apparent shortage of beef, wool, grain, and oilseeds on world markets and the decline in rural production now becoming noticeable in Queensland, has his Government plans for the reintroduction of more young people into the world of farming?

Answers:(1) "No." (2) "No." (3) "The premise on which the Honour

able Member's Question is based is not correct. The value of rural production this year is expected to exceed the previous record set in 1968-69 of $785 million."

ALLOCATION OF GRANT TO SPORTING ORGANISATIONS

Mr. Davis, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Tourism,-

(1) Is he aware of a statement appearing in the Telegraph of September 28 attributed to the Treasurer, Sir Gordon Chalk, in which he stated that $250,000 had been set aside for aid to sport in order to encourage initiative and reward merit?

(2) What criteria will be used by his Department to allocate these moneys to various associations?

( 3) Will the moneys be allocated to State bodies only or will social or provincial associations be entitled to participate in grants in their own right?

Answer:-( 1 to 3) "I am aware of the statement.

The policies and guidelines to be adopted in the allocation of the funds available to the Department of Sport are being formulated and will be announced at an appropriate time."

TERMS OF RESIDENCE, WESTBROOK TRAINING CENTRE

Mr. Davis, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Tourism,-

What is the longest, the average and the shortest period that inmates serve at the Westbrook Training Centre?

Answer:-"During the 11 years that the present

superintendent has been at Westbrook, the longest period of residence of any boy was two years and ten months. The average period of residence is approximately four months and the shortest would be one day."

KINDERGARTENS IN PRE-SCHOOL EDUCATION SCHEME

Mr. N. F. Jones, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Education,-

Following his statement that the Education Department may take over several kindergartens in Queensland under its new pre-school education scheme-

( 1) How many kindergartens have suggested or requested that his Department take over responsibility for their operation and what are their locations?

Questions Upon Notice [I9 OCTOBER I972] Questions Upon Notice 1143

(2) Under what criteria or scale will compensation be paid to kindergartens?

(3) What criteria will be used to assess whether the kindergartens are in the correct location?

( 4) Will the Department's takeover of responsibility of existing kindergartens have any effect on the proposed building programme for the proposed new centres?

Answers:-( 1 ) "To date 11 kindergartens have

expressed an interest in the Department's taking over responsibility for their operation. No definite decisions have been made in any case. Because negotiations are only at an exploratory stage I do not intend to name the actual kindergartens lest such action proves an embarrassment to some persons."

(2) "As I indicated above, the question of the Department's taking over some existing kindergartens is very much at present in the exploratory stages. We are looking at each request on its merits. It seems to me that in recognition of the fact that existing kindergarten buildings have been provided from funds raised in the community, together with assistance from State and Local Governments, it would be reasonable for the Government to take over responsibility for operation of the building while making compensation to the local association to the extent of its present liabilities."

(3) "I repeat that each case will be considered on its merits. Since we plan to operate State pre-school centres in association with existing primary schools, proximity of an existing kindergarten to an existing primary school will of course be an important factor."

( 4) "If we assume responsibility for a kindergarten in a particular centre it may well be necessary to enlarge it to cater for all children in that centre. If however the existing facility is sufficient to cater for the four to five year olds at the centre we will not of course need to do this and we shall therefore be able to provide a facility in an additional centre more quickly than would otherwise be possible."

QUARRIES IN FORESTRY RESERVES

Mr. Bousen, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Lands,-

( I) Is it allowable to establish quarries in forestry reserves for private individuals or companies and, if so, has this been the practice for more than five years?

(2) How many private and council quarries have been established in forestry reserves in the Moreton Region in the last five years?

(3) With reference to the quarry recently enlarged at Daisy Hill-(a) who owns it, (b) is the quarry, or any part of it, or are roads leading to it, within the forestry reserve and (c) what area of that reserve, if any, has been cleared for quarrying and for transport use in the last 12 months?

( 4) Will he assure the House that his Department will make every effort to preserve all forestry reserves for forestry purposes?

Answers:-(1) "The Forestry Act provides for the

disposal by sale or under licence of quarry material on State forests and timber · reserves, and this has been so for more than five years."

(2) "This information is not readily available for the Moreton Region as such, as parts of four forestry districts are involved. I will arrange to have the information researched and supplied to the Honourable Member."

(3) "(a) The Daisy Hill quarry is wholly on freehold land, and is being operated by Queensland Aggregates Pty. Ltd. (b) Access to the quarry passes through State Forest 215, parish of Redlands and use of this access is allowed under permit. (c) Queensland Aggregates Pty. Ltd. were allowed to widen the road section through the reserve for safety reasons, this work also enhancing its value as a firebreak. The additional area so cleared was approximately five acres."

( 4) "The Conservator of Forests does manage forestry reserves for forestry purposes, one such incidental p~rpose being the disposal of quarry matenal on State forests and timber reserves as provided for under the Forestry Act."

CHECKING OF SOLICITORS' TRUST ACCOUNTS, QUEENSLAND LAW

SociETY

(a) Mr. Wright, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Justice,-

( I) What requests has the Council of the Queensland Law Society made to him since January 1, I970, under the provisions of section 33 of the Queensland Law Society Act, that he should no longer accept the reports of a practitioner's trust-account auditor as the report of a certified accountant for the audit of trust accounts of a practitioner?

(2) What has he done in response to each request?

(3) Are auditors, about whom he has received such a request, still registered as public accountants under the Public Accountants Registration Act?

1144 Questions Upon Notice [19 OCTOBER 1972) Questions Upon Notice

Answers:-

( 1) "One, in respect of a former practitioner."

(2) "I have taken appropriate action."

(3) "Yes."

(b) Mr. Wright, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Justice,-

( 1) What staff does the Queensland Law Society employ in checking practitioners' trust accounts?

(2) What methods does the Queensland Law Society employ in endeavouring to discover irregularities in practitioners' trust accounts?

(3) What sums of money did the Queensland Law Society expend during each of the financial years ended June 30, 1971 and 1972 in checking for irregularities in practitioners' trust accounts?

Answers:

(!) "None."

(2) "The council of the society has power, which it has exercised on many occasions, under llection 31 of the Queensland Law Society Act to appoint an auditor to investigate a practitioner's trust account and to make a report to the council on such investigation."

(3) "(a) $2,594.08. (b) $20,784.68."

(c) Mr. Wright, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Justice,-

(!) What requests have been made by the Council of the Queensland Law Society to implement a random system of checking solicitors' trust accounts?

. (2) What action has been taken by him m response to such requests?

Answer:-

(1 and 2) "None."

MISHANDLING OF TRUST ACCOUNT MONEYS BY SOLICITORS

Mr. Burns, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Justice,-

(!) What are the names of those solicitors who have committed offences relating to the improper handling of trustaccount moneys since January 1, 1970?

(2) Where and under what firm names did the solicitors practise?

(3) What, in each case, was the sum of trust-account moneys in respect of which the solicitor was shown to be in default?

Answers:-(! and 2) "John Desmond Currie of

O'Sullivan, Currie and Co., Brisbane; Stephen Bernard Kehoe of O'Sullivan, Currie and Co., Brisbane; John Malcolm Hogg, practising under his own n.ame at Ipswich; and Patrick Byme S1mpson, practising under his own name at Bundaberg."

(3) "Claims have been paid to date as under-Currie, $5,248.88; Kehoe, $22,313.87; and Hogg, $53,803.77."

PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS REGISTRATION BOARD

(a) Mr. Burns, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Justice,-

( 1 ) What are the names of the present members of the Public Accountants Registration Board of Queensland constituted under the Public Accountants Registration Act?

(2) When and for what periods has the Board met since January 1, 1970?

(3) If any member of the Board is in full-time employment other than as a member of the Board, where and in what capacity is he so employed?

Answer:-( 1 to 3) "The Public Accountants

Registration Board of Queensland CO?Jt;S under the administration of the Premier's Department and this Question should be re-directed to the Honourable the Premier."

(b) Mr. Burns, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Justice,-

( 1) What staff does the Public Accountants Registration Board of Queensland employ in checking to ensure that audits of solicitors' trust accounts are properly carried out?

(2) What methods does the Board employ in such checking?

(3) What sums of money did the Board expend during each of the financial years ended June 30, 1971 and 1972 in such checking?

Answer:~

(1 to 3) "The Public Accountants Registration Board of Queensland comes under the administration of the Premier's Department and this Question should be re-directed to the Honourable the Premier."

CLAIMS AGAINST LEGAL PRACTITIONERS' FIDELITY GUARANTEE FUND

Mr. Hanlon, pursuant to notice, asked The Minister for Justice,-

(! ) What is the sum of claims made against the Legal Practitioners' Fidelity Guarantee Fund established pursuant to

Questions Without Notice [19 OCTOBER 1972] Questions Without Notice 1145

the Queensland Law Society Act since January 1, 1970, what sum remains unpaid and what are the dates of initiation of such unpaid claims and the relevant amounts?

(2) What is the estimated sum of contingent claims against the fund?

(3) What is the present balance in the fund?

(4) What steps is he taking to ensure that all persons who have a claim in law against the fund are made aware of their right to claim?

Answers:-(! and 2) "Claims totalling $76,323.53

have been paid. The sums of money unpaid are uncertain because of the lack of particularity of some claims or because of obvious errors in the claims. All claims in which the evidence of loss has been substantiated have been paid. In some cases where the amounts claimed were obviously incorrect they have been referred back to the claimants for further particulars as there was no evidence of any loss sustained."

(3) "$545,700.37 at September 30, 1972. A sum will be paid into the fund to bring the balance up to $600,000 within a week."

( 4) "In accordance with Rule 98 of the Rules of the Queensland Law Society Incorporated, the society advertises in the Press for claims. There is more than sufficient money in the fund to pay in full all valid claims received so far."

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE AYR STATE SCHOOL

Mr. BIRD: I ask •the Minister for Works and Housing: I refer to my earlier representations on behalf of the Ayr State School Parents and Citizens' Association requesting the raising of the level of certain rooms at that school, and his advice that ·they would be raised when the wooden stumps required replacing. As some of those stumps have collapsed since I made my representations, will he now give favourable consideration to having these rooms raised and restumped at the earliest possible time?

Mr. HODGES: Planning for •the remodelling of this school is at an advanced stage. Consideration will be given to raising the level of the classrooms as planning for the remodelling proceeds.

GROUNDING OF "STRAAT CffATHAM"

Mr. R. JONES: I ask the Minister for Conservation, Marine and Aboriginal Affairs: What are the latest developments in relation to •the vessel 'Straat Chatham," which grounded on Gubbins Reef on 3 October last (latitude 15 degrees 43 minutes south,

longitude 145 degrees 24.3 minutes east) at 1800 hours? Has a large volume of detergent been loaded onto a vessel that is to proceed into the area of this mishap? Has he received any report that it has been, or is being, proposed to discharge the "Straat Chatham's" entire oilfuel supply from the ship's tanks into the open sea? If so, is his department in a position to order a halt to such madness, or to issue an injunction to restrain this action and thus prevent any threat to marine life and coral reefs, and the pollution of shores and local resort beaches within the vicinity, particularly having regard to the prevailing northerly winds ·that blow at this time of the year?

Mr. N. T. E. HEWITT: It is certainly a very lengthy question, but for the information of the honourable member I point out that the lighthouse tender owned by the Commonwealth Department of Shipping and Transport did call at Cooktown and take on board a certain amount of chemical dispersant. This is a precautionary measure, and •there is certainly no thought of deliberately releasing oil from the "Straat Chatham". The honourable member can be assured that my department will be closely watching every measure that is taken.

BUDGET PROVISION FOR RAILWAYS

Mr. R. JONES: I ask the Minister for Transport: Has he seen the Press report wherein it is stated that the Commonwealth Minister for Shipping and Transport (Hon. P. Nixon), when speaking at a dinner to mark the opening by the Prime Minister of the $7,000,000 Port Augusta-Whyalla standard-gauge railway, said, "Some State Budgets had given lack of priority to the railways"? Was •the Commonwealth Minister embracing Queensland in those remarks?

Mr. K. W. HOOPER: The answer is very clear: Certainly not.

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTE, GLADSTONE ALUMINA REFINERY

Mr. HINZE: I ask the Treasurer: In view of the decision by Queensland Alumina Ltd. to cease work on its Gladstone extensions, does he expect that this will have any immediate effect on Queensland's ·economy, and will it involve any altemtions to his present budgeting for the State?

Sir GORDON CHALK: The situation as it is occurring in Gladstone is a very serious one, and should concern every member of this House whether he be on this side or the other side of the Chamber. The fact that some radical union interests have been able to cause a company to discontinue work on plant expansion is indeed a serious matter for the community, but even more so for the State's business future.

When one realises that some 1 ,200 men are involved and considers the low unemployment figures applicable in this State, the dismissal of those 1,200 men would mean an

1146 Questions Without Notice [19 OctOBER 1972] Questions Without Notice

increase of 15 per cent in the unemployment figures. I believe we should all note this fact now, in case we are told in a couple of months' time that there is a considerable increase in unemployment in Queensland.

I feel that every step should be taken to ensure that the company continues with its project, and I hope that members of the A.L.P. and union leaders will take some responsible action to ensure that these men accept reasonable conditions and that Gladstone and those employed there do not suffer as the result of the loss of a very substantial payroll.

I appreciate the question asked by the honourable member, because I believe that this is a serious situation with which I hope all responsible unionists and union advocates, together with the Government and the company, will grapple in order to find a satisfactory solution.

Mr. LANE: I ask the Minister for Development and Industrial Affairs: Does he believe that the contractors engaged in the expansion programme at Gladstone have explored every avenue in endeavouring to meet union demands before taking the drastic step of shutting down the work associated with the final expansion of the alumina plant?

Mr. CAMPBELL: A short answer is "Yes". However, with the Treasurer, I, too, believe that a situation of extreme gravity has arisen at Gladstone in the last two days, and feel that, in order to assess the merit of the honourable member's question, the House might be interested in the chain of events that has led to this drastic situation. I hope the House will find me not too tedious in my elaboration.

The project concerned is the third and final expansion of the Queensland Alumina Ltd. refinery to take it up to the planned operative output of 2,000,000 tons of alumina a year, and the wages and conditions of work on this expansion were governed by a contract extending over two years because it was believed that the work would be completed in that time. However, owing to the inordinate delays that have occurred on the project, the work is now five months behind schedule.

On 24 August this year a report appeared in the Gladstone "Observer", setting out a 15-point log of claims that the site committee intended to serve on the contractors. This log of claims was published even before any move was made to enter into discussions with the contractors. At all times subsequent to being acquainted with the log of claims, the contractors have expressed their willingness to meet and commence negotiations with the workers if work on the project was proceeding in a normal manner. However, I am advised that this has not yet occurred.

The report in this morning's "Courier-Mail" fairly presents the reasons for the extreme action taken by the contractors.

During the past two months I have had discussions with representatives of the contractors and Queensland Alumina Ltd. .As well I have had talks with top trade-umon exec~tives, the subcontractors engaged on the site and many of the tradesmen who are employed there. I have been advised that, in spite of the fact that . th~se tradesmen enjoy the highest wages paid m Q';leensland for the type of work they are domg, over the past three years, owing to industrial stoppages and the resultant "down-time" from work, they have made no financial advancement whatever.

Some three weeks ago I received a letter signed by a large group of t~adesmen employed on the job, in which they Ir:tplo:ed me to do what I could to meet the situati?n that has been brought about by the tac~Ics adopted by this small minority group to which the Treasurer has referred. In th.at. let~er, particular reference is made to intimidatiOn by-and I quote-"organised manipulators on the site".

Mr. Wright: Sit him down, Chalkie.

Mr. CAMPBELL: Quite obviously the honourable member for Rockhampton--

Mr. Wright: You are abusing question time.

Mr. SPEAKER: Order! I inform the honourable member for Rockhampton that I will be the judge of that.

Mr. CAMPBELL: I should imagine that the people in the area represented b~ the honourable member would be greatly mterested in seeing sanity prevail at Gladstone.

Mr. Wright interjected.

Mr. SPEAKER: Order! I warn the honourable member for Rockhampton that if he interjects again I shall deal with him under Standing Order 123A.

Mr. CAMPBELL: This letter also makes reference to industrial sabotage.

I believe that the demands made by the site committee at Gladstone are grossly inordinate. However, I also believe that the company would agree to provide any reasonable improvements to the existing contract. I point out that, as always, the services of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Commission are available to the parties should there be a willingness on ~he part of the site committee to make a genume attempt to resolve the problem. However, I have a notion that those persons who are making the demands on the company are more interested in prolonging the industrial disputes that have plagued this project than in the welfare of the work-force whom they are supposed to represent.

Questions Without Notice [19 OcTOBER 1972] Questions Without Notice 1147

Mr. HANSON: I ask the Premier: Referring to the shut-down of the third stage of the Queensland Alumina Ltd. project at Gladstone, does he consider that his provocative statement in the Press this morning is of concrete assistance to a solution of the problem, it being passing strange that a Press statement given by me to the Press yesterday afternoon was not even published? If he believes, as I do, that decisions vital to the future of this industry should not be delayed or inhibited by factors that are transient in nature, will he put aside his political stance and use every sinew of Government effort to bring about a speedy solution on fair and just terms, so that 1,200 workers' and their families will not be inconvenienced?

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: I am exceedingly amazed at the attitude displayed in the honourable member's question. I should think he would be trying to do something constructive, but I have failed to hear any statement by him in this House, or notice any action on his part, to play a role as member for the area-and he was a very important member of the A.L.P. until recently.

The honourable member referred to a statement that I made yesterday which appeared in this morning's Press. Whether his statement was published or not, I do not know; that has nothing to do with me. All I know is that we have in Queensland a very important industry which this Government, with the assistance of private enterprise, helped to bring into being and fostered, and that it has conferred great benefits on Gladstone and, indeed, on the honourable member himself, as well as many other people in this State.

As Premier of this State, I have a very great responsibility to make known the Government's attitude on such an important issue especially when in a period of two years: there have been more than 900 stoppages on this project. In such circumstances, I should at this stage make very clear my attitude, and that of the Government, to the irresponsible actions of those involved. In the situation that exists today, when many people, including good unionists, are suffering loss and inconvenience in this area, I can only say that the blame lies fairly and squarely on the irresponsible group that has brought this situation into being.

As the Treasurer has said, I am deeply concerned that nowhere in the A.L.P. organisation or the Trades Hall do we find any Labor leaders taking a stand on this issue. For goodness sake let us get on with the job; let us put an end to an extension of the 900 strikes that already have occurred on this job. I look to some of the areas with which Opposition members are associated to take a stand on this issue. Let us see where they stand on these issues which affect the interests of the people of Queensland, particularly those who are now out of a job.

COMMONWEALTH ASSISTANCE, ETON IRRIGATION SCHEME

Mr. NEWBERY: I ask the Premier: In view of the unfavourable reply to requests made by the Queensland Government to the Federal Government for financial assistance to proceed with the construction of the Eton irrigation scheme, and having regard to the serious plight that the Eton cane-growers will have to face if the drought continues, will he take immediate steps to have his officers prepare a further case for the assistance sought?

Mr. BJELKE-PETERSEN: I certainly appreciate the very deep concern and disappointment felt by the honourable member after the years of conferences and discussions he has had with me and the department in relation to submitting a case on behalf of the area he represents and the cane-growers concerned. I share in his disappointment, as I am sure do all honourable members on this side of the House.

In view of the reply received, I can only say that I very definitely intend to take this matter up again with the Federal Government and ask for a reappraisal of the whole situation and the decision that has been made, which I consider has been based on wrong premises. This morning I instructed my officers in the Co-ordinator-General's Department and the Irrigation and Water Supply Commission to prepare submissions countering the reasons submitted by the Commonwealth. I also rang Sir Reginald Swartz in Canberra this morning and spoke to him about this issue. I expressed our disappointment in the matter and told him that I would be seeking a reappraisal of the decision.

NoN-AVAILABILITY IN PARLIAMENTARY

LIBRARY OF TOURIST BUREAU MANUAL

Mr. MURRA Y: I ask the Minister for Tourism, Sport and Welfare Services: Is he aware that the State Government Tourist Bureau produces a manual containing a considerable amount of very helpful information on tourist facilities and tariffs for the guidance of tourists, and the promotion of tourism, as well as information for the assistance of people who are professionally engaged in the tourist industry? As this manual has not been supplied to the Parliamentary Library for perusal by honourable members who may be interested, would he be good enough to instruct the DirectorGeneral of Tourist Services to supply copies to that library?

Mr. HERBERT: There are many departmental publications which, for a variety of reasons, are not available in the Parliamentary Library. I will look into the matter of supplying the one in question.

1148 Supply (19 OCTOBER 1972] (Financial Statement)

SUPPLY

CoMMITTEE-FINANCIAL STATEMENTRESUMPTION OF DEBATE

(The Acting Chairman of Committees, Mr. W. D. Hewitt, Chatsworth, in the chair) Debate resumed from 17 October (see

p. 1102) on Sir Gordon Chalk's motion-"That there be granted to Her Majesty,

for the service of the year 1972-73, a sum not exceeding $62,748 to defray SalariesHis Exceliency the Governor."

Mr. R. E. MOORE (Windsor) (12.9 p.m.): In participating in the Budget debate, one cannot fail to take pride in the way in which the affairs of the State have been managed by the Treasurer. When one compares the situation in Labor-governed States with that in Queensland, one sees that the efforts of Labor Governments pale into insignificance.

The Australian Labor Party has always had a vested interest in unemployment. In days gone by when the A.L.P. was in office in Queensland, it would deliberately sack railway staff in order to be able to say to the people, "You dared to vote in a nonLabor Government. Look at what the dreadful Moore Government did. Be warned against bringing in any Government of nonLabor persuasion." The people would fall for that sort of thing.

I do not know how it can be asserted that there is any unemployment in Queensland. If anyone tries to get a job done in this State, he finds it impossible to get someone to do it for him. In fact, there is no unemployment in this State. When one sees the jobs advertised in "The Courier-Mail" each Saturday, one wonders how it could be suggested that there is unemployment in Queensland. There are always some persons who are unemployable. If those who line up at the St. Vincent de Paul hostel for breakfast and a bed at night are taken into account, the unemployment figures would be boosted.

A certain number of Aborigines do not seek employment. Since I have been a member of Parliament I have personally investigated the situation. On one occasion I dressed in sports clothes and went to an area in South Brisbane where Aborigines are known to congregate. Although I do not smoke, I bought a couple of packets of cigarettes and a couple of boxes of matches, and took along a book. I sat on a seat over there to see what would happen. It was not long before an Aborigine came along and tried to borrow a few "bob" from me. I did not come good with money and he then said, "Have you got a smoke?" I gave him a cigarette. Before very long half-a-dozen Aborigines were having a yam with me. I asked them, "Can't you fellows get work? What's your problem?" They said, "No-one will employ us." I said, "I could get you a job as a bricklayer's labourer, a carpenter's labourer

or some other labouring job." They said, "No, no, boss, no-one would employ us." I retorted, "If you reckon that no-one will employ you, why don't you work for somebody for nothing to prove you can d<? the job?" They did not want to do that either. I asked them, "What job would you do?'' One fellow said, "I'd like to be a truck driver." It turned out that they all wanted to be truck drivers. None of them could drive and none had a driver's licence. Every one of those fellows could have got work if he had wanted it. There is no racial discrimination in this country in employment. Anyone who is prepared to do a fair day's work for a fair day's pay can get a job.

In slack periods for seasonal workers the unemployment figures are boosted. These days not too many cane-cutters are employed in North Queensland, but, when they were used extensively the cane-cutters would earn more than a good year's salary during the cutting season. When the season was over, they would register for unemployment relief-as accountants or some other occupation in which they knew the~e was no hope of obtaining employment. Th~1r names would remain on the books wh1le they had a holiday. After they had had their holiday, they might go dow~ to th.e Murrumbidgee irrigation area to p1~k fruit around Mildura. Statistics that d1s~egard those factors are misleading. That IS the sort of situation we have today.

Mr. Kaus: Hippies and surfies.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: We have hippies and surfies and all the other incorrigibles around the place who boost the unemployment figures. 'rei

Mr. Hougbton: And draft-dodgers.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: There would not be many draft-dodgers other than one or two of those in the A.L.P.

One cannot resist contrasting Queensland with the Labor States, or thi~king what a progressive State South Austraha :vas a fe:v years ago under the Premiership of S1r Thomas Playford. After a few short years under Labor, industry is losing faith and departing to Victoria.

Mr. Lane: "Pansy" Dunstan is running it now.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: I know who the honourable member means. However, Governments are not run by one person and, irrespective of what Dunstan may want to do, it is the Labor Party that must be held to blame. No Premier or Prime Minister runs a country; it is run by parties. Dunstan has to get the support of his own members before doing anything, so the responsibility for any happening is a joint one. The actions of the Country-Liberal Government in Queensland are the responsibility of all members of the Government, and I, with every other Government member, must accept

Supply [19 OCTOBER 1972] (Financial Statement) 1149

my share of responsibility. And that applies equa:!ly in South Australia. The problem down there is the Labor Government.

Much the same situation pertains in Western Australia, although it would be fair to say that both South Australia and Western Australia are not as well endowed with natural resources as Queensland. Nevertheless, the resources have not changed. Although both States were doing very well under non-Labor Governments, they are doing very badly under Labor Governments.

When Queensland had a Labor Government, and before uniform taxation was implemented, there were two forms of taxation, one for industry and the other for personal exertion. The Labor Government decided to make Queensland a working man's paradise and said, "Let us put a substantial tax on industry and a fairly low tax on personal exertion." The result was that it simply drove industry out of Queensland into the Southern States and, instead of making the State a working man's paradise, it brought about the situation where no jobs were available. We have to be very careful not to get into that position.

Mr. Lane: The State was turned into an economic desert.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: To some extent. No industry has faith in a Government of

socialist persuasion. I do not believe it will happen but I am, to some extent, worried that, if a Federal Labor Government attained the reins of office in Canberra, it would do to the nation what the Labor Governments are doing to the States in which they hold office. It would chase industry out of this country altogether, and with it the developmental capital and know-how we need to get the country completely on its feet. I have some fears about that.

In Tasmania, it is another story. Tasmania is not well endowed. It has a limited population and the situation there is reasonable. ~ven though the Government of the day Is one of Labor persuasion, it is not so Leftwing as those in South Australia and Western Australia, and is doing a reasonable job.

In his Financial Statement the Treasurer commented on the increased expenditure under this Budget, the fact that this money was not to be obtained by further imposts of taxation, and that it simply reflected extra money from the Commonwealth Government and growth in State revenue. Most of the increase, of course, is due to inflation. It amounts to $107,780,699, and one cannot help wondering what a wonderful State it would be if it had merely been proportionate to the increase in the Gross National Product. What development one could expect in that situation! However, that is not the case. The increase in expenditure is necessary to retain the status quo. Last year's Budget provided for an expenditure of $570,000,000, whereas, as I have said, this year's Budget provid~s for an expenditure of $679,000,000, or an mcrease of 18.86 per cent.

38

The Treasurer has rightly budgeted for a deficit. If this State's economy were buoyant enough to enable him to budget for a surplus, Queensland could hardly be a claimant State. The budgeted deficit amounts to $4,600,000, but when last year's carry-over is taken into account the deficit will be reduced to $1,800,000. An increase in revenue from a growth tax, such as the pay-roll tax, could enable the Treasurer to balance his Budget, but at present it is not the Government's intention to balance the Budget.

The current rate of inflation is approximately 7 per cent per annum, and, in view of the fact that money can be borrowed at either 5 or 5;1- per cent, it is cheaper for the Government to carry out its works programme now than postpone it for, say, two or three years. Provided we can borrow money at a rate lower than that of inflation we are on the winning side.

This year the State will pay an additional $41,53 9,146 from Consolidated Revenue. This sum will be taken up by increased salaries and wages for public servants and Crown employees. Incidentally, as the Crown pays the earnings of the two groups, I do not know why the distinction in title is made between them. All Government workers should be classified as either public servants or Crown employees and enjoy the same conditions.

I have said that the Budget does not provide for any increase in the scale of charges. The amount of money that is being collected has increased because of inflation and growth. For ins,tance, as pay-rolls increase so, too, does the revenue from pay-roll tax. Likewise, as wages and salaries rise, the Federal Government obtains additional revenue from income tax.

It is my view-and it is shared by the Premier of Victoria, Mr. Hamer-that the States must look to the day when incometaxing powers are returned to them. Although the States receive handouts from the Commonwealth Government, this system is not good enough. If we believe in federalism rather than centralism, and if we are to stand on our own feet, we must collect our own income tax. As a war-time measure the Commonwealth took over the collection of income tax, but it could be returned to the States if enough of them favoured the transfer. It may be true that the larger States would have most to gain from the transfer, but what does that matter? In the long run, however, that may not be the case.

The Commonwealth collects income tax, and it also has the right to spend the money. An examination of appointments in Commonwealth projects clearly shows that Commonwealth projects are far superior to State projects. But we should remember that the taxpayer provides the money. Income-tax collecting is not popular, but if the States are to survive they must take over in this field. Personally I do not think they will

1150 Supply [19 OCTOBER 1972} (Financial Statement)

survive. They are becoming nothing more than grandiose local authorities simply because they do not levy income tax.

Mr. Davis: What are the Treasurer's views on this?

Mr. R. E. MOORE: I am presenting my views. I am not worried about the Treasurer's views.

Mr. Lane: You don't want the Trades Hall views either, do you?

Mr. R. E. MOORE: No. The honourable member for Brisbane is dictated to by the Trades Hall, but I am not.

Mr. Frawley: He is under the complete domination of the Q.C.E.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: That is so. The difference between governmental

spending and that of the ordinary citizen, who husbands his money and seeks value for it, is remarkable. Quite often roads that are constructed by the Government are dug up soon after so that a pipe or a telephone cable may be laid. A few years ago Central Station was modernised. Some buildings were pulled down and new ones erected, and new covered platforms were built. And now the facilities are being torn down to make way for new ones. Large private enterprise can afford such lavish expenditure, but John Citizen's economy cannot stand it. In some instances buildings have been resumed for certain purposes, but the land has been converted into parks.

Mr. P. Wood: Would you like another example of how the State Government is wasting money?

Mr. R. E. MOORE: The honourable member will be making his speech in about half an hour; he can tell me then.

If John Citizen were to act like various Governments, he would be bankrupt. He cannot carry on year after year with increasing debts.

I was very pleased to note from the Treasurer's Financial Statement that certain freight relief for goods is to be provided for people in the country, at a cost of $800,000. This financial year, north and west of Rockhampton, the reduction in grain freights will amount to a further $800,000.

During the recent parliamentary recess I made a quick trip around the north-western area of the State to look at the effect of the drought and to see how the area was recovering after the cyclonic rains of 12 months ago. I believe that the people out there need assistance. I looked at the country around Camooweal, Julia Creek, McKinlay, Kynuna, Winton and Hughenden. Many areas were very well grassed and looked like the Canadian and American prairies. In fact, the countryside looked like a vast wheatfield. However, many graziers have no sheep to eat this grass. Because they have suffered the ravages of drought and low wool prices,

they have not the funds to restock and, because the recent rise in the price of wool has increased the price of sheep threefold, they are not game to restock in case they cannot recover their outlay. Therefore these graziers, although they have plenty of grass, are in a bad way.

Fortunately, up to date, there have been no dry electric stmms and, whenever lightning has set grass alight, the rain has put out the fires. I suggest that the Federal member for the area get the Army to undertake _the task of creating firebreaks, because graziers cannot afford to do this work. The properties could be cut into, say, four separate areas so that, in the event of a grass fire, the whole district would not be burnt out. As I said, the graziers in that area have not the funds to hire a grader or a fire plough, and, if the Federal Government does not do this work, the State Government should endeavour to make finance available as a grant to provide firebreaks in this area. If a fire broke out, the sheep would run before it and end up at the fence and would either be burnt to death or suffer great eye damage and have to be destroyed. Graziers who are fortunate enough to have this good growth of gr~ss on their properties could, of course, denve some income from agistment. There is no doubt that the West would recover if we had three successive good years.

Mention has been made of the situation in Cloncurry. From my quick observations there I would say that its biggest problem is it~ proximity to Mt. Isa of which, in effect, it is a suburb. That problem does not exist in other towns.

Mr. P. Wood: It is only 80 miles awaya decent sort of suburb.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: That distance is nothing in the West. While it is pleasing that the Treasurer has seen fit to allow concessions in succession and probate duty to the extent of $750,000, I should like it eliminated altogether. I realise that it is a source of State revenue and that, if it was abolished, the Government would have to obtain that amount of revenue from other sources. I have often wondered whether it would be possible to implement a scheme under which a person who owns a property could pay probate and succes~ion duty during his lifetime. As valuatwns increased he would pay more. If they decreased after he had already paid a certain amount of duty, the estate would receive a refund. The value of the estate would still be assessable for probate duty. That proposition has been put to me by people who own properties and would like them to pass to their families. In the present situation, if families faced with paying this tax are not able to borrow sufficient money, their properties can be lost after being in the family for three or four generations.

Mr. Hanson: How are you hiding your extensive assets?

Supply [19 OcTOBER 1972] (Financial Statement) 1151

Mr. R. E. MOORE: I am pleased to say that I am not a man of straw, like the majority of Opposition members.

I notice in the Financial Statement that public debt charges have increased by $6,155,599, and that the gross public debt is now $1,346,585,000.24. I think I ought to pay the 24c to relieve the situation a little! I do not know what can be done about this situation, but I do not think it can be allowed to carry on ad infinitum with the public debt ever accumulating. W~ must cut the coat according to the cloth. The first borrowings by the State were paid back. The system now is such that it is almost impossible for the States to repay their debts. The public debt of Queensland represents $729 for each man, woman and child in this State. That is a considerable sum of money. It has been said, "Don't forget that the only Government that is reducing its national debt is the Commonwealth Government." Someone at some time has to start reducing it, and it is more to the credit than the discredit of the Commonwealth Government that it is reducing its debt.

Mr. P. Wood: The Federal Government is doing it at our expense.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: We are in effect one nation and we are all taxpayers, which means that everything is to some extent at our expense.

One of the features of this indebtedness is the yearly interest bill of $68,887,311. That is a considerable amount, which the taxpayers have to meet. In borrowings, $30,000,000-odd came from overseas, and the remainder, an amount of $1,316,000,000, was borrowed within Australia. There was a time when it was not considered advisable to borrow within this nation, but that is not the case now.

The Financial Statement shows that the cost of providing education facilities is rising. The Government promised in its policy speech that class sizes would be reduced to 30 in primary schools and 25 in secondary schools. This is being accomplished, but, together with other improvements in the education system, it is costing a lot of money. The Vote for education this year is $146,081,488.

It costs the Government $310 per annum for each State primary school-child and $124 per annum for each child attending a non-State primary school, half of which is paid by the Commonwealth Government. For each child attending a State secondary school the cos·t to the Government is $530 per annum, and the cost for those attending a church or private secondary school is $212 per annum, half of which, again, is paid by the Commonwealth Government. In view of those figures, I should like to ask people who say that the Government of Queensland should be spending more on education

how it could spend more, when most of its resources are already directed towards education.

Mr. Newbery: One-third of them.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: It is more than that. More than 53 per cent of the amount received from the Commonwealth by way of taxation reimbursement is being spent on education.

Mr. Hanson: It is a much smaller percentage than in other States.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: The other States add the cost of buildings to their education Vote, and then some people say that Queensland is spending less. It is not the dollars spent that counts; it is the goods obtained. Queensland is second to none in that respect.

Mr. P. Wood: You are using incorrect information.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: I am not using incorrect information. There is plenty of evidence to support what I am saying.

The Budget also mentions the payment of locality allowances to teachers and public servants. I make a plea for the payment of such allowances to railway employees who do not now receive them. It is true that some of >these employees live in Brisbane; but their life is spent in camp wagons, and if they do not deserve to be paid a locality allowance, I do not know who does. I hope the Government can soon see its way clear to give these deserving people the assistance they should receive.

The Budget refers also to $144,508 being provided for inves,tigation work into the flooding of Kedron Brook and Breakfast Creek. I hope it will not be very long before some action is taken in this regard, and I should like to see first the clearing of debris and sand build-up from Kedron Brook by dragline. Although that is not a long-term project, it would give some relief immediately and perhaps make it easier to implement a long-term project.

Quick action is needed to lessen the impact of flash floods, which are occurring more frequently as suburbs expand and the number of paved roads and roofs increase. In many areas sullage, as well as rain water from roofs, runs straight into creeks or stormwater drains, causing flooding to occur in a very short time. In earlier years rainwater took >time to soak through the ground; it now runs into creeks and stormwater drains in a matter of minutes.

Mr. Frawley: If the Brisbane City Council had faced up to its responsibilities, remedial action would have been taken long ago.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: That is so. It really is the responsibility of .the Brisbane City Council. Every other local authority accepts that responsibility; the Brisbane City Council, which is the wealthiest of all and has a budget larger than that of 'the State of Tasmania, does not.

Mr. Frawley: It goes on buying properties.

1152 Supply [19 OCTOBER 1972] (Financial Statement)

Mr. R. E. MOORE: Buying properties and knocking buildings down, and then leaving holes in the ground. It is not achieving anything.

The Budget also provides for the payment of a subsidy to show societies on capi,tal works. I know that the Brisbane Exhibition Grounds are not a Government responsibility, but the Government has paid a 20 per cent subsidy on all capital works carried out there by the R.N.A. The subsidy will now be increased to 40 per cent. I wonder whether, in the long term, the Government would assist the R.N.A. more by resuming a couple of thousand acres of land at Strathpine, Kingston, Goodna, or some similar outer area, so that new showgrounds, with a peripheral railway, trees, and parks, could be provided.

When the R.N.A. show is being held, it is almost impossible to move around the present Exhibition Grounds, and, as a longterm project, that area could be turned into an Oiympic stadium. The day is fast coming when the present Exhibition Grounds will have outlived their usefulness. It is very valuable property and the cost of establishing new showgrounds could be redeemed, to a large extent, by the sale of that property. The present area could be used as the R.N.A. showgrounds until another suitable area was brought to the required state.

During my trip to North Queensland, the repair work that has been carried out in Townsville since the cyclone was very noticeable. What happened in Townsville could happen in Brisbane. Although Brisbane is not in the cyclone belt to the same extent as Townsville is, we have just missed out on some cyclones and have been on the fringes of others. A Brisbane builder has told me that for $30-worth of bolts he could make the walls and roof timbers of a house cyclone-proof. Of course, what he proposed would not hold roofing tiles on.

Although this is not directly related to the Budget, a thought has occurred to me in relation to the present prevalence of crime in Queensland, and elsewhere in Australia. People today, particularly women, are afraid to answer a knock at the door for fear that it is a prowler. I offer the suggestion that electrical contractors, at discount prices, should install four lights around any house whose owner wanted them, one under each soffit. They could be controlled by one master switch. Such an installation could be done for about $12.

Mr. Sherrington: Cut it out!

Mr. R. E. MOORE: It could be done for about $12, and it would certainly help to make a house burglar-proof and prowlerproof. If there was any sort of a disturbance outside a house, the housewife or whoever was in the house could flick on the master switch. It would cost no more than I have suggested. The wires would merely have to be laid along the soffiting; they would

not have to be tacked up. I know what I am talking about. It would be a great comfort to a person to know that he could light up the whole exterior of his house by the mere flick of a switch. No prowler would remain once he knew he was visible. That is just a thought I had.

Mr. Murray: It could be known as "'Moore' protection for the public".

Mr. R. E. MOORE: Thank you. That is an excellent suggestion.

I now wish to refer to the trade union movement. We are all well aware of what is happening at the present time in Gladstone, where there is a complete shut-down of the construction work.

Mr. Sherrington: It is a lock-out.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: If the honourable member wants my personal opinion, I belie~e that if there is a right to strike there IS

also a right to lock out. I am not saying that there should not be a right to strike, but if it is fair to have one, it is equally fair to have the other.

It seems that whenever there is a strike, it is always said that the workers are to blame. That is not always so. ~t would be reasonable to assume that m most instances the blame would be shared 50/50. Therefore, I think something is wrong ..V:ith our industrial policy, with the trade umon movement and with the employers. At the present time, everyone is demanding bigger and bigger wage rises-10 per cent across the board and that sort of thing. When increases of 10 per cent across the board are granted, nobody benefits. Some formula to which the unions will agree will have to be worked out.

If I had some sort of dictatorial power, I would throw the ball back into the quarter of the trade union movement and say, "If you aren't happy with the arbitration system, come up with a formula. Tell us what percentage you should get, or what the hourly rate should be." Unless the unions are prepared to accept various levels of remuneration, some lower than others, what is the good of industrial action and threats to obtain wage rises? The other fellow simply goes ahead again.

Mr. Sherrington: There has not been an inquiry into this sort of thing since 1917, when the Piddington Commission sat.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: I realise the truth of what the honourable member says but, when one is speaking about the trade union mov~ment one likes to feel that the labourer IS

worthy of his hire. This dog-chase-tail attitude simply brings about inflation an~ harms those who are retired or on a fixed mcome. Many people have put their money away while they were working with a view to having a reasonable weekly income after they retire, but inflation has increased to such an extent that they are now the poor


people of this country. People who have made provision for themselves, who have acted responsibly during their working lives and have never called upon Governments for help, are now "giving the party" simply because inflation has run wild as the result of wage and price rises, generally caused by irresponsibles.

Mr. Newbery: We are pricing ourselves out of world markets.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: That is so. By the same token, however, inflation is world wide at the moment and if we did not accept a certain amount of it we would continually be revaluing our money. How otherwise could we get justice? While world inflation continues and we continue to operate on a world market, we must accept some increases in wages.

I can recall many instances where an employer has not taken his employees seriously until he has been threatened with a strike. The smaller employer does not usually have this problem, because he is closer to the general public and to his staff; he usually smells trouble in the wind and corrects the situation. But the larger enterprises-the employee-intensive industriesare less likely to be down to earth on this sort of subject and, accordingly, strikes occur.

At times the trade union movement does not act responsibly. One union will say to another, "You go for your wage rise. Go your hardest." As soon as any increase is achieved, the other union then makes its demand. One section gets a rise, and this is immediately followed by a demand from another section. This sort of thing cannot continue. There has to be a day of reckoning.

Mr. Wright: Do you believe that the "flow-on" principle is fair?

Mr. R. E. MOORE: I think there should be a fair day's work for a fair day's pay. I do not know so much about the "flow-on" principle. The subject is so broad, as is the principle of "like-with-like", that I do not really know what the true position is. Naturally, I hold a definite opinion on this subject, but I do not intend to debate it during the remainder of my allotted time.

Mr. Hanson: I'll bet you don't knock back a rise.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: Of course I don't. Anybody who does is not right in the head. I can remember a certain member of Parliament who refused to take an increase in his salary, only to learn subsequently that his constituents had said, "If he doesn't want to take his rise, it isn't much use our asking him for wage increases." Instead of gaining extra votes, he almost lost his seat.

Mr. Wrigbt: Who was that?

Mr. R. E. MOORE: I do not intend to embarrass the gentleman by mentioning his name.

The ordinary employee believes that if he is doing a good job he is worth the wage he is paid. Members of Parliament are no exception.

I should like to see all salaries fixed by industrial tribunals. To take it even further, I should like all salaries and wages throughout the nation to be determined by one wage-fixing tribunal. The problem is that the Public Service Board fixes certain salary rates, the Commonwealth Industrial Court fixes others and the State Industrial Commission determines others. As well, various industrial agreements are entered into, and a number of employees receive incremental payments. Of course, incremental payments are only flat wage increases. They mean, in effect, that when everybody is given a wage rise nobody gets a wage benefit.

Mr. Sberrington: Why should that be so?

Mr. R. E. MOORE: Previously, certain workers had derived benefit from being paid wages slightly higher than those paid to their fellow-workers, but incremental payments mean that when everybody gets wage rises nobody gets them.

Mr. Sherrington: What do you mean by saying, "When everybody gets wage rises, nobody gets them."?

Mr. R. E. MOORE: The workers are given a rise, but they do not derive any benefit from it.

Mr. Sherrington: Why?

Mr. R. E. MOORE: Because employers cannot afford to pay higher wages unless they increase their income. The only means they have of doing that is by increasing the charges for their merchandise or services. If they do not increase their prices they will go out of business, and the increase is passed on to the workers.

Mr. Sherrington: Wouldn't the court base its decision on the figures before it, not on a possibility?

Mr. R. E. MOORE: Yes, but the members of the courts are only human. They are not able to carry out all the necessary research that is involved; they can only receive advice.

I wish to deal now with compulsory tradeunionism. It is claimed that, although preference clauses are inserted into various State awards, there is no such thing in Queensland as compulsory unionism. Whether it be termed "preference" or "compulsory unionism", it should not be allowed to exist.

Mr. Davis: Workers are not compelled to join a union now.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: If membership of trade unions is made compulsory, the Government must provide some safeguards to the workers. One such safeguard should


be that a worker is automatically excluded fro~ the payment of compulsory political levies unless he contracts to pay them. In my view, union fees should not amount to more than one day's salary per annum.

Mr. Davis: That is your idea.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: That should be the maximum.

Mr. Sherrington: Why?

Mr. R. E. MOORE: If a worker does not join a trade union he finds that his fellow-employees will not work with him. Even tho!-Jgh unionism is not compulsory, the trade umons stand over the employers and force them to compel their workers to join the unions. Members of the Seamen's Union are being bled to death by high union fees.

[Sitting suspended from I to 2.15 p.m.]

Mr. R. E. MOORE: Before the luncheon recess I was speaking about the trade-union movement and the attitude of trade unionists to strikes. I said that the guilty party was not necessarily the worker; that employer and employee are equally responsible for strikes. I referred to dog-chase-tail wage demands :nith one union justly receiving a wag~ mcrease,. and an<;Jther union, believing that by that mcrease Its members' wage margins were destroyed, applying to the Arbitration Commission for an increase and, by various methods, pressuring the Commission into granting an increase. In this way the unionist's purchasing power is not improved because every one gets an increase and costs rise accordingly. '

As unions are not prepared to invite employers to a round-table conference to establish a formula, or a points index to determine the percentage rates for one union compared with another, I call on employers to take the initiative and call a round-table conference to establish a points index based on so m~ny points for skill and so many for obnoxwus work, brain fatigue in carrying out a job, educational standards and all the other grounds on which an employee is paid an allowance.

Mr. Hughes: Across the board, that could be a very complicated formula.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: Not necessarily. The base rate could be fixed at $2,000 or $3 000 and loadings could be added. '

We might not be able to use the likewith-like basis in all callings, because it would be impossible to compare a person doing clerical work with one doing technical work, although the man doing clerical work could well require the same amount of brain power, skill and education as a technician wiring an automatic exchan<>e or other automatic machinery. There "'is no reason why we could not establish a formula that would ensure wage justice. Someone should make a start.

Mr. Frawley: What do you think of the recent oil strike at Ampol?

Mr. R. E. MOORE: I do not know all the ramifications of that strike, but I should say that somewhere along the way the blame could be apportioned 50!50; the employer would be equally responsible for not keeping his ear to the ground and realising that the situation could arise.

In view of the road toll, the number of vehicles on the road and the amount of money spent on our roads so that people may go to and from work, I consider that it would be wise, legislatively or otherwise, to stagger working hours and days off. This would allow the facilities of the State to be used to greater advantage. There is no reason why some people could not work from Monday to Friday and have Saturday and Sunday off and others work from Tuesday to Saturday and have Sunday and Monday off. That system, together with staggered working hours, would reduce the traffic on the road at any given time. In addition, those firms which desire daylight saving could have it by starting earlier in the day, by agreement with the unions, which should have no complaint about such a suggestion.

When the Australian Labor Party was in power in this State, the wife of a public servant was not allowed to work. If she did, her husband would receive a letter or be told by the head of his department, "It has come to our notice that your wife is in employment. Labor's policy is that each home can have only one bread-winner, so either you or your wife must not work." I issue a warning to all working wives that, before deciding it is time for a change of Government, they consider the ramifications of the A.L.P's policy in that regard.

I know that both the Railway Department and the Works Department used to circulate such letters, but try as I might, I have not been able to obtain one. There is something wrong with the system when letters such as those cannot be produced from departmental records.

Mr. Marginson: The position today is that a wife has to work to maintain a proper way of life.

Mr. R. E. MOORE: Wives work today to have more amenities in their homes. Under Labor, they had only a butter cooler and a hanging safe. These days, families have all amenities in the home. Newlyweds start where their parents left off, and the Government's attitude is that people should have the right to work if they so desire.

Mr. Marginson: Are you saying that they should not have these things now?

Mr. R. E. MOORE: No, but under Labor each home could have only one breadwinner, so that people could not afford all of these amenities. That is the point I am making. Under Labor, they had to comply with a socialistic policy on manpower.

Supply [19 OCTOBER 1972} (Financial Statement) 1155

A Federal election is to be held on 2 December. In the short time that it has been in office, the McMahon Government has acted responsibly and has provided more benefits for the people than any other Government. Labor's policy on taxing capital gains means that, if a person brought a house or a sewing machine and sold it at a profit, he would have to pay tax.

(Time expired.)

Mr. P. WOOD (Toowoomba South) (2.25 p.m.): In commenting on the Financial Statement, I wish to examine the education programme as outlined by the Treasurer, and to restrict my remarks in the first instance to that programme.

The Budget provides for increased allocations in a variety of fields. I think there is a tendency to say that, because an additional amount of money is spent in a certain area of education, it is a matter of logic that the services in that area have been improved. That may be so, or it may not be so. Quoting increased expenditure in percentages can be misleading. A given percentage increase does not mean, as a matter of course, an equivalent increase in the education services provided, or their quality. In such a comparison, no account is taken of heavy inflationary pressures that have presented considerable problems to all who have to budget. No account is taken of reallocations of departmental responsibilities. In this case, allocations by the State Government to the Queensland Sub-Normal Children's Welfare Association, which previously appeared in the Estimates of the Health Department, now appear in those of the Education Department. No account is taken of the inevitability of increased services resulting from increasing student numbers. The point that I am making is that an increase of 25 per cent in the allocation for education does not necessarily mean that there is to be a 25 per cent increase in the quality and standard of education services.

I propose to examine, point by point, the education programme as it appears in the Financial Statement. The first specific matter that the Treasurer mentions is an increase in teaching staff for 1973, which he estimates will be 910. He says that this increase will bring the number of teachers in 1973 to 14,320, and he describes this as a ··step forward". I should like to examine how big a "step forward" this is.

First of all, the Treasurer assumes that the Government will be able to obtain a net increase of 910 teachers. However, the figures released earlier this year by the Minister for Education indicate that the resignation rate of teachers is disastrously high. The effect of such a high rate of resignations on education services is a heavy financial burden for the Treasurer and the Education Department. A considerable amount of money is spent on the training of teachers, and,

because of the unnecessarily high resignation rate of teachers, this financial burden is increased.

Let us however, assume that the Education Departm~nt will be successful in obtaining the 910 teachers mentioned by the Treasurer. This increase will bring the number of teachers in all the teaching services for 1973 to 14,320. That is the Treasurer's estimate, and he described it as a "step forward". But it is not a "step forward" in the eyes of t~e Education Department, because there IS available from that department a survey of needs, which was part of a nation-wide survey of needs first issued i_n May 1_970 3;nd revised in February of this year, m which the department set out as recently as February of this year what it belie':es will be. its staffing requirement for the penod extendmg to 1975. For 1973, the Education Department placed its desired staffing scale at 15,895 teachers. That figure compares with the 14,320 teachers estimated by the Treasurer, who assumes that that figure can be reached, and there is no guarantee of that. So that places the Treasurer in the position of being 1,575 teachers short of what the Department of Education estimates is its desired staffing scale for 1973. The department estimated that it would need 16,165 teachers in 1974 if it was to maintain the desired staffing scale. They are not my figures; they are figures put out by the Department of Education. So we are a long way behind in what the Treasurer described as a step forward. Although we are increasing the number of teachers coming into the service of the Department of Education next year, we are in fact 1,575 teachers short of what the department needs.

I shall proceed now to the next point, which relates to the pre-service training of teachers. The prospect of bringing teacher numbers up to the requirements of _the Department of Education that I have JUSt mentioned depends upon a proper programme of recruitment of student teachers. The Treasurer-! am referring again to the Financial Statement-estimates that there will be a little over 1 000 additional students enrolled in the vario~s teacher-education establishments from next year, which will take the number from the present 5,079 student teachers to an estimated 6,097 student teachers in 1973. Again we have to hope that that figure can be reached.

However, if one looks at last year's Financial Statement, one sees that the Treasurer said that he expected to have in 1972-this year-5,564 teachers in training. Comes the Financial Statement this year and, instead of the 5,564 that the Treasurer hoped we would have, one discovers that the figure was in fact about 500 below that figure-5,079.

Now the Treasurer talks about increasing enrolments in teacher-training establishments by a little over 1,000. But there is no guarantee that those 1,000 student teachers are going to be enrolled. If last year's record


is any indication, the Treasurer's aim will not be achieved, because he fell short of his target last year by about 500-almost half.

The survey of needs that I mentioned earlier made the very pertinent point that the desired staffing standards in Queensland schools cannot be attained during the period covered by the survey, simply because not sufficient teachers are enrolled in the training establishments. It is one thing to speak about an additional 1,000 student teachers· but, as the Treasurer has discovered fro~ last year's experience, it is a very different matter to get them. So one has to question how much reliance can be placed on the Treasurer's optimistic estimate that he will get all the student teachers he hopes to get.

Mr. Sherrington: Do you think he is like Mr. Micawber-just hoping for something to turn up?

Mr. P. WOOD: That may be so. We are faced with the situation that the Government's performance does not always match its promises.

I shall divert from the Treasurer's Financial Statement on education to deal with a very closely related matter that comes under the Department of Works-the provision of school buildings. All honourable members would be very well aware of the many deficiencies that exist in the standard of school buildings throughout the State. I am sure that every honourable member, irrespective of the side of the Chamber on which he sits, is constantly seeking from the Department of Works additional work in schools in his area-repairs, remodelling, and replacement of schools. Buildings are old-fashioned and becoming increasingly so; most of them are unsuited to modern teaching methods; many of them are dreary places, offering a very poor educational environment; and many of them are in disrepair.

The Treasurer's Financial Statement refers to a capital works programme of $21,800,000 from State Loan Funds for primary schools, technical coHeges and high schools. I am not sure whether that includes the Commonwealth Grant of $1,690,000, which is an interest-free grant for school buildings. In addition to that sum from the loan programme, there is an additional amount from Consolidated Revenue of $2,500,000 for repairs. Taking an approximate figure, the Government is budgeting this year for expenditure of $25,000,000 on replacement, repair and remodelling of primary schools, high schools and technical colleges. The actual figure is probably a little higher.

At first glance it may seem impressive, but let us look at what the Department of Education states as its requirements in school buildings for this year. Again I refer to the survey of education needs, which was part of the nation-wide survey, and stress the point that these are the figures of the Queensland Department of Education, not figures I have conjured up to suit my own argument. I have had some difficulty in

making accurate comparisons, because the allocation of $25,000,000 for repair, remodelling and replacement includes expenditure on technical colleges. I have not been able to extract from that amount a figure for purely primary schools, special schools and high schools. For the sort of work I have been talking about, the Department of Education lists its requirements under the headings "Primary Schools", "Special Schools", and "High Schools". It does not mention technical colleges.

Instead of the $25,000,000 allotted by the Treasurer for repair, remodelling and replacement, the State Education Department estimated that this year it needed $38,000,000, and then only for the purpose of repair, remodelling and replacement of existing primary schools, high schools and special schools. That figure did not cover technical colleges; the allocation of $25,000,000 does. So we can see how very far short the Treasurer's Financial Statement falls of giving to Queensland schools the amount of money that is urgently needed for the replacement, remodelling and repair of many primary and high schools. We need $38,000,000 and we have $25,000,000, a gap of $13,000,000. And I could show that the gap is considerably more if I was able to take into account the figure for technical colleges.

This is an unsatisfactory position. I am sure the Minister for Works and Housing, who is in the Chamber, is aware of the continuous pressures which must be on his department for the sort of work I have been talking about.

Mr. Sherrington: He won't be able to resist those pressures, either.

Mr. P. WOOD: I suppose he will have to resist them because the Treasurer has not given him enough money to do the full job.

I spoke about a gap of $13,000,000. Actually the position is far worse than that because the figures I have been referring to were based on the assumption that there was a capital works programme the previous year of $26,608,000 for replacement, repair and remodelling, which is what the Depa'ftment of Education estimated as its needs, but in fact the capital works programme last year for repair, replacement and remodelling reached nowhere near that figure. We fell behind last year, we are falling behind this year, and we will be a lot further behind next year.

To my mind one of the worst features of the Treasurer's Financial Statement is the complete lack of a programme to provide modern, pleasant and suitable classrooms for primary schools, special schools and high schools. Many of the education buildings in the State's system have become the slums of Australian education. While the Education Department has recognised the problem and has made a careful assessment based on its needs, the Treasury has not.

Supply (19 OCTOBER 1972] (Financial Statement) 1157

The complete inadequacy of most of our schools is shown in the contrast provided by the latest multiple-area schools. I hope that honourable members of the Committee have seen some of the multiple-area schools being built by the Department of Works. They are a delight, but they are not better than they should be. But even the multiplearea schools, delightful though they are, are not keeping pace with the demand for additional accommodation. Instead, we find spread throughout the State more and more demountable classrooms. Because of lack of finance for the Department of Works we find alongside some of our fine, new multiple-area schools-very modern types providing the very best in education and environment-temporary demountable buildings. We have figures to show that there are 712 classrooms in the State in demountable units. About 22,000 children are being taught in these temporary demountable classrooms, and that figure does not include those taught in temporary classrooms other than demountable ones. It does not include enclosed space under schools and elsewhere.

I believe that as a matter of urgency the Government should plan and execute a programme under which every child will receive education in a proper environment where he can do his best, which is his right. I have spoken about demountable classrooms and the appalling standard of accommodation they represent, but it is a sad commentary on the general standard of accommodation in our primary schools that I have been able to walk into a primary school, look at the standard of accommodation provided and say to those present, "Well, the standard of accommodation you have in your demountable buildings is, in fact, better than that in some of the permanent accommodation." Every honourable member who has seen the permanent accommodation provided in our schools will agree that demountable accommodation is better than some of the permanent accommodation. What a sad reflection that is on the general standard of accommodation for our school children!

I have spoken about the Education Department estimate of its needs. In fact, it has submitted these requirements to the Commonwealth as its part of the nation-wide survey of education needs. It was first put out in May 1970 and revised in February of this year.

Last year, through the agency of the Federal Minister for Education (Mr. Malcalm Fraser), the Commonwealth Government grossly insulted the States and disregarded the needs of education in Queensland by rejecting the information shown in the Australian survey of educational needs. It disregarded both the needs of education and the needs of children in Australia and, in a very real sense, it disregarded the future of Australia itself.

The national survey of which I speak revealed a gap of $1,443 million between the resources available to State Governments and

what they needed for their education programmes over a five-year period. I queried our own Minister for Education on this at the time and he agreed in this Chamber that Queensland's survey of needs was a reasonable estimate, and it was brought up to date in February this year.

The Commonwealth Government has pretended an interest in education especially as the time for the Federal election draws close. It has made a few gestures in this direction. For example, on page 13 of the Treasurer's Financial Statement this year he mentions an interest-free grant from the Commonwealth of $1,690,000 for capital works. This was part of an appeasement programme put forward by ~he Commonwealth Minister for Education and the Federal Liberal-Country Party Government. The survey of needs shows that Queensland requires not the $1,690,000 that has been allocated by the Commonwealth Government but $120,000,000 over a five-year period for both capital works and recurrent expenditure. I repeat that the ov.er-all gap in Australia between what was available and what was needed was $1,443 million.

In August 1970 the Education Ministers of all the States and the Commonwealth met, and the State Ministers agreed that their need was real and urgent. In 1971 the Prime Minister announced that grants totalling $20 000,000 would be made to the States. I h~ve said that Queensland received portion of this sum. In May of this year, just prior to the Queensland State election, the Prime Minister made a further announcement that grants totalling $167,000,000 would be made to the States over five years. Strangely enough, these grants were to commence in July 1973.

The figure of $167,000,000 sounds impres· sive, but neither the Prime Minister nor the Federal Education Minister said at the time of the announcement that the sum required was nearly 10 times that figure. The Commonwealth Government has made a puny, futile and hypocritical effort to meet the education needs of the States in both capital works and current expenditure. The Commonwealth's failure to show a genuine interest in the education needs of the States is reflected in the inadequate and poor environment educationally that is developing in Queensland. At a public level the Queensland Goverment has not taken much action. Cer· tainly the Minister for Education has not pressed the needs of this State as revealed in the survey. In fact, the State Government has remained very quiet on the issue. It needs galvanising into action.

It is to the nation's shame that a survey so carefully planned can be so arbitrarily rejected by the Commonwealth Government, which, in a grandiose manner, hands out to the States a mere one-tenth of the sum required.

To return to the Financial Statement, I wish to deal with pre-school education. All educationists realise its value and importance,


but, like everything else, it should be planned properly. When I look back on the policy of the Australian Labor Party, as stated prior to both the recent and previous State elections, I see that certain sound guide-lines were laid down. The Labor Party realised that the first priority is the training of teachers and the second priority is the establishment of pre-school education in certain areas.

Pre-school education became an election issue. At the last minute, so to speak, it was thrown in by the Treasurer as some sort of election promise. I do not care whether the motives behind the introduction of the scheme were political or genuine; the point that needs to be considered is whether or not the scheme is to be implemented in the best possible manner. In view of its history up to date I do not believe that it is being so implemented.

Mr. Frawley: Will you agree that it is a worth-while scheme?

Mr. P. WOOD: I have just said so. If the honourable member examines the manner in which the scheme is being implemented, I am sure he will agree that it is saddening that such a vital matter should have been thrown in at the last minute as an election promise without any research or planning. The Education Department is now having to rescue a very sound and desirable principle with extreme haste in planning and preparation. This is significant and it is indicative of the Goverment's general attitude to planning, of which there is none at all. There are no teachers, no sites, no schools and no programmes or ideas about the principles to be followed. And they certainly did not exist when the promise was made.

In response to a question by the honourable member for Salisbury, the Minister listed his criteria for establishing kindergartens. I do not argue with the criteria he listed. This is what he said-

"In selecting locations for pre-school centres, a number of criteria have been used. These include: (a) the needs of various areas in terms of educational priority; (b) the accessibility of existing kindergarten facilities; (c) the availability of excess classroom accommodation in schools; (d) the availability of suitable sites on school grounds."

The Minister outlined further criteria, and, if they were followed, they would be sound. But they have not been followed, because the Government had no time to use the proper criteria in establishing centres. The only criterion determining their establishment was that the Government had to put them wherever it could. As it had made an election promise, it had to show some results. The pre-school centres were put higgledy-piggledy, wherever a convenient location could be found.

An Opposition Member interjected.

Mr. P. WOOD: We had some wellthought-out proposals. l doubt if the Government knows what it is doing. My sympathies lie with the officers of the Department of Education, who now have to rescue such a vital, important scheme from the complete lack of forethought and planning by the Government.

We have seen from the list of proposed kindergartens that was distributed that in some instances they are to be placed immediately next door to existing facilities, and, in others, well away from areas with facilities and away from areas where there is a definite need for pre-school facilities and where none now exist. They have been placed wherever they could be put in a hurry. I hope that, in a few years' time, the criteria listed by the Minister will be taken into consideration.

Perhaps the most important matter relates to those who are to teach in these preschool centres. Neither the Minister nor the Government has given any explanation about where the teachers will come from. The clear election promise was that the scheme would be introduced in three years. But, in compiling his Financial Statement, the Treasurer seems to have forgotten that it takes three years to train a kindergarten teacher. The Minister for Education indicated that the number of teachers needed i, about 700. That is a very low estimate. If the scheme is to be brought properly into effect, the number will be rather higher than that. We are still asking where the teachers will come from. During the election campaign, when the Leader of the Opposition asked this very pertinent and relevant question, the Treasurer gave what he probably regarded as the brilliant answer that the Leader of the Opposition was a "knocker". He did not in fact answer the question, and we are still asking it. I asked a similar question only the other day.

In quoting 700 as the number of teachers needed the Minister for Education should realise that next year he is allotting 100 bonded scholarships to the Kindergarten Teachers' College and 200 primary scholarships, in addition to the original number estimated for the primary branch. That makes a total of 300, but it will take three years to train them. Inevitably there will be a wastage of teachers, and we are still a long way short of the conservative estimate of 700. Several hundred more are sure to be required.

Other members of the Opposition and I, as well as many people throughout the State who are vitally interested in the provision of proper pre-school facilities, want to know where these teachers are coming from and what their qualifications will be, but we have received no answer from the Government. Perhaps there is no answer. It is essential that the same high standards that apply to Creche and Kindergarten Association-affiliated kindergartens should apply also to kindergartens established by the Education


Department. But, with a lack of foresight and preparedness, it is difficult to see trained kindergarten teachers being provided at these schools.

I am concerned at the definite suggestions from the Education Department that many existing buildings will be used as pre-school centres. I see a system arising in which we will set up an inferior State system of preschool education that will compare unfavourably with the superior private system in those kindergartens affiliated with the Creche and Kindergarten Association. That would be a very serious mistake. We would then be repeating at the pre-school level of education the grave differences in standards that appear in some other sections of education, especially between some private schools and some State high schools. I do not want to see those differences in standards that exist at secondary level repeated at pre-school level. Yet this is a very real possibility. If the scheme is to be introduced satisfactorily, proper buildings, proper standards and properly trained teachers are needed. I have considerable misgivings about the Government's education programme in this respect.

The triennium allocation to colleges of advanced education has been increased from $19,700,000 to $33,600,000. It is a substantial increase, but on this occasion it includes the allocation to teachers' colleges, which are autonomous, as they should be, for the first time. They were not included in previous allocations.

The allocation for recurrent expenditure at the Darling Downs Institute of Advanced Education has been increased from $1,163,000 to $1,541,000. Recurrent expenditure in that and all other institutes of technology or colleges of advanced education has always been a very severe problem, and has a retarding effect on their operation. This year's Financial Statement offers no immediate solution to their existing and continuing financial problems.

I shall cite one of many examples of how colleges of advanced education are being stunted because insufficient money is provided for recurrent expenses. Although covered by the capital works programme, the library facilities at one of our teachers' colleges are quite inadequate. It is deemed necessary, as a logical course, to open the library during certain hours at night, but so perilously short of recurrent funds is the college that it cannot pay a librarian to work at night. It will have to be manned on a voluntary basis by college lecturers. However, as these people are not qualified librarians, students cannot take books out of the library or return them at night. In addition, the allocation to colleges of advanced education for postage has been limited, and they have not sufficient money to meet their heavy postage costs.

A quick reassessment must be made of the Commonwealth method of financing recurrent expenditure. As I said, teachers' colleges

have become autonomous and they are now eligible for Commonwealth grants on the same basis as other colleges of advanced education. This proposal has been advocated for a number of years by me and by the Australian Lab or Party, and I am glad that at last it has been brought into practice.

Returning to the shortage of money for recurrent expenditure, colleges of advanced education are allocated a certain sum which is governed by the amount allocated by the Commonwealth and the amount that the State can provide to match it. There is a difference between the amount being received by the colleges and what they have to spend, and this deficit has to be made up by students' fees.

I hope honourable members have paid sufficient attention to the activities of colleges of advanced education in the last two weeks to note that their fees are to be considerably increased next year to . meet _the substantial difference between their receipts from the State and the Commonwealth and what they have to spend. If the Commonwealth is really interested in education, as it pretends to be, it will take immediate action to see that these rises do not take place to the extent suggested. It has been suggested that some will double-a rise of 100 per cent.

In colleges of advanced education there are student teachers who are not holders of teaching scholarships, and if they are required to pay increased fees they will _be in effect subsidising the holders of teachmg scholarships. There is a grant arrangement between the State and the Commonwealth in respect of those who pay fees. Fee increases will impose a very heavy burden on the parents of students. For a start, more advanced-education scholarships should be made available, especially for teacher education.

The fees charged at colleges of advanced education in Queensland have for some years been among the lowest in Australia. It should not be assumed that because that is so, there is an entitlement to increase them. Everything possible must be done to keep these fees the lowest in Australia, or among the lowest. We must see that students are not priced out of colleges of advanced education in precisely the same way as they have been priced out of universities. The whole subject of fee structures and the demands made on students calls for urgent Commonwealth intervention. If I have time, I shall have more to say towards the end of my speech about fees as they relate to colleges of advanced education and universities.

I now wish to make a quick reference to the by-laws of the Queensland Institute of Technology, Brisbane, especially as they relate to staff discipline. There has already been a debate in this Chamber on the by-laws of the Queensland Agricultural College.

Mr. B. Wood: I think you can say that it was a very successful debate.


Mr. P. WOOD: It was, and I intend to show why it was.

When the Opposition raised certain objections to the by-laws of one of the colleges of advanced education, we were ridiculed by some Government members and disparaged by the Minister who told us that our objections were unreasonable. When I saw the by-laws of the Queensland Institute of Technology, Brisbane, I saw included in them every point that Opposition members raised in that debate.

Mr. B. Wood: Your stand was vindicated.

Mr. P. WOOD: It was completely vindicated by the by-laws of the Queensland Institute of Technology, Brisbane.

Mr. Wright: Why do you think they wouldn't accept your recommendation?

Mr. P. WOOD: Perhaps because it came from the Opposition.

I am genuinely glad to see that the Board of Advanced Education, which seems to make the final decision in the framing of by-laws, accepted the points that were raised by the Opposition. We considered them to be important points. The Government dismissed them as trivial, but at least the Board of Advanced Education also considered them to be significant points, and thus vindicated our stand.

I now return to the Treasurer's Financial Statement. He makes provision for additional ancillary school staff, such as janitorgroundsmen and clerk-typists, and makes allocations for equipment allowances and a supplementary scheme to improve school libraries. Each of these allocations is desirable, and is supported by the Opposition. In fact, quite a few of them were included in the A.L.P. policy at the last election, so I would find it difficult to oppose them. Then I come to the programmes for subnormal children and for their education.

Mr. B. Wood: It is good to see that they have been taken out of the hands of the Minister for Health, who had no interest in that area.

Mr •. P. WOOD: That is right, and it is quite logical to assume that they should have been included under the Department of Education.

The Queensland Sub-Normal Children's Welfare Association will receive a grant for each teacher equal to the salary of threeyear-trained primary teachers in their first year out of college. It is not exactly the full level of salary, but it is a substantial step in that direction.

I wish to deal now with the education of handicapped children. It is my opinion that Queensland lacks facilities for the tra!ning of specialist teachers who _can do.remedi~l work with children, and this applies particularly to the education of teachers to work with children who are blind, deaf, spastic, subnorma1, or multiple handicapped.

Mr. Kaus: Have you ever visited Narbethong?

Mr. P. WOOD: I think I have seen most of the establishments about which I am speaking. The honourable member may examine my point that Queensland lacks facilities for the training of teachers to teach in this field. I am speaking about the education of teachers to work in this field. Some facilities for their training are available; but this is a field of such rapidly expanding demand for specialist teachers that there are not sufficient facilities to train teachers on a wide-enough scale.

We ought to be approaching the stage at which this State accepts its responsibility for the free education of handicapped children. The present policy of the Governmentand this was a statement made by the Minister for Education some time ago-is that it provides free education for children who are able to benefit from the education provided by the Department of Education. Of course, the department simply does n~t provide some special types of schools, m particular schools for subnormal children. It does provide ·schools for deaf, blind and some spastic children, depending on the degree of their mental ability.

I believe it is time the Government accepted its full responsibilities. The principal difficulty is a lack of teachers in these specialist fields. One teachers' college offers a three-year course that provides mainly teachers for opportunity schools and remedial teachers, and in some courses third-year students can train for work in the deaf, the blind or the spastic schools. I do not have the figures, so I am open to correction on this, but I thin~ that about 30 students entered that particular course this year. As I mentioned, there are insufficient facilities for training more of these teachers.

This is an area of education in which there is an urgent need for additional finance and I cannot see anything in the Financial Statement to indicate that significant additional finance is to come into this field. It is not simply a matter of increasing the amount of money ayailable to cover increases in costs of salanes and so on.

In support of this argument, let me quote from the report of the Senate Standing Committee on Health and Welfare on "Mentally and Physically Handicapped Persons in Australia", which was released in May 1971, It made this very emphatic recommendation-

"That those States which have not taken full responsibility for the provision of free and compulsory education for all handicapped children should take immediate steps to do so."

That was over a year ago. There is little evidence that this State is proceeding to accept that recommendation, and I urge the Government to do so.


I have dealt in some detail with what is in the Financial Statement. I wish to deal now with what is not in it. As I have mentioned, there is no programme in it for an extensive school-building programme, and the situation is getting worse. There is no statement in it about an Education Commission, which once was part of the election policy of the Country-Liberal Parties.

There is no provision in the Financial Statement for an in-service training programme, and I should like to dwell on this point for a little while. The curriculum in all our schools, from tertiary to kindergarten level, is changing at a tremendously fast rate. But the teachers are already busy, and the problem faced by the Department of Education is to get hold of teachers for a long enough period to do a better job than can be done in the very short courses. This would pose a considerable economic problem to the Treasury.

If it is necessary to take teachers out for some considerable time for in-service training courses, other teachers have to be available to replace them in their normal sphere of 'teaching. The number of replacement teachers would depend on how many teachers would have to be taken out of the system at any given time.

I direct the Government's attention to the Murphy Repor;t on teacher education, which was commissioned by this Government. It made proposals for in-service training and provided for 3 per cent of teachers to be taken out of their normal class-room situation each semester for a programme of in-service training. I do not see any evidence in ,the Financial Statement that this matter has even been considered, let alone that any approach has been made in this direction.

It is an inescapable fact that the teacher is ,the heart of the educational process. To my mind, the most significant determinative of the quality of our schools is the quality of the teaching that goes on in them. Children are educated, not by courses or programmes, but by people. They are educa,ted by those who prepare the courses, who design the programmes and who do the teaching. The competence of those who teach profoundly influences the competence of those who learn. If we are to develop competent teachers, in view of the rapidly changing nature of the curriculum it is absolutely essential that we have adequate in-service courses available for them. The universities, the colleges of advanced education and the teachers' colleges should all play a part in the further education of teachers after they finish their pre-service training.

In one regard, I should like to see the establishment of more teacher centres on the same basis as the one in Toowoomba. All that the Department of Education has done in that instance is to supply the building. That is all I am suggesting the teachers

need. From there, they can "take it away". They can use the centre for a variety of purposes: they can use it for meetings, for conferences, for seminars, for study and for their own work, without necessarily taking up the time of the Department of Education. Wi,thout entering into the departmentally sponsored in-service training courses, they have available to themselves in-service training of a kind that is provided on their own initiative, and away from other matters.

I mentioned earlier that I wanted to make some comments about universities and university enrolments, and the ability of a large section of students to gain entry to universities. In all our universities there is an obvious bias against students from lower-income families. I have referred to a survey in Queensland by Professor Schonell and others in ,the early 1960's. Professor Schonell determined that 50 per cent of the students at the Queensland University came from a group representing 8 per cent of the community, namely, the professional, semi-professional and administrative section. From the 43 per cent of the general community who are skilled, semi-skilled, or unskilled, came just 3.5 per cent of the students. This is due to a variety of factors. I would not suggest that economic factors are the only ones, but they are important ones. Other factors might be very difficult to remove by Government action, but economic factors could be easily removed.

Gov,emments, both Federal and State, are further increasing the difficulties of lowerincome earners in entering universities and colleges of advanced education. I mentioned earlier the projected rise in fees of colleges of advanced education. Universities are being limited to a certain section of the community, and that position is becoming worse than it was at the time of Professor Schonell's survey. The unhcersity is now excluding students because of financial restrictions placed on it.

High fees at the university-! hope this does not become the case with the colleges of advanced education-have acted as a barrier and produced some sort of quasiquota system. Matriculation requirements were increased last year, not because a need existed to improve academic standards but simply as another method of imposing quotas on the university. No action was taken at that time by either the State or the Commonwealth, and no action has been taken since, to rectify the situation. Apparently, they are unconcerned.

I draw attention to this allegation by the National Union of Australian University Students-

"The State and Federal Governments now appear to be deliberately forming universities and colleges of advanced education as preserves for an elite and not based on ability."

If we are to remove this situation we have to look towards the abolition of tertiary fees. This is a small matter for the Commonwealth


Government-! am not suggesting that it is a matter of State responsibility-but it is of vital importance to the individual student. This is Australian Labor Party policy. The Government should, as we in the A.L.P. do, accept the principle that every individual in our society is entitled to an equal opportunity of an education to the limit of his ability.

I have only a few moments left in which to speak, and I now want to comment on the Budget as a whole. It contains some advances. We have a system of pre-school education. Muddled and confused as it is, it is an advance. I like the system of library-improvement grants to bring libraries up to a minimum standard. I could argue that the minimum standard set by the Department of Education is below what it should be, but at least it is a start.

Other things that I have mentioned will be of some positive benefit, but we are still left with the position that there are not enough teachers and they have inadequate in-service training. We are left with the fact that there is still discrimination against important sections of handicapped children who can least afford to be discriminated against. We are still left with the fact that some children are 'largely educated in poorstandard schools. The situation is becoming worse instead of better and no action is being taken to improve it. It is still a fact that low-income earners are at a disadvantage in high schools in relation to books, general fees and costs. It is still a fact that the universities and colleges of advanced education are becoming increasingly restrictive on students, and there is no evidence of any concern by either the State or Commonwealth Governments to remove some of these things.

The Treasurer made a statistical comparison of this year's allocation with last year's, and he said that the increase was 25 per cent. Let me quote statistics compiled by the Commonwealth Grants Commission in its report for 1971. This is a completely independent body, and it has given us statistics from which we can relate our performance in Queensland to those of Education Departments in other areas of Australia. These are the statistics which are often decried by honourable members opposite. The honourable member who spoke just before me put up some false sort of argument to destroy them, but they are based on facts supplied by the various Departments of Education and all particulars are relevant as between one State and another.

Irrespective of what area of education we look at, whether it is total per-capita spending in Queensland compared with that in other States, education in primary schools, training of teachers, education in secondary schools, universities or technical education, the fact as disclosed by the Commonwealth Grants Commission report is that Queensland's outlay is less than that of every other State in the Commonwealth. Queensland's

total expenditure on education in all those areas is $52.80 per head, compared with an Australian average of $64.75. The highest per-capita expenditure of all States in Tasmania, is $72.99.

Mr. Chinchen: What about the end product? Are we any worse off than they are?

Mr. P. WOOD: I think there are serious deficiencies and inequalities here. I have outlined quite a number of them. If the honourable member wants to talk about the end product, let him have a look at the record of juvenile crime in Queensland. It cannot be entirely divorced from education.

Mr. Chincben: I repeat, what about the end product? The R.A.A.F. said it wanted all the Queenslanders it could get.

Mr. Hugbes: How do you know the other States are getting more value for money than we are?

Mr. P. WOOD: I knew these figures would be unpopular with those Government members who are interjecting. In his Financial Statement, the Treasurer has drawn a comparison between allocations made this year and others made last year. I have given comparisons made by the Commonwealth Grants Commission, so, if Government members wish to attack the figures, let them attack the Commonwealth Grants Commission, not me.

Throughout the Commonwealth the average expenditure per head on university education is $5.75. By comparison, in Queensland the figure is $4.57, which is the lowest expenditure per head in all the States. The highest expenditure is in New South Wales, where the figure is $6.52.

I do not see any point in going through all the statistics that I have. However, they show that there is only one field out of 11 in which Queensland's performance is better than that of the other States. I refer to agricultural education. In all other fields of education the other States are ahead of Queensland.

In the light of the 25 per cent increase in the allocation to education in this State, it is interesting to compare Queensland's allocation with that of other States, and then to compare Australia's performance with that of other Western democracies as well as other nations that do not come under that category. Such a comparison will reveal that Australia is not doing as well as some countries that we are prone to denigrate.

I deplore the complacency that has been displayed within the past few minutes by certain Government back-benchers, who have tried to deride the figures I have quoted. They say that everything is very good and that we turn out good products.

Mr. Cbinchen: It is the end product that counts.


The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr. Dean): Order! There is too much cross-firing in the Chamber.

Mr. P. WOOD: In those Government members who interject, I find no sense of purpose in developing an education programme.

If Queensland's education services are to be improved, the State needs, firstly, a sense of idealism (which is not possessed by Government members); secondly, a goal to aim at (I see no such goal in the Financial Statement); and, thirdly, determination to do the job. I am sure that when, after the Federal election, Australia has a Federal Labor Government, the people will then be witness to a sense' of idealism, a determination to do the job, and an attainment of that goal.

Hon. R. E. CAMM (Whitsunday-Minister for Mines and Main Roads) (3.24 p.m.): At the outset. I should like to pay a tribute to my colleague Sir Gordon Chalk for his work as Treasurer of this State. There can be no doubt in anyone's mind that this, his seventh State Budget, is the best Budget brought down in the long history of this Parliament.

In his opening remarks the Treasurer reported that, over all, Queensland's economy is in good shape. Bearing in mind all of the pressures and other factors affecting the economy of this State today-many outside the scope of our control-I believe that both the Treasurer and the Government have achieved a remarkable and far-reaching economical result. Certainly, we are not able to direct all of the factors that bear on our economy; however, within the areas that come under direct State responsibility a great deal has been achieved.

Regrettably, many parts of the State are still burdened with drought, the long-time scourge of rural industry.

Down the years the word "drought" must have struck terror into the hearts of many Queensland Treasurers. For a century, Queensland, a rural State, was at the mercy of the elements for its economic well-being. The crippling effect of drought on the rural sector tolled the death knell for the economy of this State. It is significant that, although we have just come through a long period of widespread drought, and, in fact, some of our most productive rural areas are still drought stricken, our economy, as the Treasurer indicated, is in good shape today.

At the same time, we cannot overlook the impact of depressed and fluctuating markets and prices on some of our most important rural industries. When these factors are taken into account one might well wonder just why things are so good in an over-all sense. The answer to this question is really quite simple.

Outside the rural sectors I have mentioned, Queensland is booming in every direction. Industry at every level in the State is investing with confidence in Queensland. It is a

matter of personal pride for me that in the very forefront of those with the most confidence in our State are our mining and mineral-processing companies. No-one can deny the contribution that mining has made, and is making, to Queensland's economic progress and stability. In fact, in large measure, it is the mining industry that has more than effectively counterbalanced any problems we have had on the rural front.

Mining, of course, cannot take all of the credit. Many of our rural industries, such as sugar, beef and grain, and some secondary industries have also played their part in producing this buoyancy in our economy. However, no-one can deny the value of the State's mineral production, which, this year, should reach a record figure of about $350,000,000.

It is not possible to discuss the contribution that the mining industry is making to Queensland without entering into an area which is always calculated to increase blood pressure on the Opposition benches. It must be a source of great disappointment to some honourable members opposite that, despite years of bleating, none of their predictions about the future of the mining industry in Queensland have come true. The prophets of doom, like empty vessels, have achieved a great deal of sound, but little else. Over the years it has sometimes amused me to sit in this Chamber and listen to repeated charges that Queensland is not deriving measurable benefits from the mining industry. In the light of current events, these statements have been shown to be not only without foundation, but verging on the ridiculous.

I should like to touch briefly on the question of the industry's contribution, in hard cash terms, to State Government finances. For years, honourable members opposite have charged that the industry's only contribution was in the form of a mere pittance in royalties. While dealing with royalty charges levied by the Government on our mining interests, it is well to point out that Opposition members forget completely that there were no royalty payments on minerals mined in Queensland prior to 1956. Some royalty was collected on coal, but most of it was paid to the owners of freehold ground. It was not till 1957 that royalties on minerals became of any consequence in this State. Last year royalties amounted to $3,500,000.

If that were the only direct contribution the industry was making to the Government, the Opposition would, I admit, have some room for complaint. But there are avenues of direct contribution to Government finances other than industry royalties. We should consider, for instance, the amount contributed by the industry to the Government in the form of rail freights. Last financial year, the State's railway system suffered an operating loss of $8,800,000, as outlined in the Treasurer's Financial Statement. In the same period, the profit from the State's new lines built to carry minerals was $11,120,000. Bearing in mind the relative tonnages of


mineral haulage, $8,000,000 must be attributed to the haulage of coal. This profit level was achieved after meeting all interest and refund of security deposit commitments.

We met all the costs associated with the construction of these new railway lines to develop our coal deposits, the refunding of security deposits, and interest and a working profit of over $11,000,000 was achieved. This resulted from the export of even less than 10,000,000 tons of coal. That gives some idea of what the export of coal means to this State in direct benefits.

Without these new lines built for and used by the mining industry, the railways loss was of the order of $20,000,000, exclusive of interest payments on the main railway debt. I doubt if even the most critical of Opposition members could describe the direct contribution into State funds of $14,600,000 in the form of royalties and rail profits as a "mere pittance."

We must also take into account that our mining companies are also major contributors to Commonwealth funds in the form of direct and indirect taxation, and that in turn this money flows back to the State. In addition, we derive income from licensing fees, stamp duty, pay-roll tax and the T.A.B. All of the taxes levied throughout Queensland have benefited from the introduction of these mining industries into Queensland. In addition, large sums of money are being spent by mining companies in exploration. One company alone has spent in excess of $12,000,000 exploring for coal and so far has obtained no lease.

New towns, such as Moura, Blackwater and Moranbah, are springing up. Country areas are being supplied with electricity and water, which was not considered possible four or five years ago. Compare those towns that have been built by our export coal-mining companies with towns such as Ogmore and Collinsville, with which some honourable members are familiar, and the tremendous differences that have been made in the mining industry and the advantages that have come to it and the men employed in it become apparent.

If anyone still thinks that this is an insufficient contribution, ignoring all the other tangible benefits we receive in the form of employment opportunities, capital investment and increased avenues for trade and commerce, let him cast his mind back to the years before this Government came into power when the Labor Government endeavoured to interest people in exploiting the coal reserves of this State. The Labor Party introduced a Bill to ratify an agreement between the State of Queensland and the Electric Supply Corporation (Overseas) Limited for the development of the Blair Athol coalfield. The Electric Supply Corporation was an English company. The agreement laid down the terms for the development of that field. That legislation remained on the Statute Book and those

terms were the criteria for the mmmg of coal in this State. Any company which desired to explore for coal following the passage of that Act took for granted that those conditions would be applicable to the development of our coal resources. Let me briefly outline the situation applying at that time. The Blair Athol coalfield was well known; it was not a new discovery. The proposed developers would not have been involved in any exploration costs at all. In return for the concession to develop the field, the company was to pay a royalty based on a sliding scale ranging from 6d to ld a ton. The company was to pay 6d a ton on the first million tons, 3d a ton on the second million tons and ld a ton on the third and any subsequent million tons. The company planned for a production of 3,000,000 tons a year for export. Some 1,000,000 tons of that total would have been going overseas each year for a royalty payment of le a ton. In fact, all exports in excess of 2,000,000 tons would have attracted royalty at that rate.

Mr. Sherrington: What year was that?

Mr. CAMM: It does not matter what year it was. This was the criteria established by a Labor Government for the development of a well-known coalfield which was offered to an overseas company.

Even this would perhaps not have been so bad if the Government had planned for additional sources of revenue for the State. However, the Government of the day had no such plans. The company was to be given the right to build and operate its own railway and loading facilities. It was a railway to be used solely for the haulage of coal. As a matter of fact, it was indicated that some parts of this railway line could be in the form of a conveyor belt. This would completely restrict the operation of the line to the haulage of coal. Let that be contrasted with the agreement made by the Government in the development of a coalfield nearer the coast than Blair Athol, the railway line to which is now also used for the cartage of commodities other than coal.

Under that agreement such activities would have returned no income to the State. The State would have received not one penny from the operation of that railway line.

Mr. Sherrington: Wasn't the Bill that provided for a private line withdrawn?

Mr. CAMM: The Moura railway line is being built by the company itself with a security deposit that is being refunded.

Mr. Sherrington: Wasn't it originally to be a private line?

Mr. CAMM: I dare say the first agreement was based on the very conditions of the Bill that I am talking about. That is why this Government, when it came to power, altered things completely.


Mr. Sherrington: I am talking about the lifetime of this Government.

Mr. CAMM: If the honourable member looks at the Moura line today, he will find that it is operated as an all-purpose line over which grain, cattle and other commodities are being carried. If it had been built under the conditions proposed for the cartage of Blair Athol coal, there would have been conveyor belts over the range into Gladstone.

Disregarding rents on leases, which amounted in those days to one shilling an acre, Queensland's return on every million tons of coal in excess of 2,000,000 each year would have been less than $10,000. This Government increased the rent from one shilling an acre to $1. The total return to the State in royalties and rents would have been $85,000 for the 3,000,000 tons that it was intended to export.

Last year the coal industry contributed more than $8,000,000 in rail-freight profits alone on less than 10,000,000 tons. The same tonnage under Labor's policy would bave returned $150,000 in royalties and nothing else. I think it is about time that the Opposition pulled its head out of the sand and took a realistic view of what is going on today. Whether honourable members opposite like it or not, Queensland is deriving great and growing benefit from mineral expansion. Had we used the thinking of the former A.L.P. Government as a yardstick for our approach to this question, there would have been a great deal of room for complaint.

Coal, of course, is not the only mineral contributing to Queensland's prosperity.

Mr. Marginson: What was the value of the coal exported?

Mr. CAMM: Irrespective of what the value was, there were no escalation clauses contained in the agreement that was to be presented to the British company, so the same meagre royalty payments would have been received. If the honourable member will only listen, he will hear some more about this industry.

For every wild charge that has been levelled against the mining industry and the Government's mineral policies, there is a logical answer. Is it possible to place a price on the value of a city such as Mount Isa in the otherwise barren north-west of this State? The Opposition, of course. delights in ignoring this type of contribution to Queensland's prosperity. We must take into account, too, the many benefits that are yet to come.

The mining industry has already demonstrated that it is the foundation upon which industrial expansion will be built. Without mines, industries such as the Gladstone alumina plant and the Townsville copper refinery would not have been possible. Without mines and mineral potential, we could never hope to attract a steel industry,

or even an aluminium smelter, to Queensland. If this potential alone does not represent a benefit to this State in very concrete terms, I will be happy-and so will the man in the street-to hear from those who have opposite views. Their conclusions should be more than interesting.

I wish to examine in detail a question that is of vital importance to both this State and this nation. Honourable members will be aware that in recent months the export coal industry has been brought into sharp relief. All sorts of criticisms have been levelled at companies, the industry generally and Governments over the future of coal development in this country. Companies have been accused of employing unfair selling methods and price cutting; the industry has been accused of disregarding national interests; and Governments have been accused of everything from ineptitude to collusion with foreign interests.

By and large, situations of this type are common on the political and industrial scenes when large amounts of money and key industries are involved. It is not possible, of course, to please all of the people all of the time. But I believe that the current situation requires comment because so many misleading statements and so much incorrect information have been forthcoming in recent months that anyone could be excused for being confused.

Honourable members will be aware that shortly, in company with the Under Secretary of the Department of Mines, Mr. Healy, I am going to Japan for discussions with leaders of the Japanese steel industry. My reasons for going are simple. The Government is concerned that we should maintain our already good business relations with our Japanese customers for coking coal. vVe are anxious to make sure that the contracts already signed between Queensland-based coal exporters and their customers are protected and continued.

Members of the Committee will, of course, be aware that in recent times there has been strong competition between elements of the export coal industry in New South Wales and Queensland. The reasons for this competition are understandable, but they have nothing to do with State boundaries. I make it perfectly clear that there is no dispute between New South Wales and Queensland. However, there are points of disagreement between the open-cut and underground sections of the export coal industry, both intra-State and interstate.

It is a matter of pure chance that the majority of the open-cut producers are in Queensland and that most of the underground production comes from New South Wales. We should not overlook the fact that a significant amount of our export coal in Queensland is produced in modern underground mines and that this proportion will

1166 Supply [19 OcTOBER 1972] (Financial Statement)

increase in the future. Producers in both categories have to sell their product on world markets in the face of world competition.

At present, the proportion of open-cut to underground operations on the South Blackwater field is 55 per cent open-cut to 45 per cent underground. It is expected that this will increase until, in the not too distant future, it will be an entirely underground operation. The position at Moura is similar. Today 78 per cent of the coal is produced by open-cut mining and 22 per cent by underground mining. In a few years that proportion also will alter and a greater quantity of coal will be produced by underground mining.

Mr. Harvey: What is the economic relationship between the two?

. Mr. CAMM: The economic relationship 1s hard to gauge when one considers how deeply open-cut mining can now be carried out. Naturally, anyone mining 1,000 feet underground is faced with much greater expenditure than someone who has an overburden of only 50 feet. But when the overburden exceeds 300 feet and the underground mining is close to the surface, the costs of the two operations are very close.

As I have said, producers in both categories have to sell their product on world markets in the face of world competition. As a result of this situation, production and marketing costs are of prime importance. Any increase in production costs, no matter how small, can have a vital bearing on final selling prices. Many factors affect costs, but far and away the biggest single variable is salaries and wages.

In that regard I am not being critical of wages paid to men engaged in the coalmining industry. If, through their approaches to the Industrial Commission, they can increase their wages and get better conditions, I say, "Good luck to them." Never since I have been Minister for Mines have I criticised the level of wages paid to men engaged in that industry. I have sometimes criticised the policies they adopt in an endeavour to obtain a greater increase than that awarded by the Industrial Commission.

It is a fact of mining that underground operations have a much greater labour content than open-cuts. As a result, increases in labour costs have a greater impact in underground operations than they do in open-cut mines. In simple terms, if two mines-one underground and one open-cut ~sign long-term contracts at the same time and at the same price, both can anticipate cost increases based on escalating labour costs. In the contracts that are negotiated and signed between the coal producers and the consumers of coking coal in Japan, there is always provision for escalating costs associated with wages and haulage. However, as the underground mine has a higher labour content, naturally its pro-rata cost increase will be higher. After a period the costs in the underground mine are going to

be relatively higher. To maintain his initial profit margin, the underground operator is forced to sell at a higher price than the open-cut operator. I have perhaps oversimplified what is really a rather complex matter.

Many factors have to be taken into account in examining the value of coal: some economic and others relating to such questiOns as quality, impurities and transport. [t is against this background that some people who represent the underground export indus· try have endeavoured to bring pressure to bear on open-cut operators. Some wild charges have been made and there have been some top-level discussions. Within the last fortnight a deputation representing the underground operators has been to Japan for talks with steel producers. Queensland, to my knowledge, was not represented on that deputation and therefore Queensland's point of view was not put forward. I will make sure that Queensland's view is made clear when Mr. Healy and I visit Japan shortly.

Competition is the lifeblood of freeenterprise industry, and in the final analysis we all sink or swim on the basis of our ability to sell our products. Competition is a tradition of our way of life-sometimes we win and sometimes we lose. Let me illustrate the point by recounting a recent instance when we lost. Honourable members will recall the widespread interest that was aroused some years ago following the announcement that a new aluminium smelter was to be established in Australia by Alcan. There was certainly understandable interest in Queensland, and why not! Queensland is Australia's biggest bauxite producer and the Gladstone alumina plant ranks amongst the largest in the world. It seems logical that any plant designed to convert alumina into aluminium should be built in this State.

Things were going very well until it came to the question of power costs-a vital qt!estion for a plant that would consume electric power in huge quantities. Queensland proposed Gladstone as a site for the plant, with power coming from a new power station to be built on the alumina refinery's doorstep. Coal for the power station was to come from Callide. New South Wales also put forward a proposition for the aluminium refinery.

Mr. Harvey: That coal would all be overburden?

Mr. CAMM: No. The Callide coalfield does not supply any overseas coal at all.

Mr. Harvey: Are you going to use solely overburden coal?

Mr. CAMM: I am talking about the Callide coalfield, which supplies coal to the Ca!cap Power Station. It is entirely a steaming-coal seam. It was expected at that time that that would be the coal that would feed the power station for the aluminium


smelter. The export coal industry had not been established to the extent where we had negotiated with the operating companies the reservation of overburden steaming coal.

New South Wales put forward a proposition for the aluminium refinery to be built on the Hunter Valley area coalfields, with power coming from the new Liddell Power Station, the biggest in Australia. Coal for this project was to be mined at Liddell and taken by conveyors straight into the power station. As it turned out, the price of coal from Liddell and Callide was about the same, because Callide is an open-cut operation. The only differing factor was that of transport costs. It cost more to haul coal from Callide to Gladstone than it did to take it the couple of miles involved from the mine to the power station at Liddell.

Certainly, many other factors were involved. However, I believe it is more than significant that at that time no-one suggested that Queensland should be given any advantageous concessions. Not even the Miners' Union or the operators suggested that we should have any advantageous concessions as against the New South Wales operators. Certainly it was never suggested by the Government.

No-one suggested increasing the cost of Liddell coal to compensate for the cost-oftransport factor involved in Queensland. No-one outside this State was remotely interested in the increased job opportunities that an aluminium refinery would provide for Queensland unionists, and no-one was interested in the fact that Queensland was entitled to some consideration as the producer of the raw material.

It is now a matter of historical fact that the aluminium refinery is established at Kurri, in New South Wales. Such a plant would have been a major boost to the industrial development of Central Queensland. Instead, it has joined the ranks of the many major industries located in the Newcastle region. Of course, we benefit indirectly because the alumina for this aluminium smelter is being refined in Gladstone.

On this occasion, the New South Wales people won the day and we must concede that they won fairly. We were beaten by economic factors beyond our control. It is, I believe, very much to Queensland's credit that we bore our adversity with a patient shrug and continued our search for other avenues of development. And, with the construction of the large power station at Gladstone, we hope to obtain an aluminium smelter for Queensland. I stress that no-one at that time suggested that any consideration should be given to Queensland over and above the pure economic factors that then prevailed.

It is being claimed that open-cut operators have an unfair advantage over underground miners in the export of coal, and pressure is being brought to bear from some quarters

to equalise the position. We are now being asked to make concessions, and thus bring the cost of producing export coking coal in open-cut mines into line with the cost structure applying in underground mines.

The Minister for National Development, speaking in Federal Parliament on 28 September on the question of coal exports, hinted at possible Commonwealth intervention in this area. He did not say that they would do it, but he indicated that they had the power to do it if they so desired. His words were echoed in Japan a couple of weeks ago by the delegation of underground-coal owners. Since then, many trade journals from Japan and mining journals from Great Britain have highlighted the facts about Australian coal and the possibility of disagreement between open-cut operators and underground miners.

Mr. Harvey: What is the position in England so far as export market is concerned? They have been out here looking at our coal, haven't they?

Mr. CAMM: Yes. Opportunities do exist in Europe for the export of our coal, but so far we have not established any market possibilities in Great Britain because they, too, have huge deposits of coal.

Before anyone can even begin to comment on this question of alleged unfair competition, it is first necessar)( to establish once and for all whether, in fact, open-cut operators are unfair competitors with underground miners on the Japanese market. I will leave honourable members to draw their own conclusions from the documented facts. Most of the current dispute centres on the question of the cost of the product to the consumer. This would be a simple matter if all coal was the same; unfortunately, it is not. Some coals command a higher price because they are superior to others for a given use. Some coals have higher impurity levels than others, and some vary in quality as the producers work through the seams> All of these factors make for a large number of variables, which can affect the price at which coal is sold.

Ideally, it would be best to compare two coals of equal quality, but this is a difficult job as, although the coal may be the same, the other relating factors may be different. However, I shall compare the contract prices for two coals from Queensland open-cut mines of high quality with coal from six New South Wales underground mines of varying quality. On this basis, the open-cut coals should have a considerable advantage.

In 1968 Thiess Peabody Mitsui Ltd., the operators of the Moura mine, negotiated a contract to supply coal to Japan for a period of ten years. The agreed price was $Al1.01 a ton. In the same year Utah Development Co. entered into a contract to supply coal from Blackwater to Japan at $A10.00 a ton. In the following year, 1969, six underground operators in New South


Wales negotiated contracts to supply coal from various mines for periods of up to seven years. In every case the contract selling price for the underground coal was lower than that for Moura coal, and in only two cases was the negotiated price higher than that fixed for Blackwater coal in the previous year.

One might observe that in this instance, if anyone is guilty of price-cutting it is the underground operators who negotiated a lower price than that secured by either T.P.M. or Utah. Conversely, the two groups who secured a higher price than Utah for their coal would seem to have little room for complaint. At no time in the history of the export of coal from this State have underground ope-rators undercut the current contract price obtained by New South Wales operators. In fact, as I have indicated, the converse is the case. The wheel has turned since 1968-69.

Owing mainly to award variations, increased costs have affected the whole of the coal industry, and, of necessity, this effect has been greater in the underground sector than in the open-cut area. This is a serious problem that we must all be prepared to face.

Of course, there is a benefit to be had by underground operators who are faced with unavoidable cost increases. In all contracts there is an escalation clause which allows the price to be increased to a certain amount on the basis of higher wages or shorter working hours that may be granted by the courts. The effect of this is that underground operators, with a higher labour content, will get more in the way of increases in prices than low-labour-content, open-cut operators.

This brings to light the fact that, although underground miners and open-cut operators negotiate a contract at the same base price, over a period of two or three years, with the escalation of costs as a result of increased wages, the underground miners, by virtue of the high labour content, will be asking for greater increases in their export prices. This, then, puts them at a higher price than the open-cut operators, and naturally the purchases of coal then tend to go to the opencut producers.

The people who purchase our coal are aware of these facts, and appear to be reluctant to tie themselves for any length of time with the underground industry. The average period of contract with southern underground operators is about five years. Obviously, nobody is prepared to look further ahead than this in terms of what might happen to wages and salaries as well as other escalating costs. But it is a different story with the open-cut operators. Contracts for open-cut sales have been signed for periods of up to 15 years.

I am in favour of supporting the economically viable sections of the coal-mining industry, whether they be underground or open-cut. Action along these lines is very

much in the national interest. However, the yardstick must be economic viability. I can illustrate this point by referring to what has perhaps been one of the most misunderstood and misrepresented events in the Australian coal industry this year.

On May 5 this year, Clutha Development Co. closed two of its collieries on the south coast of New South Wales because of loss of markets. The mines concerned, South Clifton and North Bulli No. 2, had been supplying coal under contract to steel-makers in Italy. The contract was not renewed but was awarded to Utah, who undertook, in the face of world competition, to supply the Italian market at a more favourable price. This price was in excess of the original price negotiated for the supply of overseas coal.

This series of events, which, regrettably, led to the dismissal of about 300 men, raised a storm in New South Wales. The Miners' Federation, through its official organ, "Common Cause", levelled a series of charges against the Clutha Development Co. and Utah, and also the Federal and State Governments. Utah was accused of forcing the closure of the two mines and it was implied that this had been the resuit of price-cutting and unfair competition.

The facts do not support this contention. For instance, on 28 April 1971 the secretary of the Miners' Lodge, South Clif>ton Mine, was called to give evidence before the Coal Industry Tribunal in support of a Coal Mining Union claim for a $20 a week increase in pay. The secretary, Mr. Cyril Mills, was asked what basic conditions in the mine were like. In reply, he said-

"They are very bad at present. In fact, we have been to a conference on a number of occasions with the management, trying ,to increase production, and we also got to the stage that every day the men are ringing up from the mine to the management, saying they have not got a walk-up start. They ring up practically every day on day shift to say their machines are not ready and they have to do some two or three hours' work before they can start."

In reply to a further question about the attitude of ,the men towards the mine he said-

"They are always at us about what to do and we have been going to the management in conference, but we have got to the stage where we can go no further."

Another witness a't the same hearing was James Wright Brown, Superintendent of Collieries for Clutha Development Pty. Ltd. He gave evidence on 6 May. He told the tribunal that the South Clifton Colliery was losing money. He said the loss for ,the seven months to 31 March 1971 was more than $400,000. Mr. Brown further told the tribunal that, on the basis of a ?-!-hour working day, South Clifton miners spent 4t hours' effective working time at the coal face. He


went on to say that if a 35-hour week was introduced this effective coal-production time would be reduced to 3;t hours.

It is hard to reconcile the substance of this evidence with the claims made by the Miners' Federation in "Common Cause", which would have us believe that the South Clifton miners had been thrown out of work by the activities at Utah's open-cut mines. No attention was paid to the fact ,that the South Clifton colliery was old and outdated. The simple fact of the matter is that the mine was incapable of competing on world markets at competitive prices.

I agree with the Miners' Federation that it is not in Australia's interests to see sections of the coal-mining industry closing down, with a resulting cessation of employment opportunities. However, I cannot agree that this policy should be pursued to the stage of stupidity.

The South Clifton mine was more than 80 years old, its workings were many miles underground, and it was expensive to operate. In consequence, its internal transpoN costs were high in terms of both money and labour. The mine had a water problem and mining involved very high pumping costs: Some of the seams being worked were only four feet thick, and production was around 200,000 tons a year. It was a mechanised mine, yet the output per man-shift was less than three tons per ~mployee. To me, these facts add up 'to a mme that could not compete. on Australian markets, let alone try to sell 1ts product to overseas customers in the face of world competition.

It is grossly unfair to suggest tha,t open-cut operators in Queensland were in any way responsible for the closure of the South Clifton mine. To put it in modem terms, South Clifton had "had it", and this was obviously appreciated by the secretary of the Miners' Lodge, if not by the Miners' Federation and the other critics of the situation prevailing at the time when the mine sought new export contracts.

I well remember discussing this problem with representatives of the Miners' Union. I asked them to establish for me the parameters of open-cut operations as compared with underground. So far, they have not been prepared to do so. When I first became Minister for Mines seven years ago, anyone contemplating mining with overburden in excess of 120 ft. had to be sure of tremendous seams of coal beneath the overburden, and anyone contemplating mining operations where the overburden was in excess of 200 ft. would have mounted an underground operation. Today, the company at Hail Creek expects an open-cut minin" operation to a depth of 400 ft. "'

I, for one, will not be a party to forcing men to mine coal underground when it is possible to adopt the open-cut method, which is the most economic way to mine coal resources because it ensures that every ton of coal is taken out of the ground. Using

the underground method, up to 50 per cent of the coal is left in the ground as pillars to support the roof.

Open-cut mining to a certain depth has an economic advantage over underground mining. However, below a certain depth it is almost as costly as underground mining. And who is to say what technical advances will be made during the next 10 years to allow open-cut mining to be economic to a far greater depth? The economic depth has been almost doubled in the past 10 years. It is an established fact that, if opencut mining is conducted on the bench method, there is no limit to the depth provided the seam is thick enough and the quality of the coal is good enough.

An Opposition Member: Have they worked out the greatest depth of overburden below which open-cut mining is not economic?

Mr. CAMM: I indicated that, seven years ago, it was 120 ft., but there had to be a favourable ratio between the depth of overburden and the depth of the seam. In addition, the type of overburden is a major factor. At Moura, the overburden is a very solid sandstone formation and considerable amounts of explosive are required. At Utah, and to some extent at Goonyella, the overburden is soft, and less explosive and less dragline work are required to remove it. It is expected that the depth of open-cut mining will be greater in those areas than at Moura, which is resorting to undergroundmining methods.

The deliverability of our coal to Japanese markets is of prime consideration. During the past few years, Queensland has had a good record in this regard. Utah has a deliverability in excess of 100 per cent, and the over-all proportion of Queensland's deliverability in its contractual obligations is well in excess of 94 per cent. These factors are taken into consideration when export deals are made with overseas consumers.

Mr. Harvey: How much have you done is considering the use of coal in the manufacture of synthetics?

Mr. CAMM: At present we are endeavouring to encourage overseas companies to establish petrochemical industries in this State. They are testing the various types of coal in the fields stretching from Millmerran in the south to north of Collinsville, and in the Galilee basin, which has not been mined yet, to see if the deposits of coal are suitable for the establishment of a petrochemical industry in this State. If the companies concerned can ascertain the existence of suitable coal, it will be reserved for that specific purpose.

As I have said on many occasions, both inside and outside this Chamber, it is very much in the interests of both Queensland and the nation that we protect our raw materials from unnecessary and wasteful

1170 Supply [19 OCTOBER 1972} (Financial Statement)

exploitation. I believe further that we should do everything possible to maintain internal industry balances, thereby giving the widest possible scope for employment and development. However, we cannot stand by and let the weakest links in the chain dictate the future of the industry as a whole. We could do this if Australia was the only supplier of coal on world markets. But we are not. We already face strong competition from the United States and Canada in Japan, and South Africa and other countries are very interested in breaking into Europe.

It is a well-known fact that Japan, our biggest customer, is having talks with other countries about coal supplies. What they are doing is good, sound business practice. China, which has enormous coal reserves and very low production costs, is much closer to Japan than we are. The question surely must be: Can we afford to jeopardise what we have achieved?

We should not forget that, despite all its imports, Japan has a substantial domestic coal industry of its own. Often the Japanese buy consignments of coal ou(l;'ide their contract agreements for blending with their own coal when this is necessary. They do this quite frequently. They choose a particular type of coal that is needed to blend with their local product to make it suitable for their steel mills and blast furnaces, and they pay an extra price for this coal in special saies. Without entering into any contractual agreements whatsoever, they will purchase 200,000 or 300,000 tons at a high price so that it is held in reserve to blend with their own coals. If I remember correctly, Japan mines in excess of 40,000,000 tons of coal a year.

These spot sales have a tendency to inflate the export-coal economic structure for short periods, and sometimes they give a false impression. However, it is the longterm position that should be uppermost in our minds. The cost of maintaining a few uneconomic mines in operation in the hope that they will secure spot sales might well be very costly indeed in the long term.

I come to one final criticism that has been levelled at the Government and is completely unfounded. We have been accused of raping the country for short-term gain and not giving any thought to the future. This is untrue. All who have been here for any length of time and have witnessed the passing of the Bills that have been associated with these agreements will realise that the Government has imposed stringent conditions on export operators as to the amount of coal they can mine and the amount they must leave proved in the ground. For example, under the speciaJ coal-mining lease that the Utah organisation has at Blackwater, they are limited to an export tonnage of 100,000,000 tons. For that right, they had to upgrade the railway line from Blackwater to Gladstone. They

built their own spur line, and they made provision for water, electricity and all other amenities at the town of Blackwater. ln their lease on the Blackwater field, they have proved many times over the tonnage of coai that the Government has allowed them to export.

The same applies to the franchise agreement reached with Central Queensland Coal Associates on the Goonyella field. Under that agreement, the company is allowed to export 150,000,000 tons of coal. For that right, they built the railway line from Hay Point to Goonyella and the spur line down to Peak Downs, and they are now contemplating constructing a line farther down to Saraji. In addition, they have establisheJ the port at Hay Point. They have undertaken a capital investment of hundreds of millions of dollars. In order to gain the right to export a further 150,000,000 tons, they have to prove to geologists and to the Mines Department that for every ton they mine, two tons of coal of the same quality will be left in the ground for the future use of the people of this State.

But that is not all. In the authority to prospect originally granted to the Utah organisation, the Government reserved, north of the Central Queensland line up to just north of the Mackenzie River, a huge area of coal-bearing land on which, through its drilling team, the Queensland Government has proved 160,000,000 tons of coking coal and 340,000,000 tons of steaming coal. We have gone no further, because there is no need to do so. That coal is being held in reserve, and it will be made available to any company or person who desires to establish an industry in this State to use it. That is not only confined to this State. Any industry that is established in Australia will receive special consideration in the use of coal of this type.

In this way, the Government believes that it is protecting the State's natural resources of coal. Of the many millions of tons of coking coal that have been proved in Queensland, the only coal that the Government has allowed to be exported under its contractual agreements with Utah is 250,000,000 tons, with the right to a further 150,000,000 tons. The position is different at Moura and South Blackwater, where the reserves are very small and operations are carried on under special coal-mining leases. The tonnage permitted to be mined there will be the tonnage that is in the ground.

The Government has made ample provision for the future. In addition, the State has very big reserves that are as yet untouched.

A second factor involves mining methods. As I indicated earlier, the operators in Queensland have gone into open-cut operations because they are the most economical. In some cases, this has been possible only with the use of modern technology and more sophisticated machinery. I reiterate


that some mines operated by underground methods in Australia are shallower than the coal at Hail Creek, which will be mined by open cut. If these underground mines had begun operating at this stage with modern machinery, they also would have been opencut mines. Having begun as underground operations, they are, of course, saddled with the additional operating costs.

I do not believe that any scheme to tie the price of Australian coal to some scale based on the costs of the most uneconomic producer, be he underground or open-cut, will provide a short-term answer or longterm security. The industry and the Government of Queensland have made a vast investment in our emerging export coal trade. We will leave no stone unturned in our efforts to safeguard this investment, the jobs of the people who have followed in the wake of progress, and the prosperity of future Queenslanders who will benefit from the ultimate development that this progress will bring.

Mr. CASEY (Mackay) (4.18 p.m.): At the outset in the Budget debate, I, as the representative of my electorate, must express my thanks to the Treasurer on behalf of the sections of my electorate that have benefited from provisions made in the Budget. I think most honourable members would be prepared to admit that the Budget has been very beneficial to some sections of the community that have been in dire financial straits-organisations such as the ambulance, subnormal schools, and kindergartens throughout the State-and to undertakings such as school libraries and other school activities.

While I am on the subject of schools, I express my appreciation to the Minister for Works and his departmental officers for their co-operation relative to school buildings within my electorate. It is a very important field of Government activity, and, through negotiations with the Department of Works, Mackay certainly has not lagged behind other areas of the State.

One of the points that I wish to touch on in this debate concerns me greatly. Being freer from political ties, perhaps, than other honourable members in this Chamber, I am better able to speak on it and draw the Government's attention to it.

Politicians represent elected government at three levels-Federal, State, and local-and they are accused of many things. But having served at two levels of Government, and having made a study of the third, I should say the worst thing that has happened is that today we are creating a system that is over-governing us. I believe that this has been brought about by the shifting of complete financial power in Australia to the Commonwealth Government.

Under the original financial agreement when the Commom1ealth was formed, the Commonwealth Government was required to

return to the States three-quarters of the receipts from customs and excise and to finance itself from the other quarter and from the profits of the Postal Department.

I think it would be admitted at this stage that the States had the greatest share of the cake. History shows what has happened since that time. World War I saw the introduction by the Commonwealth Government of its own additional taxation. Then the depression years brought about such things as Loan Council meetings, and gradually the financial powers of the States were whittled away.

After World War II a system of grants was applied. Whilst the States realised that this replaced their own income tax, it was not providing them with the necessary development finance in a rapidly changing world. Therefore, the Commonwealth agreed to a system of additional specific-purpose grants, and here lies its new-found power and influence over the direction and extent of the States' spending. To each of those grants there are strings attached, and always dangling the strings is yet another Commonwealth administrative organisation.

Whilst the Commonwealth has no difficulty in spending, in accordance with its own needs, on its own functions and in carrying out its responsibilities in the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory, it maintains a very tight control on the spending of the States. The best way to see this is to compare the Estimates of the Commonwealth with those of the various States. To give the Committee some idea of the position, I have made some comparisons between the Budgets for this year of the Commonwealth and the State of Queensland. I point out that my figures are approximate as it is difficult, because of the different formats of the Budgets, to obtain precise amounts.

Let me take the Parliaments themselves. The cost of running the Commonwealth Parliament, with U times the number of members of the Queensland Parliament, is almost 10 times the cost of running this State Parliament. One segment of it alone is worth citing. I refer to the Parliamentary Library, which we all acknowledge is the storehouse of knowledge for our legislators. For 1972-73 the Commonwealth has budgeted more than $1,000,000 for its Parliamentary Library; the State has budgeted $63,000. The Commonwealth Government has budgeted almost 16 times as much as this State for that very important purpose. I will be critical here by pointing out that the allocation for the purchase of books for the Queensland Parliamentary Library this year has been cut back from $13,000 to $10,000.

Most honourable members would probably be surprised to know that the Antarctic Division of the Commonwealth Department of Supply has a greater Budget allocation than the Queensland Department of Irrigation and Water Supply.


Another interesting comparison is that the Commonwealth spends more on local-government services in the A.C.T. than the Queensland Local Government and Electricity Department spends in the whole of this State. Even if the Queensland Treasurer's subsidies for local authorities are added to the amount spent by the Local Government and Electricity Department, the total does not reach the amount that the Commonwealth Government spends on local government within its own sphere. Of course, the Commonwealth Government's figures do not include expenditure on roads, bridges, water supply and sewerage works, which are provided by the Commonwealth Department of Works. Is it any wonder that many local authorities in Queensland feel that they are being badly done by?

Last financial year the Queensland Government received from the Commonwealth, in addition to its normal taxation reimbursements, over $136,000,000 under the Specific Purposes Grant Scheme. Some of that money was by way of direct grant, but much of it has to be repaid with interest. Almost all of it would be spent on projects that are constitutionally the responsibility of the State, but it can only be spent in the manner and location designated by the Commonwealth. Take beef roads as an example. They are being built with money provided by the Commonwealth, in locations selected by the Commonwealth and to its standards and requirements.

The Commonwealth also provides direct grants for Main Roads works from the petrol tax. This is without direction, but with money advanced through the Commonwealth Aid, Local Authority Roads, Fund, which is for the use of both the State Government and local authorities, the Commonwealth lays down ways in which it must be spent by the local authorities. To guide it in the \\ay it should allocate this finance the Commonwealth has set up its own Bureau of Roads, which this year alone will cost $952,000. That is the very point I am coming to-the administrative organisations that the Commonwealth is setting up to administer the distribution of funds to the States for tasks that are rightly those of the States. Surely we are a responsible Government. Surely the Commonwealth should have a more equitable and much better system of dividing its cake without having to set up these great administrative organisations.

A similar example exists with Commonwealth assistance to universities. This year the Commonwealth will spend $327,000 on a body called the Australian Universities Commission simply to work out how much money it can give to universities. I,t is a great, developing colossus of Government administration. Incidentally, without any financial problems at all, the Commonwealth Government itself spends almost twice as much on the Australian National University at Canberra as Queensland has to spend on all its universities.

Another classical example of over-government, as the Minister for Works and Housing would appreciate, is the new scheme for homes for aged persons. A simple explanation of the scheme is that groups of selfcontained home units are to be buiLt where there is a need to assist aged persons to obtain cheap rental accommodation suitable to their requirements. Constitutionally, housing is the responsibility of the States so that the State Housing Commission will build the units. The Commonwealth will pay the bill, but in many cases local authorities are asked to help look after and maintain the grounds and some other aspects of the buildings.

But the position is not quite w simple, because the State draws up the plans and submits them to the Commonwealth for approval. The Commonwealth s'ends them back to the State, which, in turn, sends them to ,the local authority. The local authority then returns them to the State, which sends them back to the Commonwealth again. The Commonwealth then announces the approval of financial allocation and returns them to the State. The State calls tenders, builds the units and then hands them over to the councils, which in some areas maintain the grounds and look after other activities.

Surely the Commonwealth Bureau of Census and Statistics and the Social Services Department would have details of the areas where a need exists. It would be just too simple for the Commonwealth to make a grant direct to the State and then have the State allocate it to local authorities in areas where a need exists. In other words, this money could be given without any strings or ties attached. All State Governments and local authorities are responsible elected bodies, but the symbol of Government red tape must be maintained.

A look at community health provides some very interesting comparisons. For instance, the Commonwealth spends more on its repatnatwn hospitals and services than Queensland does on all its health services. Perhaps the Commonwealth can justify this spending on patriotic grounds but, while the hospi,tals of our State are becoming squalid, those in the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory are doing fine. The Commonwealth is able to spend on them, per capita, twice as much as Queensland does, even though we have the Golden Casket Art Union to help us along.

In the field of health, we find perhaps the greatest amount of overlapping. Let me give an example that may typify the sort of thing I am getting at. If a Mackay waterside-worker caught a rare stomach complaint through eating, in Mackay Harbour, some Yugoslavian asparagus given to him by an Alaskan seaman from a Greekowned boat sailing under Panamanian colours, it would suddenly be found that the Commonwealth, State and local authority Health Departments would all be involved, as well as possibly the Commonwealth


Departments of Customs and Excise, Foreign Affairs, Education and Science through the C.SJ.R.O., the State Departments of Primary Industry, Harbours and Marine, and Local Government and, of course, both Commonwealth and State Attorneys-General would be involved. Then, because of the possibility of an industrial dispute, the Commonwealth and State Ministers for Labour would also come in.

The university students would probably be picketing outside the Greek Consulate and the Queensland police, assisted by the Commonwealth-sponsored Australian Security Intelligence Organisation, would be observing agitators. Conservationists would be writing letters to the Press and the Murray Valley Asparagus Growers' Association would be asking the local Country Party branch to call on the Minister for Trade to ban the import of asparagus. And, of course, both the Prime Minister and the Premier would be answering embarrassing questions in Parliament.

Meanwhile, good old nature would probably have taken its course, and the wharfie's stomach complaint would have passed, as most other bowel disorders do, with the exception that sufficient samples would have been taken to keep an extra four scientists in work for another 12 months.

Many of the dual Ministries did not come into being until recent years. The best example would be the Commonwealth Mini~:>try of Education. Because the States were not receiving enough money from the Commonwealth to provide the proper facilities for their schools, the Commonwealth decided to make special grants for education purposes. Commonwealth scholarships, grants for science and library blocks, and so on, came into ·existence. Duplicate means of administration were set up to manipulate the strings, and this year the department that has been created will cost the Commonwealth $7,500,000. Over a period of four years that department has increased in size by 300 to 400 per cent.

This year the Commonwealth Department of Housing will cost $8,000,000 to administer the distribution of moneys to the States under the various housing agreements and War Service loans.

In all, there are approximately 25 Commonwealth and State Ministries or departments that duplicate their efforts. Many solutions to the problem have been put forward. One, which is very popular in the southern States, is the complete centralisation of power in the Commonwealth, with the resultant elimination of the States. But if ever the Northerners stop fighting against this idea of centralisation, they will rue the day.

We have lost sight of the fact that each level of government should be autonomous within its own constitutional framework. To achieve this autonomy, at all levels of government Australia needs leaders of

courage rather than compromise, men of integrity rather than personality, and men who foresee change rather than follow it.

Even though, on the surface, a Budg~t may appear to be a very successful on~,- 1t is the job of a member of the Oppos1t10n to bring to the notice of the _Gover~n;~nt some of its shortcomings in 1ts actJv1t1es that are coveTed by the Budget. I shall t~y to do so by refeTring to the uncertam future of the Queensland sugar industry.

I am concerned for all those people who are either wholly or partly dependent on the sugar industry, that is, the workers, th_e growers, the millers and, as well, ~he bus;nessmen in the towns throughout th1s States sugar areas. Over the past fon:r years a great deal of uncertainty has ansen as to future markets for our sugar. Unfortunately, the policy of the Queensland qovern~ent has been to follow a soft-se!l !me, wh1ch, I believe, has proved a failure.

For many decades our sugar industry has ·relied on a fixed pricing arrangement and the fact that, under the British ~ommonwealth Sugar Agreement, the maJor proportion of our crop has been sold to Great Britain. The British market has J;leen the mainstay of the industry. Dunng b_ad times in the 1960's our agreement ~1th Britain and to a smaller extent, the Umted States 'market, came into the picture with the result that the sugar industry was able to remain liquid. However, since that time the world market situation has changed a great deal. This change has been brought about Iarnely because Queensland has been "dumped""' by Great Britain, which propo_ses to enter the European Economic Commumty. She refused to allow negotiators from the Queensland Sugar Board a place at the conference table to discuss the futur~ of the suoar industry. Anyone who beheves that after 1974 Queensland will still receive a fa'ir deal from' Great Britain is only kidding himself.

It is apparent that, both o_n t~e _surface and underneath the industry 1s hvmg on the hope that' the situation will rectify itself. Future sales are tied directly to the entire world sugar-marketing structure. While Australia lies fifth or sixth as a world sugar producer, it is the second-largest exporter of sugar. Sugar is a rather strange crop in that most Europea~, _North ~nd South American, and even As1at1c countnes, grow enough beet and cane sugar to ~eet a substantial portion of their own Teqm:ements. Importations by many countnes fluctuate violently according to the crops they produce.

Even in the last three or four years our Australian marketing structure was secure, with exports of 330,000 tons to Britain, 180,000 tons to the United States, and our home consumption market of 700,000 tons. Of a total of 2,250,000 or 2,500,000 tons, under the negotiated International Sugar Agreement we were selling about 1,000,000


tons on the free world market, which, after a few stormy years, has settled down, and the price is now reasonably stable.

Whereas 40 per cent of our sugar was previously sold on the free world market, after 1974 only about 40 per cent of it will be sold to a guaranteed market, that is, the home-consumption market and the United States market. But the United States market can be changed at any time by the United States Department of Agriculture after the expiration of the current three-year agreement. That means that 60 per cent of our sugar will have to be sold on the free world market. More than half of our crop will be sold on the free world market, which, as I have said, is subject to violent fluctuations both in tonnages purchased and prices paid.

After 1973, the International Sugar Agreement is due for its first five-year negotiation. It will be necessary to renegotiate Queensland's entire quota, but the terms of the International Sugar Agreement do not provide for that in any way. There is nothing to say that, of right, we will be able to renegotiate the quota that we will lose on the British market. Indeed, there is a danger that the whole structure of the International Sugar Agreement may collapse.

By law, the marketing of our sugar crop is the direct responsibility of the Queensland Government. In recent years the Government has forfeited the right, through its soft-line approach, to be the body completely responsible for marketing our sugar overseas. The European Economic Community is not a party to the International Sugar Agreement. When the renegotiation takes place next year, it may become a party to it. If it does. it could well be as an exporter rather than as an importer. It is a doubtful market, and that is another reason for our not knowing where we may be able to market our sugar.

In spite of the statement by the Minister for Mines that Japan is the most likely area for us to obtain a fixed quota-and I believe that could be right-up to this stage we have adopted a soft-line approach. That is foreign to the Japanese because they are bargainers, as the Minister should know through negotiating coal contracts with them. They are hard bargainers, and they have played us against both Cuba and South Africa in the matter of sugar purchases. They have been doing this for a number of years.

The Queensland Government missed an opportunity when negotiating with Mitsui and Mitsubishi-the major Japanese importers of both our coal and our sugar--of making a more beneficial arrangement, through direct trade and through our trade exchanges in those countries, for the importation of sugar. In our coal-mining agreements with those two companies, we have underwritten Japan's iron and steel industry for the next 20 years and, in some cases, the next 40 years. We have guaranteed a stable supply of coking coal, which has allowed Japan to expand its iron and steel

industry and other industrial concerns. It would have been better, when negotiating with those countries for the importation of coal, to negotiate also for the importation of our sugar at a guaranteed price.

The Minister for Mines explained that, in the mining arrangements that were made with these companies, fixed contractual rates were set. Admittedly, those arrangements take into account any escalation in our costs, but they also protect the costs of those companies. Japanese industry has been underwritten by Queensland. But t~e same cannot be said of the sugar _mdustry. Queensland missed out badly on this golden opportunity.

Previously, we gave preference to Britain in the importation of goods and materials. The specifications of various Government departments, such as the Irrigation Cor~mission, the Department of 'Works, the. Mam Roads Department and the Co-ordmatorGeneral's Department, contained . a clause which provided that, after Australta~ manufacturers, preference was t? be gtven to Britain. As Britain has decided to. op.t o.ut and not give preference to Austraha m 1ts importation of sugar, our preference to Britain in the importation of goods and materials should be "scrubbed". It co~ld be used in bargaining with other countnes for the sale of our sugar. The .moment Britain enters the European Econom1'? Co?Jmunity, it will cut its past industnal ties with Queensland.

In a few weeks' time, the Minister ~or Mines will visit Japan. Without appeanng to give him too much praise, let m~ . say that he would be the most suitable Mrmster to seize the opportunity, while in Japan, to negotiate an agreement for the sale of our sugar. The only interest that the Minister for Primary Industries has in the sugar industry is as a consume~, . whereas the Minister for Mines, as a practismg canearower and as a miller before he entered Pariiament, knows the sugar industry thoroughly.

The Government has an opportunity to broaden the Minister's proposed trip into a trade delegation to negotiate fixed markets for the sale of our sugar to replace those we will lose in Britain after 1974. The deleaation could include grower as well as ;;iller representatives of the sugar industry, and could start firm negotiations with the Japanese at Government level. The Government must accept its role of main negotiator in the sale of our sugar.

The Sugar Acquisition Act was introduced in 1915 and implemented down the years by men such as T. 1. Ryan, Theodore, Forgan Smith and Ned Hanlon. They were the men who, with a knowledge of the sugar industry, undertook the top-level negotiations on behalf of the Queensland Government that led to the successful marketing arrangements that the industry has enjoyed over the years.


I believe that the Government must again accept this role. It has, in the visit of the Minister for Mines to Japan, an opportunity to play a major role by negotiating with the Japanese not only on behalf of the Mines Department but also on behalf of the sugar industry. I am not trying to pass over the Colonial Sugar Refining Company completely. That company has been looking after marketing arrangements for the sugar industry in Queensland since 1915, but it is the Queensland Government that determines matters of policy. The C.S.R. Company functions as administrative organiser in the sale of sugar on behalf of the Government. l think it is time that consideration was given to negotiation by Government representatives, because the C.S.R. Company now seems to be more interested in mining, chemicals, and other investments, than it is in sugar. Let us not become the vassals of international traders, as we were in years gone by. This is what will happen, unless something is done quickly. and at a high level, by the Queensland Government.

If there is any recession in the sugar industry after 1974, not only in the amount of sugar sold but in the price received for it, my city of Mackay is the centre that would be hardest hit. Only through the efforts of the cane-growers of Mackay and districtand, more recently, those of the Burdekin area -has the Queensland Government been able to supply its quotas under the International Sugar Agreement. It is through their ability to maintain over-peak production down the years, and make good the shortfalls in other areas of the State, that Queensland has gained the reputation throughout the world as not only one of the most efficient sugar producers but also the most reliable. It is this reliability that maintains trade.

In tr2de negotiations the Japanese are interested only in Japan, and in negotiating with them the soft line of selling is a complete waste of time. The Japanese appreciate hard bargaining, and it is only by hard bargaining that trade arrangements can be made with them.

Throughout the world, sugar consumption is increasing at a reasonable rate each year, but we, as a small country with a major export quota, are caught up in the fluctuations in the international market that make it dangerous if much of our fixed quota is lost, as it will be when Britain enters the European Economic Community. I have extreme confidence in the sugar industry, but I am not confident that sufficient negotiation is being carried out at present to guarantee the future of the industry. Queensland would be better able to stand a lower nrice on the international market than would 'most other sugarproducing c01:ntries. Howr.ver, if we became completely dependent upon international buyers and their whims, and if what has happened in the wool industry in recent years also happened in the sugar industry, the death knell would be sounded of cities such

as Bundaberg, Mackay, Ayr, Cairns, Innisfail and all similar centres along the coast, because it would be uneconomic for canegrowers to remain in production. The whole of the coastal strip in Queensland has been developed by the sugar industry. Unless !he Government again accepts the role of leadmg negotiator for the sugar industry on ;.v?~ld markets it will have to accept responstbthty for the' aftermath and what will happen in the towns along the coast of Queensland.

I believe that it should also be taking action now to ensure that additional storage for sugar is provided, because such storage could be a buffer against price fluctuations. I realise that an additional shed is currently beina built at Cairns and that extensions are being made to the shed at Mourilyan. But, in its wisdom, the Sugar Board has acquired land at manY: . of the other ports on which large quantlttes of sugar could be stored. Now is the time to prov~de additional storage facilities-when the pnce of sugar on the international marke.t is high. The industry can afford to provtde them now and as I said earlier, they could be used as 'an additional buffer against price fluctuations that might eventuate after 1974.

While I am on this subject, I wish to touch on a small point and add to the comments made in this debate by the honourable member for Mirani relative to Mackay Harbour and the provision of additional coal-handling facilities somewhere within the Mackay district. In my opinion, the sugar industry is ~ot lo?kin~ at .all aspects of its existence m con)unctwn w1th coal-handling facilities, because one that should be concerning it now is that sugar ports in Queensland ~an currently .take only ships of a certain stze. There Is a very good reason for this. In years gone by, under fixed marketing arrangements, Great Britain was Queensland's major customer for sugar. In later years, of course, Japan has purchased larger quantities of su_gar than Great Britain. The ports at whtch sugar was unloaded for refineries in Great Britain were quite a distance up the Thames, the Mersey and other rivers, where berthing facilities were suitable only for vessels up to about 25,000 or 30,000 tons. Therefore, vessels of that tonnage or smaller have been carrying Queensland sugar to the markets of the world.

As has been the case in the marketing of other products, Queensland has had to sell its sugar on distant markets. In future, economic requirements will make it imperative to use bigger vessels for the carriage of sugar, just as they are now being used for grain, coal, bauxite and other expo.rts from Australia to markets on the other stde of the world. The sugar industry, which may have marketing problems in the next few years, might also find that its economic development is hampered by inadequate shipping facilities and that, in order to compete with other countries in sale arrangements, it has to use bigger ships.


That, of course, will mean bigger harbours. From the point of view of the export trade, the death knell of some Queensland sugar ports will sound because they will not be able to accommodate ships of a substantial size. Bundaberg is one such port that comes to mind immediately. I believe that another port could be built at Bundaberg to take larger vessels, and perhaps it is a pity that so much money has been spent on establishing a river port in its present position. Obviously there will be a need in the future for bigger and improved port facilities for the export trade, and ports that have only a comparatively shallow depth of water will be forced to ship sugar only to Australian refineries. The sugar industry will have to provide improved port facilities and harbours with a greater draft either by itself or in co-operation with the Government of Queensland.

Again the Government should be the key negotiator. If the Queensland Government insists that certain ports be developed to a certain stage by a coal purchaser, it will save the sugar industry the cost of that work. That is something that has to be looked at very closely by the sugar industry. If some other big industrial user does not develop the ports, the sugar industry will have to do so. The cost of that would be passed back to the growers, the millers and all others within the industry.

There is much more I could say about the sugar industry, but I think I have covered most of the points I wanted to raise. However, I warn the industry that it must not become politically complacent. Irrespective of its political support for one party or another, the sugar industry must be concerned about the industry itself. It is all very well for it to sit back and say, "We'll be right. They're our Government and they'll look after us." I think I have made sufficient points this afternoon to indicate that this is not so. The Queensland Government could play a far greater role than it has in recent years in assisting the sugar industry.

We all know how much the subject of industrial development in Queensland has been bandied around for a number of years. Industrial development depends largely on the availability of power. The Minister for Mines spoke at length on that subject this afternoon. Agricultural industry in Queensland is becoming more and more mechanised. As a consequence there are now fewer people in the farming communities. That will be an increasing trend. Throughout the whole of Queensland we look to industrial development to populate the State. The $200,000,000 power station at Gladstone will generate an extra 1100 megawatts of electricity in that area. For quite a time stories have been circulating that another major power station for Queensland was in the planning stages. Perhaps to placate at election time those who were speculating on whether they were going to get the power station in their area, the

Queensland Government called tenders for coal suppliers for an additional major power station. I believe that the calling of tenders at that time was nothing but a cover-up or a political side-stepping of the issue. Many areas were chasing the power stationNorth Queensland, Central Queensland and South-eastern Queensland.

Let us examine the facts. Most of them I have taken directly from Government reports or from answers to questions I have asked on the subject in this Chamber. I believe that the location of the future additional major power station has already been determined. The report of the Northern Electric Authority indicates clearly that even the current expansion of the Collinsville Power Station has been deferred. An extra 60 megawatts was supposed to come on line in 1974. That expansion has been deferred because the projected users have not come forward with the demand for supply. On statistics, the requirements of the whole of the Northern Electric Authority area would need to increase by almost 10 times the projected figure before a major power station would be warranted up there.

More than half of the power that will be produced by the Gladstone Power Station is earmarked for South-east Queensland. The route of the transmission line had been cleared and it was pa11tly built when the mad bombers got to work and destroyed some of it. Nevertheless, that is proof positive that more than half of the capacity of that station has been reserved for South-east Queensland. That being so, surely it would appear that Central Queensland, too, has not much chance of getting this station. The Ministers involved in these matters should be honest with us and tell us what is happening. I believe that neither Central nor Northern Queensland has any chance, at least at present, of getting the additional power station.

Now let us look at the li1>t of tenderers. It reveals some very interesting information. We have been told frequently in this Chamber that steaming coal being mined in Queensland will provide a cheap source of additional power to meet the State's future requirements, and that, on the basis of these cheap stockpiles of steaming coal, we will see major power stations spring up on newly developed coal fields. The reply to a question I asked in this Chamber on 27 September revealed that not one of the major new mines developed in Queensland tendered for the supply of steaming coal for the new power station.

We can look through the whole list and see that Blair Athol, Taroom, Theodore, Griffin (south of Collinsville), Nebo, Millmerran, Tarong and all the Ipswich mines tendered for the coal, but we do not see in the list Utah, Blackwater, Goonyel!a, Moura, Saraji, Norwich Park, Peak Downs or Hail Creek, which is the next mine t<;> ~et under way and the subject of the next mmmg agreement to be brought into Parliament for


ratification. They did not tender for the coal, yet they are the ones who, under the agreements, are supposed to supply this cheap steaming coal for future power requirements in Queensland. I think it can safely be said, therefore, that none of the newly developed mines in Queensland will be the source of supply of this coal.

Going further, the reply to another question recently asked by me revealed that the steaming coal being set aside at these mines is the property of the companies until it is disposed of by them. Therefore, the Queensland Government cannot step in and say <to them, "You have to sell this coal." It is their property and, if they were interested in supplying this coal, they would have submitted tenders. I believe that companies such as Griffin Coal, Thiess Peabody Mitsui, Nebo, the Milmerran Coal Company and some of the others who have tendered have done so purely on a speculative basis as a means by which they can develop another coalfield in Queensland. In view of the tenders, I believe that it has already been decided that the next major power station to be built in Queensland will be in the south-east corner, most probably on the Ipswich field.

Apparently the statement made in Ipswich by the Minister for Development and Industrial Affairs during <the election campaign and the question asked in the Chamber the other day by the honourable member for Wolston were not very far from the mark. In my opinion it has already been decided that this is where the power station will go. Let me go a s'tep further. An adequate supply of water is a requirement in power generation, and we see that in the south-east corner of the State the Co-ordinator General's Department is developing a new dam at Wivenhoe in the Brisbane Valley. I realise it is required for other purposes but, I believe it is also needed as a source of water for a new power station. I feel that the reason for the "cover-up" by the Cabinet at present is that the Government is not game to 'tell the rest of Queensland that it is going to further industrialise the Southeast. That will be the net result of another major power station in this area. I believe we should be encouraging industry throughout the whole of Queensland, including ~entral and North Queensland. Perhaps this IS another shortcoming of the mining agreements that have been entered into in recent years.

As I have said before, the Government should do all it can to encourage heavy industry to this State. After all, it will be a major user of our electric power. One concern that should be encouraged to Queensland is Broken Hill Pty., which is Australia's greatest manufacturing enterprise. Instead of having any major plant in this State, that company has only an office in Queen Street and a steel store at its wharf at Hamilton. Although Queensland is a major user of

barbed wire and steel picket-fence posts, not one foot of barbed wire or one steel fence post is manufactured in this State, so s1:1rely the Queensland Government should negotiate with B.H.P. to set up a major plant in this State.

B.H.P. has announced that over the next eight years its nation-wide expansion programme will cost $3,500 million, yet all it intends to do in Queensland is to continue with active exploration for coal. If B.H.P. bails up and says that it will not come to Queensland, then the Minister for Mines and his Government should follow the example set by Ben Chifley shortly after the war in establishing a local motor-vehicle industry. They should encourage industries from other countries to commence operations in Queensland and thereby break B.H.P's stranglehold on industrial development in the State. Queensland needs tough negotiators to act for it. While Queensland talks about the construction of one major power station, New South Wales is currently engaged in the construction of three such power stations.

I wish to turn now to the portfolio of Tourism, Sport and Welfare Services. I am pleased to see the Minister in the Chamber. I claim that the creation of this portfolio was nothing more than a con trick by the Government. During the election campaign the electors were told a great deal about the fact that a Minister of Sport would be created; however, when the time came to establish such a ministry, to it was added Welfare Services. The Budget reveals that welfare services account for over 80 per cent of the department's expenditure for the year. In other words, 80 per cent of the time of the Minister and his staff will be taken up with prisons and other welfare services. I am sure that in this Chamber the Minister has been asked more questions about the boys' home outside Toowoomba than about tourism. I believ,e that our tourist industry, which ,ranks fifth in the State, is worse off under the new portfolio than before.

This year $250,000 has been allocated to assist &port. In his Financial Statement the Treasurer says-

"The purpose of grants will be to encourage initiative and reward merit within the sport itself in areas where a financial need has been clearly demonstrated . . . the Government sees the funds being applied to facilities, coaching, subsidies towards the cost of State representative teams,"

and so on.

I wish to put in a word on behalf of Rugby League. Undoubtedly it is the biggest participant and spectator sport in Queensland. Sometimes it is claimed that it is a professional sport. I contradict such a claim and go on record as stating that 95 per cent of it is not professional. I refer to Rugby League at all levels, from the youngsters


to the senior players. It is one of the very few truly representative sports in Queensland. When a State Rugby League team is picked efforts are made to conduct trials in all centres in the State so that every player has an equal opportunity to be a member of the State team.

The same cannot be said about cricket. The Sheffield Shield team that is due to play tomorrow should be called nothing other than the "Brisbane Cricket" team. The Queensland Cricket Association, whose headquarters is the Brisbane Cricket Ground, caters for Queensland in name only. Perhaps that is one reason why we can never win the Sheffield Shield. Our team is like an in-bred family playing in and around Brisbane, developing itself. Instead of encouraging coaching schools throughout the State, the association concentrates on the metropolitan area. It would do very well indeed to follow the example set by Rugby League. Better competition improves players. Only by competition between one centre and another is ability to play any sport developed.

A good example is provided at a very low level in Rugby League. Recently the Mt. Isa Junior Rugby League sent teams to Mackay. There could be no professionals in those teams because the oldest player was 14 and the youngest was nine. Five or six teams came from Mt. Isa to Mackay so that they would have an opportunity to compete with different teams. It cost the Mt. Isa Junior Rugby League $2,500 to make the trip. The members worked and slaved for 12 months to raise the money so that their teams could meet players of a similar standard. Surely this is an avenue that could be explored by our Queensland Department of Sport. Surely the department could assist the young players of this greatest game of all, which, I repeat, is the biggest participant and spectator sport in Queensland. I believe that all sports should be encouraged, and that there should be no pet sports. All sporting bodies should be given encouragement in proportion to the number of players and the standard of the State organisation. If the department follows that course, it will do a good job.

The tourist industry is the fifth largest industry in Queensland. It needs people who are skilled in management. The Government has taken a step to help the industry by establishing a training course at the Kangaroo Point Technical College. I believe that similar courses should be provided at technical colleges throughout Queensland. The assistance given in the last few years falls far short of the technical assistance given to our primary industries. That is obvious when we consider the facilities available to primary industries through various Government departments. It also falls far short of what is done for the mining industries by the Mines Department. The tourist industry deserves every assistance because it is no longer a luxury industry.

Everybody in Queensland is entitled to a holiday, and everyone is entitled to the best facilities and service he can afford.

I believe that the Federal Government, too, should provide assistance, because the tourist industry contributes a great deal directly and indirectly to the Federal coffers. It contributes indirectly through food and if we could calculate what the Federal Government receives from tourists by way of sales tax and excise on tobacco, cigarettes and drink, we would be astounded. What does the Federal Government give the industry in return? This year the Australian Tourist Commission will spend $3,000,000. Its annual creport is a very odd document, because I can see nothing in it but an endeavour to encourage visitors to Sydney.

It has published several major reports, such as the Great Barrier Reef visitors' plan. Like most of its reports, it is a pretty document. It recognises the Great Barrier Reef and its associated resorts on both the mainland and the islands as being among the best tourist attractions in the world. However, whenever a report like this is published, the resort owners and operators ask where they will obtain the developmental capital to compete with other world resorts. New Zealand Fiji and Hawaii, which are also in the ' Pacific area, attract tourists from all over the globe because, with developmental finance and governmental support and sponsorship, they have better tourist resorts.

We were given to understand that the lowering of international air fares would bring tourists to Queensland. But it ~as resulted in more Queenslanders travellmg overseas where better tourist facilities exist. In addition, Pacific cruises from Sydney in the "Himalaya" and other overseas-owned vessels, whose crews are paid low wages, are offering strong competition to Queensland's tourist industry. Each tourist leaving Australia should be required to pay a tax of $20 or $30, which would provide funds to develop Australian resorts. Australia's internal airlines recently "came to the party" with cut-price fares. The Queensland Government should also assist with finance through the State Government Insurance Office, which has financed the building of <t:he Crest International Hotel in Brisbane, the Mount Isa Mines Limited Building and the Central Railway St~tion project. In all, it will snend $48,000,000 this year. The Govern~ent should assist tourist resort operators rather than finance activities only in Brisbane.

Dr. EDWARDS (Ipswich) (5.19 p.m.): I congratuiate the Treasurer on his contribution to the economy of the State of Queensland in the introduction of what he has termed an "achievement" Budget. As he said it will achieve so much for so many and' will help to build a better, brighter and more progressive and prosperous Queensland. Some honourable members have said that the Budget will make history in the eyes


of Queensland. I go further and claim that it will make history in the eyes of Australia. We must give credit and praise to the wise planning that has occurred over a long period because of the Government's progressive and active policies, which have proven to be an economic stimulant to every Queenslander.

The Treasurer has planned the Budget not as a single economic exercise but as a continual exercise over the years that he has been Treasurer. It culminates in a Financial Statement that gives benefits to every member of the community without placing any extra charges on any person in the State. I am sure honourable members will agree that we can look forward during the next year, or even the next two or three years, to tremendous economic and social growth, as well as a consolidation of the development that is occurring throughout the State.

I am amazed at the attitude and remarks of Opposition members throughout this debate so far. I have no doubt that this attitude is nothing more than a cover-up for their appreciation of the work that has been well done by the Government, and that the confusion that is so evident in their speeches indicates a high standard of economic assessment by the Treasurer and the Government, and an awareness of their achievements in very difficult conditions.

In recent years Queensland has experienced some of the worst drought conditions it has ever seen, and these are still evident in some parts of south-western and western Queensland. The Government's assistance to people so affected has been a heavy drain on many of the State's resources. We are proud of our efforts in this direction, and we will continue to aid the unfortunate people whose properties and stock have been ravaged by weather conditions of such an unfavourable nature over such a long period.

There is no doubt that there is a fairly definite element of economic instability throughout the world. This has been substantiated by the unemployment problem that has existed over the past 12 months throughout Australia, and indeed throughout the world. However, in spite of this national and international trend the unemployment figures of this State have been extremely low, and on nearly every occasion over the past 12 months the Queensland figures have supported the belief current today that we in this State have a particularly stable economy, and one that is stronger than that of any other State.

It is heartening to see that, despite our rural problems, the national and international financial instability, and the increasing level of wage structures, there is a boom in industrial development as well as in the construction industry. This is demonstrated by the number of building approvals for all types of industrial complexes, home units, commercial enterprises, and private

dwellings, which represents an increase of 23 per cent over the figures for 1971-72. By contrast, the national figures for the remainder of Australia show an increase of only 3 per cent. This again indicates to me the tremendous and correctly placed confidence of the general public of this State, and indeed of the Commonwealth, and the commercial and industrial interests of this country, in the Government. Because of the Government's enterprising and progressive policies, future prospects must be regarded as economically sound and stable.

In my city of Ipswich, of which I am extremely proud, there is a growth rate of 3 per cent, and building approvals every month are among the highest in the State. I am sure that the honourable members for Wolston and Ipswich West would agree that we have in Ipswich a growth rate and a degree of progress of which we, as members, are very proud. If the current rate of growth and progress continues-and I have every confidence that it will-1 am certain that the city of Ipswich will become one of the leading provincial cities in this State.

There are certain aspects of the Budget to which I should like to pay close attention. The Budget has so many excellent features that I believe it will become a historic document, and it is difficult to confine oneself to just a few aspects of it. However, I should like to make a few comments about health aspects of the Budget, with particular reference to the Health Department and its expenditure.

I believe that the Health portfolio is one that involves every member of the community, because at some time in every day someone in every family has health problems. This is a topical subject at the present time, because, with a Federal election to be held in the next few weeks, all and sundry are speaking about health policies. I am sure that the Committee is well aware of my feelings on this matter. The Health Department has a very heavy responsibility. It has maintained and expanded the free public hospital system, despite what the prophets of gloom have been saying over the years. The statement that only a victory by the A.L.P. at the Federal election will save the free hospital scheme for Queens· land is, to me, sheer hypocrisy and political dishonesty. We in this State are very proud of our free hospital scheme, and I can honestly say, without fear of contradiction, that it is the Liberal-Country Party Government that will continue to expand the tremendously beneficial free service that is in operation at the present time.

It would be a different story, I believe, if the A.L.P. were elected to office federally later this year, because it would introduce a compulsory national insurance scheme-! repeat, a compulsory national insurance scheme~that would affect every taxpayer within the State and tax him to the extent of


at least 1.35 per cent of his taxable income above his normal tax payments, together with other hidden costs, to provide the free hospital system that Queensland already has without charge and without a means tests. I am convinced-! say this without fear of contradiction-that Queenslanders would be subsidising health services for the remainder of Australia.

Other people, including the shadow Minister for Health in the Federal Parliament, have put forward all kinds of schemes, political ideals and figures that have meant very little.

Mr. Lane: Honourable members opposite are ashamed.

Dr. EDW ARDS: With the policy that has been put forward by the A.L.P. I should imagine they would be ashamed.

When I debated this matter with Mr. Hayden at the Medical School some weeks ago, I challenged him on what would happen to the extra $22,000,000 that he has continually said would come to Queensland hospitals under the A.L.P.'s policy. I said to him during the debate, "We could well do with ,the $22,000,000. We could certainly use the money; there is no doubt about that. The point is that this would go against the principles of CommonwealthState relationship." Mr. Hayden ,then replied-and he supplemented his remarks by replying in 'The Courier-Mail" the next day-

" I point out to Dr. Edwards that we would remake the rules so that Queensland would not be disadvantaged.''

What hypocrisy! He is offering Queensland $22,000,000; but to do that, because it interferes with the Grants Commission and the Commonwealth-State financial relationship, he is going to remake the rules.

Let me now quote what the shadow Federal Treasurer said only two days agoon 17 October-in the Federal Parliament. He was asked this question by way of interjection: "But you would keep the broad principles of the Grants Commission, wouldn't you?" Mr. Crean said, "Yes, I would keep the broad principles.'' That proves to me that the members of the A.L.P. are in conflict, one with another and among themselves, as to how they would deal with their health scheme.

It seems to me that the whole scheme is a fantasy in the minds of these people; that it is full of untruths and has not considered the patient at any time. A recent survey of 3,000 public patients showed that 90 per cent of them were not insured. But under 'the A.L.P. plan a large number of these people would be taxed 1.35 per cent of their income for the services they now obtain free. And this is the working-class party that has proposed the introduction of a scheme such as that!

Not only ,that, but it does not consider the type of service it would give to the people. Let me tell the Committee that sick people are not very interested in the complicated economic arguments that the Labor Party is continually putting up. Sick people are really concerned only about having a doctor available when they need one, a hospital bed available when they need one, and confidence that the doctor and the hospital to which they go will be properly equipped and competent to relieve their suffering and make them well again as soon as possible without undue financial strain.

The present Australian health care system serves this basic function very well. Plenty of evidence is available to show that Australians are well satisfied with the health care they receive, and it is difficult to see how proposals for juggling with health care and finance will make Australians any healthier, make them well more quickly when they are sick, or in any way improve the standard of the actual medical care ,they receive. That is the important point.

Mr. Lane: That is the real reason why Houston ran away to New Zealand-to avoid stating where he stands.

Dr. EDW ARDS: That could well be so. On 28 August, when I spoke in this Chamber about the A.L.P. health schemes, I challenged every honourable member opposite to state where he stood relative to Queensland's free hospital scheme and the A.L.P.'s proposals. So far, at every opportunity they have hadin the deba,te on matters of public interest and in this debate-there has not been one utterance in support of the iniquitous scheme that Mr. Hayden has put forward. I am pleased to see that obviously we have the Labor Party on ,the run as far as its health scheme is concerned. It will be a sad day for the State if this country ever elects a Labor Party to bring into Queensland and Australia a national insurance scheme against the wishes of the people and the medical practitioners of this country.

I am pleased to see that the Vote for the Health Department has been increased by over $13,700,000 to an estimated expenditure of almost $90,000,000, an increase of 18.6 per cent. As a medical practitioner, it appears to me that it is essential to look ca.refully at some of the expenditure of the Health Department and to explain to honourable members opposite some of the activities of this department, about which they have been so critical on many occasions, and to enli<>hten them on a few points-particular!; those who are so critical and saying so much about our scheme without looking

critically at their own.


I think it is necessary to look at the developments that are going on within the Health Department and see where the money is being spent to provide a free service. As the Treasurer has indicated, it is proposed to spend $100,000,000 on the building of hospitals over 10 years, and $12,958,488 has been provided for capital works for hospital and health services this year. A sum of $5,800,000 has been allocated from the Loan Fund for capital works at special hospitals, institutions, maternal and child welfare centres, and maternity hospitals.

Opposition Members interjected.

Dr. EDW ARDS: Honourable members opposite are making a lot of noise now, but they have made no noise at all in reply to my challenge to them about a month ago.

Mr. Lane: Mr. Hayden's campaign director is over there.

Dr. EDWARDS: I am well aware of that. He has been one of the quietest in the Chamber about the health scheme. I am sure that if I were the campaign director for Mr. Hayden, I would be just as quiet.

In Press releases the day after the Budget was announced, the Leader of the Opposition said that it was a Country Party Budget and that Brisbane was forgotten. To me, that is a ridiculous statement. For example, $2,000,000 will be spent on planning and stage 1 of the casualty and out-<IJatients' department for Block 7 at the Royal Brisbane Hospital. Obviously, according to the Leader of the Opposition, Herston is not in the Brisbane area. That project will provide one of the most modern medical blocks of its kind in the world, with efficient, well-designed sections adding to the excellent service given by dedicated nurses, doctors and other hospital staff to provide free out-patient, casualty and emergency services to the people of Brisbane.

As well, the Government will continue to develop its contributions to the Mater Hospital for public-patient care. It will provide nearly $5,000,000 for that purpose. Again, according to the Leader of the Opposition, South Brisbane is not part of Brisbane. That money will be provided to assist with the operation of the Mater Public Hospital, as well as generous subsidies for that hospital's new building programme. Again, this means the provision of excellent f,ree services for the citizens of this city.

I am very pleased with the scheme suggested by the Treasurer to encourage privatehospital construction. The Treasurer should be very proud of that suggestion. The State will meet most of the initial interest payments on loans raised by charitable and religious organisations for new hospitals and hospital wards p.roviding private and intermediate facilities approved by the Department of Health. In most cases the scheme will cover all the interest payments on loans

39

obtained for building such projects under any schemes completed by 1982. There is no doubt that the scheme will be welcomed by the medical profession and by the vario~s charitable and religious organisations. It Will provide a stimulus for the construction. of private and intermediate accomm~datwn, which is needed everywhere but particularly in the Brisbane area.

Of course, I might add that Dr. Moss Cass who also is a member of the Federal Lab~r Party, has said that there is no place in the Federal A.L.P. health plan for private hospitals; that they are irrelevant to the A.L.P. health plan. It is no wonder then, that the Opposition is upset by this tremendous scheme that the Treasurer has submitted to us in the last few weeks. It is irrefutable evidence of the mistaken ideas the Opposition has about this scheme.

As the Treasurer said in his Financial Statement the payment of the maximum subsidy i~ the early years will prove of tremendous assistance while the hospital is settling in. It should also encourage large redemptions of loans in the ~arly yea~s and will open the way for financial planmng by the organisations involved. With t~e qovernment bearing the cost of the maJor mterest payments, this scheme will also encourage lending authorities to look more favourably at proposals submitted to them.

I have no doubt that this Budget proposal will prove a gre~t ~timulus ~o re.ligious and charitable orgamsatwns which m the past have done so much for hospital construction in the private sphere. I am very thrilled to see the continued support for thrs part of community service. As well as this, the Budget provides support for the Community Home-care Service, which is one of the excellent schemes introduced by the Department of Health. This i~ an outstanding community health service, a_nd the department of geriatrics and the Mimster f<?r Health should be congratulated on therr sterling and responsible efforts in the care of the aged. Because of the activities of this department, many. elder~y peop~e are spending a much happier existence, m the eventide of their lives, in their own homes. With the introduction of the Community Home-care Service in Brisbane, Redcliffe, Nambour, Gympie, Maryborough, Warwick, Bundaberg, Toowoomba and lpswic?, and its proposed establishment at Townsv!lle, we have a scheme that offers care for the aged in the familiar surroundings of their own homes, under the supervision of their own relatives and friends and, more importantly, possibly their own doctors. The service offers medical and domestic assistance assessed by expert medical doctors and nurses and advice from social workers. Domestic assistance is also available. This service is a co-ordinating one which co-operates closely with home nursing services, Meals on Wheels, and other extremely worth-while organisations.


. I am also very pleased to see the subsidy mcreased for the Home Nursing Service. This is of tremendous assistance to such wonderful bodies as the Blue Nursing Service which is very active in my own city the district nurses, and other people wh~ play a vital role in the care of the aged, sick and handicapped in the community. As a general practitioner in Ipswich, I see at first hand the dedication particularly of the Blue Nursing Service in that area. These dedicated women do wonderful work and play an extremely valuable role in my electorate and the other electorates in the Ipswich area-and, I am sure, throughout the State. Their conscientious efforts are often not recognised as they should be. Therefore, I am pleased to see this increased subsidy to assist them in continuing their valuable community service.

Within the Department of Health there are several sections that I should like to mention and that are playing a very important role. Firstly, there is the recently organised planning department, under the control of Dr. Owen Powell, formerly superintendent of Princess Alexandra Hospital. This department has been set up by the Minister for Health to plan the future medical man-power throughout the State. I am informed that, as it expands, it has plans to include a sociologist, a statistician and other people who will assess the availability of man-power in the medical services of this State and the best use to which it can be put.

I do not hear the opposition voicing much criticism of the plans we have for our medical services. This is part of the free system offered throughout Queensland. I trust that in its research and planning, this department will provide detaiis and data from which future developments can arise. The planning in the department is to be done by Dr. Powell. As superintendent of one of the largest hospitals in the Southern Hemisphere he gained very wide experience in medical matters, and, as well, possesses tremendous ability in public administration. I am sure we will see great things from this department.

I pay tribute to the Department of Health as well as to the Under Secretary and other officers, who are dedicated and diligent, and have the interests of Queensland hospitals at heart. They devote their time to their work in such a way that our system of free hospital care is the envy of the other States.

Another aspect worthy of mention is community health services. It seems to me that these have caused a great deal of confusion in Australia. The Federal Labor Party has said that in its health scheme it will introduce health centres. However, the A.L.P. has not given any details as to the type or standard of centres it envisages. I am led to the belief that the A.L.P. opposes general practice as it now exists.

I feel sure that in our health scheme there is a place for community health centres. From my observations and study of reports of the English and Canadian systems and the working party of the Australian Medical Association, I cannot agree to the setting-up of any form of community health centre that exists overseas. I would like to see implemented in this State a community health centre programme in particular areas that do not presently contain a hospital.

Mr. K. J. Hooper: Such as Inala.

Dr. EDW ARDS: I am sure that the hon· ourable member for Archerfield will be very pleased to hear that I agree that such a centre should be established at Inala. I also believe that these centres should be provided at Wynnum, Cleveland or Sandgate. The buildings should be large enough to house a full-time social worker, maternal and child-welfare sisters, and accommodation for occasional visits by maternal and welfare medical officers for infant and toddlers' clinics.

As well, thought should be given to providing space for medical services, which, in the mornings could be conducted as a free out-patient clinic by general practitioners on a sessional basis and, in the afternoons, rented by general practitioners for privatepatient care. Maternity clinics could be run from these centres, and patients' records could be duplicated, with one copy retained at the centre and the other copy forwarded to the public hospital where the patient is to be confined. This would save expectant mothers the need to attend base hospitals for ante-natal care, as already occurs in some suburbs.

It may well be that the expansion of community health centres could cater for paramedical services, such as pathological and radiological services. However, because of staff problems, I would rather not see these services incorporated in the introduction of the scheme. I feel certain that these health centres would be acceptable to the A.M.A., but they must include the rig~t of private practice. Members of the pubhc should have the right to visit a private doctor if they wish. These centres could be expanded to provide such services as immunisation cancer-smear clinics, healtheducation p~ogrammes, and even familyplanning centres.

I am well aware that, some two or three years ago the Minister for Health, through his department, set up a special ad hoc committee to investigate the possibility of establishing a basis for community health centres in Queensland. This committee had instructions to consider methods of involving private practitioners in these centres. It consisted of such extremely dedicated and competent people as Professor Saint (Dean of the Faculty of Medicine at the Queensland University), Professor Douglas Gordon (Professor of Social and Preventive

Supply [19 OCTOBER 1972) (Financial Statement) 1183

Medicine), representatives of the Australian Medical Association and general practitioner groups, and members of the Health Department through its administration section.

I am led to believe that this committee has already presented an interim report, and I understand that the Minister is awaiting a final report. I therefore offer certain suggestions for consideration and possible implementation. I suggest that certain areas be considered for pilot schemes and that, from them, the basic unit could be developed. Personally, I am not convinced at this stage, from reading and studying the matter, that small hospitals are necessary as adjuncts to major hospitals. At this stage I cannot be convinced that the Government should consider building smaller hospitals of the cottage type that are so prevalent throughout England. When they are so small, the cost of building them is extremely high, and the upkeep and running costs are also very great. It is difficult to know just how big or small to keep these units, and what services they should provide in the sense of paramedical or specialised health services. I am sure that, after the final report is available, the Health Department will fully consider the community health centre complexes in making a full assessment of the needs of our population.

Another aspect of the Health Department that is not mentioned very often is the study being done of the implementation and use of computers in health work. This is being implemented, and fully programmed, with special reference to scientific activities. That proves to me that we in this State, which, as I have said, provides a free health service to the people, are well to the fore in such planning. When we look at the progress being made in computerisation, I believe that, technologically, we will be well in front when this information is being programmed and detailed. I prophesy without any hesitation or fear that, in the years that lie ahead, because of the present activity within the Health Department we will become one of the leading States in computerisation in health.

I come now to psychiatric services. There has never previously been such an advance in medicine as has been seen in the psychiatric services over the past few years. The term "mental illness" is regarded by many people in the community as being applied to certain severe and chronic illnesses necessitating admission to, and treatment in, mental hospitals. To a smaller number of people these days the term still carries with it, unfortunately, a certain hopelessness and fear. However, I am personally convinced that, over the years, there has been a determined effort to remove this attitude.

Modern methods of treatment and the free facilities provided by this Government -I shall say more about treatment in a

few moments-have changed the whole approach to mental illness. There is nothing sadder in a family than mental illness. Fortunately, this sadness can be lightened by the attitudes of the medical and allied professions, and also by the steps taken by the Government over the past 15 years in its endeavours to improve the lot of psychiatric institutions and patients.

I well remember, as a young medical student some years ago, visiting Wolston Park Hospital-or the Goodna Asylum, as it was in those days. That was an experience I will not forget. Last Monday I had an opportunity, through the invitation of the Minister for Health-as had every member of the Chamber-to visit Wolston Park on the first open day in its history. I was very disappointed to see that so few representatives of the Opposition visited this hospital to have a look over it. The honourable member for Wolston and the honourable member for Stafford were the only two members of the Opposition whom I saw there.

Mr. Lane: The others preferred to stay away and "knock" the place.

Dr. EDWARDS: That could well be so. If they had been there, they could have learnt a great deal about the service it provides.

Mr. Wright: Will you give us an extra air-fare voucher to come down? When was the last time you came to Rockhampton?

Dr. EDW ARDS: I was in Rockhampton only a few weeks ago. The honourable member for Rockhampton has not said a word about this place, because obviously he has not visited it. For only two Opposition members to visit the place on an open day is an insult not only to the dedicated people who work there but also to the people who are being treated there.

Mr. Wright: How many Government mem-bers were there?

Dr. EDWARDS: Quite a number.

Honourable Members interjected.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr. Wharton): Order! There is far too much cross-firing in the Chamber. The honourable member for Ipswich is making his speech, and I ask other honourable members to hear him in silence.

Mr. Wright interjected.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: Order! I warn the honourable member for Rockhampton not to continue interjecting in such a manner.

Dr. EDWARDS: As I was saying before I was so rudely interrupted by honourable members opposite, who obviously feel guilty for not attending the open day, Wolston Park Hospital is now recognised as an


excellent hospital complex with such facilities as Ellerton House, Noble House, Anderson House, a new neuro-psychiatric unit, and new kitchen and dining areas. They are only a part of the programme. Dedicated nursing staff, paramedical people and social workers who conduct discussion groups and other forms of occupational physical education, give assistance to these people in need. I pay a tribute to the staff members at Wolston Park Hospital for the tremendous effort they make, day by day. They take a pride in the place and should be given credit for the work they are doing.

If Opposition members feel guilty for not attending the open day-and obviously they do-they can, in two weeks' time--

Mr. Tucker: Don't be silly.

Dr. EDWARDS: If the honourable member for Townsville West had been there, he would be able to speak about the place.

Mr. Tucker: Don't be silly.

Dr. EDWARDS: I am not being silly. It is the honourable member who is being stupid.

With the extension of these wards, and the provision of new kitchen and dining areas, new clinical blocks and new E.E.G. departments, this hospital is now offering a service to the community that is vitally needed. It is at this hospital that mental patients have been rehabilitated, assisted and rejuvenated. If Opposition members are not prepared to go and look at the work that is being done, I am.

Mr. Tucker: Don't be so petty.

Dr. EDWARDS: I am proud of what is being done for the people. If the honourable member is not, it is to his discredit and that of his party.

With the facilities available in all areas and the dedicated staff, to whom I am sure the honourable member for Wolston and Ipswich West would pay credit, we can look forward to even greater advances in this difficult field of medicine.

Similar advances are seen at Baillie Henderson Hospital and Mossman Hall, but in my opinion the greatest advances have occurred at the Challinor Training Centre. I can remember visiting this place in 1959 as a young student, and the resultant thoughts and impressions still haunt me. Today we have one of the most advanced training centres in Australia where the old, poorly designed, badly illuminated wards have been transformed into modern functional areas where residents--not "inmates"-live, and the whole programme is geared to help the handicapped become part of the community. The highly organised, dedicated programmes for residents, both inside and outside the centre, have changed the whole approach to these people. I pay tremendous credit to Dr. McCutcheon and his medical, nursing

and paramedical staff and the other people involved, and I have no doubt that within Chal!inor Centre we shall see even further progress in the future.

Mrs. Jordan! He has effected a big improvement there.

Dr. EDW ARDS: He has. I am sure the honourable member for Ipswich West is well aware of that and will join with me in complimenting Dr. McCutcheon. He has done an extremely good job, and the staff at that centre must also be complimented on the work they are doing.

At the Basil Stafford Centre at Wacol there have also been great advances. Here, there is a high standard of training that in many cases is returning children to home life. The pre-vocational plan for training children for possible sheltered-workshop employment has been introduced, and, with its social and vocational training, we have seen progress as a result of the devotion, dedication and enthusiasm of the staff. I look forward to further advances in this work, and the Budget has further enhanced the possibility and probability of these advances.

Another aspect of the Budget that I should like to discuss is the development of electricity. In this year's Budget the total allocation for electricity development is $46,003,872, which is $11,600,000 more than last year's allocation. I am convinced that for an area to be progressive, both economically and commercially, there is a need, in addition to industrial development, for an adequate supply of electric power and water at a cost that the economy of the area concerned can accept.

I am particularly interested in the production and distribution of electricity, and I feel that the Government has made tremendous advances in the installation of powersupply constructions and distribution programmes over the last few years. Of course, this programme is continuing. As the Committee is well aware, at the present time tenders are being considered for the supply of coal which will determine the site of the new major power station. The honourable member for Mackay has already mentioned this matter in detail. Approximately 70 per cent of the power usage of Queensland is in the area administered by the Southern Electric Authority of Queensland and the Brisbane City Council.

In the West Moreton area there are certainly adequate coal supplies that can be produced at a cost per ton slightly higher than that in other centres, but the water supply in this area is plentiful. From my study of the facts available, an 1100-megawatt station would use about 600,000 gallons of cooling water a minute at a temperature of 75 degrees F. for 24 hours each day. Transmission costs must also be considered if a station is constructed some distance from the load centre.

Supply [19 0CTOBERj)972) l (Financial Statement) 1185

In addition, the future of the coal-mining industry in the West Moreton area would be insecure if the power-house is not constructed in this area. I am sure that in this submission I have the full support of the honourable members for Wolston, Ipswich West and Fassifern. The future of the Ipswich coalfields depends on underground mining. I was extremely interested in the excellent speech of the Minister for Mines today, in which be mentioned the essential differences between underground and open-cut mining. I am informed that reserves of underground coal sufficient for a new power station are available in the West Moreton area.

There are at present about 900 miners employed in the mining industry in the Ipswich area, and, if the power station is not built there, this number could fall to fewer than 400 by the early 1980's. If the station were constructed nearby, the workforce would increase to 1,550 at least, and Ipswich needs this development for the growth that is now evident in the city, as well as the economic advantages that it can offer. If the new power-house cannot be constructed there, I feel sure that I would have support in the suggestion that an extension of the present Swanbank Power Station be prepared to maintain the demand for coal in the industry after 1978.

I have bad long discussions with coalowners, coal-miners and union representatives during the past few months, and I assure the Committee that we in the Ipswich area will be looking for the release of the news of the siting of the new power-house when it is decided next year. I feel, however, that the Government is to be congratulated on its fine effort in electricity generation and distribution.

I should also like to refer very briefly to the general need for planning in the community. I feel that the Government has taken very active steps in regional planning during the past year. In this modern generation, there is a weakening of the traditional welding or compacting forces, and there appears to be a real loosening of the urban fabric. From my observations and reading, the growth of city population and the opportunities open to the people have an impact on the size, structure and form of a city. It appears to me that people as individuals should be considered in every aspect in which planning is being undertaken.

[Sitting suspended from 6 to 7.15 p.m.]

Dr. EDWARDS: As I said before the dinner recess, it appears to me that people should be considered in every possible way when planning is undertaken. If they are not, there is nothing to plan for. Physical planning is increasingly seen to be only one part of the complex processes of growth and organisation, and in the past the planning of towns has often been viewed as a purely physical operation.

It seems to me also that planning has occurred in one of two ways. It either has occurred in response to ad hoc pressures of development or the lack of it, when a special Government agency or authority is involved, or a mesh of nation-wide regional-planning organisations is set up in response to more universal pressures. It is the Government's responsibility to promote social an.d economi_c welfare, and the Budget confirms Its respons~bility here and its dedication to that responsibility. But it is also the Governll!-ent's responsibility to promote a good, physt?all.Y planned environment, and therefore It IS

necessary that the Government, in planning through the Co-ordinator-General's Department, should plan along two lines: f!rstly, to ensure a good standard of the environment so that there is a system of control over occupancy of land, and this is being don~ in the present generation through town planmng, etc.; secondly, to allocate and control development to prevent waste, partial use, ~r overcrowding-in other words, to provide the right amount of space for the right purposes at the right time. In addition, the growth that is planned must be orderly growthgrowth to guide the location and programming of both public and private investme~t in sewers, drains, water supply, gas, electncity, and so on.

Planning is more than just a collection of maps and town plans. It must consider inhabitants and their needs and values. I look forward to further Government activity through the various departments . so that planning through all ~venues contmues for the betterment of soctety.

In conclusion, I congratulate the Treasurer on the fine Budget that he has brought forward and on his tremendous achievements in past years. I look forward to further outstanding achievements in the years ahead.

Mr. LEESE (Pine Rivers) (7.18 p.m.): I am pleased to have this opportunity of speaking for the first time in a Budget debate in tiiis Chamber. I hoped that the honourable member for Merthyr would be in the Chamber, because I wanted to reflect--

Sir Gordon Chalk: I asked him to represent me at a function. He will be returning a little later.

Mr. LEESE: I am afraid that I cannot wait for the honourable member to return. I wish to pass a few remarks about the speech made by him in this Chamber yesterday. He devoted about 60 per cent of his speech to laudatory remarks about Kevin Cairns, tiie Federal member for Lilley, and a scurrilous attack upon the trade-union movement, and he called upon Opposition members to answer that attack. I assure the Committee that it will not be answered, simply because there is nothing to answer.

However, there is one matter that I should put straight. I intend to give the Committee some facts about Mr. Kevin Cairns, the


Federal member for Lilley, who spends most of his time making statements on anything and everything instead of applying himself to his Housing portfolio and letting Queensland know what he is doing for this State as Federal Minister for Housing. In fact, it is on record that Mr. Cairns has done more for South Australia than he has for Queensland.

I am very pleased that the honourable member for Merthyr has entered the Chamber and can now hear my remarks about Mr. Kevin Cairns. Mr. Cairns has done more for South Australia and Western Australia than he has done for Queensland. Many of his parliamentary colleagues distrust him-and with good cause. He has more friends in the D.L.P. than he has in his own party. He is looked upon by his colleagues as an opportunist.

Mr. Lane: Who is this you are talking about?

Mr. LEESE: Mr. Kevin Cairns. He is looked upon by his colleagues as an opportunist.

Government Members interjected.

Mr. LEESE: I am quite prepared on the right occasion to play the ukulele for honourable members opposite. At the moment I am telling members of the Committee about Mr. Kevin Cairns, a man who is looked upon by his colleagues--

Mr. Lane interjected.

The ACTING CHAIRMAN: Order!

Mr. LEESE: The honourable member for Merthyr likes to dish it out, but he cannot sit back and take it.

As I said, Mr. Kevin Cairns' own cronies consider him to be an opportunist. He was one of the men who helped to make Mr. Gorton Prime Minister, but when the tide turned he knifed Mr. Gorton in the back. In fact he inserted advertisements in the Press disclaiming any association with Mr. Gorton. So much for the loyalty of Mr. Kevin Cairns!

On his recent trip to Queensland Mr. Gorton was asked if he would campaign for Kevin Cairns. His reply was, "If I had the time, and if I was asked, I might attempt to squeeze it in, but I doubt that I would have the time." I doubt that the Federal member for Moreton, the former Minister for the Navy, would allow Mr. Kevin Cairns to come into his electorate.



Mr. LEESE: Let us look at what sort of a person this Kevin Cairns actually iswhat type of man is submitting himself again for Lilley. I am pleased to be able to say that he will be defeated at the next Federal election.

At the Federal election in 1966 the A.L.P. candidate's signs were thrown into the river at Hamilton. Two people were arrested and convicted. Both of them happened to be brothers-in-law of Kevin Cairns. A third person who was with them got away, but it is reliably reported that the third person was Kevin Cairns. I say to the honourable member for Merthyr that they definitely make a strange pair.



Mr. LEESE: I will close my remarks about Kevin Cairns by saying--


The ACTING CHAIRMAN: Order! The honourable member for Merthyr will restrain himself.

Mr. LEESE: They make a strange pair. Both of them are filled with hatred for the A.L.P. Both of them are traitors to their own class, and they know it. They walk side by side, and what a strange couple they are! Here we have an ex-policeman and a fugitive walking side by side.

The Treasurer refers to his Budget as "a real 'Achievement' budget-a budget which will achieve so much for so many, a budget which will help to build a better, a brighter and even more progressive and prosperous Queensland." But for whom? The Treasurer talks about a progressive and prosperous Queensland. Queensland is a great State with a tremendous future, but until we reach the stage where every Queenslander shares in the prosperity and there is freedom from want-a situation that will never come about under the present Government-the Treasurer would do well to curb his adjectives when describing his Budget.

Sir Gordon Chalk: What was that word? "Adjectives"?

Mr. LEESE: I will get an interpreter for the Treasurer if he has any real difficulty.

We are accustomed to hearing that trade unions are to blame for rising costs and that increased wages are the cause of inflation and are stifling >the economy. When trade unions, on behalf of ,their members, apply for an increase in wages, they have to submit their case to the arbitration court, and the court brings down its judgment on the facts placed before it. The intention behind the granting of increases is that wages should be sufficient to meet price rises which have occurred since the court's last judgment. But what happens? Immediately the court hands down its judgment, the employers put themselves in contempt of court by immediately increasing their prices. This situation will not cease until such time as manufacturers and others are forced to justify increases, just as trade unions have 'to justify any increases they seek.

Mr. Lane: Real Karl Marx!


Mr. LEESE: I would sooner have Karl Marx than the N.C.C.

I know that this has been said many times by honourable members on this side of the Chamber, but the facts are that rules cannot be set down for one section of 'the economy and a flagrant open-go given to the other section. We have reached a stage where, under this Government, many Queenslanders are not getting a fair go. How can this Government be proud of its achievements?

Mr. Lane: How would you know? If you don't like it here, you are entitled to go back where you came from.

The ACTING CHAIRMAN: Order! The honourable member for Merthyr will contain himself.

Mr. Lane: We'll take the hat around to pay your fare back, if you don't like it here.

The ACTING CHAIRMAN: Order! I called the Chamber to order. I ask honourable members to respect my wishes.

Mr. LEESE: Thank you, Mr. Hewitt. I should like to tell the honourable member for Menthyr how I would know. Since coming to Australia I have applied myself to working for the workers of Queensland, not snooping around like the honourable member for Merthyr spying on trade unionists and bashing drunks whenever he gets the opportunity.

As I was saying, how can this Government be proud of its achievements when thousands of families are either living in abject poverty or near-poverty, when they have even forgotten what a decent cut of meat looks like much less tastes like, when children rely on hand-me-downs, when the mother cannot buy a new dress for herself and the family holiday is an unheard-of treat? This does happen, so honourable members opposite can wipe the smiles from ~their faces. If they go around their own electorates, they will find that this is happening; it is evident just outside this building. There is no room for smiles, because this is no exaggeration. It is happening to people in full employment.

The situation is so shocking and the present Federal and State Governments' attitude to social security is so deplorable that ~the family in receipt of a reasonable income can find itself overnight living in a state of poverty if the breadwinner happens ~o fall sick for an extended period or is injured at work.

Sir Gordon Chalk: Is this Stanaway or Burns?

Mr. LEESE: This is Ken Leese's own experience. I gained this experience as a secretary of a sub-branch of my trade union prior to coming into Parliament. Day after day I received letters from families that had fallen into these s~traits. The position of a tradesman who had been getting by and meeting his hire-purchase commitments, changed overnight. Because of the lack of

security in Australia his family, if he was sick for an extended' period, would be living in poverty or near-poverty. They got through only because his workmates took t~e hat around in order to help them. This Government the Federal Government and the other Tory Governments in Australia have not been prepared to provide any real or meaningful social security for the people of Australia.

Now let us look at the plight of people who rely solely on social service benefits. What sort of plight do they find themselv~s in? I should like to cite a case reported m "The Sunday Mail", but before doing so I ask the Government members to keep quiet and show some respect for my remark~, because they will relate to a woman who IS

forced to live a life of deprivation. Mr. Bousen: They don't want to hear the

truth.

Mr. LEESE: Of course not. Although they continually tell the people of Quee~sland, "We care for you," they do not give a damn for anyone except themselves. All they are interested in is getting to the bank and getting to the bar.


The ACTING CHAIRMAN: Order! Constant interjecting across the Chamber will stop. I intend to hear the speech of the honourable member for Pine Rivers, and if honourable members do not contain themselves I shall warn them.

Mr. LEESE: Thank you, Mr. Hewitt. This case concerns a young mother whose husband was an alcoholic. She divorced him, and came to Queensland with her baby daughter nearly five years ago. They now live in a couple of rooms on the south side of the river, and she pays a rental of $11 a week. Ill health prevents her f~om work~ng. Her daughter who is approachmg her Sixth birthday, has' never been visited by Santa Claus and does not know what the Easter Bunny is about.

The Treasurer may laugh. Let him lau¥h. He has plenty of time to go round .gettmg himself "primed up" instead of takmg an interest in the plight of the unfortunate members of our community. It is about time this Government took an interest in them.

As I was saying, the child does. not even know what the Easter Bunny IS. The mother claims that each week she has nothing left over and that all the clothing she wears is given to her by other people. She adds that, of course, she and her child cannot afford entertainment. They never taste steak or pork, they cannot afford butter, and they drink tinned milk mixed with water. The mother usually has only coffee for breakfast does not have any lunch but does ha~e what she describes as a 'wholesome meal in the evening. This usually comprises bacon bones and split peas.



Mr. LEESE: I only hope that the people of Queensland hear about all the laughter emanating from the Government benches. They should see the smirks and looks of self-satisfaction on the faces of Government members, especially on the Treasurer's face. Of course, he does not give a damn for the people of Queensland.

The mother to whom I have referred is one of many people in Queensland who are forced to exist on social welfare payments.

Mr. Hughes: She is still better off here than in England, I'll bet.

Mr. Lane: Answer that one.

Mr. LEESE: I cannot answer that one, because at this point of time I am not talking about England. I am an Australian, I have been elected to this Parliament, I am interested in Australians, and I am talking about them.

Sir Gordon Chalk: Tell us why they deported you out here.

Mr. LEESE: At least it wasn't the reason why the Treasurer's ancestors were deported out here in chains. I am pleased to see that my speech has brought some levity to the Chamber; however, I hope Queenslanders will be made aware of the attitude adopted tonight by Government members.

The State must share with the Commonwealth the responsibility for the fact that in 1972 a number of people live in Queensland under stress, anxiety and social inequality. How much longer will the Tory Governments allow this situation to continue? How much longer will they compel many persons to live a life of poverty? I should like to know what criteria are used to determine eligibility for social service payments. The assistance received by widows or deserted wives with children is little enough, but what basis of reasoning is used to decide that an unmarried mother or a de-facto wife should receive less assistance? Surely their children need as much food as other children, and cost as much to keep. Is there some way-out thought that we have to protect the marital status and therefore cannot condone what this State possibly calls immorality?

It has been stated that approximately 10 per cent of Australians live in poverty. Steps must be taken to pinpoint the 10 per cent and undertake research to find out what percentage is static and what percentage moves in and out of the poverty area. I suggest that one of the main things that perpetuate poverty is inequality. If we are to remove poverty, we must know the inequalities that exist, and set out to put things right.

Mr. R. E. Moore: How would you do it?

Mr. LEESE: If the honourable member will listen for a while, I will tell him.

Mr. Lane: We cannot understand what you are saying.

Mr. LEESE: That is because you are just a "flatfoot". How would you be expected to understand?


Mr. Lane: You are getting personal now.

Mr. LEESE: My word I am being per-sonal with you, my friend.

The ACTING CHAIRMAN: Order! The honourable member will address the Chair.

Mr. LEESE: I suggest that-


The ACTING CHAIRMAN: Order! The honourable members for Toowoomba East and Merthyr will both restrain themselves. I will not give them any further warnings.

Mr. LEESE: Thank you, Mr. Hewitt. Research has shown that in less affluent

areas there is a lack of doctors, dentists, kindergartens, child welfare centres and adequate educational facilities. The Government's ad hoc approach to social welfare is completely unrealistic. Is the Government happy with the position? Is it content that people who fall into the low-income and social-service categories are often forced to live in crowded, substandard conditions, without privacy for different members of the family and no facilities for children to study? In fact, the majority of children are doomed to leave school as soon as the law permits, to supplement the family income. In turn, they become low-paid workers themserves, and so perpetuate the circle. If it were not for many charitable organisations, which are doing a wonderful job, the position would be much worse. The fact that they have to be relied upon to feed, clothe and counsel so many is a shocking indictment of the Government.

In a speech on Tuesday, the honourable member for Ipswich West made a valuable contribution when she drew the attention of the Chamber to the fact that, since receiving an increase in Commonwealth social-service payments, some 700 families were to have their State supplementary assistance reduced. To the families concerned, that not only means very little change in their real income in spite of recent increased costs but, in some cases, also results in the loss of valuable assistance for educational requisites because one or more of their children will no longer be eligible for family assistance. This is a shockingly insensitive approach to the plight of these families.

In "The Courier-Mail" of Wednesday, 18 October, the Minister for Welfare Services was reported as saying that, by next year's Budget, aid given by the Children's Services Department to people already receiving Commonwealth help for their families should be finished. What is the purpose of the


Children's Services Department if it is not to protect and look after the welfare of children? Yet the Minister said that, by next year, aid would be finished. Perhaps the Minister believes, as I do, that by that time we will have a Federal Labor Government and there will be no need for this service. With regard to the 700 families who have had their family assistance cut, the Minister said he had discretionary powers, and he invited people with any reasonable claim to contact him. I only hope that all 700 do. I doubt that they will, because many people do not know how to go about it, and the Children's Services Department has always been loath to make public any information about entitlements. This is another facet that must be causing added hardship, especially to people living on the fringe of the city area.

Mr. Lane: Are you a young Turk or a porcupine grouper?

Mr. LEESE: If the honourable member comes over here I shall show him.

People in acute financial circumstances cannot even afford the fare to the city, so they have the problem of getting to the department as well as the problem of knowing where to go. Full explanatory information on entitlements and how to go about getting them should be readily available to the public. This is a very important point. People under stress have sufficient difficulties to face without being shunted from department to department. What is required is one department to take care of all social needs.

It is pleasing to note that at last, after dithering on the fence for so long, the Federal Government will hold an inquiry into poverty, which is something that the Australian Labor Party has been seeking for years. Professor Henderson has been chosen to conduct the inquiry and a better man could not have been chosen. He is a very experienced person and I am sure that he will do an excellent job if given a free hand by the Government. No doubt, when his report is tabled, some very startling facts will be brought to light. By that time Australia will have a Federal A.L.P. Government, so we can rest assured that his findings will be put to good use.

Following a change of Government in Canberra, there will be an end to headlines like these:

"1,000 Poor sleep under city stars"; "Society to spend $750,000 on welfare

work in State"; "Poverty and apathy"; "McMahon axes poverty inquiry"; "Shocking conditions for the disabled-

Government assistance an urgent need"; "Deserted wife, the worst deal here"; "42,000 grow up in acute poverty"; "Pensioners call for pension equal to

basic wage."

So it goes on, yet the Treasurer says that Queensland is a progressive State. I can only hope that we do have a change of Government in the coming Federal election.

Mr. Murray: You have never had it so good.

Mr. LEESE: That is the type of remark that always comes from a shallow-mind~d person. That is something that a defeatist would say. I am no defeatist. There is a challenge in Australia. We have a great country and we have the opportunity, but it will take people like Opposition members, including me, to bring to realisation the full potential of Queensland and Australia. That is why the people of Pine Rivers put me into Parliament.


Mr. LEESE: It is not the honourable member who has to put up with me. It is the people of Pine Rivers who say whether I stay here or not.

If I may, I will say a few words on workers' compensation.

Mr. Lane: Be kind.

Mr. LEESE: I would not be kind to the honourable member.

Although the Government has gran~ed some increases in the weekly compensation payment, it has not gone far enough. Injured workers, the majority of whom live from week to week, should be paid not less than their average weekly earnings. This amount should be paid irrespective of the period of the injury.

Mr. Murray: What about time-and-a-half?



Mr. LEESE: If honourable members on the other side of the Chamber can find any humour in a discussion on workers' compensation, all I can say is that they should move around in the factories and mills and see some of the shocking deals that workers are getting in Queensland and throughout Australia. This is no laughing matter, and it is not a matter fur interjections.

As I was saying, Mr. Hewitt, the compensation should be equal to average weekly earnings and it should be paid irrespective of the 'period of the injury. The present payment of the basic wage of $41 a week for males and $31.85 for females, plus an additional $10.25 for a dependent wife and $4.10 for each dependent child, leaves a lot to be desired.

Sir Gordon Chalk: That is not factual.

Mr. LEESE: This is factual at this point of time.

Sir Gordon Chalk: You are not speaking the truth.


Mr. LEESE: This document can be tabled.



Mr. LEESE: If workers' compensation is a benefit to cover the worker injured whilst carrying out his duties, surely the cover 'should be sufficient to ensure that he and his family suffer no financial loss at a time when any extra stress caused by the loss of weekly earnings must be detrimental to his full recovery.

I refer honourable members to this extract from the judgment given by His Honour Mr. Justice Sheehy in an accident claim made by the Building Workers' Union on 21 May 1971-

"In some cases the present workers' compensation payment would be little more than half the award wage, and this is difficult to countenance when one considers that the injury causing the man's absence from work must have been related to his employment."

He went on to say-"Even if full pay were granted, there

would still be a loss of earnings in the average case, as no account of overtime would be taken."

Let us now look at the way in which the Act discriminates against women. Even a woman earning equal pay who is injured at her job does not receive equal compensation. If she is a widnw with children it is taken for granted that it does not cost much to raise her children. This shocking discrimination relegates women to the role of second-class citizens.

There have been some useful advances over the years in workers' compensation legislation, but the Act no longer fully meets modem needs. I have no argument with the public servants who administer the Act· they do a difficult job well. In fact, I an{ led to believe that many of them consider that the Act should be rewritten. It is the Government that is responsible for its many inadequacies.

Workers' compensation became a right in Queensland in 1916. At that time it took the form of a weekly payment of 50 per cent of the wages that the worker had been ~aming prior to his injury. Over the years lmprnvements have been made, but it is time that workers' compensation was taken out of the realm of social service payments. Every worker has the right to expect full financial security for his family, with no loss of earnings, should he be incapacitated by injury at work.

Workers' compensation has been, and still is, a very profitable business. The Workers' Compensation Fund of the State Government Insurance Office to 30 June 1970 showed that a surplus of $36,700,000 had been earned. That surplus was after payment of claims in the years covered. But we see that, of

that massive surplus of $36,700,000, nearly $34,000,000 was given back to employers by way of bonus allocations.

I know that some honourable members on the other side of the Chamber might argue that bonus payments to employers may help to bring an increased awareness of the need for industrial safety. I suggest that when one looks at the bulletin of industrial accident statistics and sees that, in the years 1968 to 1971 2,244,226 working days were lost through industrial injury, and then transfers those figures into production loss, this should be sufficient to make employers safety minded.

Of course, the figures I have mentioned represent pain and suffering, and it is my view that it is reasonable to take the line that there should not be any bonus repayments to employers. The mere fact that there is such a huge surplus shows a need for some bold new thinking-in fact, a completely new Act.

Let us look at some of the areas in which change in the Act would be most desirable. It should be the responsibility of the State Government Insurance Office either to find suitable employment for a worker who cannot return to his former employment or to allow him to remain on workers' compensation equal to the wage he would have received if he had not been hurt. When an injured worker cannot return to his former employment and a suitable job is found for him but at a lower rate of pay than he received before being injured, the difference between his former and his present rates of pay should be made up by the S.G.I.O., and that make-up pay should continue indefinitely.

Lump-sum payments should be increased to at least bring them into line with the Commonwealth Employees' Compensation Act. For instance, under the Commonwealth Act the lump-sum payment for the loss of an arm is $10,800. Even though this is inadequate, under the Queensland Act the lump-sum payment for the loss of an arm is only $6,870. To take another example, the lump-sum payment under the Commonwealth Act for the total loss of hearing is $9,450; under the Queensland Act it is $5,380. That is as from 29 May 1972. If the scale of payments has been altered, I do not recall that the Treasurer informed us of that fact. For the loss of both hands the Queensland Act provides a payment of $12,680; the Commonwealth Act provides a payment of $18,900.

Mr. Davis: Shocking!

Mr. LEESE: It is shocking. For the loss of both feet the Queensland payment is $12,680, compared with $16,200 by the Commonwealth. I could go right through the list and point out similar discrepancies. And Government members talk about Queensland being a progressive State!


To bring the lump-sum payments in Queensland into line with those under the Commonwealth Act would only be a start. They should eventually be brought up to the amounts awarded in civil damages claims.

The existing Act also fails to provide adequately for the widow and dependants of a deceased breadwinner. At the moment, the lump-sum payment received by a widow is $12,680, together with $340 for each dependent child. This amount would be reduced if, prior to his death, the breadwinner had received any compensation or >lump-sum payment for his injury. Once again the full compensation is only about three years' earnings. And the Government talks about this being a progressive State! A just settlement would be that a widow with dependent children should continue to receive weekly compensation equal to the deceased breadwinner's average weekly earnings, and a widow without dependants a percentage of that amount.

There are many extra aids that a seriously injured worker may have to pay for, but which are not necessarily part of the medical treatment; for example, handrails, alterations to house fittings, door handles and other household fittings. It is reasonable to suggest that a sum of money should be allowable to cover such requirements.

One area into which the State Government Insurance Office could channel some of its huge surplus is the building of an industrial rehabilitation hospital and clinics to enable badly injured workers to be taught new skills that would allow them once again to play a meaningful role in society, rather than having to rely upon social service benefits once the maximum payment is reached. As I said earlier, there should be no maximum payment; a worker should receive full compensation for as long as his injury persists.

There are other anomalies such as the make-up of the various medical boards and the role that the State Government Insurance Office does not, but could, play in safety precautions and accident prevention. The National Safety Council is already doing a tremendous job. The State Government Insurance Office must have on its files a wealth of very valuable information, but I am advised that that information is not made available to the National Safety Council. If it were, I am sure the National Safety Council would be able to play a more meaningful role in preventing shocking industrial accidents. Not only should workers' compensation payments be increased from their present level of social service benefits, but, in addition, the utmost attention should be given to making the job of the worker really safe.

I should now like to pass a few remarks about transport. Like other honourable members on this side, I could find no mention in the Budget of railway electrification or the implementation of a co-ordinated

transport system. Both of these things were promised by the Government parties during the recent election campaign.

The electrification of Brisbane's suburban railways wi11 be a costly and gigantic undertaking, but it would have been a reality today if the Country-Liberal coalition had had sufficient foresight to continue with the electrification work started by the A.L.P. Government. It is because of this Government's "hick" thinking and lack of vision that we have in Brisbane today what must be the worst transport system in any city in a developed country. It is shocking to have to say that in 1972 we still cannot travel from suburb to suburb by public transport. If Brisbane's railways had been electrified, we would have had a ring service or loop-line service to all suburbs.

The Government's attitude is that people can afford private transport. It completely overlooks the fact that this is not so. Most families have only one car, and Dad has to use it to go to work. What happens when he is at work and something goes wrong with one of the children, which necessitates Mum taking it to a hospital? She either attempts to get herself and the child there by the present inadequate public transport or she takes a taxi-if she can afford it.

What happens to the parent who cannot afford a taxi and is not on a public-transport route? The child has to go without medical attention. It is no use a mother telephoning a private doctor and saying, "I have no money and I'm not in medical benefits. Wi·ll you come and treat my child?" She would be "knocked back". Even if she were in medical benefits, if she telephoned late at night or at the week-end when the doctor was away playing golf she would not be able to get him to call.

I recently had the experience of a case in the electorate of the honourable member for Sandgate. A family came down from Rockhampton to spend a week at Sandgate, and the wife took ill over the week-end. The family telephoned all over Sandgate in an attempt to get a doctor to visit her, but everywhere they phoned they were told, "As you are not a patient, we cannot come to see you." Finally, they got a taxi and took the woman to the Royal Brisbane Hospital. When they got there, the woman was dead. Had that been my wife, I would have sued every doctor in Sandgate. The medical profession is supposed to care for the people, but the only people in it who are really dedicated are the nurses. The doctors leave much to be desired. I liken them to solicitors.

Mr. HUGHES: I rise to a point of order. The allegation by the honourable member that people will not come out to attend to medical cases is offensive to me as a member of the Q.A.T.B. Committee and to all ambulancemen in Queensland.


The ACTING CHAIRMAN: Order! The honourable member's point of order is not valid. He will please resume his seat.

Sir Gordon Chalk: You are attacking the ambulance.

Mr. LEESE: No, I am not attacking the ambulance. They do a wonderful job and this Government does not do sufficient to help them. It is shocking to see ambulancemen collecting from door to door, begging money to pay their own wages.

In my electorate, the Pine Rivers Shire Council is building a library which, when completed, will be one of which we can be proud. It also intends 1to build a civic centre and a swimming pool. Eventually the council will get these amenities-that is if its loan allocations are not continually slashed by the Treasurer as they were this year.

These amenities are to be built in Strathpine. My electorate is composed of various suburbs, each of which would be about 4 miles from the other. If a library is built in Strathpine, what is the use of having a library there--

Mr. Lane: What about a library in New Farm, built by the Brisbane City Council?

The ACTING CHAIRMAN: Order! I inform the honourable member for Merthyr for the last time that I will not tolerate any further interjections.

Mr. Sherrington: I would have been sent out long before now had I been carrying on like that.

The ACTING CHAIRMAN: Order! The honourable member is not administering ,the Committee; I am.

Mr. LEESE: I commend the Pine Rivers Shire Council for its proposal to build this library at Strathpine but, as I was saying, the Pine Rivers Shire is made up of a number of suburbs. The proposed library is a very expensive one, but it will not be one iota of us,e to residents of Arana Hills, Ferny Hills, Albany Creek, or Samford, all of which are in the Pine Rivers area. The only way these people could reach ,the library would be by using their own private transport. This means that the council will eventually have to build another library at Arana Hills, one at Albany Creek and one at Ferny Hills and 1he same can be said of the civic centre. How many civic centres can a council build, and how many swimming pools?

If we had a decent transport system, people would be able to travel direct from suburb to suburb instead of having to go through the city. If a person at Strathpine wanted to visit a relative at Arana Hills and did not have private transport, he would have to travel all the way into the city and then back ;to Arana Hills. This ridiculous journey from Strathpine to Arana Hills by public transport would cover 16 miles, whereas the distance between the two suburbs is only 4 miles.

One thing I was very pleased to see in the Budget is that Strathpine West is to get a new school. A school is very much needed there and it will be well accepted. However, the Treasurer should not become complacent, because it will not meet the full needs of education in the area.

Although the Pine Rivers Shire is one of the fastest-growing areas in the State, the Government has shown a complete lack of forward planning in providing education to the children who live there. For instance, the Strathpine State School, at which nearly 50 per cent of the students are accommodated in demountables, is situated on the main Gympie Road and has the North Coast railway behind it. Honourable members can imagine the noise and vibration that is caused by diesel road transports as well as locomotives. I cannot imagine a worse environment for school-children.

Mr. Sherrington: It would not be as bad as listening to the honourable member for Merthyr.

Mr. LEESE: That is true; I could not imagine anything worse than that.

The children are unable to "tune in" and pay attention to their teachers. As for the school building itself, it should have been burnt down years ago, so I urge the Minister to replace it.

I shall conclude by making one more whinge, this time about the provision of insufficient police officers in my electorate. The only police station in my electorateand, for that matter, in the Pine Rivers Shire-is at Petrie.

Mr. Low: Just "pining" away.

Mr. LEESE: I take the honourable member's interjection.

The police station is staffed by six police officers and one civilian clerk. It is not manned 24 hours a day. Those six police officers are required to serve the needs of 22,000 residents in the shire. The sergeant in charge has told me that he does not stand a chance of travelling around his district and of giving its inhabitants the protection to which they are entitled.

On 12 July I wrote to the Minister for Works and Housing stressing the urgency of providing additional police at Petrie. On 14 July he acknowledged my letter. Subsequently, on 15 August, as a result of representations that I had received from the shire council, which said it was very concerned about the lack of police in the shire and that it was required to spend a large sum of money on creating parks and picnic areas, which, at night, were being destroyed by vandals, I again wrote to the Minister. He acknowledged this letter, too, but all he said was that he was investigating the matter. I hope that, as the Budget provides for the recruitment of additional police officers, the Minister will appoint at least two more officers to the Petrie Police Station.


Mr. ROW (Hinchinbrook) (8.8 p.m.): In rising to speak in this debate I should like at the outset to compliment the Treasurer.

Mr. Bousen: That is not what you said about him the other day.

Mr. ROW: I have never made any comment about the Treasurer within earshot of the honourable member for Toowoomba North.

As I say, I compliment the Treasurer on what I think is one of the best Budgets presented in this Parliament. Unlike the honourable member for Pine Rivers, who whinged about it from the time he rose to speak until he resumed his seat, I will--

Mr. Sherrington: Be doing a little bit of back -scratching.

Mr. ROW: I will be doing a little bit of back-scratching because I am on this side of the Chamber. If the honourable member was here he would be doing the same.

Mr. B. Wood: Is that the only reason?

Mr. ROW: It would be the only reason from the honourable member's point of view. What does he think?

Mr. B. Wood: I think it is.

Mr. ROW: The honourable member thinks what suits him; he only thinks one way.

The level of buoyancy in the general economy of Queensland is very evident. The average ratio of earnings to prices has remained very much in favour of the average citizen. Most local consumer-based industries have the advantage of being able to absorb the spending money that flows from the continual increases in award wages. The circle is completed and creates a state of buoyancy in that section of industry which has an opportunity to pass on added cost to the consumers. Trade unions then come in again for their "chop". If continuing large increases in wages embarrass our exporting industries, and the State has to rely solely on the cash flowing from internalconsumer industries, the picture will become very different. Surely it is evident to the public that the trade unions have created the problem and have left it to the Government to solve. Trade unions seem to be creating major problems for all types of industries and people in all walks of life, and then leaving the Government to sort out the mess.

Admittedly there may be some circumstances in which a strike is justified. I wager that Opposition members are surprised to hear me say that. But the activities of trade unions are making a complete and utter farce of the just system of conciliation and arbitration. Even as a new member of this Assembly, I venture to say that the Queensland Government has been too lenient with trade unions. It has allowed them to assume too much power which, obviously, their own inadequate leaders cannot handle for their own good or for the benefit of society.

The situation is common at Federal and State levels. Perhaps the initiative relative to the activities of trade unions should come from the Federal Government.

Mr. Davis: What would you suggest?

Mr. ROW: I suggest that the unions should be made to pay some of the fines that have been levied on them by the courts, which they refuse to pay.

Mr. B. Wood: Do you take steps to extract fines that are imposed for extraneous matter in cane?

Mr. ROW: That is a rather different field. The growers pay the fines and they become part of the common fund. But the union fines do not; instead, the money is "stashed" away somewhere.

If Australia loses its exports markets because of pressures arising from inflationary trends, the domestic economy of many industries will collapse.

Mr. Hughes: Sometimes I think that is what they are hoping for.

Mr. ROW: I sometimes wonder if that is so.

Primary agricultural industries have been faced with terrible conditions caused mainly by drought and other adverse circumstances. If other industries in this country have to face up to restructuring as applied to rural industries, the social result will be very undesirable, even for Opposition members. The causes of the drift to the city are already manifest in the recession that has taken place in the rural industries--droughts and rising costs.

Mr. B. Wood: The Minister denied that this morning.

Mr. ROW: The Minister did not deny that it has happened in the past. He might have said that the position is improving.

Mr. Davis: Do you realise that there is not one poor Country Party member here?

Mr. ROW: It is a matter of relativity. I have many poor constituents and I am here to do something for them. They do not sweat on unions for a voice in the community. They are out on their own in the backblocks and there are not many people who can speak up for them. There are no professional urgers out there.


The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr. Wharton): Order! There is far too much noise on my left.

Mr. ROW: While present export markets are maintained, it is hoped that industry can cope with disproportionate rises in wages and prices.

Mr. Bousen: What about some form of price control?


Mr. ROW: Well, what about it? What has the honourable member to say about this? Has the Government ever advocated price control?

Mr. Bousen: No.

Mr. ROW: No. Opposition members have always had a fair deal. They cannot complain about the Government being unfair to them. If the Government had introduced price control, they would have something to whinge about.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: Order! The honourable member is not required to answer interjections.

Mr. ROW: I am enjoying it, Mr. Wharton.

Another reassuring aspect of the Budget is that the Government is improving the availability of finance to rural industries. The $34,100,000 in combined loan moneys that will be made available to primary industries this financial year is very gratifying. However, the Treasurer, in allocating $14,300,000 of loan funds to the Agricultural Bank Fund, has not in my opinion adopted a realistic approach. It means that a limit of approximately $20,000 will be placed on each individual who borrows money from the Agricultural Bank. I defy anyone to prove that a person can establish himself in a rural industry today with that amount.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: Order! There is far too much audible conversation on my left.

Mr. B. Wood: There is also too much audible conversation on your right.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: Order! I said that there was too much audible conversation on my left, and I meant it.

Mr. B. Wood interjected.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: Order! I warn the honourable member for Barron River.

Mr. ROW: If the total of loan moneys was increased, primary producers could obtain larger individual loans from the Agricultural Bank. If our primary industries are not ruined by continual inflationary pressures, rural borrowers will become viable and will be able to service a far greater debt. To assist them to get over the hill, more loan funds should be made available. In my maiden speech, I made the plea that the amount of money available through the Agricultural Bank should be increased, and I reiterate that plea tonight.

Mr. B. Wood: Does the Budget contain any reference to bridges in your electorate?

Mr. ROW: The Budget deals with main roads and all the facilities that go with them. Bridges in my electorate are being replaced so rapidly that the honourable member would be surprised at how little time it would

take him to get to Cairns to enjoy the sunshine-that is, if he had the courage to go there and see what the people of the North are doing for themselves.

Mr. Wallis-Smith: The milk supply is cut off in my electorate each wet season because the roads are too low.

Mr. ROW: That could be said of quite a number of areas. How do you get on in your "neck of the woods", anyway?

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr. Wharton): Order!

Mr. ROW: Nobody is Robinson Crusoe here. It is all very well to say that people get cut off in my electorate. There are many Labor-held electorates, too, in which people have to swim or be cut off.

I congratulate the State and Federal Governments on the joint allocation of funds, as revealed in the Financial Statement, for the maintenance of animal hygiene standards. This will be of great assistance to the beef industry, which is under so much pressure as a result of extravagant demands by overseas buyers. The hygiene standards required by some overseas buyers are surely in excess of what is reasonable. If anyone can inform me of any person who has di,ed in this country as a result of inadequate standards of hygiene in food-processing, particularly of meat, I will fly backwards to Bourke. l defend this Budget allocation, because it is an endeavour to meet a problem that faces the beef industry. The special grant of $100,000, made in conjunction with the Federal Government, is a welcome grant to help maintain beef export markets.

Mr. Davis: Do you think we should have daylight saving on the Gold Coast?

Mr. ROW: I thought that people usually went to the Gold Coast to play up at night. I did not think that they would want so much daylight there.

Mr. Sherrington: They need daylight saving to recover!

Mr. ROW: It seems ludicrous to suggest that Queensland beef is not good enough for the United States consumer. The Department of Primary Industries conducts massive laboratory tests by highly qualified personnel to ensure that beef that reaches the Queensland consumer is in no way substandard. To my knowledge, no consumer has suffered from the consumption of substandard beef in Queensland. Other countries have their requirements, and, although our research shows them to be unnecessarily fastidious, if we want to retain that market, we have to meet the required standard. The $1,400,000 that has now been granted for tuberculosis and brucellosis testing of cattle will ensure that there is no interruption to beef exports.

Supply [19 OcTOBER 1972} (Financial Statement) 1195

I must say that I was disappointed to note in the Financial Statement that the Treasurer has made a special grant of only $100,000 to the Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations. Members may be surprised that I have expressed disappointment, because I know that $100,000 is a lot of money, and that it is welcome. However, the Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations is an organisation that has contributed to Queensland, by way of research and extension services in the sugar industry, probably more than any other research organisation in the history of this State. When this organisation was first established, it had a budget of £7,000. The Government of the day agreed to match that budget, which meant that initially the Government's contribution was £7,000.

Mr. R. Jones: That was a Labor Government, wasn't it?

Mr. ROW: I think it was.

Mr. Frawley: One of the only good things they ever did.

Mr. ROW: Yes, but I will give credit for it.

Mr. R. Jones: Well, give credit.

Mr. ROW: I give credit; I am not biased. Over the years, the budget of the Sugar

Experiment Stations Board has increased to more than $1,000,000. It was my hope that an amount of at least $100,000 would become an annual contribution from the Government, and it disappoints me to see that this, apparently, is a grant for special purposes and that the board will have to justify the project that it undertakes with the grant and then claim the money.

Mr. Davis: Do you think that there will be a relaxation of death duties, too?

Mr. ROW: I think that there is already a relaxation of death duties. I think that people who earn their living from real estate will find that pressure for expansion will soon negate the value they might derive from relaxation of death duties. It will be a vicious circle, but I should not like to say to whom the blame should be attributed~ I do not think it will be attributable to the Government-if inflationary pressure forces people to continually expand their assets.

Undoubtedly the wool-growers will be happy to know that the Government, as indicated in the Budget, will continue to assist the wool industry. This, in addition to the recent price rise for wool, will give a greatly needed impetus to the industry and lift the hearts and hopes of many people, some of whom were previously on the verge of despair.

The inauguration of the $5,500,000 scheme for the dairying industry, to be implemented over a three-year-period, also will do much to assist that industry to operate at peak

efficiency. As you will be aware, Mr. Wharton, the dairy industry is undergoing another phase of industrialisation, and the handling, transportation and processing of milk has become a question of bulking for economy of scale. I point out to the Committee that it could truthfully be claimed that the bulk-handling of milk was pioneered in my electorate and other electorates in North Queensland.

Mr. P. Wood: Do you think the dairy farmers should be helped with conversion costs when the metric system is introduced? [t will cost a lot of money.

Mr. ROW: Does the honourable member think that every industry should receive some sort of assistance? We cannot assist one and not the other. I am talking about the bulkhandling of milk, not about conversion to the metric system. That will be a national effort, involving everybody.

I compliment the Treasurer on the $57,600,000 that has been spent on the construction of beef roads since the scheme was inaugurated. I am also happy to see in the Budget that the Main Roads Department has allocated a substantial sum of money for arterial roads and developmental roads. But the existence of missing links in Queensland's arterial road system must be recognised, and they must be brought up to a standard similar to that of the expensive road systems that they connect.

Development is taking place in the grazing industry much more rapidly than many people realise. With the reclamation that is occurring in the marginal lands and the tropical wet belt, it is very obvious that greater land utilisation has become possible through modern methods. However, many grazing units still lack suitable access because minor road jobs have not been carried out. In my electorate there are several missing links. If the links were constructed they would service the rural industries and be of everlasting benefit to the tourist industry. In most instances in North Queensland it is possible to link the coastal plains with the hinterland quite easily. All that is required is the provision of funds under section 19. I understand that only $200,000 has been allocated to that road fund. That is one of the minor disappointments in the Budget.

An Honourable Member interjected.

Mr. ROW: Reclamation of land is proceeding very well under private enterprise. If people can get enough finance, they will reclaim land.

Mr. Frawley: Would you agree that under the Country-Liberal Government main roads throughout Queensland have been improved greatly compared with what they were like in 1957?

Mr. ROW: I certainly do. It is now possible to drive on a good road from Far North Queensland to the border. There is


nothing wrong with our main arterial roads. This Government has done a marvellous job in the construction of the main highway from Brisbane almost to Cooktown. It is possible to drive right to Cooktown, but I will not skite about the last portion of the road.

Mr. Yewdale: What about the road between Rockhampton and Mackay?

Mr. ROW: It would not be worse than anywhere else. When the Opposition was the Government it was not possible to drive to Townsville. When I was a child it was not possible to drive to Townsville; a person had to either take the train or ride a horse.

I was pleased to see that the appropriation for local authorities has been increased this year by 14.4 per cent. Borrowing, of course, is only of value to the more fortunate shires, those that have not suffered from the long drought that ravaged some parts of the State.

An Opposition Member: Would you agree that the Brisbane City Council got a raw deal from the Loan Council?

Mr. ROW: The Brisbane City Council is almost a State within a State. If I were asked, I would say it was more like a principality.


Mr. ROW: Save the people of Brisbane from destruction! It is nice when you get landed with a bankrupt City Council! Save the people of Brisbane!

The drought-stricken shires-and there are many of them-need more Federal Government grants. Taxes do not flow back sufficiently through local government to the people. It is my belief that the State Government should press the Federal Government to the limit to obtain funds that are provided by the people of this State in taxation but are not justly redistributed. I make no bones about criticising the Federal Government in that respect.

Another matter of concern to me lately in the development of rural areas in my electorate is the lack of incentive for investment in electricity authority loans. To my knowledge, many people would like ~o extend electricity to newly developed rural holdings in parts of my electorate where electricity reticulation is only partly complete. I find, however, that there is very little encouragement for 1the necessary covering finance t<> be invested in electricity authorities because the competition in other fields of investment is too strong.

I urge the Government to look at ~his situation and to take some action to see that Government-guaranteed loans are at least as attrac~ive to private investors as loans in the private sector. It is not the investor I am worried about, but the man who relies on him to get developmental work done. Some action in this direction is badly needed. and the situation needs looking at.

Mr. Harvey: Will some of these consumers you mention accept it on a guarantee basis?

Mr. ROW: The consumer will accept his proposition from the electricity authority on the basis of a domestic-consumer guarantee, but in order to cover the capital cost of the work involved in a rural electricity extension it is necessary to have investment funds.

Mr. Harvey: I am not talking about capital inve~tment. I am talking about accepting it on a guarantee basis on units consumed.

Mr. ROW: In most cases I think they are prepared to do that because it is not an exorbitant cost. But when it comes to putting in $5,000 in the form of a loan, it worries them. If the interest rate was made attractive, somebody else would invest and the undertaking would be self-suppotting.

I have spoken mostly on primary industries, but as a Country Party member of Parliament I am vitally interested in all areas of government. In fact, I think the citizens of Queensland can be justly proud of the high priority ,this Government has always given to education. This high priority was again reflected in the present Budget. Undoubtedly, Queensland is one of the leading States in the field of education. After all, education is not only knowledge, awareness and learning; it is also a foundation for the construction of tomorrow, for the benefit of future generations. History shows that responsible government governs not only for today but paves the way and builds for tomorrow. The money this Government has allotted to education shows that it is doing just this.

The installation of pre-school centres-

Mr. Sherrington: Where?

Mr. ROW: If the honourable member is patient, he will find out. They are to commence in 1973, and it is not yet 1973. This shows that the Government is prepared to tackle education at grass-roots level, in the early, formative years of a child's learning life. When this scheme is complete, Queensland will be almost the only State in the Commonwealth in which ,the Government provides a full-scale pre-school education programme. Until the present, a pre-school education has been available to less than 15 per cent of Queensland children. That figure was "nil" not very long ago, when others were occupying the Treasury benches. It is obviously a massive project to increase it to 100 per cent. Naturally, every honourable member wants to have a pre-school centre established in his electorate first, but, of course, this is not possible.

Any pre-school scheme should be carefully planned and implemented. To rush headlong into it would not be in the best interests of the State. As a first step towards implementing pre-school education, a board of inquiry


compnsmg suitably qualified persons, both academically and administratively, should be set up.

I am pleased to see the progress of education in North Queensland, where, 10 years ago, parents were unable to provide tertiary education for their children. Thanks to the foresight of this Government, the City of Townsville can now boast a university and a teachers' college equal to any other in Australia.

Mr. Sherrington: That is due to the representations of the honourable member for Townsville West.

Mr. ROW: I certainly have not claimed that he has "knocked" it. The people of North Queensland now feel secure in the knowledge that their children can receive tertiary education in their own area. Not only is the education of children important, but so also is the return to their community of persons who have completed their education. This helps to build up and strengthen the vitality and morale of the community.

Mr. Davis: Were you at the open day at Wolston Park?

Mr. ROW: I certainly was, and I agree with everything that Dr. Edwards said about Wolston Park.

Mr. Sherrington: Were you watching from the inside?

Mr. ROW: Did the honourable member for Salisbury attend?

Mr. Sherrington: I would not be seen dead with the Minister for Health.

Mr. ROW: That is a personal reason, which I do not intend to pursue.

I am pleased at the allocation in the Budget of $5,100,000 towards the improvement of facilities for indigenous people. My electorate contains a very large indigenous community at Palm Island. This Government has spent millions of dollars in erecting decent accommodation and providing one of the best schools in this State on the island. Last month I had the honour of accompanying the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs at the official opening of that school. It presents one of the most modern systems of education ever brought to Australia from overseas, and is staffed by 24 teachers.

Mr. Bousen: Doesn't Jim Keeffe do all this work?

Mr. ROW: He visits the island only to stir up some Black Power trouble. There are many decent Aborigines on Palm Island, and I am pleased to see that their wage rate ha~ been increased by $5 a week, which bnngs them closer to the basic wage than before. I agree that they deserve treatment and rights equal to those accorded to the whites. They only need a little help and encouragement. Anyone with a grain of common sense knows that elderly indigenous

people, who have not had the educational opportunities that, thanks to this Government their children will have, cannot be expe~ted to accept the white man's standards.

Many do-gooders in the community press for assimilation of our Aborigines. Mark my words-these peop1e will get a fair go only when this matter is handled properly by having the right people administering these centres, together with the abolition of political interference. While some people are prepared to sell the black man's soul for political advantage--

Mr. Frawley: Like Senator Keeffe.

Mr. ROW: That is so, like Senator Keeffe.

Mr. Frawley: Do you know that Senator Keeffe objected to a house for an Aboriginal family being built next door to him?

Mr. ROW: I believe that to be true.

Mr. Bousen interjected.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr. Wha.rton): Order! The honourable member for Toowoomba NoJCth will address his question through the Chair.

Mr. ROW: Irrespective of what happens, there will always be radicals who seek to stir up trouble that may reflect on the Government.

Mr. Jensen: Why do you want to talk about Aborigines? Why don't you talk about the sugar industry?

Mr. ROW: I will do just that. Overseas marketing arrangements for our

primary products have long been successful, based on a partnership of private enterprise and Government help. Today, the honourable member for Mackay expressed concern about marketing arrangements for the sugar industry.

Mr. Jensen: He hasn't worked in the sugar industry.

Mr. ROW: I have never worked for a sugar mill. I own my own property.

Mr. Jensen: I said that the honourable member for Mackay has not worked in the sugar industry.

Mr. ROW: I withdraw my remark. Any organisation involved in overseas mar

keting is also involved in overseas diplomacy. The sugar industry provides a good example of how a diplomatic corps established by private enterprise, eo-opted by a Government instrumentality-the Sugar Board-has designed a marketing arrangement for sugar grown in Australia that is second to none in the world. Anyone who tries to tell me that this organisation should be relieved of its responsibilities and that its marketing of our important primary produce should be placed in the hands of unskiiled people, not responsible to an organisation that can hire and fire-an organisation that demands


nothing but the best-is looking for a loss of advantages in the d1plomatic field of international marketing. If ever that should happen, Queensland will rue the day.

Mr. Newbery: Dr. Patterson would like to abolish the Sugar Board.

Mr. ROW: That is so, and there are many Dr. Pattersons on the other side of this Chamber.

Mr. Jensen interjected.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Mr. Wharton): Order!

A Government Member: Put him out!

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: Order! I will decide if any honourable member is to leave the Chamber.

Mr. ROW: It is deplorable that in recent times the Federal Opposition has sought to gain political advantage by interfering with this country's legitimate Government sponsored marketing arrangements.

Mr. Jensen: Who said that?

Mr. ROW: The honourable member knows who went to Red China. He knows who put Red China in the stocks. He knows who tried to make Red China a pawn in the political game of the A.L.P. It was the Sugar Board that sold two consignments of sugar to Red China this year, not the A.L.P. political chess-players.

Mr. Jensen: We put it on the right leg.

Mr. ROW: I know all about that.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: Order! The honourable member for Bundaberg will cease interjecting, and the honourable member for Hinchinbrook will address his remarks to the Chair.

Mr. ROW: I accept your directive, Mr. Wharton.

Mr. Sherrington: Why don't you behave yourself?

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: Order!

Mr. ROW: How long will our international marketing arrangements last if they are to be made part of the game of politics?

Mr. JENSEN: I rise to a point of order. The honourable member for Hinchinbrook was one of those people from the North who stopped every mill from having a representative on the Cane Growers' Council. He is in favour of the C.S.R. mills.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: Order! There is no valid point of order. The honourable member for Bundaberg will resume his seat.

Mr. ROW: Regardless of what the A.L.P. says, it achieved nothing for our export industries during its visit to Red China.

The A.L.P., not being in Government, could not officially negotiate anything, least of all long-term export contracts.

Mr. Bousen interjected.

Mr. ROW: Why doesn't the Opposition start a ping-pong club here? We have a bowls club.

It is long-term contracts that we want, not one-year contracts or one-year ping-pong matches that are of little value in the long term. The Sugar Board, fearful of how the A.L.P. might have jeopardised the export market for sugar in Red China, sent its own agents, at its own expense, to that country and successfully negotiated the sale of 36,500 tons of sugar. Without any care for the future solidarity of our export markets or diplomatic arrangements, the A.L.P. has unscrupulously used Red China as a pawn in its political game.

Mr. JENSEN: I rise to a point of order. The honourable member is condemning the Federal Government for selling wheat to Red China. He is also condemning the State Government for selling sugar to Red China.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: Order! There is no valid point of order.

Mr. ROW: I did not mention wheat. I do not intend to take the full time allotted

for this debate. The reason for this is what I believe to be my purpose in being a member of Parliament. I was proud and honoured to be endorsed by the Country Party to stand for this Parliament. I was equally proud and honoured to be elected. I believe the functions of Parliament to be of the utmost importance, and I think it is senseless to waste the time of Parliament by endless repetition and meaningless verbiage on relatively unimportant matters.

Mr. Sherrington: Then why have you been speaking for so long?

Mr. ROW: I have not spoken for as long as some Opposition members. The business of Parliament is far too important for timewasting. I am not saying that all who speak for their full time do not make valid points. Some do, but many do not.

The honourable member for Mourilyan recently made a statement in this Chamber to the effect that I have very little to say here. Perhaps that is so, but as time goes on the honourable member will realise that when I do speak, I have something to say. At the time when he made that statement, the honourable member was referring to the "little fish" episode, and prawn trawlers. In fact, the fish referred to were not young fish of a recognised breed, but adult fish known as pony fish which are of no use in the fishing industry. Neither he nor any conservationist has any cause for worry over this episode. It is not as if the prawners were destroying fish that would eventually


become the barramundi for which the North is renowned throughout Australia. As a matter of fact, the fish were of so little importance that I did not waste my valuable time, or the time of Parliament, on debating the matter.

On returning to my electorate, I discovered that some of my constituents did not know the true story. Whilst I respect the opinions of all, any opinion that I express will be based on information obtained from qualified sources, and not on hearsay evidence about fish being washed up on somebody's beach. The honourable member for Mourilyan should put his priorities in order and put forward constructive suggestions to improve the off-shore fishing industry before it becomes the asset of a foreign fishing fleet.

Mr. HARVEY (Stafford) (8.58 p.m.): I hope that in my contributions in this Chamber I will never show signs of verbal diarrhoea, but will rather put forward constructive suggestions with a due regard for my responsibilities in this Parliament.

In examining the Financial Statement, I noticed on page 1 a reference by the Treasurer to the fact that average weekly earnings during the final quarter of the financial year under review were 10.8 per cent above those of the same quarter of the previous financial year. In relating that figure to my previous budgetary experience in another field, it appears that the Budget has been framed in consideration of a full year of that wage movement, plus the anticipation of what will take place during this year. If that is so, my assumption is that the increase will be something of the order of 16.2 per cent.

The financial requirements of the various departments cannot be allocated "across the board" on such a formula, as a lot depends on the classes of persons engaged in the various departments and their classifications. I might refer to the position in the Brisbane City Council. From 1 July 1969 to 30 June 1972, salaries of those in the engineering category increased by 47 per cent, or over $4,000 per annum, whereas over that same period of three years the salaries of the labouring staff increased by 25 per cent, or $511.56 per annum.

When increases to maintain the existing work-force in the various departments are being considered, it is necessary to take into account the types of officers engaged in the various departments, and the labour content of those departments. For example, it is acknowledged that over 73 per cent of the cost of operating a power-house is attributable to coal. In the case of public transport operated by the Brisbane City Council, 64 per cent of the total cost represents wages. That shows the difference in the cost structure of those two undertakings. There is also a high labour content in hospital costs. Factors such as these must be taken into

account in the Treasury when the Budg~t is being prepared. It is not a simple, straightacross-the-board exercise.

The Treasurer pointed out in his introductory comments that average earnings had increased by 10.8 per cent in the year 1971-72. He mentioned also that there had been an 18.2 per cent movement in cer~ain other fields. Taking these figures mto account, I should say that there would be an over-all increase of about 2.2 per cent when costs of both material and labour are included.

I do not intend to speak at great length in this debate on subsidies to local government, because I dealt with them in an earlier speech in this Chamber. However, I note from the Auditor-General's report that in 1971-72 $24,744,000 was allocated to various local authorities throughout the State by way of subsidies and grants, and that the Brisbane City Council's share of that amount was $4,554,000. One must relate that figure to the Government's overall expenditure from Consolidated Revenue, Trust and Special Funds, and Loan Fund.

I shall be quite honest and admit that I will have to be here many years before I am able to read the report in detail and understand it fully. At this stage I have only a very vague grasp of the situation, particularly from an accounting point of view. Figures are repeated; money received is transferred from one department to another and then disbursed through the administration in various fields. It is quite a difficult exercise to attempt to understand the accounting procedures.

The summary of all funds indicates that the estimated expenditure for 1972-73 is $1,491,646,458, compared with actual expenditure from all funds in 1962-63 of $545,970,786. That shows the total increase in expenditure in 10 years, and it is fairly typical of the increase in all the funds throughout that period.

I admit that the Government has had avenues of finance available to it that did not exist before. For example, when I was chairman of the Transport Committee of the Brisbane City Council, I was very upset that the Council's Transport Department had to pay pay-roll tax. However, it is the Government's prerogative to impose taxes.

I noted that on page 120 of the Estimates of the Probable Ways and Means of Expenditure $300,000 is provided for the South Brisbane-Roma Street cross-river rail connection. That reminds me of the exercise that was undertaken years ago in connection with the building of a new bridge over Breakfast Creek. Sixteen plans for that new bridge were drawn before it was built. Land for the rail connection between South Brisbane and Roma Street was acquired many years ago. No doubt many plans for the new bridge have been drawn and filed away in pigeon-holes. In fact, I am wondering whether the record number of plans for the


Breakfast Creek Bridge will be exceeded in this instance. I am quite sure that from time to time many such plans have been prepared and shelved.

It is very necessary for the Commonwealth Government to do something to assist public transport. I admit that the report came out in 1947, in the time of a Labor Government but it was not until 1950 that it was adopted: It subsequently got under way in ensuing years. But at least land was resumed in the area for the extension. According to the Wilbur Smith Report, the extension was to cost $5,500,000. When Mr. Smith was out here recently, he suggested that costs have escalated to such an extent since the report was published that the crossing would now cost more _than twice as much. On his figures, the extensiOn across the river would now cost in the vicinity of $10,000,000 or $11,000,000.

In preparing his Budget, the Treasurer must have regard to railway operations. What applies to public transport in Queensland applies also to public transport anywhere in the world. According to the Auditor-General's Report, the Railway Department deficit in 1971-72 escalated to $26,543,000, with an increase in operating costs of over $8,800,000. The increased capital cost of the railways must be biting into the operations of that department.

Mr. Hughes: We had to put more trains on in the city area to carry the passengers--

Mr. HARVEY: The honourable member for Kurilpa is talking about putting more trains on the line in the city area. During peak hours, for safety reasons there is a limit on the number of trains per line. When there is only a single prime-mover on the line, there has to be a certain gap between trains for safety reasons. With a single primemover, only a limited number of cars per train can be used on a line, to allow for curves and side-drag on the rails. I believe that during peak hours the Railway Department is operating the maximum number of trains it can put on the line under the existing dieselisation system with a single primemover. If each car had its own traction. any number of cars could be put on. With present-day safety devices, any number of electric trains can be run at 50 or 60 miles an hour, one train length apart. Because of the trip 'relays in the track, if the trains get any closer than they should be they are automatically stopped.

I mentioned the figure of $26,000,000. I acknowledge the point the Treasurer has made frequently since I have been in this Chamber about coal freights. The Central and Northern Divisions of the Railway Department are subsidising the Southern Division very heavily. It is significant that whereas in 1969-70 the excess working expenses over revenue earnings in the Southern Division totalled $7,990,000, in a period of 12 months the figure has increased to $16,611,000. Fortunately, the Northern

Division made a profit of over $11,180,000 and the Central Division showed excess revenue over operating costs of $12,872,000. No doubt that was very fortunate for the over-all railway system, and it must have assisted the Treasurer in framing his Budget. Without that, I would say that the plight of railway services in general would indeed be perilous. This situation is associated principally with passenger transport services. The fact that the percentage of working expenses over revenue earnings for this area represents 150.58 per cent is a matter for some concern.

I note that over $16,800,000 is tied up in stores for ~this department. For what it is worth, some years ago I had an experience in the council's transport department of officers buying materials in bulk. At one stage we were carrying £583 worth of parts per bus. It is ridiculous to think that a person buying a motor vehicle would have to buy an extra cylinder head, spark plugs, and so on. In subsequent contracts we ensured that the successful tenderer undertook to make all spare parts and necessary materials available. We placed the obligation on the supplier of having his money, instead of ours, tied up in carrying spare parts.

I am quite sure that in some sections of the Railway Department, and probably in other departments as well, there are stores that were bought many years ago and are now obsolete and redundant and, in fact, will have to be written off at scrap value. This can happen, and I mention it because I have had this experience.

Dealing with the metropolitan transport services, as closely as I can assess the position from what I have read in the Wilbur Smith Report and the annual report of the Commissioner for Railways, I would say that in the metropolitan area at the present time we are subsidising passenger services at the rate of 35c per passenger trip.

Mr. Low: What would be the percentage relative to the Brisbane City Council transport services?

Mr. HARVEY: I will give the honourable member those figures 1later.

Sir Gordon Chalk: In your calculations, what have you taken as the average passenger trip?

Mr. HARVEY: I have taken the over-all operation of the metropolitan railway services, plus the figures disclosed in pages 1, 2 and 5 of the annual report of the Commissioner for Railways on the total number of passengers carried.

Sir Gordon Chalk: And you divided that into what?

Mr. HARVEY: I divided it into the operating loss on this division. To be quite candid, it was a really big exercise. I will admit that some people travel longer


distances than others. I also acknowledge that the Railway Department is receiving money through the Education Department for the transport of students within the metropolitan area.

Mr. Hughes: Whilst it is admitted that the reason for the deficit lies in the city. doesn't this 1>how a great need to rationalise and co-ordinate our transport services?

Mr. HARVEY: It shows a need for greater utilisation, in the operation of all forms of public transport, of both personnel and equipment. To be quite candid I was particularly pleased the other day' to hear of the intention to bring down a law to ensure that taxi-drivers wHl remain on the road during peak hours. Anything that can be done to assist in the peak period should be done, because the peak period determines the establishment strength of our rolling stock. However, I will not deal with that point any further at this stage.

In referring to the State Public Debt it is interesting to note from Table 2J that the State Public Debt is $1,346 million. I do not decry that, because we should never put off until tomorrow the things that can be done today. It is far better to borrow money and do the job today, because interest charges will be less than the future escalation of costs.

One point I would stress is that, as wages and costs escalate and .the commun1ty grows, so, too, do the Commonwealth's profits increase. In fact, the Commonwealth Government is utilising additional revenue obtained in ·this way ,to liquidate its loan indebtedness, without ensuring the allocation of an equal proportion to the States and local authorities. In other words, the Commonwealth is using this spiralling .trend to its advantage while, at the same time, it is disregarding what I would consider to be a fair and necessary requirement of the other two arms of government.

In the report of the Commissioner for Railways, I observe .that over the past 10 years the department's staff has grown from 1,689 to 1,724. That certainly is not a substantial increase. In fact, on a comparative basis with the increase in population throughout the State, the number of railway employees has really slipped back. The same remarks can be said of council bus services.

If I might temporarily get away from the s!-lbject of transport, I suggest that the time has come to review the ministerial portfolios. Whilst in Cabinet the Ministers get together as a sort of co-ordinating committee betw_een the various deparrments, at the same time, one Minister is responsible for both mines and main roads. I pause here to compliment the Minister on the way he dealt with his portfolio today; he proved !hat he k??WS his subject. However, there 1s no relativity between mines and main roads. There is also a Minister in charge of works housing and police. I do not see what work~ and housing have to do with the police.

Mr. Hughes: What about electricity and transport in the Brisbane City Council?

Mr. HARVEY: I acknowledge the point made by the honourable member for Kurilpa. However, if one Minister were to be responsible for main roads and police, .there could be greater liaison between those two departments.

Every now and again any business must consider whether it is pursuing the right path, and I do not believe that it does the Government any harm .to do likewise. With great respect to th·e Ministers concerned! do not criticise any one of them for the work he is doing-I believe tha:t police and main roads should be linked under the one Minister.

Earlier tonight the honourable member for Pine Rivers referred to cross-country suburban transport services. The Brisbane City Council endeavoured to inaugurate such services, but they were not a success. Unless there are co-ordinated rail and bus services, they have no hope of succeeding. If the services are co-ordinated, cross-country routes will be successful.

The Main Roads Department has carried out some work on Gympie Road at the edge of the Aspley area, but the remainder of the main road section requires urgent attention. No doubt the Minister, and Mr. Harry Lowe, the Commissioner for Main Roads, will give this matter due consideration.

Recently we heard statements about pollution in Kedron Brook. Because the Government has given the council powers to direct industries to treat effluent and connect it to sewer lines, at the same time making sure that they extract solids and hold them, and that the pH factor-or acidity and alkalinity factors-is maintained at the required level, the necessary control can be exercised. One of the most offensive industries in my areait has completely disregarded the welfare of the people affected-is a tannery. The council served notice on the firm, giving it six months to take the necessary corrective action. I believe that, having served notice, the council will insist that the tannery meets its requirements. I will be pleased when the Government passes the necessary legislation conferring a_dditional powers over our streams, because many of them are nothing but cesspits.

Mr. McKechnie: It is well on the way.

Mr. HARVEY: I appreciate that. The sooner it is passed, the better it will be.

The Brisbane River and non-tidal streams in Brisbane-and, no doubt, in other parts of the State-have been neglected for too long. They are offensive to people and create health hazards that no-one in our civilised world should be subjected to. A former speaker referred to the condition of Kedron Brook. I believe that we should take all necessary steps to construct battered banks, with a dry-weather flow, on our tidal and non-tidal streams.


When I made an overseas trip I was fortunate to be able to gain first-hand knowledge of how creek banks were battered so that they could be mown and become attractive, instead of being overgrown with bindy-eye and other noxious weed. At the bottom of the streams, inverted concrete pipes take the normal all-weather flow and the battered banks cope with flood run-offs, particularly the increased run-offs caused by increased residential development. The banks of many creeks are scoured and watercourses are altered when a tree retains a mass of hyacinth or other debris. When the tree topples over as a result of the force of the current, the creek is gouged out. A hole is formed by the surge of water.

With a $6,000 allocation from the Government, the University conducted an experiment in which it battered creek banks and planted grass, using a retaining wire mesh. When the grass came through and water flowed over it, it bent in the same direction as the flow, just as the weeds do at the bottom of the sea-bed, and prevented scouring. The watercourse continued its natural flow, and in this way a great deal of unnecessary flooding was avoided.

The other day an honourable member asked what the Brisbane City Council was doing to assist people in the way of granting concessions. Honourable members would probably be interested to know that the council receives $17,000,000 a year in rates and charges. Out of that sum, it allows the following concessions: rate remissions to pensioners, $1,476,000; bus permits for pensioners, $835,700; returned servicemen's passes, of which there are 3,470, $107,000; blind persons' passes, of which there are 402, $32,100; handicapped children's passes, of which there are 195, $2,000; and the value of school passes for children between 15 and 19 years of age travelling to school in uniform, $1,600,000. On top of that, the transportation of those children ,to and from school at a charge of 5c costs the council $1,563,000. In all, those concessions cost more than $4,000,000.

I shall now deal with the need for an electrified railway system. I sometimes wonder whether we will have electric motorcars in Brisbane before we have electric trains. This concerns me a great deal, and I am sure that it concerns every other honourable member. The Commonwealth Minister for Transport said that over the period of 20 years from 1951-52 the Commonwealth had allocated $205,000,000 to the States in this field. That may seem a large amount but, according to recent Press statements, Queensland alone will need over $700,000,000 to implement the Wilbur Smith scheme. This indicates how ignorant the Commonwealth Government is of Queensland's requirements.

From time to time, the various State Transport Ministers have presented cases to the Commonwealth. The Victorian Minister

for Transport, Mr. Wilcox, has consistently condemned the Commonwealth Government for its lack of responsibility in this field. He is reported in the Press of 5 October as follows:-

"The Federal Goverment had not kept promises to help urban transport . . .

"The Federal Minister for Transpo11t, Mr. Nixon, lacked any understanding of the problem . . . After all, he lives in Canberra."

Mr. Nixon commented that the passenger railway services were the responsibilities of the States. On 18 October he is reported as saying, "At the same time 'the railways of Australia . . . are of national importance." He is a man who wears two cloaks, and it is very hard to keep up with him.

In dealing with public transport, consideration must be given to the movement of people as well as of goods. Some time ago, a United Nations report pointed out that cities were growing beyond their normal geographical limits. This makes me think of towns like Redcliffe, Beenleigh, Ipswich and Gold Coast. When one realises, as the Wilbur Smith Report pointed out, that over 60 per cent of the population of the State lives in 1 per cent of the State's area, one sees that there is a great necessity to ensure that something is done about moving people and goods in the most economic manner possible. There appears to be some confusion in high places on this matter. I well recollect that when the report was first presented, the Minister for Mines and Main Roads was the one who was to determine priorities, and it appeared that the railway would not "get off the ground".

The 1947 report was adopted in 1950, and the expectation was that the trains in Brisbane would be much faster than those running at the time in Sydney and Melbourne. _ At that stage the 40-hour week was being implemented, and consideration was being given to the worth of reduce.d working hours if people had to lose their extra leisure by reason of increased travelling time to and from their places of employment. This is in fact happening in Brisbane today. People are spending up to two hours a day, travelling to and from their jobs, to do eight hours work. This would not happen with sound and logical planning. Honourable members from the South Coast area would be well aware that it is possible to travel from the South Coast to the outskirts of Brisbane in a shorter time than it takes to travel from the outskirts to the heart of the city. In peak hours it takes 17 minutes for a bus to travel from one end of Elizabeth Street to the other.

I have one point to make to the ~inister for Main Roads. I trust that, m the development of the freeway plan for Brisbane, consideration will be given to providing express buses from the outer areas, particularly those on the south side of the city from which people do not have at

Supply [19 OcTOBER 1972} (Financial Statement) 1203

present a rapid service to the city. At least, it is my hope that as a temporary expedient express buses will be permitted to join the freeway at given points and to travel in reserved lanes on the freeway in peak hours. This would be a means of providing the people of these areas with a service of the type more commensurate with that using its own right of way.

Mr. Hughes: If people want to live in the outer-suburban areas because of the clean air there, shouldn't the planning be that industries should go there too, rather than concentrating them in the centre of the city? Isn't that the answer?

Mr. HARVEY: There are two avenues to be followed in planning. Public transport and city planning should go hand in hand. This is very necessary in view of the point made by the honourable member for Kurilpa that industry should be so located that it is close to a residential area, and people do not have to waste time unnecessarily travelling to and from work. However, one must take into account the afternoon north-east breeze in Brisbane. We do not want fall-out being blown across the city, as is happening at the present time.

Furthermore, high-rise development should be closer to railways or other forms of public transport, because once a person has to take his car out to travel some distance to reach public transport, he will use it for the whole of his journey. If a person lives three-quarters of a mile from a bus or rail service, he has to take out his car to go to the bus stop or the station. Once he has his car out, he will stay in it. A person who lives in close proximity to a public transport service will leave his car at home and walk to the bus stop or the station. High-rise development should therefore be within a quarter of a mile of a railway service or other form of public transport. This is not a suggestion of mine; it is something that I have read in reports from other places.

The 1947 report indicated that the electrification of Brisbane suburban railways would, at that time, cost £2,540,000 and implementation of the report was started. When the Minister for Justice was Minister for Transport, he said that it was a Labor Government that stopped that project. That statement was incorrect. As the Treasurer is aware, in October 1960 Sir Thomas Hiley, who was then Treasurer of this State, pointed out that over £9,000,000 had been spent on the electrification scheme. In 1962, when the Government was considering the Ford, Bacon and Davis report, the present Treasurer, Sir Gordon Chalk, mentioned that £8,000,000 had been spent and that the total cost of completing the project would be £20,000,000.

I will admit that Sir Gordon Chalk immediately he was appointed Minister fo; Transport under the Nicklin Government, went to Adelaide and other places to study

transport systems. While he was away, the Premier of the day stated that it seemed likely that the electrification programme would be shelved for the time being. The cost of that electrification programme, which in 1962, according to figures supplied by Sir Thomas Hiley and Sir Gordon Chalk, was £20,000,000, has now increased to $700,000,000.

Increases such as that concern me greatly, and one of the most important factors is the lack of Commonwealth responsibility in this field. I have before me documents indicating what the Nixon administration in the U.S.A. has done in subsidising transport services, whether privately or publicly ow~ed. The United States House of Representatives backed by a vote of 327 votes to 16 <: J?ill providing $US3.1 billion of the $US1.0 b1ll1on required for an urban transportatiOn programme. It was considered very necessary because "so many privately owned systems serving medium and small-town America had failed, leaving many cities without public transportation". It was pointed out that 235 such systems had failed since 1954. That is one of the problems that we must face up to in Queensland and, indeed, throughout Australia.

When Mr. Wilbur Smith was here on 20 August 1972, he said that the cost of building an underground system had soared from $300,000,000 to $750,000,000 in four years. The Government employed Wilbur Smith and Associates to submit a report on Brisbane's transportation problems. If we acknowledge that these experts know what they are talking about and accept the figures they put forward, it is obvious that Queensland must do all it can within its own budgetary structure and also co-op~rat~ with other Australian States to ensure that the Commonwealth Government puts forward a very definite and positive programme to overcome capital-city transportation problems. Victoria and New South Wales already have electrified railway systems, and I believe that Brisbane and adjoining areas will suffer unless an electrification scheme is implemented here. The time must come when an electrified railway system is extended to North and South Coast areas and to other areas from which people travel to Brisbane daily to work.

Mr. Sherrington: There is only one problem. When the Government pulled up the South Coast railway line, it sold the land.

Mr. HARVEY: It might have been better if the Government had kept the land and built a special toll road. I cannot criticise the Government for that because the Brisbane City Council dug up some tram tracks. I will not comment as to whether or not the right thing was done there.

Mention was made of what happens at peak hours and at off-peak periods. I mentioned a few weeks ago the need for the staggering of working hours. Brisbane has

1204 Supply [19 OCTOBER 1972) (Financial Statement)

the most acute peak period of any capital city in Australia. That peak period is very costly to the community. The peak period determines staff and capital outlay; it determines road capacity; it determines the number of employees required in the railway and council transport services; it determines the number of vehicles required for public transport; and it determines the load factor of power stations.

At 8 a.m. the Brisbane City Council needs to have 506 buses on the road. From approximately 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. only 205 are adequate to meet requirements. The evening peak is not as acute, only 485 buses being required. The graph I have in my hand indicates the situation we have to face up to in this city. It is a problem that can be tackled by Government and other authorities. It is a case of getting round a table and doing something about it. It will not cost one cent by way of capital outlay. It is merely a matter of doing something about staggering working hours.

It must be acknowledged that over the week-end the city road capacity can handle the vehicle flow, as it can handle it during offpeak periods, but the road capacity cannot handle traffic flow during peak periods. The more money that is spent on roads, the more vehicles come on the roads and the more down-town parking is required. It is like the dog chasing its tail.

It must be remembered that every block of ground acquired in the city for road purposes means another allotment of nonrateable land and another area that cannot be used for any commercial activity. In the inner-city area there are single allotments attracting the equivalent in rates of those for a total outer urban area. These are factors that must be faced up to. They must be assessed.

If the road transport report and the public transport report had been integrated and had come down as one report instead of two, I believe that elevated outlet roads from the city above the railway line would have been designed. That would have called for very little resumption of property. When anything is done in the city area about electrification extension, we must ensure that we use a method of cut and cover along the roadways. If the system of cut and cover is used along the roadways, people can walk down steps to railway platforms, whereas if it is necessary to go under building foundations 60, 80 or 90 feet down, the foundations have to be cleared and at every station there is the added cost of providing escalators to the platforms.

Someone asked a question earlier about council transport. In 1971-72 the total cash budget for disbursements was $11,671,000, less loan commitments, etc., of $2,503,000, leaving a balance of $9,168,000. The total operating surplus of revenue over actual operating costs of council buses was $664,619 for the year. The Brisbane City Council,

of course, faces the situation that also confronts the Railway Department in loan commitments and other charges which bite into funds. In the council's case these amounted to over $2,503,000 in 1971-72, so the department finished with a deficit.

While dealing with commitments, pay-roll tax is something I should like the Treasurer to consider. Last year he fleeced the council -if I may use that word-of $205,684 for this tax.

Turning to fuel tax, the council uses diesel fuel on its own roads. These roads are Crown lands dedicated to the care of the local authority rather than made council property, so we have to pay diesel fuel tax. The cost of the fuel is 14.4c a gallon and the tax is 17 .5c a gallon. The total cost to the council is 31.9c a gallon, the tax being greater than the actual purchase price of the fuel. Last year the council used over 1,600,000 gallons.

Mr. Low: That is a Commonwealth tax?

Mr. HARVEY: That is so. In fact, from that particular fund the council receives back less than we pay into the fund. This always shocks me. If a person has a diesel vehicle operating around a farm or a diesel engine in a boat, he is exempt from the tax but, as I say, because the council is operating public transport services on Crown roads, it has to pay that tax. I think that situation is worthy of consideration. I consider that it is an iniquitous tax imposed on public transport authorities and I again condemn the Commonwealth Government for its complete disregard for public transport as a whole. I could elaborate in further detail, but I do not think there is any need to do so.

I feel that I must mention pollution because I have often heard criticism of the fact that diesel vehicles cause pollution. In fact, the amount of carbon monoxide discharge in diesel fumes is .9 per cent. I took that from an American report which I obtained from the American Transit Association. Its report shows that the discharge of diesel vehicles is .9 per cent, against those of refuse disposal 6.3 per cent, space heating 5.7 per cent, power plants 14 per cent, industry 16 per cent and gasoline engine 60 per cent. That was a worth-while exercise relative to diesel fuel discharge by public transport.

Once again I refer to the necessity for over-all planning in public transport. I believe the Government is to do something urgently about co-ordinating public transport. I do not know what the special committee has in mind, but I do know that the 1962 Ford, Bacon and Davis report said that the Brisbane City Council should be responsible for all transport within its geographic limits to the extent of the difference between revenue collected and the actual running costs, and I believe that two of Mr. Moriarty's reports, when the Treasurer was Minister for Transport, were on similar lines. I certainly do


not condone that, even though I now have ties with this Parliament. That was in the Ford, Bacon and Davis report in 1962 and I believe that the operating loss for that particular year was £2,504,000. The exact words, on page 2, are-

. "We view City Council as being respon~Ib~e for service within its geographic limits; to the extent Railways service is considered necessary to supplement tram and bus, it should be provided by contract under ,the terms of which the Railways would be reimburs,ed for costs incurred less any revenues collected."

The Wilbur-Smith report recommends that a st~tutory authority be set up to co-ordinate pubhc. transport,. and, for the railways and council bus services to save on the issue as well as for existing assets to be utilised to a greater extent than at present, action must be taken early. 1f either in this Chamber a.r elsewhere I can assist in any way, I shall do so.

. In 1962 the then Minister for Transport discussed the problems of co-ordination with the Brisbane City Council. Particular attention. was paid to the Indooroopilly Railway StatiOn. At that time certain problems prevented such a scheme from getting off the ground; however, they should not stand in the way any longer.

I shall deal now with electricity. A previous speaker referred to the people who live in the outlying areas of the State. In the Report of the Electricity Supply Authori!y of Australia I note that the Snowy Mountams Hydro Electric Authority spent £765,000,000 on the Snowy Mountains scheme to provide the 2,160mW capacity that was necessary for New South Wales and Victoria. Once again, Queensland has been left out .on the limb. In spending £716,000,000 to provide 1,7llmW capacity, this State has spent nearly as much on electricity as the expenditure incurred by the Commonwealth to supplement that of New South Wales and Victoria in meeting their peak-hour requirements.

A definite need exists for an over-all review and rationalisation of our electricity suppl~. We must ensure that, ultimately, one smgle generating authority supplies electricity throughout the State. In 1975 the S.E.A's franchise expives, and that is the appropriate time for this Government to do something about the south-eastern sector of the State and progressively bring all the other regional boards under one generating authority. This will bring Queensland into line with Great Britain and New South Wales, where electricity is supplied in bulk to the various distribution boards at a uniform bulk-supply charge. If I were up at the other end of George Street, I may be putting forward a different argument.

I acknowledge that there could be a case for varying the charge by a certain percentage in some parts of the State. That could apply in this area. When the late Ernie Evans was a member of Cabinet, he gave instructions to reduce the S.E.A. surcharge in country areas. This was done at the expense of city residents. However, as the profits made by the Railway Department in country areas help cover the losses incurred in Brisbane, I suppose that, in the supply of electricity, it is fair enough for the city people to make some sacrifice for the people of the Outback. It must not be forgotten that in some remote areas of Queensland people are paying 32 times more for electricity than in other parts of the State.

That is unfair and does not in any way encourage decentralisation. If we could do something to achieve a uniform bulk-supply rate, with all the distributing authorities throughout the State having a small margin so that they could make a small subsidy contribution to people with long transmission lines, we would go a long way towards correcting the anomalies. An earlier speaker said that an extension to a certain property would cost $5,000. I do not say that that cost should be met, but I do believe that every person in the State should get electricity. That aim can be achieved by an over-all plan similar to the one in operation in New South Wales. In this part of the State we are generating electricity and supplying it in New South Wales as far south as Murwillumbah. If we can supply electricity to New South Wales, surely to goodness we can supply the more remote parts of our own State.

We must be as concerned about people on the land as we are about big industries that come here. As the bigger units in the North begin generating, the area will become selfsufficient but, initially, we will be supplying power to Gladstone from Brisbane and Swanbank. In November, when the 275kVA line comes into service, we will be able to feed it back into these areas. The bigger the unit, the more economic it is, and costs can be absorbed, with electricity charges being kept to a minimum. When we consider that the big northern power station is to come into operation in 1975, we must feel encouraged to extend electricity supplies throughout the State.

Mr. Low: That is an ideal objective.

Mr. HARVEY: I believe it is essential.

With an over-all grid system, if we get into trouble in one part of the State, we can rely on generation capacity elsewhere to get us out of the difficulty.

(Time expired.)

Progress reported.

The House adjourned at 9.58 p.m.

legislative assembly thursday october€¦ · 1136 ministerial statement (19 october 1972]...

Documents